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'Neill
Web Team Manager
Prescription Pricing Authority
Bridge House
152 Pilgrim Street
Newcastle Upon Tyne
NE1 6SN
 
 
tel: (0191) 203 5246
ext: 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 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 i n 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 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 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 happe n.

IFRAME = Inter nal 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
baaaaaaaaad 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 becaus e browsers didn't have v ery
>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? Gov ernments? 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
>*****************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
>*****************************************************< BR>>The discussion li st 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
*****************************************************



*** IMPORTANT NOTICE ***
*** PPA DISCLAIMER ***
This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it, including replies and forwarded copies subsequently transmitted (which may contain alterations), contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.
The content of this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the person authorised as responsible for delivery to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this e-mail
or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Network Team at the Prescription Pricing Authority via e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] including a copy of this message. Please then delete this e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to validate this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses, as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be transferred by way of this e-mail.
This e-mail is from the Prescription Pricing Authority whose principal office is at Bridge House, 152 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 6SN. Switchboard Telephone Number :- +44 (0)191 232 5371

Reply via email to