RE: [WSG] markup readability (was: newspaper format)
On Sunday, April 17, 2005 7:29 PM, Richard Czeiger wrote: > Maybe we can formalise this list so that it becomes a > 'see-if-any-of-these-are-relevant-first' list of values that > people can use. If what they need is not on the list then they can > make up their own... You may be interested in checking out "What's in a name?", by Andy Clarke from May 2004: http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/whats_in_a_name.html Andy looks at the same question, with some interesting results via "surveying" a number of popular sites looking for "emergent conventions" so to speak. A good read, and definitely worth considering. Cheers, Derek. -- Derek Featherstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: 613.599.9784; toll-free: 1.866.932.4878 (North America) Web Development: http://www.furtherahead.com Web Accessibility: http://www.wats.ca Personal: http://www.boxofchocolates.ca ** 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] markup readability (was: newspaper format)
2005/4/18, Richard Czeiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Maybe we can formalise this list so that it becomes a > 'see-if-any-of-these-are-relevant-first' list of values that people can use. > If what they need is not on the list then they can make up their own... I agree this point. I think it should be useful especially for beginners, and it may prevent them from using presentational names. The list could be a kind of good "dictionary", I guess. But, every site has its own name space controlled by its original naming rule. The list you're suggesting has its own rule, I guess. So, my suggestion is the list should be given with the rule so that users can customize the rule and make their own name space. It's just my thought. -- Kazuhito Kidachi mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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] markup readability (was: newspaper format)
This is a great issue and one where I think the WSG can take the lead and put forward a standard. To Patrick's comment 'header' is a tricky one and your points about its print origins are very valid. Perhaps we can take that and still use the print reference by calling it 'masthead' as this actually does refer to all the elements you spoke of and doesn't have the same presentational weight as 'header'. Perhaps there can be a list of appropriate 'values' for IDs or classes. Most of us already use: container wrapper header/masthead nav content footer Maybe we can formalise this list so that it becomes a 'see-if-any-of-these-are-relevant-first' list of values that people can use. If what they need is not on the list then they can make up their own... If anyone wants to add to this list maybe we can pass it around and when it gets comprehensive enough, put it up on the WSG site as a resource. Just a thought... Richard ** 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] markup readability (was: newspaper format)
designer wrote: Hi Patrick (and all), I understand what you are saying about presentational names, but where does one draw the line? [...] Also, if you take this argument to it's extreme, you wouldn't use names such as 'header' or 'footer', because you might want to change them around later! True, but I'd argue that the terms such as "header", although rooted in the print tradition of being at the top of a page, have come to signify the information you'd normally have there, such as "title, sub-title, author, date, page number"...so it's not purely about "it's at the top". Even if you visually re-order the page, that type of information would still be identified as "the header"...by me anyway. But of course, it comes down to pragmatism and reasonability. But I think you can see how having part of a name like "left" or "right" does indeed pose certain problems. Heck, even CSS guru Eric Meyer wonders about this sort of thing sometimes http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2005/04/03/class-presentation/ P -- 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 ** 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] markup readability (was: newspaper format)
Of course, it is really hard to think of descriptive names which avoid presentational character, but surely we all agree that names should help readability of markup (in most cases anyway :-) ? I strive for readability myself (now, don't go poking around my sites to prove me wrong!), to to point where I don't think it's reasonable to pull comments and whitespace out of a file before delivered just to save some bandwidth. But your point about appropriate names is exactly why you should use meaningful names, not presentational names. I have literally encountered dozens of sites where the class="smallOrangeLinks" were not small, nor orange, nor even links in some cases -- the original coder just saw some small orange text in the mock-up and applied the class. Similarly, what happens when your lefcol becomes the center? Or two generations of coders down the line, a new page gets designed and the coder applies leftcol to the wide navigation there because it seemed to look right and was easier than defining a new class? How much more confusing would that be than if you named it PrimaryContent all along? Yes, you can go too far and you should watch for that, but I think the first instinct of most people is not far enough. -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** 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] markup readability (was: newspaper format)
Hi Patrick (and all), I understand what you are saying about presentational names, but where does one draw the line? I must say that I sometimes find it hard to 'read' someone's markup because the div names are chosen badly. Certainly in this particular case, my structure of: container menu banner heading leftcol rightcol subhead leftcol rightcol subhead leftcol rightcol fullwidth subhead leftcol rightcol subhead fullwidth footnote would confuse me terribly if I couldn't instantly see which stuff was on the left etc. Also, if you take this argument to it's extreme, you wouldn't use names such as 'header' or 'footer', because you might want to change them around later! The worry is that declarations may end up being of the type: container menu bar (instead of header) emc2 c2em etc! Of course, it is really hard to think of descriptive names which avoid presentational character, but surely we all agree that names should help readability of markup (in most cases anyway :-) ? Anyone have thoughts/suggestions ? Bob McClelland, Cornwall (U.K.) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
