[WSG] iframes
Hi, What is the consensus of iframes? I've heard they've been deprecated, could some point me to articles on their impact on accessibility? C ** 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] iframes
Chris,
I can't speak to iframes because I use the CSS overflow style, which provides
the same basic
functionality, but requires using absolute positioning, and the height should
be insufficient to
contain the text, which will automatically generate a scroll bar:
#news
{position: absolute;
top: 65%;
left: 65%;
height: 185px;
width: 155px;
overflow: auto;
text-align: left;
border: 2px inset #fff;
padding: 0 5px;
background-color: #dd;}
Respectfully submitted,
Mario S. Cisneros
Hi,
What is the consensus of iframes? I've heard they've been deprecated, could
some point me to
articles on their impact on accessibility?
C
**
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] iframes
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't speak to iframes because I use the CSS overflow style, which provides the same basic functionality, but requires using absolute positioning, For the record, the div + css overflow does NOT have to be absolute position. It can be block, or relative, or asbolute, or heck- i bet inline would work too (perhaps not semantically, but overflow/scorll bars should still come out) ** 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] iframes
If you're using the iFrame to pull an external site into a box in your own site, I've been using object for that. But I'm not sure on the cross-browser status on that.
RE: [WSG] iframes
I used a 3 iframe layout on a site which i did before i was aware of web standards. There was a problem with a scoll bar showing up where it wasnt supposed to in ie but otherthan that it worked all right. I havnt used them since then. here is the url. www.strykelacrosse.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Brian Cummiskey Sent: 17 August 2005 21:53 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] iframes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can't speak to iframes because I use the CSS overflow style, which provides the same basic functionality, but requires using absolute positioning, For the record, the div + css overflow does NOT have to be absolute position. It can be block, or relative, or asbolute, or heck- i bet inline would work too (perhaps not semantically, but overflow/scorll bars should still come out) ** 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
The voices are telling me that Lee Roberts said on 7/8/2004 7:45 AM: JavaScript was created in 1994 by the Netscape Communications Corporation. Probably worth saying Brendan Eich about here. I believe most folks credit him with a substantial part of the work. -- Rev. Bob Bob Crispen bob at crispen dot org Ex Cathedra Weblog: http://blog.crispen.org/ Don't ask yourself what the world needs - ask yourself what makes you come alive, and then go do it. Because what the world needs is people who have come alive. -- Howard Thurman * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
FYI: http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1086387609order=1count=10 Good read. Hit some points I tried to hit but failed :) Scott Scott Barnes wrote: Hi All, Firstly thankyou for contributing in this discussion, i know most of you are probably feeling who is this clown, attacking W3C. This is not infact the case, I am merely trying to get an overall understanding of why and where bodies like the W3C will be in the future. In doing so i have illustrated what in my mind is a flaw, in that the W3C is made up of a few selected Elite, and the little guy you, me and every other developer out their has no voice on the subject matter of whether DOM should be refined or whether some obscure CSS property is retrofitted accordingly. A few points have been made that Democracy in this case would be a fatal blow to the overall purpose of what the W3C represents. I find that a very hard thing to stomach and believe that a few would simply say that a vote would be a long drawn out exhausting process. To me if we can elect people within our society (in some countries) to run an entire country based on information we are given? Surely its not that much of a stretch in imagination to ask that we the ACTUAL development community have a say in the way standards are put forward to the world to follow? Its not a very large request? At some point the W3C have to cast some kind of vote to go forward on something along those lines, and thats where I would love to see us contribute. I'm not for a total abolishment of the W3C, they serve a purpose well, but I feel we should either be a virtual member (ie we the people collectively make one vote at least) or we ultimatley decide the outcome based on what they have put forward? We aren't dealing with an amount of people who cast their vote because its the most popular at the time, we are a diverse amount of individuals who come from every known social background with a huge array of beliefs and vast amounts of life experience! It is a radical idea that I know, but for me as a developer to take the W3C seriously, i need at least some sense of ownership, otherwise its just another collection of windbags telling me how technology should be run the standards way. I put it to you, a country today were to sit back and say to the people yeah, we have decided that in order to best run the country, we will select a few of our so called elite, they will make the choices on how we we will be governed and you go about your lives, as democracy isn't as easy as it sounds and you'll just drag us back. insert war here I've been making websites since i think 1996 or was it 1995, I've seen the HTML go from a very basic format into what it is now, some may have been around longer but the point is, i've seen it at its best, and I've seen it at its worst. I've seen browsers dictate the outcomes of many a standard and we are paying the price for it now. In years to come, i have serious doubt the W3C will in fact be a worthwile group? bold statement I know, but I say this as technology like FLEX and Microsofts AXML are trying their hardest to push the HTML browser out the door. Reason is its just too slow and way to many flavours out there, thus the standardss are required. I wonder now what impact it would have on the future of the Internet and products like this, if the concept above were to come true and we the developers did cast our vote? how much faster would things maybe done? How fast would technologies like XUL or similiar flavour evolve if their was a large majority shaping and moulding HTML to evolve in parrell with these languages. Microsoft are one clear major player who have seen how HTML has mutated into this thinware deployment system, where you could write applications to do day to day tasks, with minimal payload and in many cases Operating System Independent. Joel on Software (google it) put in perspective that in many ways the browser could end up being the virtual operating system where you utilise the overall browser as your base framework, that runs many operations (whether they be applications or presentations). They appear to see this is a big advantage to an existing operating system, thus Longhorn products are born, allowing developers a standard, that be microsofts, way of developing thinware applications with minimal development time. HTML has served its purpose and it feels like it was the first prototype for what may in years to come be a more advanced protocol in the way we handle computer experiences. For now, XHTML seems to be setup and evolved soley to bring order back to chaos, but its growing slowly in many ways and it's not accepting the fact that backward compatibility is a must. We are far too deep entrenched in TAG soup country. W3C have had the luxury of saying to the world do it this way please but they in now way are helping to enforce the standards they make? its more of a reference point and thats
RE: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Interesting read, but seems they also propose we cease developing for IE. Microsoft doesn't want to improve their software because they want to do it their way. Sure, they have representatives working with the W3C and is a full member. But, as was realized during Thursday's conference call they simply don't care about meeting standards. They claim people have a choice. Let's examine that for a moment. Twenty percent of the Internet population is disabled. Approximately 80% of those have low vision or are blind. So, those using screen readers like JAWS show up in stats as IE users. So, let's take 18% from the 85% and were now down to 67% of the world using IE. Another 3 or 4 percent use Opera and give the impression that they are using IE so they can get pass the garbage codes. Now, we're down to approximately 63%. Dang, where did all those IE users go? Don't ever think people don't use other browsers. And don't be fooled by Microsoft's statement that people have no choice. We already see 18 - 22% don't have a choice in how their browser is identified or what they can use. Now Microsoft wants to embed IE more into their operating system. Watch people not upgrade. I know I won't. I'll be using Linux when I upgrade. I already use Firefox and Netscape more than anything else. I will have to find a word processor and email client I that offers me the features I want. My position on standards is that all developers should follow them. I won't hire anyone that refuses to learn and use them. Unfortunately, part of our shopping cart requires Microsoft technologies which I hate but have no current alternate option. Lee Roberts http://www.roserockdesign.com http://www.applepiecart.com -Original Message- From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2004 6:34 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) FYI: http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1086387609order=1count=10 Good read. Hit some points I tried to hit but failed :) Scott Scott Barnes wrote: Hi All, Firstly thankyou for contributing in this discussion, i know most of you are probably feeling who is this clown, attacking W3C. This is not infact the case, I am merely trying to get an overall understanding of why and where bodies like the W3C will be in the future. In doing so i have illustrated what in my mind is a flaw, in that the W3C is made up of a few selected Elite, and the little guy you, me and every other developer out their has no voice on the subject matter of whether DOM should be refined or whether some obscure CSS property is retrofitted accordingly. A few points have been made that Democracy in this case would be a fatal blow to the overall purpose of what the W3C represents. I find that a very hard thing to stomach and believe that a few would simply say that a vote would be a long drawn out exhausting process. To me if we can elect people within our society (in some countries) to run an entire country based on information we are given? Surely its not that much of a stretch in imagination to ask that we the ACTUAL development community have a say in the way standards are put forward to the world to follow? Its not a very large request? At some point the W3C have to cast some kind of vote to go forward on something along those lines, and thats where I would love to see us contribute. I'm not for a total abolishment of the W3C, they serve a purpose well, but I feel we should either be a virtual member (ie we the people collectively make one vote at least) or we ultimatley decide the outcome based on what they have put forward? We aren't dealing with an amount of people who cast their vote because its the most popular at the time, we are a diverse amount of individuals who come from every known social background with a huge array of beliefs and vast amounts of life experience! It is a radical idea that I know, but for me as a developer to take the W3C seriously, i need at least some sense of ownership, otherwise its just another collection of windbags telling me how technology should be run the standards way. I put it to you, a country today were to sit back and say to the people yeah, we have decided that in order to best run the country, we will select a few of our so called elite, they will make the choices on how we we will be governed and you go about your lives, as democracy isn't as easy as it sounds and you'll just drag us back. insert war here I've been making websites since i think 1996 or was it 1995, I've seen the HTML go from a very basic format into what it is now, some may have been around longer but the point is, i've seen it at its best, and I've seen it at its worst. I've seen browsers dictate the outcomes of many a standard and we are paying the price for it now. In years to come, i have serious doubt the W3C will in fact be a worthwile
Re: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Hugh Todd wrote: Scott, you said, If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? True, its just amazing how we blindly follow a cluster of people? based on the fact we hero-worship them in some way or form? What if they actually put concepts to a public vote? the web itself could vote on yes (you couldn't ask for a more diverse separated parallel society), lets abolish/implement xyz or no lets not? In that set a time frame, all votes are final, done. Wonder how a concept like this, in its basic democratic form would impact on future browser development? At the moment most browser development teams probably could only hazard a guess on what features to make w3c compliant and what ones not to (can't do them all in one hit in that or implement new approved standards). To me this would give me the little a guy at least a voice in something, while at the same time giving Browser based technologies out there an actual statistical impact study on what actual new/old issues are hot vs ones aren't furthermore it gives me the little guy who would like to help shape the online language we have come to know and love. I mean, I'm sure the people in the w3c gang are really smart monkeys, but like all clusters of people, politics could end up driving it (whether it be some small hidden demon within who voted No on something purely because the guy who thought it up made a bad XMAS party joke about him)? its why we as a society just fail at coming to a collective decision on topics unless a majority ruling is in fact in place (look to local governments). I dunno, personally i have set reservations on webstandards being set and expected to be followed no questions asked. You can join and contribute ideas to the w3c but i can't find anywhere where i can participate in some way as to how end decisions get made? unless i am an organization that appears to pay for such privilege? Like all open free good ideas, they are great on paper, but it needs money to make them work. So to answer your question, Who would elect such a body why my good man, The web. As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? far-sighted? or near-sighted? how do you measure their progress on a daily basis? furthermore what impact are they having on new features? are they simply there for profile sake, are they active? do they embrace new technology with just as much passion as we seem to do? or are they traditional conservative people? ... in other words just because they invented the web many a year ago, is it a big ask for us to follow their lead still? or is it a matter of retiring the old lion and make way for the upstart cub? Scott. Down with proprietory solutions, I say! -Hugh Todd * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Scott wrote: [quote]I dunno, personally i have set reservations on webstandards being set and expected to be followed no questions asked. You can join and contribute ideas to the w3c but i can't find anywhere where i can participate in some way as to how end decisions get made? unless i am an organization that appears to pay for such privilege?[/quote] If you want to participate please let me know in what manner or group you would like to participate. I'll get you where you need to be. Lee Roberts http://www.roserockdesign.com http://www.applepiecart.com -Original Message- From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 12:22 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Hugh Todd wrote: Scott, you said, If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? True, its just amazing how we blindly follow a cluster of people? based on the fact we hero-worship them in some way or form? What if they actually put concepts to a public vote? the web itself could vote on yes (you couldn't ask for a more diverse separated parallel society), lets abolish/implement xyz or no lets not? In that set a time frame, all votes are final, done. Wonder how a concept like this, in its basic democratic form would impact on future browser development? At the moment most browser development teams probably could only hazard a guess on what features to make w3c compliant and what ones not to (can't do them all in one hit in that or implement new approved standards). To me this would give me the little a guy at least a voice in something, while at the same time giving Browser based technologies out there an actual statistical impact study on what actual new/old issues are hot vs ones aren't furthermore it gives me the little guy who would like to help shape the online language we have come to know and love. I mean, I'm sure the people in the w3c gang are really smart monkeys, but like all clusters of people, politics could end up driving it (whether it be some small hidden demon within who voted No on something purely because the guy who thought it up made a bad XMAS party joke about him)? its why we as a society just fail at coming to a collective decision on topics unless a majority ruling is in fact in place (look to local governments). I dunno, personally i have set reservations on webstandards being set and expected to be followed no questions asked. You can join and contribute ideas to the w3c but i can't find anywhere where i can participate in some way as to how end decisions get made? unless i am an organization that appears to pay for such privilege? Like all open free good ideas, they are great on paper, but it needs money to make them work. So to answer your question, Who would elect such a body why my good man, The web. As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? far-sighted? or near-sighted? how do you measure their progress on a daily basis? furthermore what impact are they having on new features? are they simply there for profile sake, are they active? do they embrace new technology with just as much passion as we seem to do? or are they traditional conservative people? ... in other words just because they invented the web many a year ago, is it a big ask for us to follow their lead still? or is it a matter of retiring the old lion and make way for the upstart cub? Scott. Down with proprietory solutions, I say! -Hugh Todd * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Lee Roberts wrote: Scott wants to know who voted the W3C the ruling authority. That was me! 20 years on the *net gave me that right. Oh so you were the one? hehehehe Seriously, though, who voted the ISO or IETF to be authoritative enough to establish rules for people using the Internet and World Wide Web, oh yes there is a difference? Who established the rules for the World Wide Web which ethical designers and developers attempt to follow? If web development is your job, don't you think you should be good enough to follow the rules established? If you were a construction builder wouldn't you have to follow rules? As for iframe, I don't like it either. I've used it once, but the page it was pulling in was a flash communications presentation for my radio show. As for frames, they were the most ignorant thing ever created. Personally, they should be allowed to exist today, but for some reason we can't get rid of them by some developers. Well, to answer that i dare you to walk into any web-based enterprise that has a DHTML intranet, and say the following words: Get rid of IFRAMES, and use something else Wear some padding, as the fall from the window could be high. hehe Seriously, lets get into the whole iframe use. 508 stuff, not up to speed on, but most DHTML based applications would be a luxury to get 508 compatible. SOE are a saviour to the DHTML breed, and while i try to make as much as my applications close to being accessible with usability it just doesn't happen. IFRAME = Internal frame, if we are to emulate the client-top generation of software within a browser, its the one little trick we have left. As for using them on the web? well i used them many years ago for my personal site, simply because it was easy at the time (mind my site is horrible, needs bad need of update/doover). Making an actual public website today, seems to be one big juggling act imho, and i'm glad i'm not really required to be a public facade developer and more a SOE. You have to keep in mind, there are two main clusters using the web browser / html language. Internal Corporations and Public Users, while one thing works for one, ther other percentage works for another etc. The real problem with frames is people don't know how to use them in the first place. Second, they lack any real features for accessibility. For SEO purposes they are really bad. Frames were allowed in the beginning because browsers didn't have very good caching abilities. Now that they do, you don't need them. They won't help. That or i'd put it in another way in that they existed for the ability to dynamically render information on screen, while keeping other parts static reducing overall latency and downloads. Perhaps that will help some. Scrolling DIVs at least put all the information on the same page, unless you plan on pulling in another page. In my opinion the latter is a mistake. Search engines say all content must be visible, it never says you can't scroll a DIV to see all the information. Scrolling Divs also come with a higher penalty in that some browsers (namely Internet Explorer) pretty much will cain your memory if it contains large amounts of information, whilst an iframe for various unknown reasons to me, seem to keep the memory balance lower. Good and valid points though. Regards Scott Barnes Sincerely, Lee Roberts http://www.roserockdesign.com http://www.applepiecart.com -Original Message- From: Hugh Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Scott, you said, If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? Down with proprietory solutions, I say! -Hugh Todd * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
awww... that's a bit rough on IFRAMES (and framsets in general)... we're building web applications, not web pages per se. We're being influenced by various windows UI's (more than just MS Windows) because that's the standard that people expect. We're also pushing ahead as far as a web platform will allow (using DHTML without going too far down the Flash UI route). to do that with dynamic content and without iframes/framsets is just silly. Look at your Windows Explorer. you see more than one independent pane that interacts. Look at (admittedly old hat) Outlook Web Access (OWA - a clunky but workable ASP web front for Outlook). you just can't build that sort of functionality without frames. you *might* with JS remoting calls changing the innerHTML of divs but it would be such a massive headache to maintain such a convoluted page structure (logic, not layout). I waited years for IFRAMES to be cross browser (well, a couple anyway). Don't you dare take them away now... just my 2c (while bored writing db connection code) barry.b -Original Message- From: Lee Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 8 July 2004 3:56 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Scott wants to know who voted the W3C the ruling authority. That was me! 20 years on the *net gave me that right. Seriously, though, who voted the ISO or IETF to be authoritative enough to establish rules for people using the Internet and World Wide Web, oh yes there is a difference? Who established the rules for the World Wide Web which ethical designers and developers attempt to follow? If web development is your job, don't you think you should be good enough to follow the rules established? If you were a construction builder wouldn't you have to follow rules? As for iframe, I don't like it either. I've used it once, but the page it was pulling in was a flash communications presentation for my radio show. As for frames, they were the most ignorant thing ever created. Personally, they should be allowed to exist today, but for some reason we can't get rid of them by some developers. The real problem with frames is people don't know how to use them in the first place. Second, they lack any real features for accessibility. For SEO purposes they are really bad. Frames were allowed in the beginning because browsers didn't have very good caching abilities. Now that they do, you don't need them. They won't help. Perhaps that will help some. Scrolling DIVs at least put all the information on the same page, unless you plan on pulling in another page. In my opinion the latter is a mistake. Search engines say all content must be visible, it never says you can't scroll a DIV to see all the information. Sincerely, Lee Roberts http://www.roserockdesign.com http://www.applepiecart.com -Original Message- From: Hugh Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Scott, you said, If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? Down with proprietory solutions, I say! -Hugh Todd * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Lee Roberts wrote: Scott wrote: [quote]I dunno, personally i have set reservations on webstandards being set and expected to be followed no questions asked. You can join and contribute ideas to the w3c but i can't find anywhere where i can participate in some way as to how end decisions get made? unless i am an organization that appears to pay for such privilege?[/quote] If you want to participate please let me know in what manner or group you would like to participate. I'll get you where you need to be. Yes, I'll forward that on in a bit, but is this a who you need to know in order to participate or is it an open forum? I mean, i'm talking things like basic polls, we login through a serious of identification checks to validate you are one person, click vote yes/no log out? Is this possible for individuals? Scott * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Scott, from an accessibility perspective, I put http://www.seowebsitepromotion.com/enigma_log.htm together the other day. It advocates the move to accessibility and standards from a humanist perspective. Now a more pragmatic approach - Sound like you're looking for an ROI reward-based argument. Well ... in the UK alone, silver surfers are a 14 ?billion market. Many will take advantage of text resizing in their browsers to make surfing a little more tolerable. Accessibility is build upon W3C standards. Get those sorted and the rest is easy. The point being, the more standardised your markup, the more traffic, from search engines whose spiders can more easily index the copy, to users who can more easily navigate, view and, if ecommerce, buy products ... and who will more readily bookmark the site simply because it is usable. Now throw in people with various impairments and the equation becomes more than just viable, it is vital to capture and retain their spending power by building sites to which they will gladly return and exercise their right to vote accessible. Now ... look to the future and we have a whole bunch of PDAs, WAP-enabled cellphones, tablet PCs and emergent technology whose screen sizes will vary but whose OS's (albeit proprietary in many instances) will accept X(HT)ML feeds. This is the present and the future. We're talking big, accessible, standards-compliant bucks. Without standards (irrespective of the who, why and wherefore of the originating bodies) web development would ramble on in the wilderness with numerous competing technologies vying for position and developers writing disparate browser-specific markup with a total disregard for the issues faced by either impaired users or those who elect to use non mainstream browsers like the Geckos, Opera or whatever. In my view, it's a falsehood to suggest that standards-compliant markup is a challenge to embrace. In comparison to using FrontPage or similar WYSIWYG editors then, yes, having to develop W3C compliant code and get your hands dirty is more time consuming and requires a greater knowledge base and effort on the part of the developer. But Web development, professional development, is not an easy task. Like any skill, their is a period of apprenticeship ... and some body - our peers and dare I say betters - must set the entrance and exit exams - the standards - to which we aspire. I take an active part in a few of these bodies because 1., I believe in what is happening within the industry, the move towards Time Berners-Lee's vision of a fully accessible communications medium available to all nations and individuals on the planet and 2., I like being paid to offer my clients a greater return on investment than they would otherwise expect from non-compliant development. It's good common business sense and a courtesy to develop for as great an audience as reasonably practicable. Mike Pepper Accessible Web Developer (after a good night's sleep, and a weird dream) www.seowebsitepromotion.com Administrator www.gawds.org -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Scott Barnes Sent: 08 July 2004 05:27 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Q. I've been on the List for a while now, and while i love the webstandards concept, i'm finding it hard to believe that the web will adjust itself to suite extensions like XHTML? The reason i say this is if we were to make a concious decision to move forward, it would be years 5+ before we would even see a shift in its coding standards alone, not to mention implementing STRICT. If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). To me, tags like iframe are being used and quite a lot and do do away with them, is in many ways the kiss of death for movements like this, as you will be faught all the way. Even though the tag is a wrapper (defined in DTD) in many ways for the HTML Object it still leaves me wondering why tags like iframe aren't valid? to me they seemed harmless along with tags like B to STRONG so forth. Not to mention the web is looking to shift away from browsers, and move more to native XML packets to run its presentation layer on applications (ie MXML, AXML, XFORMS etc). It just seems lately to be a futile battle, and extensive one and yet no real gains? why would a developer go out of his/her way to learn XHTML? I personally use strict XHTML as its the only real DTD that fixes the Box Model bug in both IE Mozilla (consistencey). Its got added pain, but i'm used to it now.. but others well they'd go too hard pile Regards Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com Brian Cummiskey wrote: Scott Barnes wrote: Are you absolutly positive about iframes not being available in strict XHTML? because I've got
Re: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Scott, Yes, I'll forward that on in a bit, but is this a who you need to know in order to participate or is it an open forum? I have to say I think this open forum idea would be so completely unwieldy as to completely bog down progress for ever. It takes some time and mental application to even get a web standards approach, let alone be able to say anything intelligent about how to propel it forwards. What we have is a set of driving principles, which are evolving over time. The way I see it, there are two strong drivers to standards. 1) The things web designers would like to be able to do in web pages, like positioning content, controlling type, or (looking to emerging standards) opacity, or new ways to create borders, or whatever else floats to the top of the general wishlist that designers express to each other and to the W3C. 2) Achieving these things in ways that promote accessibility, adaptability to various user agents, and whistle-clean HTML code. The fact that there may be some quite limited group of people who actually decide how to implement these things does not worry me. I know that if they get it wrong there'll be hell to pay from people like me, so they have a strong incentive to get it right. There's a difference, though, between giving them stick because they don't adhere to the principles outlined above, and criticizing them for recommending the deprecation of technologies that don't fit with the grand vision in driver 2. If web design were a completely professional occupation like law or medicine, maybe we could elect our own standards body. But the present arrangement, with Sir Tim at the helm, the browser manufacturers represented and the creme de la creme of web thinkers getting involved by a process of recognition and sound contributions, seems to me to deliver a good result. It's not too dissimilar to open source software. Proposals for improvements, peer discussion, and the best implementation wins. -Hugh Todd * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Why don't you participate in one of the working groups? That would lend your experience and possibly make things better. Lee Roberts -Original Message- From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 1:06 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Lee Roberts wrote: Scott wrote: [quote]I dunno, personally i have set reservations on webstandards being set and expected to be followed no questions asked. You can join and contribute ideas to the w3c but i can't find anywhere where i can participate in some way as to how end decisions get made? unless i am an organization that appears to pay for such privilege?[/quote] If you want to participate please let me know in what manner or group you would like to participate. I'll get you where you need to be. Yes, I'll forward that on in a bit, but is this a who you need to know in order to participate or is it an open forum? I mean, i'm talking things like basic polls, we login through a serious of identification checks to validate you are one person, click vote yes/no log out? Is this possible for individuals? Scott * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Scott Barnes wrote: I will say that the user of Object tag was a new one for me.. is there any compatibility issues out there for using it that you know off? I understand your thinking, and the whole it's the cool thing to do but it honestly does have its advantages if used correctly. The SEO side of things, as well as more portable, easier to update, cleaner code base. As for the object tag, I'm not familiar with any of its limitations, if any. To me, it sounds like there could be some issues with it. I'm not too familair with it, but I remember there being a different method for both IE and NN browsers back in the day- I just can't recall what it was. Something about codebase vs something else- It's early morning, and i'm not fully awake yet. need mroe coffee :) But, the problem with the object tag is that it relies a lot of the user's browser more than anything to actually pull of the inclusion- and again, to me, that's server side territory. * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Now why did you go and do that? Now I have to give someone else a history lesson this week. JavaScript was created in 1994 by the Netscape Communications Corporation. CSS was created in 1996 and released as a specification December 17, 1996. DHMTL was created in 1996 when CSS was released. There are many that think JavaScript or JScript allowed the creation of DHTML. Regrettably, that was never the case. If you visit any of those DHTML scripting sites you'll notice they do not include any form of CSS. JavaScript cannot change HTML, only CSS can change HTML. Therefore, CSS makes HTML dynamic. DOM was created in 1998. [quote]Dynamic HTML is a term used by some vendors to describe the combination of HTML, style sheets and scripts that allows documents to be animated. The W3C has received several submissions from members companies on the way in which the object model of HTML documents should be exposed to scripts. These submissions do not propose any new HTML tags or style sheet technology. The W3C DOM Activity is working hard to make sure interoperable and scripting-language neutral solutions are agreed upon.[quote] So, any shop or company that uses hack-programmers claiming to know DHTML and they want to give me a bunch of JavaScript, I simply tell them to take a hike off a short pier. There are a few things we cannot do with CSS that we can do with JavaScript, but certainly validating a form prior to submitting is not dynamic HTML. Neither is providing a clock. Nor JavaScript menus. Use CSS for menus and you got it made in the dynamics of HTML. Lee Roberts http://www.roserockdesign.com http://www.applepiecart.com PS: I'll let someone else change the subject if they like. -Original Message- From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 12:50 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Lee Roberts wrote: Scott wants to know who voted the W3C the ruling authority. That was me! 20 years on the *net gave me that right. Oh so you were the one? hehehehe Seriously, though, who voted the ISO or IETF to be authoritative enough to establish rules for people using the Internet and World Wide Web, oh yes there is a difference? Who established the rules for the World Wide Web which ethical designers and developers attempt to follow? If web development is your job, don't you think you should be good enough to follow the rules established? If you were a construction builder wouldn't you have to follow rules? As for iframe, I don't like it either. I've used it once, but the page it was pulling in was a flash communications presentation for my radio show. As for frames, they were the most ignorant thing ever created. Personally, they should be allowed to exist today, but for some reason we can't get rid of them by some developers. Well, to answer that i dare you to walk into any web-based enterprise that has a DHTML intranet, and say the following words: Get rid of IFRAMES, and use something else Wear some padding, as the fall from the window could be high. hehe Seriously, lets get into the whole iframe use. 508 stuff, not up to speed on, but most DHTML based applications would be a luxury to get 508 compatible. SOE are a saviour to the DHTML breed, and while i try to make as much as my applications close to being accessible with usability it just doesn't happen. IFRAME = Internal frame, if we are to emulate the client-top generation of software within a browser, its the one little trick we have left. As for using them on the web? well i used them many years ago for my personal site, simply because it was easy at the time (mind my site is horrible, needs bad need of update/doover). Making an actual public website today, seems to be one big juggling act imho, and i'm glad i'm not really required to be a public facade developer and more a SOE. You have to keep in mind, there are two main clusters using the web browser / html language. Internal Corporations and Public Users, while one thing works for one, ther other percentage works for another etc. The real problem with frames is people don't know how to use them in the first place. Second, they lack any real features for accessibility. For SEO purposes they are really bad. Frames were allowed in the beginning because browsers didn't have very good caching abilities. Now that they do, you don't need them. They won't help. That or i'd put it in another way in that they existed for the ability to dynamically render information on screen, while keeping other parts static reducing overall latency and downloads. Perhaps that will help some. Scrolling DIVs at least put all the information on the same page, unless you plan on pulling in another page. In my opinion the latter is a mistake. Search engines say all content must be visible, it never says you can't scroll a DIV to see all the information
RE: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Well, to answer that i dare you to walk into any web-based enterprise that has a DHTML intranet, and say the following words: Get rid of IFRAMES, and use something else Wear some padding, as the fall from the window could be high. Scott Barnes I think this demonstrates why having the Web vote on what should be standards falls flat. Wallace Stegner wrote, I don't know what I like as much as I like what I know. Meaning, in this context, that people are likely to maintain what they know and are comfortable with rather than to move forward into concepts that force them to change. I work in a university and my guess if put to a vote we would have outlawed any sort of CSS-P and probably any CSS at all. These folks grew up on tables and font tags and are loathe to give them up. Sometimes it is good to have people with vision to lead people where they would not go themselves. Joe Huggins * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Hugh Todd wrote: I mean, I'm sure the people in the w3c gang are really smart monkeys, but like all clusters of people, politics could end up driving it (whether it be some small hidden demon within who voted No on something purely because the guy who thought it up made a bad XMAS party joke about him)? its why we as a society just fail at coming to a collective decision on topics unless a majority ruling is in fact in place (look to local governments). The way i see it is, if what the W3 distributes as a DTD can effect the way EVERY major browser on the market renders layout, who else really is there to follow? I can put: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//JoeSchmoe//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN http://www.joeschmoe.org//xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd; html xml:lang=en lang=en xmlns=http://www.joeschmoe.org/1999/xhtml; and well, guess what- We're back in quirks mode on most browsers. * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Hugh Todd wrote: Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? I was going to say somethig similar, but since you said it already, I'll just ad a quote from Benjamin Franklin: Democracy is two wolves and lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Brian, Just to deny that I wrote this. The attribution belongs to Scott Barnes, I think. My belief is that the W3C is much more accountable than Scott seems to imagine. -Hugh (Brian Cummiskey wrote: Hugh Todd wrote: I mean, I'm sure the people in the w3c gang are really smart monkeys, but like all clusters of people, politics could end up driving it (whether it be some small hidden demon within who voted No on something purely because the guy who thought it up made a bad XMAS party joke about him)? its why we as a society just fail at coming to a collective decision on topics unless a majority ruling is in fact in place (look to local governments). * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Lee: - If we examine the two statements as a computer would, we find a difference. Your statement clearly indicates that the book and chapter titles are on EACH page, meaning both elements. My statement clearly says the book title is on the left page and the chapter title is on the right page; both are not on each page. With boolean algebra your statement requires both to be true; mine requires only one to be true. Lee, did you see Bicentennial Man? :o) Mike Pepper (cheerful) Accessible Web Developer www.seowebsitepromotion.com Administrator www.gawds.org * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Hugh Todd wrote: Brian, Just to deny that I wrote this. The attribution belongs to Scott Barnes, I think. My belief is that the W3C is much more accountable than Scott seems to imagine. -Hugh Opps- Thunderbird handels multiple quoted messages poorly. I blame it fully for that error :) Couldn't possibly be user error :X * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
While your giving a history lesson, do you know when Sun first introduced Java Server Pages. Just need to check someone in not telling fibs on their CV. Please visit the PPA Website at: www.ppa.org.uk Rob O'NeillWeb Team ManagerPrescription Pricing AuthorityBridge House152 Pilgrim StreetNewcastle Upon TyneNE1 6SN email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: (0191) 203 5246ext: 5246 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/07/2004 13:45:15 Now why did you go and do that? Now I have to give someone else a historylesson this week._javascript_ was created in 1994 by the Netscape Communications Corporation. CSS was created in 1996 and released as a specification December 17, 1996. DHMTL was created in 1996 when CSS was released. There are many that think_javascript_ or JScript allowed the creation of DHTML. Regrettably, that wasnever the case. If you visit any of those DHTML scripting sites you'llnotice they do not include any form of CSS._javascript_ cannot change HTML, only CSS can change HTML. Therefore, CSSmakes HTML dynamic. DOM was created in 1998.[quote]"Dynamic HTML" is a term used by some vendors to describe thecombination of HTML, style sheets and scripts that allows documents to beanimated. The W3C has received several submissions from members companies onthe way i n which the object model of HTML documents should be exposed toscripts. These submissions do not propose any new HTML tags or style sheettechnology. The W3C DOM Activity is working hard to make sure interoperableand scripting-language neutral solutions are agreed upon.[quote]So, any shop or company that uses hack-programmers claiming to know DHTMLand they want to give me a bunch of _javascript_, I simply tell them to take ahike off a short pier.There are a few things we cannot do with CSS that we can do with _javascript_,but certainly validating a form prior to submitting is not dynamic HTML.Neither is providing a clock. Nor _javascript_ menus. Use CSS for menus andyou got it made in the dynamics of HTML.Lee Robertshttp://www.roserockdesign.comhttp://www.applepiecart.comPS: I'll let someone else change the subject if they like.- Original Message -From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 12:50 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)Lee Roberts wrote:Scott wants to know who voted the W3C the ruling authority.That was me! 20 years on the *net gave me that right. Oh so you were the one? heheheheSeriously, though, who voted the ISO or IETF to be authoritative enough to establish rules for people using the Internet and World Wide Web, oh yes there is a difference? Who established the rules for the World Wide Web which ethical designers and developers attempt to follow?If web development is your job, don't you think you should be good enough to follow the rules established? If you were a construction builder wouldn't you have to f ollow rules? As for iframe, I don't like it either. I've used it once, but the page it was pulling in was a flash communications presentation for my radioshow.As for frames, they were the most ignorant thing ever created. Personally, they should be allowed to exist today, but for some reason we can't get rid of them by some developers. Well, to answer that i dare you to walk into any web-based enterprise thathas a DHTML intranet, and say the following words:"Get rid of IFRAMES, and use something else"Wear some padding, as the fall from the window could be high.heheSeriously, lets get into the whole iframe use. 508 stuff, not up to speedon, but most DHTML based applications would be a luxury to get 508compatible. SOE are a saviour to the DHTML breed, and while i try to make asmuch as my applications close to being accessible with usability it justdoesn't happe n.IFRAME = Inter nal frame, if we are to emulate the client-top generation ofsoftware within a browser, its the one little trick we have left. As forusing them on the web? well i used them many years ago for my personal site,simply because it was easy at the time (mind my site is horrible, needsbad need of update/doover). Making an actual public website today,seems to be one big juggling act imho, and i'm glad i'm not really requiredto be a public facade developer and more a SOE.You have to keep in mind, there are two main clusters using the web browser/ html language. Internal Corporations and Public Users, while one thingworks for one, ther other percentage works for another etc.The real problem with frames is people don't know how to use them in the first place. Second, they lack any real features for accessibility. For SEO purposes they are really bad.Frames were allowed in the beginning becaus e browsers didn't have v ery good caching abilities. Now that they do, you don't need them. They won'thelp. That or i
Re: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
brian cummiskey wrote: Opps- Thunderbird handels multiple quoted messages poorly. I blame it fully for that error :) Couldn't possibly be user error :X That's funny. I usually find it does a better job than most. * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
-Original Message- From: Hugh Todd Scott, you said, If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? Down with proprietory solutions, I say! -Hugh Todd Agreed, and if you read the discussion on the WAI-GL (not something I would recommend, cause it can be incredibly boring), IMHO, those people working on the WAI standards are working very hard to be inclusive of every possibility, and the last thing they want to do is make life difficult for developers. That is the intention at least. It's a very difficult challenge to address accessibility requirements and and provide a set of open development standards. Geoff Deering * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
JSP was release June 2, 1999. Anything prior to that and they misrepresent themselves. http://java.sun.com/features/2000/06/time-line.html I hope that helps. Lee Roberts From: Robert O'Neill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 9:48 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) While your giving a history lesson, do you know when Sun first introduced Java Server Pages. Just need to check someone in not telling fibs on their CV. Please visit the PPA Website at: www.ppa.org.uk Rob O'NeillWeb Team ManagerPrescription Pricing AuthorityBridge House152 Pilgrim StreetNewcastle Upon TyneNE1 6SN email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: (0191) 203 5246ext: 5246 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/07/2004 13:45:15 Now why did you go and do that? Now I have to give someone else a historylesson this week._javascript_ was created in 1994 by the Netscape Communications Corporation. CSS was created in 1996 and released as a specification December 17, 1996. DHMTL was created in 1996 when CSS was released. There are many that think_javascript_ or JScript allowed the creation of DHTML. Regrettably, that wasnever the case. If you visit any of those DHTML scripting sites you'llnotice they do not include any form of CSS._javascript_ cannot change HTML, only CSS can change HTML. Therefore, CSSmakes HTML dynamic. DOM was created in 1998.[quote]"Dynamic HTML" is a term used by some vendors to describe thecombination of HTML, style sheets and scripts that allows documents to beanimated. The W3C has received several submissions from members companies onthe way i n which the object model of HTML documents should be exposed toscripts. These submissions do not propose any new HTML tags or style sheettechnology. The W3C DOM Activity is working hard to make sure interoperableand scripting-language neutral solutions are agreed upon.[quote]So, any shop or company that uses hack-programmers claiming to know DHTMLand they want to give me a bunch of _javascript_, I simply tell them to take ahike off a short pier.There are a few things we cannot do with CSS that we can do with _javascript_,but certainly validating a form prior to submitting is not dynamic HTML.Neither is providing a clock. Nor _javascript_ menus. Use CSS for menus andyou got it made in the dynamics of HTML.Lee Robertshttp://www.roserockdesign.comhttp://www.applepiecart.comPS: I'll let someone else change the subject if they like.- Original Message -From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 12:50 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)Lee Roberts wrote:Scott wants to know who voted the W3C the ruling authority.That was me! 20 years on the *net gave me that right. Oh so you were the one? heheheheSeriously, though, who voted the ISO or IETF to be authoritative enough to establish rules for people using the Internet and World Wide Web, oh yes there is a difference? Who established the rules for the World Wide Web which ethical designers and developers attempt to follow?If web development is your job, don't you think you should be good enough to follow the rules established? If you were a construction builder wouldn't you have to f ollow rules?As for iframe, I don't like it either. I've used it once, but the page it was pulling in was a flash communications presentation for my radioshow.As for frames, they were the most ignorant thing ever created. Personally, they should be allowed to exist today, but for some reason we can't get rid of them by some developers. Well, to answer that i dare you to walk into any web-based enterprise thathas a DHTML intranet, and say the following words:"Get rid of IFRAMES, and use something else"Wear some padding, as the fall from the window could be high.heheSeriously, lets get into the whole iframe use. 508 stuff, not up to speedon, but most DHTML based applications would be a luxury to get 508compatible. SOE are a saviour to the DHTML breed, and while i try to make asmuch as my applications close to being accessible with usability it justdoesn't happe n.IFRAME = Inter nal frame, if we are to emulate the client-top generation ofsoftware within a browser, its the one little trick we have left. As forusing them on the web? well i used them many years ago for my personal site,simply because it was easy at the time (mind my site is horrible, needsbad need of update/doover). Making an actual public website today,seems to be one big juggling act imho, and i'm glad i'm not really requiredto be a public facade developer and more a SOE.You have to keep in mind, there are two main clusters using the web browser/ html language. Internal Corporations and Pub
RE: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Sometimes it is good to have people with vision to lead people where they would not go themselves. and sometimes the world marches past 'cos they're too slow Lets hurry up and have CSS behavious added to the spec - it's a damn fine idea. the camel committee* has bandied this about for the last 4 years and (it seems) is still on the to do list. http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-becss-19990804 That way it'll actually integrate HTML, CSS and javascript and give us TRUE dhtml. my Friday 2c worth barry.b * camel: a horse designed by committee -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, 8 July 2004 10:51 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Well, to answer that i dare you to walk into any web-based enterprise that has a DHTML intranet, and say the following words: Get rid of IFRAMES, and use something else Wear some padding, as the fall from the window could be high. Scott Barnes I think this demonstrates why having the Web vote on what should be standards falls flat. Wallace Stegner wrote, I don't know what I like as much as I like what I know. Meaning, in this context, that people are likely to maintain what they know and are comfortable with rather than to move forward into concepts that force them to change. I work in a university and my guess if put to a vote we would have outlawed any sort of CSS-P and probably any CSS at all. These folks grew up on tables and font tags and are loathe to give them up. Sometimes it is good to have people with vision to lead people where they would not go themselves. Joe Huggins * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Hi All, Firstly thankyou for contributing in this discussion, i know most of you are probably feeling who is this clown, attacking W3C. This is not infact the case, I am merely trying to get an overall understanding of why and where bodies like the W3C will be in the future. In doing so i have illustrated what in my mind is a flaw, in that the W3C is made up of a few selected Elite, and the little guy you, me and every other developer out their has no voice on the subject matter of whether DOM should be refined or whether some obscure CSS property is retrofitted accordingly. A few points have been made that Democracy in this case would be a fatal blow to the overall purpose of what the W3C represents. I find that a very hard thing to stomach and believe that a few would simply say that a vote would be a long drawn out exhausting process. To me if we can elect people within our society (in some countries) to run an entire country based on information we are given? Surely its not that much of a stretch in imagination to ask that we the ACTUAL development community have a say in the way standards are put forward to the world to follow? Its not a very large request? At some point the W3C have to cast some kind of vote to go forward on something along those lines, and thats where I would love to see us contribute. I'm not for a total abolishment of the W3C, they serve a purpose well, but I feel we should either be a virtual member (ie we the people collectively make one vote at least) or we ultimatley decide the outcome based on what they have put forward? We aren't dealing with an amount of people who cast their vote because its the most popular at the time, we are a diverse amount of individuals who come from every known social background with a huge array of beliefs and vast amounts of life experience! It is a radical idea that I know, but for me as a developer to take the W3C seriously, i need at least some sense of ownership, otherwise its just another collection of windbags telling me how technology should be run the standards way. I put it to you, a country today were to sit back and say to the people yeah, we have decided that in order to best run the country, we will select a few of our so called elite, they will make the choices on how we we will be governed and you go about your lives, as democracy isn't as easy as it sounds and you'll just drag us back. insert war here I've been making websites since i think 1996 or was it 1995, I've seen the HTML go from a very basic format into what it is now, some may have been around longer but the point is, i've seen it at its best, and I've seen it at its worst. I've seen browsers dictate the outcomes of many a standard and we are paying the price for it now. In years to come, i have serious doubt the W3C will in fact be a worthwile group? bold statement I know, but I say this as technology like FLEX and Microsofts AXML are trying their hardest to push the HTML browser out the door. Reason is its just too slow and way to many flavours out there, thus the standardss are required. I wonder now what impact it would have on the future of the Internet and products like this, if the concept above were to come true and we the developers did cast our vote? how much faster would things maybe done? How fast would technologies like XUL or similiar flavour evolve if their was a large majority shaping and moulding HTML to evolve in parrell with these languages. Microsoft are one clear major player who have seen how HTML has mutated into this thinware deployment system, where you could write applications to do day to day tasks, with minimal payload and in many cases Operating System Independent. Joel on Software (google it) put in perspective that in many ways the browser could end up being the virtual operating system where you utilise the overall browser as your base framework, that runs many operations (whether they be applications or presentations). They appear to see this is a big advantage to an existing operating system, thus Longhorn products are born, allowing developers a standard, that be microsofts, way of developing thinware applications with minimal development time. HTML has served its purpose and it feels like it was the first prototype for what may in years to come be a more advanced protocol in the way we handle computer experiences. For now, XHTML seems to be setup and evolved soley to bring order back to chaos, but its growing slowly in many ways and it's not accepting the fact that backward compatibility is a must. We are far too deep entrenched in TAG soup country. W3C have had the luxury of saying to the world do it this way please but they in now way are helping to enforce the standards they make? its more of a reference point and thats it, you hope your hard work can be used in years to come in a correct way simply because you adhered to XHTML validation rules, but all things
Re: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Scott, you said, for me as a developer to take the W3C seriously, i need at least some sense of ownership, Ownership is important, as you say, and this is why I support web standards. Because it's not just one corporation deciding what to give us. It's a process of winnowing, from developer wishlists through discussions, proposals, feedback to implementation. Geoff Deering has explained it all in lucid terms. There are those, like you, who are cluey enough about this stuff to get involved and make a serious contribution. There are others, like me, who will pop in a suggestion or comment from time to time if I really know what I'm talking about. (And this may be never!) I'd be happy to vote on emerging standards 1) if I was sure that I understood them fully enough in the abstract, which ain't easy and 2) if I could be sure that the other voters really understood the purpose and philosophy of standards. Perhaps another way of saying this is that you need to work out how to establish standing for voters. And perhaps the current system already does this adequately. The web, with its vast range of authors and contributors, is such an amorphous thing that you'd be hard put to it to do more than what organisations like this group are doing, in encouraging implementation and, for some, involvement in standards creation. -Hugh Todd * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Good point but remember we elect people who then represent us (in theory at least because I don't know who our current fellow at the top really represents) and vote on particular issues/bills. In no way do we vote on each bill. And no one is suggesting that we would be a better democracy if each and every bill went before the people. We can and some us do get involved at varying levels. Joe Huggins Technology Specialist Colorado Area Health Education Center (AHEC) 1976 Uvalda CT, Bldg 618 Aurora, CO 80010 (W) 303.724.1131 (C) 303.903.8352 www.uchsc.edu/ahec -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Scott Barnes Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 7:59 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) A few points have been made that Democracy in this case would be a fatal blow to the overall purpose of what the W3C represents. I find that a very hard thing to stomach and believe that a few would simply say that a vote would be a long drawn out exhausting process. To me if we can elect people within our society (in some countries) to run an entire country based on information we are given? Surely its not that much of a stretch in imagination to ask that we the ACTUAL development community have a say in the way standards are put forward to the world to follow? Its not a very large request? * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Hi Scott, The process is open. Join W3C, get on a working group and contribute to you're heart's content. But you'll need to know a lot more than you do now. No offence but I think you'll be out of your depth just getting out of the elevator (as I would be). http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Prospectus/Joining It's very easy to criticise the process but very few (360) actually make the huge effort to be involved, sit on a working group, attend the workshops, contribute to the discussions and actually do something about it. I trust the people that are there and that they are a very balanced and incredibly clever group. http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Member/List Obviously the majority of them are corporate. They have the resources to actually pay someone to be involved and fly them around to wherever the meetings are, and they will have a person that is an expert in the field. I wouldn't want just anyone (me, you etc.) sitting on these committees wasting their time. Read some of the transcripts of the meetings and see what's involved. Like this one from June: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webapps-cdf-discuss/2004Jun/att-0 000/2004jun01.html A side point (from the above workshop)... I love this statement: Bert Bos: Nearly 10 years ago, HTML was in danger. Extensions for layout made HTML less useful, proprietary extensions, etc. so we created stylesheets. CSS is now being taken up, but HTML is in danger again. JavaScript is the worst invention ever. And this: Hakon Lie: Bert started his presenation by saying he joined W3C to save HTML. How do you save something? How do you save a village? An endangered species? Do we save it by freezeing it? Or by doing something totally differetrn? Evolve it? EDo we want a revolution or an evolution? 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 *
Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs
I do recall reading somewhere that it's possible to link a div to an external source (it used an attribute like data or src) but I think it was a Netscape-ism. you can take it a step further with a server side include: div id=somescroller ?php include (somefile.php); ? /div * 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] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs
iFrame is valid XHTML 1 Transitional (and Frameset) but it is not available in the Strict DTD (and probably won't be available in future recommendations of XHTML). To embed a document in Strict, use the object element. Something like: object data=foo.html type=text/html width=500 height=300/object Are you absolutly positive about iframes not being available in strict XHTML? because I've got one working as we speak? !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; ?? Scott * 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] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs
Scott Barnes wrote: Are you absolutly positive about iframes not being available in strict XHTML? because I've got one working as we speak? !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; ?? working and being valid are two different things all together. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Q. I've been on the List for a while now, and while i love the webstandards concept, i'm finding it hard to believe that the web will adjust itself to suite extensions like XHTML? The reason i say this is if we were to make a concious decision to move forward, it would be years 5+ before we would even see a shift in its coding standards alone, not to mention implementing STRICT. If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). To me, tags like iframe are being used and quite a lot and do do away with them, is in many ways the kiss of death for movements like this, as you will be faught all the way. Even though the tag is a wrapper (defined in DTD) in many ways for the HTML Object it still leaves me wondering why tags like iframe aren't valid? to me they seemed harmless along with tags like B to STRONG so forth. Not to mention the web is looking to shift away from browsers, and move more to native XML packets to run its presentation layer on applications (ie MXML, AXML, XFORMS etc). It just seems lately to be a futile battle, and extensive one and yet no real gains? why would a developer go out of his/her way to learn XHTML? I personally use strict XHTML as its the only real DTD that fixes the Box Model bug in both IE Mozilla (consistencey). Its got added pain, but i'm used to it now.. but others well they'd go too hard pile Regards Scott Barnes http://www.mossyblog.com Brian Cummiskey wrote: Scott Barnes wrote: Are you absolutly positive about iframes not being available in strict XHTML? because I've got one working as we speak? !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; ?? working and being valid are two different things all together. * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Scott, you said, If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? Down with proprietory solutions, I say! -Hugh Todd * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Thanks Brian, I haven't really gotten into the Devices side of things as of late, and hand't considered that angle, but I can accept what you've outlined below. I was just curious as i see a constant you gotta go XHTML but we aren't following through with some sort of rewards? either technology wise or coool factors. The sad part is, while i enjoy backward compatibility as it saves your butt more times then none, it can sadly sufficate good / new concepts to death as people keep ignoring the new and stick with the old. I will say that the user of Object tag was a new one for me.. is there any compatibility issues out there for using it that you know off? Regards Scott Barnes Brian Cummiskey wrote: Scott Barnes wrote: Q. I've been on the List for a while now, and while i love the webstandards concept, i'm finding it hard to believe that the web will adjust itself to suite extensions like XHTML? The reason i say this is if we were to make a concious decision to move forward, it would be years 5+ before we would even see a shift in its coding standards alone, not to mention implementing STRICT. If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). the most important to me, is search engine rankings. css-driven compliant code are read much easier by the bots. but more so, its for blind and other handicapped folks as well. governnment related sites here in the states are REQUIRED by US law to meet 508 accesibility standards. And even more so, the internet is changing. more and more folks are using palms, cell phones, and other devices to hit the web. that is only gowing each and every day. try throwing a table-based image layout to a text browser on a phone, and your site is worthless. have a full xhtml, or even wap, and mobile devices can read the text. it might not look pretty- but the fact remains that it can STILL be read. To me, tags like iframe are being used and quite a lot and do do away with them, is in many ways the kiss of death for movements like this, as you will be faught all the way. Even though the tag is a wrapper (defined in DTD) in many ways for the HTML Object it still leaves me wondering why tags like iframe aren't valid? to me they seemed harmless along with tags like B to STRONG so forth. they aren't valid because, again, devices as above can't handel them. I hate i frames. i see zero purpse to them. In my opinion, an iframe serves as a hack-job approach to dynamic content. its simply the wrong tool for the job. Not to mention the web is looking to shift away from browsers, and move more to native XML packets to run its presentation layer on applications (ie MXML, AXML, XFORMS etc). It just seems lately to be a futile battle, and extensive one and yet no real gains? why would a developer go out of his/her way to learn XHTML? I shoudl have read ths hwole thing before replying :) seems like we're on the same megahurtz :) the problem with learnign xhtml 1.0 is that, theres next to nothing to leran from html 4.01. all lowercase tags, and a couple properties missing but really, XHTML 1.1 is where it becomes a learning process- its the modularization that the whole web is slowly moving to. http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/ I personally use strict XHTML as its the only real DTD that fixes the Box Model bug in both IE Mozilla (consistencey). Its got added pain, but i'm used to it now.. but others well they'd go too hard pile take a look here: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=BoxModelHack http://css.maxdesign.com.au/listamatic/about-boxmodel.htm * 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)
Scott wants to know who voted the W3C the ruling authority. That was me! 20 years on the *net gave me that right. Seriously, though, who voted the ISO or IETF to be authoritative enough to establish rules for people using the Internet and World Wide Web, oh yes there is a difference? Who established the rules for the World Wide Web which ethical designers and developers attempt to follow? If web development is your job, don't you think you should be good enough to follow the rules established? If you were a construction builder wouldn't you have to follow rules? As for iframe, I don't like it either. I've used it once, but the page it was pulling in was a flash communications presentation for my radio show. As for frames, they were the most ignorant thing ever created. Personally, they should be allowed to exist today, but for some reason we can't get rid of them by some developers. The real problem with frames is people don't know how to use them in the first place. Second, they lack any real features for accessibility. For SEO purposes they are really bad. Frames were allowed in the beginning because browsers didn't have very good caching abilities. Now that they do, you don't need them. They won't help. Perhaps that will help some. Scrolling DIVs at least put all the information on the same page, unless you plan on pulling in another page. In my opinion the latter is a mistake. Search engines say all content must be visible, it never says you can't scroll a DIV to see all the information. Sincerely, Lee Roberts http://www.roserockdesign.com http://www.applepiecart.com -Original Message- From: Hugh Todd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 11:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs) Scott, you said, If this IS the case, what benefits are we getting as developers for taking on extra headaches in making it W3C compliant (who by the way aren't an international elected body - more of a group that have taken liberty to makeup standards). Who would elect such a body? Web designers? Governments? Users? The UN? As it is, we have the major browser manufacturers on board, the guy who invented the web heading it up, and some of the clearest-thinking, most far-sighted people in the web community making contributions that aim to free the web from proprietory chains and dead-end hacks, with as elegant solutions as can be devised. What more could you want? Down with proprietory solutions, I say! -Hugh Todd * 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 *
[WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs
I was interested in making a site that had an iFrame that I could call
new html pages into.
So I've read that Scrolling Divs is the way to go vs. iFrames, but what
about in the case of wanting to call a new page into the iFrame? Can
this be done in a div (calling an html file into the div) or should an
iFrame be used in this case? Are iFrames old news, should I veer
totally away from them?
Thank you,
Shane Helm
{ sonzeDesignStudio
*
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] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs
G'day So I've read that Scrolling Divs is the way to go vs. iFrames, but what about in the case of wanting to call a new page into the iFrame? iFrame is valid XHTML 1 Transitional (and Frameset) but it is not available in the Strict DTD (and probably won't be available in future recommendations of XHTML). To embed a document in Strict, use the object element. Something like: object data=foo.html type=text/html width=500 height=300/object See www.w3.org/TR/html401/present/frames.html#edef-IFRAME And www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/objects.html#edef-OBJECT I do recall reading somewhere that it's possible to link a div to an external source (it used an attribute like data or src) but I think it was a Netscape-ism. Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design www.bwdzine.com Fast-loading, user-friendly websites * 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] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs
Hmmm.
You could use some very clever Javascript.
eg.
document.getElementById('divid'0.innerHTML = blah blah
then load the new doc. into that div.
but yeah.
iFrames are old.
although i dont see them dissapearing anytime soon
Shane Helm wrote:
I was interested in making a site that had an iFrame that I could call
new html pages into.
So I've read that Scrolling Divs is the way to go vs. iFrames, but
what about in the case of wanting to call a new page into the iFrame?
Can this be done in a div (calling an html file into the div) or
should an iFrame be used in this case? Are iFrames old news, should I
veer totally away from them?
Thank you,
Shane Helm
{ sonzeDesignStudio
*
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
*
