[WSG] lotus domino vs doctype
Sadly, with Lotus Domino the only reliable way to control DOCTYPE (as far as I can tell) is to generate the entire page from scratch with an agent. If your first print is a DOCTYPE, then Domino won't generate headers. But if you use Forms you get stuck with what Domino decides is best for you. But if you have to go to that trouble, Why use Domino at all? one might begin to wonder. --David
RE: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype
Chris Bentley might be able to give you an exact DOM solution, as he had to deal with this exact same problem only 6 months ago, but I'd still just try working with HTML 4.01 :O) Cheers Jeff Lowder Website: www.accessibility1st.com.au Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of matt sawkill Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 2:40 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype Great idea, but i can't get it to work - Have tried window.document.childNodes[0].nodeValue = '!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN \n http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd'; and similar in ie6, but the document stays in quirks mode. Any ideas or working examples of a doctype change? Also other browsers are returning the html tag not the doctype as the first node in the document. Cheers On 3 Jun 2004, at 13:47, Jeff Lowder - Accessibility 1st wrote: With regard to the DOCTYPE, you could use a DOM script to re-write it, if you like (I'd be wary though - you might end up with more in-valid pages than not). I would first start with whatever the CMS can output easily (least work), if that's HTML 4.0 then go with that - as this is still a completely valid DOCTYPE - you don't necessarily have to go with XHTML strict. HTML 4.01 STRICT might actually be a better/easier way to go anyway. Whatever DOCTYPE you use - just make sure it's a valid one, i.e. !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd Cheers Jeff Lowder Accessibility 1st Website: www.accessibility1st.com.au Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of matt sawkill Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 12:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype Hi, I've been engaged to produce some standards compliant xhtml templates for a largish website for a legal firm. The programming and backend is being handled by another company - at the clients request they are using the 'Lotus Workplace Web Content Management' system (nee Aptrix) which is being integrated/built on top of Lotus Domino. It turns out that Domino can only generate the following html 4 doctype with no url - !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN Found some confirmation of this here: http://www.notestips.com/80256B3A007F2692/1/TAIO-5V5LQN http://www.notestips.com/80256b3a007f2692/1/taio-5v73sc Which puts ie into quirks mode, and doesn't let me write xthml strict either - obviously not a good thing when the site needs to be. Panic ensues. Anyone else come across this and have and advice/reliable hacks? Cheers, Matt * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
RE: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype
xhtml is the client's request - they don't see the point of undergoing a major redevelopment without being up to date (as an example to their own clients among other things). This was made clear at the start of the project but i gather that the technology decisions had already been made (and paid for) by their IT dept, so its now as much of a political issue as a technical one. As I said, I would clearly outline the problem to the client, and outline the three options I can realistically see here: a) they overcome their political backstabbing games and change the backend to something that can handle xhtml output( or, as a variant, some extra server-side coding/patching/kludge to get the existing backend to at least chuck out the right doctype) b) they live with html4 and the potential few display discrepancies with IE (with careful, albeit slightly more hacky/convoluted markup, you can attempt to smooth out as many of the quirks mode issues as possible) c) table based design I'd try to get the point across to the client that a) is obviously the ideal solution, and that b) and c) will involve extra time/cost in terms of production, and potentially more work further down the line when it comes time to tweak / redesign the site. Beyond that, there's nothing legit that can be done. As I said before, using JS DOM to rewrite the doctype client-side is a kludge if I've ever seen one, and brings with it a whole other share of problems. The ball is in the client's court, really... P * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
[WSG] lotus domino vs doctype
Hi, I've been engaged to produce some standards compliant xhtml templates for a largish website for a legal firm. The programming and backend is being handled by another company - at the clients request they are using the 'Lotus Workplace Web Content Management' system (nee Aptrix) which is being integrated/built on top of Lotus Domino. It turns out that Domino can only generate the following html 4 doctype with no url - !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN Found some confirmation of this here: http://www.notestips.com/80256B3A007F2692/1/TAIO-5V5LQN http://www.notestips.com/80256b3a007f2692/1/taio-5v73sc Which puts ie into quirks mode, and doesn't let me write xthml strict either - obviously not a good thing when the site needs to be. Panic ensues. Anyone else come across this and have and advice/reliable hacks? Cheers, Matt * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
RE: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype
With regard to the DOCTYPE, you could use a DOM script to re-write it, if you like (I'd be wary though - you might end up with more in-valid pages than not). I would first start with whatever the CMS can output easily (least work), if that's HTML 4.0 then go with that - as this is still a completely valid DOCTYPE - you don't necessarily have to go with XHTML strict. HTML 4.01 STRICT might actually be a better/easier way to go anyway. Whatever DOCTYPE you use - just make sure it's a valid one, i.e. !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd; Cheers Jeff Lowder Accessibility 1st Website: www.accessibility1st.com.au Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of matt sawkill Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 12:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype Hi, I've been engaged to produce some standards compliant xhtml templates for a largish website for a legal firm. The programming and backend is being handled by another company - at the clients request they are using the 'Lotus Workplace Web Content Management' system (nee Aptrix) which is being integrated/built on top of Lotus Domino. It turns out that Domino can only generate the following html 4 doctype with no url - !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN Found some confirmation of this here: http://www.notestips.com/80256B3A007F2692/1/TAIO-5V5LQN http://www.notestips.com/80256b3a007f2692/1/taio-5v73sc Which puts ie into quirks mode, and doesn't let me write xthml strict either - obviously not a good thing when the site needs to be. Panic ensues. Anyone else come across this and have and advice/reliable hacks? Cheers, Matt * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype
Great idea, but i can't get it to work - Have tried window.document.childNodes[0].nodeValue = '!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN \n http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd;'; and similar in ie6, but the document stays in quirks mode. Any ideas or working examples of a doctype change? Also other browsers are returning the html tag not the doctype as the first node in the document. Cheers On 3 Jun 2004, at 13:47, Jeff Lowder - Accessibility 1st wrote: With regard to the DOCTYPE, you could use a DOM script to re-write it, if you like (I'd be wary though - you might end up with more in-valid pages than not). I would first start with whatever the CMS can output easily (least work), if that's HTML 4.0 then go with that - as this is still a completely valid DOCTYPE - you don't necessarily have to go with XHTML strict. HTML 4.01 STRICT might actually be a better/easier way to go anyway. Whatever DOCTYPE you use - just make sure it's a valid one, i.e. !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd; Cheers Jeff Lowder Accessibility 1st Website: www.accessibility1st.com.au Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of matt sawkill Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 12:26 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype Hi, I've been engaged to produce some standards compliant xhtml templates for a largish website for a legal firm. The programming and backend is being handled by another company - at the clients request they are using the 'Lotus Workplace Web Content Management' system (nee Aptrix) which is being integrated/built on top of Lotus Domino. It turns out that Domino can only generate the following html 4 doctype with no url - !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN Found some confirmation of this here: http://www.notestips.com/80256B3A007F2692/1/TAIO-5V5LQN http://www.notestips.com/80256b3a007f2692/1/taio-5v73sc Which puts ie into quirks mode, and doesn't let me write xthml strict either - obviously not a good thing when the site needs to be. Panic ensues. Anyone else come across this and have and advice/reliable hacks? Cheers, Matt * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
RE: [WSG] lotus domino vs doctype
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Great idea, but i can't get it to work - Have tried window.document.childNodes[0].nodeValue = '!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN \n http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd;'; and similar in ie6, but the document stays in quirks mode. Any ideas or working examples of a doctype change? You're able to access the doctype through the document.doctype attribute, but I'm pretty sure it's read-only :| Also other browsers are returning the html tag not the doctype as the first node in the document. As they should. The doctype isn't a child node of document (IE in quirks mode probably gets that wrong tho). Had a quick scout around and found this (French): http://darkmag.net/darkBlog/index.php/2004/01/06/4-GenerationDePagesWebL otusNotesConformesAuxStandardsDuW3c Seems to be something about adding the doctype to the HTTP headers output by the server, might be of use to you. -- Lindsay Evans. Developer, Red Square Productions. [p] 8596.4000 [f] 8596.4001 [w] www.redsquare.com.au * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
