Re: [WSG] w3c mobile validator and html5?
The mind is willing, Rick. It's finding the time that's the problem as ever but yes, I'd be happy to try and create something that could be downloaded and used directly. Cheers Phil. On 15/01/2012 20:55, Rick Lecoat wrote: On 12 Dec 2011, at 21:18, Phil Archer wrote: Hi Nancy, On 12/12/2011 20:25, Nancy Johnson wrote: I have been moving image sizing to the style sheet and not left inline.. NNo!!! That's one thing that the mobile checker is definitely good for - stopping this bad practice of using CSS to define the size of an image and, even worse, using CSS to resize the image. W3C Best Practice: http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#IMAGES_SPECIFY_SIZE My take on it: http://philarcher.org/diary/2011/phpimageadaptation/ That’s a great article Phil, so thanks for sharing. As somebody who is completely unversed in PHP, however, I was having a hard time figuring out how all the pieces fit together. Do they end up as one PHP file? or as a collection of PHP files that call each other? And how does the connect with the HTML markup? Any chance that you can you expand upon your explanation for PHP no-nothings like me? The article is fantastic on detail, but I think I need help forming an overview. Thanks, and warmest regards; -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** -- Phil Archer W3C eGovernment http://www.w3.org/egov/ http://philarcher.org @philarcher1 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] w3c mobile validator and html5?
On Jan 15, 2012, at 3:55 PM, Rick Lecoat wrote: ... As somebody who is completely unversed in PHP, however, I was having a hard time figuring out how all the pieces fit together. Do they end up as one PHP file? or as a collection of PHP files that call each other? And how does the connect with the HTML markup? -- Rick Lecoat Rick: I often use the following analogy for my students (I teach web languages at my local college). A web site is like a house. You have the foundation, framing, rafters, and general construction which can be viewed as HTML -- it's the glue that holds everything together. You have wall paint (color), flooring (carpets/wood), siding (vinyl/brick), and roof (shingles/steel) which can be viewed as CSS -- it's the way the house looks. The house also provides water, electricity, and heat/cooling to the user -- that's the functionality which PHP provides. The house also has behavior in that you can turn on/off the lights, water, furnace, air conditioning, and open/close windows and doors -- that's Javascript. And then lastly, you need a place to store all the paperwork such as bills, insurance papers, and deed -- that's MySQL. Put all those elements together properly and you'll create a fully functional web site. With respect to PHP, it is a server-side language that delivers to the Browser data that the Browser in turn parses and presents the resultant web page to the user. Much of this is done via HTML, which can be provided by PHP. In fact, PHP can provide/create all the web languages provided to the Browser -- this includes HTML, CSS, JavaScript, data, as well as access to MySQL. PHP is a very powerful language. As for all the PHP files ending up as one file, no. But all the scripts (in whatever language) contribute their offerings to the Browser which in turn renders the web page. A truly functional web site is far more than a static web page. HTH's tedd _ t...@sperling.com http://sperling.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] w3c mobile validator and html5?
On 12 Dec 2011, at 21:18, Phil Archer wrote: Hi Nancy, On 12/12/2011 20:25, Nancy Johnson wrote: I have been moving image sizing to the style sheet and not left inline.. NNo!!! That's one thing that the mobile checker is definitely good for - stopping this bad practice of using CSS to define the size of an image and, even worse, using CSS to resize the image. W3C Best Practice: http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#IMAGES_SPECIFY_SIZE My take on it: http://philarcher.org/diary/2011/phpimageadaptation/ That’s a great article Phil, so thanks for sharing. As somebody who is completely unversed in PHP, however, I was having a hard time figuring out how all the pieces fit together. Do they end up as one PHP file? or as a collection of PHP files that call each other? And how does the connect with the HTML markup? Any chance that you can you expand upon your explanation for PHP no-nothings like me? The article is fantastic on detail, but I think I need help forming an overview. Thanks, and warmest regards; -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] w3c mobile validator and html5?
On 12/12/2011 17:18, Nancy Johnson wrote: I noticed this validator only checks for xhtml 1.1 basic or mp1.2. Is it going to checking again html5? http://validator.w3.org/mobile/ Not to my knowledge, no. You could argue that it's aimed at older generations of phones/browsers. What about media queries... Is the mobile checker suitable for if you are creating one set of htmls code and for mulitple devices? No. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ __ twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] w3c mobile validator and html5?
On 12/12/2011 17:28, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: On 12/12/2011 17:18, Nancy Johnson wrote: I noticed this validator only checks for xhtml 1.1 basic or mp1.2. Is it going to checking again html5? http://validator.w3.org/mobile/ Not to my knowledge, no. You could argue that it's aimed at older generations of phones/browsers. We (W3C) have been discussing this issue. The mobile checker is an implementation of the mobileOK Basic Tests [1] which is the machine testable subset of the Mobile Web Best Practices [2]. As long as that is true we have: - a checker rooted firmly in a specification - which is a good thing; - a checker that is growing old and, as is obvious, increasingly out of date - which is a bad thing. If we were to update the checker to, for example, cover HTML5 or any other technology (CSS3, SVG or whatever) then how would we root that in a spec? It becomes a dynamic system without a reference point. Now - since a lot of work went in to the checker (and the specs behind it) and it's a potentially useful tool, we don't want to lose it. However, we would need some sort of community effort to determine what the checker would check. There's also an issue of cost - maintaining the validation suite means writing new code. For now, I think we can say that the mobileOK checker is a useful guide. A lot of the best practices are still entirely valid. Taken with the Mobile Web Applications Best Practices [3] they form good advice to any mobile developer. However, it does need some interpretation - which is a pity. For example, the checker will warn you if you don't use the application/xhtml+xml MIME type. If you're coding in HTML5 that's simply wrong and I haven't seen an instance where there's an advantage in using the XHTML MIME type. The checker will scream at you if you don't include cache control or image dimensions - those are very much right! What about media queries... Is the mobile checker suitable for if you are creating one set of htmls code and for mulitple devices? No. I'd say not yet. What we need is the mechanism for how to manage change and how to effect change in the checker. Keep nagging us - that might help us get it higher on the agenda. HTH Phil. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK-basic10-tests/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/ [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/mwabp/ -- Phil Archer W3C eGovernment http://www.w3.org/egov/ http://philarcher.org @philarcher1 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] w3c mobile validator and html5?
Thanks, I love the more graphical layout and organization putting critical issues on top. The checker told me a number of very useful things like my page size is too large, not to use event handlers I went and found a wai-aria model that I think will work instead.. I have been moving image sizing to the style sheet and not left inline.. Take care, Nancy Johnson On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Phil Archer ph...@w3.org wrote: On 12/12/2011 17:28, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: On 12/12/2011 17:18, Nancy Johnson wrote: I noticed this validator only checks for xhtml 1.1 basic or mp1.2. Is it going to checking again html5? http://validator.w3.org/mobile/ Not to my knowledge, no. You could argue that it's aimed at older generations of phones/browsers. We (W3C) have been discussing this issue. The mobile checker is an implementation of the mobileOK Basic Tests [1] which is the machine testable subset of the Mobile Web Best Practices [2]. As long as that is true we have: - a checker rooted firmly in a specification - which is a good thing; - a checker that is growing old and, as is obvious, increasingly out of date - which is a bad thing. If we were to update the checker to, for example, cover HTML5 or any other technology (CSS3, SVG or whatever) then how would we root that in a spec? It becomes a dynamic system without a reference point. Now - since a lot of work went in to the checker (and the specs behind it) and it's a potentially useful tool, we don't want to lose it. However, we would need some sort of community effort to determine what the checker would check. There's also an issue of cost - maintaining the validation suite means writing new code. For now, I think we can say that the mobileOK checker is a useful guide. A lot of the best practices are still entirely valid. Taken with the Mobile Web Applications Best Practices [3] they form good advice to any mobile developer. However, it does need some interpretation - which is a pity. For example, the checker will warn you if you don't use the application/xhtml+xml MIME type. If you're coding in HTML5 that's simply wrong and I haven't seen an instance where there's an advantage in using the XHTML MIME type. The checker will scream at you if you don't include cache control or image dimensions - those are very much right! What about media queries... Is the mobile checker suitable for if you are creating one set of htmls code and for mulitple devices? No. I'd say not yet. What we need is the mechanism for how to manage change and how to effect change in the checker. Keep nagging us - that might help us get it higher on the agenda. HTH Phil. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK-basic10-tests/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/ [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/mwabp/ -- Phil Archer W3C eGovernment http://www.w3.org/egov/ http://philarcher.org @philarcher1 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] w3c mobile validator and html5?
Hi Nancy, On 12/12/2011 20:25, Nancy Johnson wrote: Thanks, I love the more graphical layout and organization putting critical issues on top. Yes, that's a good feature. There's a half-made plan to use the same design for the main validator but it's a big job. [..] I have been moving image sizing to the style sheet and not left inline.. NNo!!! That's one thing that the mobile checker is definitely good for - stopping this bad practice of using CSS to define the size of an image and, even worse, using CSS to resize the image. W3C Best Practice: http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/#IMAGES_SPECIFY_SIZE My take on it: http://philarcher.org/diary/2011/phpimageadaptation/ HTH Phil. On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Phil Archerph...@w3.org wrote: On 12/12/2011 17:28, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: On 12/12/2011 17:18, Nancy Johnson wrote: I noticed this validator only checks for xhtml 1.1 basic or mp1.2. Is it going to checking again html5? http://validator.w3.org/mobile/ Not to my knowledge, no. You could argue that it's aimed at older generations of phones/browsers. We (W3C) have been discussing this issue. The mobile checker is an implementation of the mobileOK Basic Tests [1] which is the machine testable subset of the Mobile Web Best Practices [2]. As long as that is true we have: - a checker rooted firmly in a specification - which is a good thing; - a checker that is growing old and, as is obvious, increasingly out of date - which is a bad thing. If we were to update the checker to, for example, cover HTML5 or any other technology (CSS3, SVG or whatever) then how would we root that in a spec? It becomes a dynamic system without a reference point. Now - since a lot of work went in to the checker (and the specs behind it) and it's a potentially useful tool, we don't want to lose it. However, we would need some sort of community effort to determine what the checker would check. There's also an issue of cost - maintaining the validation suite means writing new code. For now, I think we can say that the mobileOK checker is a useful guide. A lot of the best practices are still entirely valid. Taken with the Mobile Web Applications Best Practices [3] they form good advice to any mobile developer. However, it does need some interpretation - which is a pity. For example, the checker will warn you if you don't use the application/xhtml+xml MIME type. If you're coding in HTML5 that's simply wrong and I haven't seen an instance where there's an advantage in using the XHTML MIME type. The checker will scream at you if you don't include cache control or image dimensions - those are very much right! What about media queries... Is the mobile checker suitable for if you are creating one set of htmls code and for mulitple devices? No. I'd say not yet. What we need is the mechanism for how to manage change and how to effect change in the checker. Keep nagging us - that might help us get it higher on the agenda. HTH Phil. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK-basic10-tests/ [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/mobile-bp/ [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/mwabp/ -- Phil Archer W3C eGovernment http://www.w3.org/egov/ http://philarcher.org @philarcher1 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
