Rossen Raykov writes:
> ...
> 1. the server log
> 2. the output to the client.
> ...
> In the second case it is better if Zope is returning just the error or the
> response.
> In the XML-RPC case the error have to be a valid XML-RPC response, not a
> stack trace.
Thus, this may mean an exc
If you're looking for a group that understands UI and HTML, check out
www.37signals.com. They do excellent UI and design work that looks
simple, clean, and slick. They're expensive, but I wouldn't be
surprised if they donated their work just to say they designed Zope
3's UI, that would be a huge t
At 07:41 AM 4/5/02 -0500, Paul Everitt wrote:
I think this conversation is
trending in the wrong direction.
The core ZMI is needed to the extent that it helps build or administer
products. Thus, Zope 3 is not like YABB.
Yes, your point is well taken. I hesitated bringing this up in the
first pla
From: "Casey Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In light of that, I would like to see a ZMI skin that is fully xhtml 1.0
> compliant, and uses CSS2 to its full extend, and possibly some CSS3. To
> me that means that one could develop the html coding completely devoid
> of presentation (no tables used
From: "Casey Duncan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> In light of that, I would like to see a ZMI skin that is fully xhtml 1.0
> compliant, and uses CSS2 to its full extend, and possibly some CSS3. To
> me that means that one could develop the html coding completely devoid
> of presentation (no tables used
Hi, Alexander Limi here, I am responsible for Plone's design and XHTML/CSS.
I just want to clarify some issues:
* The goal of Plone is to be lightweight, to offload as much layout as
possible to the CSS. Should be possible to use in low-bandwith situations
(mobile 9600bps GSM connections etc).
*
Jens Vagelpohl wrote:
>
> as a data point, here is browser data for one of the sites i own. the data
> is produced by webalizer. NS4 is becoming negligible::
IMHO it simply has to pass the w3c html and css validators at
http://validator.w3.org/
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
BTW: my Brows
> "JV" == Jens Vagelpohl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JV> as a data point, here is browser data for one of the sites i
JV> own. the data is produced by webalizer. NS4 is becoming
JV> negligible::
> "PE" == Paul Everitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
PE> However, it is impor
I almost 100% agree with Casey--and hallelujah for him writing it, because
that means I don't have to. ;-)
I agree that
we ought to trash frames
we ought to use strict xhtml 1.0
we ought to rely on CSS for all graphic elements
(correlative) we ought to not use *any* shims or non-logical
I agree 100% with Toby. I don't care how it looks in NS4 or (insert old
non-standard browser here), so long as the functionality is still there.
I think the ZMI should also work 100% with w3m. If we do that, then we
are basically already taking care or accessibility.
I also vote to kill frames
Folks, can we please stop the zope-dev/zope3-dev crossposts and direct this
thread to zope3-dev only? You're doubling the volume of posts I have to
read. :) Thanks.
___
Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinf
Jens Vagelpohl writes:
> mac OS X browsers:
>
> - IE 5.1
> - mozilla 0.99 (=>1.0)
>
> i won't include OmniWeb because its CSS support is still flaky.
Whether a browser should be included depends on what portion of the
audience uses it, not how broken it may be. I don't see it listed in
On 05 Apr 2002 09:04:15 +, Dan Pierson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I agree. IMHO the browser compatibility requirements for the new ZMI
>should be summarized as:
>
> Current IE
> Mozilla 1.0
> Konqueror (KDE 3.0 version)
> ...what's the current state of Mac browsers..
mac OS X browsers:
- IE 5.1
- mozilla 0.99 (=>1.0)
i won't include OmniWeb because its CSS support is still flaky.
jens
On Friday, April 5, 2002, at 04:04 , Dan Pierson wrote:
> On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 12:41, Paul Everitt wrote:
>
>> However, it is important to note: Zope 3 is *not* a product.
On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 12:41, Paul Everitt wrote:
> However, it is important to note: Zope 3 is *not* a product. It is used
> to build products. The core ZMI is needed to the extent that it helps
> build or administer products. Thus, Zope 3 is not like YABB.
[snip]
> With all this in mind, I
as a data point, here is browser data for one of the sites i own. the data
is produced by webalizer. NS4 is becoming negligible::
Top 25 of 73 Total User Agents
# HitsUser Agent
1 47194 81.46% Micro$haft Internet Exploder
2 16780 28.96% MSIE 6.0
3 16273 28.09%
I think this conversation is trending in the wrong direction.
Zope 3 needs to make it possible to build YABB, interfaces which support
all browsers while still looking slick, etc.
However, it is important to note: Zope 3 is *not* a product. It is used
to build products. The core ZMI is need
I have been working with Plone now for a couple of days. I think your
suggestion is an excellent one. It has very crisp/clean lines ... excellent
implementation...
> I propose to base the Zope3 ZMI on the Plone CMF skin (designed primarily
by
> the talented Alexander Limi and Vidar Andersen wit
From: "William Trenker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> One design consideration is how much to rely on CSS. Looking under the
> hood (ie, viewing the source) for some of these "slick" designs reveals
> modest to sophisticated dependence on CSS. But I think the days of
> worrying how it's going to look on
19 matches
Mail list logo
