Hi all
I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html
Well thexhtml validation shows error but even after reading the explanation of errors, I still
On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote:
Hi all
I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict
just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here
http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html
Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after reading
El mié, 25-02-2004 a las 04:24, Justin French escribió:
Personally, I've been using single quotes for a few years, because it
makes echo's in PHP a lot easier:
echo div id='foo'{$bah}/div;
is a lot easier to read than
echo div id=\foo\{$bah}/div;
I tend to single-quote the
Hi Jaime
On 25 Feb 2004, at 09:12, JW wrote:
Hi all
I have copied a page from my website and make the DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict
just to see the diff btwn transitional and strict. You can see it here
http://www.sodesires.com/about/strict.html
Well the xhtml validation shows error but even after
Ooo I see! Thanks Andy/ Martin!
Hmm any ideas in tweaking Dreamweaver to work with standards?
As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I achieve it with strict?
I guessis preferences really although I do notice lots of website do not open up in new window but
El mié, 25-02-2004 a las 11:40, JW escribió:
Ooo I see! Thanks Andy / Martin!
Hmm any ideas in tweaking Dreamweaver to work with standards?
As for open target in new window, if I want a new window, how can I achieve
it with strict?
When switching DOCTYPEs isn't an option, try
UsingMX 04. Actually really want to tweak it the way it generates the html codes. Like if I am working with strict thenI cantweakit to generate the html the way I want forxhtml strict.
Hmm maybe dreamweaver can't becustomised that way. Sounds rather far-fetch.
With Regards,
Jaime Wong
Hello folks,
I have a fully valid XHTML transitional page that performs
perfectly in the standards compliant browsers but refuses to behave in IE. The
page is here: http://www.skyrocket.com.au/Concepts/Artform/index.html
In IE 6 for example there is a 3 pixel gap formed between the
Yes, I use dreamweaver for all flavours of
XHTML. You can customise it by editing the template files if what you want isnt
in the preferences. In a default installation on windows theyre in
c:\program files\macromedia\Dreamweaver MX 2004\configuration you can use any
text editor to change
Justin French wrote:
div onmouseover=myFunc('foo','bah').../div
will break terribly when converted to
div onmouseover='myFunc('foo','bah')'
This might actualy not be such a big problem if you HTMLEncodes your
inline javascript.
This seems to work in IE 6, FF 0.8, OP 6 and NN 4.7 (win)
a
El mié, 25-02-2004 a las 13:21, Paul Ross escribió:
Hello folks,
I have a fully valid XHTML transitional page that performs perfectly in the
standards compliant browsers but refuses to behave in IE. The page is here:
http://www.skyrocket.com.au/Concepts/Artform/index.html
In IE 6 for
Just received an email[1] from my SMH subscription stating they've
launched a new website, SMH.com.au technology:
http://www.smh.com.au/technology
I have to admit. I was a little cynical and was preparing myself for an
onslaught of presentational markup and zilch semantic markup. Off I went
El mié, 25-02-2004 a las 15:02, JW escribió:
Line 89, column 11: there is no attribute name (explain...).
form name=service id=service method=post action=
form_service/dodosmail.p
Yes, in Strict there's no name attribute for the form element, use
id instead. Note that name *IS NOT*
Thank you very much Manuel.Now everything validates and converted all pages on my site except for thefavourite linksas I have the links to open up in new pages.
Now I am confident to convert client's site to XHTML 1.0 Strict.
Couldn't do this with everyone's kind assistance! Once again
Well done Jaime, I remember only a couple of weeks ago when I converted my
first one. I nearly wore out my delete key getting rid of all the
extraneous crap on my pages. The size of the site is a fraction of what it
was now, even though the content is the same.
And I bet your site is now
Title: RE: [WSG] A new standards based smh.com.au/technology
Hi Tim,
thanks for yr kind words :)
I was going to send a note around to the list when we fixed a
few things up with it but just havent had time...
ok, so few points:
* yep, the new tech section is our first live site
Hi Pete,
Funny, I was going to mention this to the list but I hesitated.
However, after your reply below I'm glad Tim didn't hesitate. I don't
know about anyone else, but your reasons why, coming from such a high
profile site, are a great advertisement/example to Australian clients
of
Title: RE: [WSG] A new standards based smh.com.au/technology
I'd certainly like to use them if you have no objections.
of course not, its an important message. gotta get it out there :)
we're going to try to put together a whats new about the design page on the site with some more
The first draft of the 'reader' media type. Published to get some early
feedback, especially on whether 'reader' is necessary and implementable.
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-css3-reader-20040224/
*
The discussion list for
Dumb question but ...
Do you repeat your META tags on every page of your site, or only the
index page?
Thanks
Peter
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
Peter Firminger blurted out:
Windows users with low security setting should be aware that the page
below has links to load some stuff you really don't want to know about.
Be aware... Hopefully this was out of Paul's hands and can be fixed
immediately. Paul?
The first page isn't too bad,
Good question Peter!
Absolutely. The metadata is about the page not the site and should be unique
(at least the title and description) for every page. Depends on how much
metadata you use.
This leads to a really deep discussion about metadata that we may have at
some point, but in the mean time
Hi Peter,
Put them on every page of your site and ideally they should be specific
to that page...as in This page is about... type stuff.
Nick
Dumb question but ...
Do you repeat your META tags on every page of your site, or only the
index page?
Thanks
Peter
meta tags should generally be added to each page, listing keywords that
are accurately relevant to the content on the page.
Keep the list short and precise.
Cheers
Chris Blown
PS. Not all search engines read nor care about meta keywords
On Thu, 2004-02-26 at 15:16, Universal Head wrote:
Thanks for the replies. I didn't realise they should be specific to each page - I would set them up once and then repeat on every page.
BTW, is there a site somewhere that describes them all? I have a few I use that I only half understand - 'Robots', for example, and 'MSSmartTagsPreventParsing'
PS. Not all search engines read nor care about meta keywords
In fact, we believe that only one (not too significant) SE looks at them at
all and they would be far down the decision list there anyway as they are
perfect spambait for spamming the engines with incorrect metadata.
There is some
http://literarymoose.info/=/synopsis/metadatum.xhtml
http://literarymoose.info/=/destroy/metadatum.xhtml
As with most of the Moose's work, this CSS technique only works in the
most compliant of browsers.
By adding an alternate style sheet you can actually view meta data on
screen using this
Universal Head wrote:
Thanks for the replies. I didn't realise they should be specific to
each page - I would set them up once and then repeat on every page.
BTW, is there a site somewhere that describes them all? I have a few
I use that I only half understand - 'Robots', for example, and
Peter
You can add your own meta data if you want. (take a look at the
macromedia.com website -
http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/ts/documents/fail_load_fp7.htm
as an e.g).
This makes it really easy for internal tracking of pages, internal
searches etc - as Peter F said, the external
Interesting - so why do we all religiously add meta descriptions and keywords, not to mention all the other stuff? Curious.
Peter
On 26/02/2004, at 4:14 PM, Peter Firminger wrote:
In fact, we believe that only one (not too significant) SE looks at them at
all and they would be far down the
In looking for some other
stuff on W3, I stumbled across this pagehttp://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/
The DTD is
"-//W3C//DTD XHTML Basic 1.0//EN"
Anyone had anything to do
with this? I hadn't heard of it at all (maybe I'm ignorant and should spend more
time trawling the W3 site).
P
Title: Message
The following sites describe each of the metadata elements which
Australian Government departments and agencies can use to improve the visibility
and accessibility of their services and information over the
Internet.
The National Archives of Australia
is the maintenance
Yer... XHTML Basic - the only time I've seen it used is in DENG
(http://claus.packts.net/deng/, http://mozquito.markuplanguage.net/).
Basically this is a light weight browser written in Flash. It supports CSS1
2, SVG, XForms, XFrames and XHTML Basic.
So why basic not strict or transitional - I
Peter,
In looking for some other stuff on W3, I stumbled across this page http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-basic/
The DTD is -//W3C//DTD XHTML Basic 1.0//EN
Anyone had anything to do with this? I hadn't heard of it at all (maybe I'm ignorant and should spend more time trawling the W3 site).
We
34 matches
Mail list logo
