Re: [WSG] xhtml doctypes and charsets-thank you
Hi Everyone, Thank you all so much for the great information, that helped a lot. I agree with those of you who said that one could stay with html, of course as long as one uses clean and valid code :) Thanks again Lisa At 11:03 AM 11/25/2005, you wrote: I guess I am wondering what the current debate is about xhtml, after reading articles like this one: http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archive.php?id=2005/04/08/doctype-declaration-and-content-type-headers Lisa ** 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] xhtml doctypes and charsets
Oops! Not sure what happened there...but after that doctype below the charset would be: meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" / I usually use the charset=iso-8859-1. Hopefully that will make sense! I guess I am wondering what the current debate is about xhtml, after reading articles like this one: http://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archive.php?id=2005/04/08/doctype-declaration-and-content-type-headers Thanks! Lisa At 10:46 AM 11/25/2005, you wrote: Hi Everyone, I am going to delurk to ask a question :) I have been using html 4.01 transitional on my sites and have slowly branched out to xhtml. However, I remember that there has been some discussion on other lists about the 'dangers' of using xhtml. Here is what I have seen used, what would be the pluses and minuses of using this combo? "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";> I usually use this charset: Any links or advice would be much appreciated. ** 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] xhtml doctypes and charsets
Hi Everyone, I am going to delurk to ask a question :) I have been using html 4.01 transitional on my sites and have slowly branched out to xhtml. However, I remember that there has been some discussion on other lists about the 'dangers' of using xhtml. Here is what I have seen used, what would be the pluses and minuses of using this combo? "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";> I usually use this charset: Any links or advice would be much appreciated. Cheers Lisa ** 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] valid tracker code
Hi Kornel, That makes sense :) I am off to read more... Cheers Lisa At 02:53 PM 2/16/2005 +, you wrote: On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:08:15 -0400, The Snider's Web <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: src="<a href="http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter_xhtml.js"">http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter_xhtml.js"</a>;> class="statcounter"> href="http://www.statcounter.com/";> src="http://c5.statcounter.com/counter.php?sc_project=XXX&java=0&security=XXX"; alt="free web site hit counter" /> What do you think? It won't work with XHTML served as XHTML (application/xhtml+xml). If you serve XHTML as HTML tagsoup (text/html), it will. The script: http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter_xhtml.js relies on document.writeln, which is part of old Netscape "DOM", and is not supported anymore in XML documents. This is a difficult problem. document.createElement should be used instead, but it has small and buggy support, so ideally counter should first try innerHTML (IE prefers that), then document.createElement (but not in Opera 6, IIRC) and finally fall back to document.write supported by browsers that don't support XML. PPK (www.quirksmode.org) should have some interesting info on this... regards, Kornel Lesiñski ** 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] valid tracker code
Hi Kornel, What is interesting is that once I signed up I found this information under 'generate your code', where they have two options for the code (standards compliant and xhtml). I had no clue looking at the web site that they even had this (maybe it was there but I was in a rush)...Here is what they said on the web site (once I sign in): -W3C Compliant (You can check this as an option) Maintaing correct line breaks in your code are crucial if you want to use W3C valid HTML. If you are just worried about your counter working all the time then don't tick this box. -xhtml compliant (You can check this as an option) 99% of users will not need this option. Unless you are specifically familiar with XHTML code don't tick this option as you may get unintended validation errors. -The following code is supposed to be html and w3c compliant (I checked both boxes)
http://www.statcounter.com/counter/counter_xhtml.js";>http://www.statcounter.com/";>http://c5.statcounter.com/counter.php?sc_project=XXX&java=0&security=XXX"; alt="free web site hit counter" /> What do you think? Cheers Lisa At 01:54 PM 2/16/2005 +, you wrote: http://www.statcounter.com/ I haven't found any tracker code on their website, but there is a typical problem with real XHTML and trackers - document.write doesn't work.Most of them get information using JS and then generate img/script tag using document.write. That won't work in XML mode, and DOM must be used. -- regards, Kornel Lesiñski ** 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] valid tracker code
Hello, I am delurking as I may have the answer to your question :) I just found a free hit counter/tracker this morning that not only can include valid code but also valid xhtml code, a rare thing. You can see it here:http://www.statcounter.com/ Haven't used it yet, but from what I see so far it looks great :) Cheers Lisa At 01:14 PM 2/16/2005 +, you wrote: Do any of you wizards know of a (free) tracker which actually validates when used with xhtml strict? Or indeed, ANY tracker with valid code? Bob McClelland, www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] feedback and question
Hi Felix, Thanks for looking at the page. I am just starting to play with percentages (I used to use pixels)-as at least you can mess with them more as a viewer (if you know what to do). It is hard to get a size that everyone likes :) Cheers Lisa At 01:48 PM 4/7/2004 -0400, you wrote: The Snider's Web wrote: > -I just did a site redesign and wanted to get feedback. This site was tough > as it had to be fully bilingual on each page and the fourth biggest group > of users use Netscape 3!!! How did I get so lucky? > http://www.c-l-c.ca/mainpage.html It's nice to see a page that does so well in N3. I prefer N3 on this page, since it doesn't force me to hassle with the zoom menu to find a % that gets me 100% of my preference for main content. -- "Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others..." 1 Peter 4:10 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/ * 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] feedback and question
Hi Everyone, I have been lurking on the list for a while and have really enjoyed it, this group seems very helpful and friendly. I found this list through the css-f one. I am starting to get my act together in terms of html standards, css and accessibility-lots to learn! I thought I would dive in to ask about a site I am working on right now... -I just did a site redesign and wanted to get feedback. This site was tough as it had to be fully bilingual on each page and the fourth biggest group of users use Netscape 3!!! How did I get so lucky? http://www.c-l-c.ca/mainpage.html Does the navigation work okay on the left side nav? Do you see any bugs? Do you see anything problematic with the css? Any suggestions, comments? -In N6 on Win ME the left side nav is only white text on blue with no formatting. When I go to mouseover the links, all I get is a white bar over the link area-so you can't see it. Anyone have any idea why? I found it weird, as I used similar code on another site and it worked over in N6. Any help/feedback would be much appreciated, Cheers Lisa * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
