Re: [WSG] Valid and well-formed

[David Dorward]

Lachlan Hunt wrote:
> That article is actually only talking about the cases where the W3C
> validator has known XML limitations.

Which are removed in the current beta. http://validator-test.w3.org/


-- 
David Dorward   


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Valid and well-formed

[Stuart Foulstone]

Hi,

sorry, I was thinking of a well formed document in general, rather than
specifically to a (X)HTML/XML markup document.

I seem be at cross purposes.

Stuart


On Sat, April 28, 2007 6:45 pm, Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
> On 28 Apr 2007, at 18:18:00, Stuart Foulstone wrote:
>
>> And, people do format their document with of headings, paragraphs
>> etc.,
>> which if they do correctly is called well formed document.
>
> No, it means it's a _valid_ document. Well-formedness means
> conforming to rules such as no use of the "<" or "&" characters other
> than to start an opening or closing tag, or to start an entity
> reference, respectively. Validity means conforming to a DTD.
>
> See the definitions:
> Well-formedness:  formed>
> Valid: 
>
> Regards,
>
> Nick.
>
>>
>> On Sat, April 28, 2007 8:02 am, David Dorward wrote:
>>> Stuart Foulstone wrote:
 Validation concerns the correctness of the syntax of the code,
 i.e. if the tags, etc. are properly coded.
>>>
 Well-formedness concerns the structure of the document,
 i.e. where in the document headings , paragraphs, etc go.
>>>
>>> You've got those backwards.
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Nick Fitzsimons
> http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/
>
>
>
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


-- 
Stuart Foulstone.
http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk
BigEasy Web Design
69 Flockton Court
Rockingham Street
Sheffield
S1 4EB

Tel. 07751 413451


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Valid and well-formed

[Lachlan Hunt]

Katrina wrote:
David Hammond suggests that validity is not well-formedness, in that a 
document can be well-formed and not valid, but could also be !!! valid 
and not well-formed.


http://www.webdevout.net/articles/validity-and-well-formedness#validity_well_formedness 


That article is actually only talking about the cases where the W3C 
validator has known XML limitations.  Despite the validator claiming the 
non-well-formed documents are valid, they are not.  If you use a 
validator that makes use of a real XML parser, the documents would not 
validate.


Page Valet has an XML parser available for validation.
http://valet.webthing.com/page/

--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Valid and well-formed

[Nick Fitzsimons]

On 28 Apr 2007, at 18:18:00, Stuart Foulstone wrote:

And, people do format their document with of headings, paragraphs  
etc.,

which if they do correctly is called well formed document.


No, it means it's a _valid_ document. Well-formedness means  
conforming to rules such as no use of the "<" or "&" characters other  
than to start an opening or closing tag, or to start an entity  
reference, respectively. Validity means conforming to a DTD.


See the definitions:
Well-formedness: 

Valid: 

Regards,

Nick.



On Sat, April 28, 2007 8:02 am, David Dorward wrote:

Stuart Foulstone wrote:

Validation concerns the correctness of the syntax of the code,
i.e. if the tags, etc. are properly coded.



Well-formedness concerns the structure of the document,
i.e. where in the document headings , paragraphs, etc go.


You've got those backwards.




--
Nick Fitzsimons
http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Valid and well-formed

[Stuart Foulstone]

No, really, people do validate their code - they use a validator.

And, people do format their document with of headings, paragraphs etc.,
which if they do correctly is called well formed document.

Having got a well formed document, they may well decide to create a
Webpage by using a Markup language (which they then valdate).

As well as validating the code, they should also ensure that their markup
do not alter the well-formedness of the underlying document.

Stuart

On Sat, April 28, 2007 8:02 am, David Dorward wrote:
> Stuart Foulstone wrote:
>> Validation concerns the correctness of the syntax of the code,
>> i.e. if the tags, etc. are properly coded.
>
>> Well-formedness concerns the structure of the document,
>> i.e. where in the document headings , paragraphs, etc go.
>
> You've got those backwards.
>
>
> --
> David Dorward   
>
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
>
>


-- 
Stuart Foulstone.
http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk
BigEasy Web Design
69 Flockton Court
Rockingham Street
Sheffield
S1 4EB

Tel. 07751 413451


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Will HTML5 be a purely presentational language?

[Lachlan Hunt]

Laura Carlson wrote:
The following may be of interest to web standards folk who haven't been 
keeping up with the HTML Working Group and where HTML5 is headed:


On 4/26/07, Ian Hickson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote [1]:

There are people strongly arguing
that HTML should be a purely presentational language, much, much more
presentational than the proposed WHATWG draft...


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-html/2007Apr/0171.html


Hixie was probably referring to things like people asking for a new 
 element to replace .  Personally, I totally ignored 
that thread and few people took the idea seriously because the whole 
idea is nonsense.  HTML5 will not be becoming a presentational language, 
though it also won't be a strictly and purely semantic language either.


http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2007Apr/0391.html

--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.au/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Windows Vista Style Buttons

[Breton Slivka]

Right, but now that he knows what they're called, he can use google  
to find a link such as this:

http://www.seoconsultants.com/css/menus/tutorial/
which has a fix for IE, or any of a number of other links on google,  
which also have fixes.


Anyways, nothing wrong with IE users getting a slightly degraded  
experience, as long as they can still use and access the site.




On 28/04/2007, at 8:31 PM, Designer wrote:


Breton Slivka wrote:

you can do it like this:
http://meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/menus/demo.html
But you should know that this UI pattern is a usability/ 
accessability disaster, and usually a symptom of poor content  
organization. I would encourage better organization in order to  
avoid these altogether.



You should also note that these methods rely on the browser's  
ability to support hover on pseudo elements, which makes it utterly  
useless in the real world (where IE is king!). AFAIK, only mozilla  
will support this.


(Incidentally, I was just amused to find that the Thunderbird   
spell checker doesn't know what Mozilla is, nor indeed,  
Thunderbird :-) )


--
Bob

www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Windows Vista Style Buttons

[Designer]

Breton Slivka wrote:

you can do it like this:
http://meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/menus/demo.html

But you should know that this UI pattern is a usability/accessability 
disaster, and usually a symptom of poor content organization. I would 
encourage better organization in order to avoid these altogether.






You should also note that these methods rely on the browser's ability to 
support hover on pseudo elements, which makes it utterly useless in the 
real world (where IE is king!). AFAIK, only mozilla will support this.


(Incidentally, I was just amused to find that the Thunderbird  spell 
checker doesn't know what Mozilla is, nor indeed, Thunderbird :-) )


--
Bob

www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Windows Vista Style Buttons

[Breton Slivka]

you can do it like this:
http://meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/menus/demo.html

But you should know that this UI pattern is a usability/accessability  
disaster, and usually a symptom of poor content organization. I would  
encourage better organization in order to avoid these altogether.



On 28/04/2007, at 6:01 PM, Sagnik Dey wrote:



Hi Everybody,

 I've following the queries in this group since long. The solutions  
provided are quite helpful to all. This is my first query


How can i develop a menu just like in winvista...sublinks  
one...whenevr we hover a link an expandable image is displayed.


I'm attaching an image to be more clear. Marken in red is the link.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/windowsvista/default.mspx





--
:: Sagnik ::
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Valid and well-formed

[David Dorward]

Stuart Foulstone wrote:
> Validation concerns the correctness of the syntax of the code,
> i.e. if the tags, etc. are properly coded.

> Well-formedness concerns the structure of the document,
> i.e. where in the document headings , paragraphs, etc go.

You've got those backwards.


-- 
David Dorward   


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***