Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
PHP is not your perfect "template system"; even though it capable of nice and tidy simple web pages, it is worse than embedded HTML in Perl for producing complex pages and large sites. So, even PHP has a problem to solve regarding separation of code and appearance. For that, there are templates systems available for PHP just like there are for Perl; a few are even included with the PHP source code distribution (as part of PEAR). Also, for PHP compatibility with Perl's famous HTML::Template, there are at least two projects for PHP which implement that module's language: http://htmltmpl.sourceforge.net/php.html http://phphtmltemplate.sourceforge.net/ -Daniel -- Daniel Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wrote Chris Wagner: > Speaking of templates have you considered PHP? I would consider that the > ultimate template system and the ultimate customization vehicle. Instead of > relying on unreliable client side interpretation of style sheets and > javascript you have a controllable environment on the server side. Think > about it like this, if you are embedding some html into ur script > application use Perl, if you are embedding some scripting into your website > use PHP. They have this yin-yang relationship. If you know how to use > server side includes then you basically already know how to use PHP. > > > At 07:07 PM 1/2/04 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >If you want to see a site that uses poor HTML/CSS, view > http://www.buybordenmilk.com (it's a site my company designed and we host, > so I can slam it if I want). The designer did some good > >stuff, but she also did absolute positioning with the CSS. Try it at > 1280x1024. (We're getting ready to do a re-write). > > Heh, that site's not *that* bad, I've seen far worse. One page doesn't even > show up because of basic html mistakes. Ok no rants today ;) > > > > > > -- > REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- > "...ne cede males" > > 0100 > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Speaking of templates have you considered PHP? I would consider that the ultimate template system and the ultimate customization vehicle. Instead of relying on unreliable client side interpretation of style sheets and javascript you have a controllable environment on the server side. Think about it like this, if you are embedding some html into ur script application use Perl, if you are embedding some scripting into your website use PHP. They have this yin-yang relationship. If you know how to use server side includes then you basically already know how to use PHP. At 07:07 PM 1/2/04 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >If you want to see a site that uses poor HTML/CSS, view http://www.buybordenmilk.com (it's a site my company designed and we host, so I can slam it if I want). The designer did some good >stuff, but she also did absolute positioning with the CSS. Try it at 1280x1024. (We're getting ready to do a re-write). Heh, that site's not *that* bad, I've seen far worse. One page doesn't even show up because of basic html mistakes. Ok no rants today ;) -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
PHP is not your perfect "template system"; even though it capable of nice and tidy simple web pages, it is worse than embedded HTML in Perl for producing complex pages and large sites. So, even PHP has a problem to solve regarding separation of code and appearance. For that, there are templates systems available for PHP just like there are for Perl; a few are even included with the PHP source code distribution (as part of PEAR). Also, for PHP compatibility with Perl's famous HTML::Template, there are at least two projects for PHP which implement that module's language: http://htmltmpl.sourceforge.net/php.html http://phphtmltemplate.sourceforge.net/ -Daniel -- Daniel Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Wrote Chris Wagner: > Speaking of templates have you considered PHP? I would consider that the > ultimate template system and the ultimate customization vehicle. Instead of > relying on unreliable client side interpretation of style sheets and > javascript you have a controllable environment on the server side. Think > about it like this, if you are embedding some html into ur script > application use Perl, if you are embedding some scripting into your website > use PHP. They have this yin-yang relationship. If you know how to use > server side includes then you basically already know how to use PHP. > > > At 07:07 PM 1/2/04 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >If you want to see a site that uses poor HTML/CSS, view > http://www.buybordenmilk.com (it's a site my company designed and we host, > so I can slam it if I want). The designer did some good > >stuff, but she also did absolute positioning with the CSS. Try it at > 1280x1024. (We're getting ready to do a re-write). > > Heh, that site's not *that* bad, I've seen far worse. One page doesn't even > show up because of basic html mistakes. Ok no rants today ;) > > > > > > -- > REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- > "...ne cede males" > > 0100 > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Speaking of templates have you considered PHP? I would consider that the ultimate template system and the ultimate customization vehicle. Instead of relying on unreliable client side interpretation of style sheets and javascript you have a controllable environment on the server side. Think about it like this, if you are embedding some html into ur script application use Perl, if you are embedding some scripting into your website use PHP. They have this yin-yang relationship. If you know how to use server side includes then you basically already know how to use PHP. At 07:07 PM 1/2/04 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >If you want to see a site that uses poor HTML/CSS, view http://www.buybordenmilk.com (it's a site my company designed and we host, so I can slam it if I want). The designer did some good >stuff, but she also did absolute positioning with the CSS. Try it at 1280x1024. (We're getting ready to do a re-write). Heh, that site's not *that* bad, I've seen far worse. One page doesn't even show up because of basic html mistakes. Ok no rants today ;) -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
My two cents.
I agree that using a template driven system is much better than CGI.pm,
especially if you are
using CSS. Whether you do a roll your own template processor or use
HTML::Template, it works
to allow the design of the site to be separated from the function of it. I
create some of the
worlds ugliest web sites, but I'm a pretty good Perl hacker. So, I build an
functional, but
ugly, template, then give it to someone who has some artistic sense. They make
it look pretty,
then I have a pretty and functional site.
I also use CSS, but mainly to make the site compatible across platforms. It
really allows the
end user to see it in the way best for them. I try to stay away from
positioning with CSS.
But, it rocks as far as make a site-wide look-and-feel. I usually test my stuff
on Netscape,
Opera, Explorer and Lynx.
If you want to see a site that uses poor HTML/CSS, view
http://www.buybordenmilk.com (it's a
site my company designed and we host, so I can slam it if I want). The designer
did some good
stuff, but she also did absolute positioning with the CSS. Try it at 1280x1024.
(We're getting
ready to do a re-write).
Rod
>
> CSS is not deprecated. It is not reliable for positioning but it is quite
> usable for defining text and character styles. If you have ever
> changed all the font tags in a web site, you will be a CSS fan.
>
> If you attempt to validate your HTML against w3.org's validator, you
> are required to be a fan.
>
> http://validator.w3.org/
>
> It is probably not a good idea to use CGI.pm to produce HTML output. Why
> learn another HTML syntax ? Something like HTML::Template or even a HERE
> document will serve you better.
>
> However it is very foolish to **Not** use CGI to parse input from a form.
> It is much, much easier and safer than parsing the raw query string or
> reading STDIN or escaping shell charactors or otherwise doing the job by
> hand.
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl -wT
> use strict;
> use CGI;
> use CGI::Carp;
> my $q= new CGI;
> my $name = $q->param('first_name') || 0;
>
> my $result = < Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1\n\n
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
>
> Hello $name
> hello $name
> HERE
>
> if ($name) {
> print $result;
> }
> else {
> print ;
> }
>
> # see perldoc perldata for __DATA__ file handle info
> __DATA__
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
>
>
> simple form
>
>
>
> Name:
>
>
>
>
>
> #
>
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Chris Wagner wrote:
>
>> I can tell you some stuff about that right now. CGI.pm is just a quick and
>> dirty module that will save on some typing in your perl script. Emphasis on
>> some. If you're doing anything more than basic html tags it quickly becomes
>> not worth it anymore. Writing tag attributes takes up more time and space
>> than just writing out the html itself. The one thing it's really good for
>> is writing out tables. If you have an array with all your row data you can
>> write something like print Tr( td([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ). That saves a lot of
>> typing.
>> The perldoc has most of the gritty details.
>>
>> Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style
>> sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless
>> there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause
>> compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style
>> sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with
>> everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts,
>> browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be
>> careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off
>> in my browser.
>>
>>
>> At 10:50 PM 12/29/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote:
>> >Please, somebody point me to URL's that provide examples and best
>> >practices of using CSS2, CGI.pm and XHTML v1.x.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Best Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=--
>> "...ne cede males"
>>
>> 0100
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
The man who sets out to carry a cat by its tail learns something that will
always be useful
and which never will grow dim or doubtful.
-- Mark Twain
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
My two cents.
I agree that using a template driven system is much better than CGI.pm, especially if
you are
using CSS. Whether you do a roll your own template processor or use HTML::Template, it
works
to allow the design of the site to be separated from the function of it. I create some
of the
worlds ugliest web sites, but I'm a pretty good Perl hacker. So, I build an
functional, but
ugly, template, then give it to someone who has some artistic sense. They make it look
pretty,
then I have a pretty and functional site.
I also use CSS, but mainly to make the site compatible across platforms. It really
allows the
end user to see it in the way best for them. I try to stay away from positioning with
CSS.
But, it rocks as far as make a site-wide look-and-feel. I usually test my stuff on
Netscape,
Opera, Explorer and Lynx.
If you want to see a site that uses poor HTML/CSS, view http://www.buybordenmilk.com
(it's a
site my company designed and we host, so I can slam it if I want). The designer did
some good
stuff, but she also did absolute positioning with the CSS. Try it at 1280x1024. (We're
getting
ready to do a re-write).
Rod
>
> CSS is not deprecated. It is not reliable for positioning but it is quite
> usable for defining text and character styles. If you have ever
> changed all the font tags in a web site, you will be a CSS fan.
>
> If you attempt to validate your HTML against w3.org's validator, you
> are required to be a fan.
>
> http://validator.w3.org/
>
> It is probably not a good idea to use CGI.pm to produce HTML output. Why
> learn another HTML syntax ? Something like HTML::Template or even a HERE
> document will serve you better.
>
> However it is very foolish to **Not** use CGI to parse input from a form.
> It is much, much easier and safer than parsing the raw query string or
> reading STDIN or escaping shell charactors or otherwise doing the job by
> hand.
>
> #!/usr/bin/perl -wT
> use strict;
> use CGI;
> use CGI::Carp;
> my $q= new CGI;
> my $name = $q->param('first_name') || 0;
>
> my $result = < Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1\n\n
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
>
> Hello $name
> hello $name
> HERE
>
> if ($name) {
> print $result;
> }
> else {
> print ;
> }
>
> # see perldoc perldata for __DATA__ file handle info
> __DATA__
> Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
>
>
> simple form
>
>
>
> Name:
>
>
>
>
>
> #
>
> On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Chris Wagner wrote:
>
>> I can tell you some stuff about that right now. CGI.pm is just a quick and
>> dirty module that will save on some typing in your perl script. Emphasis on
>> some. If you're doing anything more than basic html tags it quickly becomes
>> not worth it anymore. Writing tag attributes takes up more time and space
>> than just writing out the html itself. The one thing it's really good for
>> is writing out tables. If you have an array with all your row data you can
>> write something like print Tr( td([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ). That saves a lot of typing.
>> The perldoc has most of the gritty details.
>>
>> Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style
>> sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless
>> there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause
>> compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style
>> sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with
>> everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts,
>> browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be
>> careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off
>> in my browser.
>>
>>
>> At 10:50 PM 12/29/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote:
>> >Please, somebody point me to URL's that provide examples and best
>> >practices of using CSS2, CGI.pm and XHTML v1.x.
>> >
>> >--
>> >Best Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=--
>> "...ne cede males"
>>
>> 0100
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
The man who sets out to carry a cat by its tail learns something that will always be
useful
and which never will grow dim or doubtful.
-- Mark Twain
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
CSS is not deprecated. It is not reliable for positioning but it is quite
usable for defining text and character styles. If you have ever
changed all the font tags in a web site, you will be a CSS fan.
If you attempt to validate your HTML against w3.org's validator, you
are required to be a fan.
http://validator.w3.org/
It is probably not a good idea to use CGI.pm to produce HTML output. Why
learn another HTML syntax ? Something like HTML::Template or even a HERE
document will serve you better.
However it is very foolish to **Not** use CGI to parse input from a form.
It is much, much easier and safer than parsing the raw query string or
reading STDIN or escaping shell charactors or otherwise doing the job by
hand.
#!/usr/bin/perl -wT
use strict;
use CGI;
use CGI::Carp;
my $q= new CGI;
my $name = $q->param('first_name') || 0;
my $result =
Hello $name
hello $name
HERE
if ($name) {
print $result;
}
else {
print ;
}
# see perldoc perldata for __DATA__ file handle info
__DATA__
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
simple form
Name:
#
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Chris Wagner wrote:
> I can tell you some stuff about that right now. CGI.pm is just a quick and
> dirty module that will save on some typing in your perl script. Emphasis on
> some. If you're doing anything more than basic html tags it quickly becomes
> not worth it anymore. Writing tag attributes takes up more time and space
> than just writing out the html itself. The one thing it's really good for
> is writing out tables. If you have an array with all your row data you can
> write something like print Tr( td([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ). That saves a lot of
> typing.
> The perldoc has most of the gritty details.
>
> Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style
> sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless
> there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause
> compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style
> sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with
> everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts,
> browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be
> careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off
> in my browser.
>
>
> At 10:50 PM 12/29/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote:
> >Please, somebody point me to URL's that provide examples and best
> >practices of using CSS2, CGI.pm and XHTML v1.x.
> >
> >--
> >Best Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=--
> "...ne cede males"
>
> 0100
>
>
>
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
CSS is not deprecated. It is not reliable for positioning but it is quite
usable for defining text and character styles. If you have ever
changed all the font tags in a web site, you will be a CSS fan.
If you attempt to validate your HTML against w3.org's validator, you
are required to be a fan.
http://validator.w3.org/
It is probably not a good idea to use CGI.pm to produce HTML output. Why
learn another HTML syntax ? Something like HTML::Template or even a HERE
document will serve you better.
However it is very foolish to **Not** use CGI to parse input from a form.
It is much, much easier and safer than parsing the raw query string or
reading STDIN or escaping shell charactors or otherwise doing the job by
hand.
#!/usr/bin/perl -wT
use strict;
use CGI;
use CGI::Carp;
my $q= new CGI;
my $name = $q->param('first_name') || 0;
my $result =
Hello $name
hello $name
HERE
if ($name) {
print $result;
}
else {
print ;
}
# see perldoc perldata for __DATA__ file handle info
__DATA__
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
simple form
Name:
#
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Chris Wagner wrote:
> I can tell you some stuff about that right now. CGI.pm is just a quick and
> dirty module that will save on some typing in your perl script. Emphasis on
> some. If you're doing anything more than basic html tags it quickly becomes
> not worth it anymore. Writing tag attributes takes up more time and space
> than just writing out the html itself. The one thing it's really good for
> is writing out tables. If you have an array with all your row data you can
> write something like print Tr( td([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ). That saves a lot of typing.
> The perldoc has most of the gritty details.
>
> Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style
> sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless
> there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause
> compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style
> sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with
> everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts,
> browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be
> careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off
> in my browser.
>
>
> At 10:50 PM 12/29/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote:
> >Please, somebody point me to URL's that provide examples and best
> >practices of using CSS2, CGI.pm and XHTML v1.x.
> >
> >--
> >Best Regards,
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=--
> "...ne cede males"
>
> 0100
>
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Ah, "together". Well there's nothing that I know of that would cause a problem simply by virtue of them being used together. CGI.pm is nothing more than html shorthand so that can't really interfere with anything else, unless there's some bug that spits out bad code. They're pretty much self contained so I wouldn't worry about it. Once you start putting alot of css attributes into your tags you'll probly want to drop CGI.pm because it's less typing to just do it the old fashioned way. It's no good for anything complex. At 12:53 PM 12/30/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote: >Yes, I am quite familiar with all three tools -- separately. > >I believe that they are all the right choices for my project. However, >I do not fully understand how they play together -- and, when they do >not play well together ;> -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Erik Grinaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003:12:30:18:05:37+0100] scribed: > On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 17:26, Chris Wagner wrote: > > Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style > > sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless > > there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause > > compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style > > sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with > > everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts, > > browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be > > careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off > > in my browser. > > This is probably going to end up as a flamewar, but I'll throw in my two > cents anyways. Yes, I am quite familiar with all three tools -- separately. I believe that they are all the right choices for my project. However, I do not fully understand how they play together -- and, when they do not play well together ;> Hence, my post . . . -- Best Regards, mds mds resource 877.596.8237 - Dare to fix things before they break . . . - Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . . -- pgpzIAnnbR8ID.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Heheh, nah no flamewar. Everything you said was strictly speaking true. But at this stage style sheets are like giving a random person off the street a loaded gun. Style sheets can be used to great effect but just be sure u truly know what ur doing. And do testing testing testing. A good regimin would be making sure it looks right in: All used versions of Netscape(4&7), Opera, & IE; Text based browsers(Palm, Lynx); Moniters from 15" to 19"; Resolutions from 800x600 to 1600x1200; Various system font sizes from 90-120dpi, handicapped settings can go to 200dpi. These last two have particularly infuriated me. Also make sure the site is still usable with style sheets disabled. Turning off style sheets should not fatally hobble ur website. At 06:05 PM 12/30/03 +0100, Erik Grinaker wrote: >For an example of the truly amazing things you can accomplish with css, >check out http://www.csszengarden.com/ Just as an aside, the truly amazing things I've seen done with web pages were DHTML. -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Ah, "together". Well there's nothing that I know of that would cause a problem simply by virtue of them being used together. CGI.pm is nothing more than html shorthand so that can't really interfere with anything else, unless there's some bug that spits out bad code. They're pretty much self contained so I wouldn't worry about it. Once you start putting alot of css attributes into your tags you'll probly want to drop CGI.pm because it's less typing to just do it the old fashioned way. It's no good for anything complex. At 12:53 PM 12/30/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote: >Yes, I am quite familiar with all three tools -- separately. > >I believe that they are all the right choices for my project. However, >I do not fully understand how they play together -- and, when they do >not play well together ;> -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Erik Grinaker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003:12:30:18:05:37+0100] scribed: > On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 17:26, Chris Wagner wrote: > > Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style > > sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless > > there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause > > compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style > > sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with > > everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts, > > browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be > > careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off > > in my browser. > > This is probably going to end up as a flamewar, but I'll throw in my two > cents anyways. Yes, I am quite familiar with all three tools -- separately. I believe that they are all the right choices for my project. However, I do not fully understand how they play together -- and, when they do not play well together ;> Hence, my post . . . -- Best Regards, mds mds resource 877.596.8237 - Dare to fix things before they break . . . - Our capacity for understanding is inversely proportional to how much we think we know. The more I know, the more I know I don't know . . . -- pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
Heheh, nah no flamewar. Everything you said was strictly speaking true. But at this stage style sheets are like giving a random person off the street a loaded gun. Style sheets can be used to great effect but just be sure u truly know what ur doing. And do testing testing testing. A good regimin would be making sure it looks right in: All used versions of Netscape(4&7), Opera, & IE; Text based browsers(Palm, Lynx); Moniters from 15" to 19"; Resolutions from 800x600 to 1600x1200; Various system font sizes from 90-120dpi, handicapped settings can go to 200dpi. These last two have particularly infuriated me. Also make sure the site is still usable with style sheets disabled. Turning off style sheets should not fatally hobble ur website. At 06:05 PM 12/30/03 +0100, Erik Grinaker wrote: >For an example of the truly amazing things you can accomplish with css, >check out http://www.csszengarden.com/ Just as an aside, the truly amazing things I've seen done with web pages were DHTML. -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 17:26, Chris Wagner wrote: > Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style > sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless > there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause > compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style > sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with > everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts, > browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be > careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off > in my browser. This is probably going to end up as a flamewar, but I'll throw in my two cents anyways. CSS is the next step for web-design, and definitively a step in the right direction. They are in no way "deprecated". True, there are many badly written CSS-based websites out there, but misuse of the technology is in no way indicative of its merits. The major problem with css right now is that IE (as usual) has unbelievably bad support for the standard. Most other browsers handle them well, and altough it's a pain in the ass, you can always get around the horrible ie bugs. Some of the major benefits of css are: - Complete separation of content structure and presentation. HTML was originally intended for content structure, not design, which has resulted in hacks such as transparent gifs and nested tables. - Media-independent presentation. Well-written XHTML/CSS pages can be viewed nicely in graphical and text-based browsers, cell phones, pdas, on paper, blind-terminals, as audio through a speech synthesizer etc. - User-supplied style sheets can override author-provided ones, for example letting people with poor sight use larger fonts and colors with better contrast. - Much easier to maintain - just change your css file, and the design of your entire site is updated. It is also much easier to read and understand the code. - Less bandwidth use and faster load times (better responsiveness) - I have myself reduced a ~1000 line HTML document to around 100 lines of XHTML/CSS. - It also provides many, many features which would be completely impossible to do with standard html, such as block-justifying text in a column or having content flow around a document element. For an example of the truly amazing things you can accomplish with css, check out http://www.csszengarden.com/ The best way to learn css is probably by reading the book HTML Utopia: Designing Without Tables Using CSS: http://www.sitepoint.com/books/css1/ w3c has an extensive list of resources for learing css at http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/learning You can also check out http://www.w3schools.com/ for many nice introductory articles on xhtml and css, or read the spec at http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/ - I always keep it open when developing websites. -- Erik Grinaker http://erikg.wired-networks.net This signature has been rot13-encrypted twice, reading it is illegal under the terms of the DMCA.
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
I can tell you some stuff about that right now. CGI.pm is just a quick and dirty module that will save on some typing in your perl script. Emphasis on some. If you're doing anything more than basic html tags it quickly becomes not worth it anymore. Writing tag attributes takes up more time and space than just writing out the html itself. The one thing it's really good for is writing out tables. If you have an array with all your row data you can write something like print Tr( td([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ). That saves a lot of typing. The perldoc has most of the gritty details. Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts, browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off in my browser. At 10:50 PM 12/29/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote: >Please, somebody point me to URL's that provide examples and best >practices of using CSS2, CGI.pm and XHTML v1.x. > >-- >Best Regards, -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
On Tue, 2003-12-30 at 17:26, Chris Wagner wrote: > Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style > sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless > there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause > compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style > sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with > everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts, > browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be > careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off > in my browser. This is probably going to end up as a flamewar, but I'll throw in my two cents anyways. CSS is the next step for web-design, and definitively a step in the right direction. They are in no way "deprecated". True, there are many badly written CSS-based websites out there, but misuse of the technology is in no way indicative of its merits. The major problem with css right now is that IE (as usual) has unbelievably bad support for the standard. Most other browsers handle them well, and altough it's a pain in the ass, you can always get around the horrible ie bugs. Some of the major benefits of css are: - Complete separation of content structure and presentation. HTML was originally intended for content structure, not design, which has resulted in hacks such as transparent gifs and nested tables. - Media-independent presentation. Well-written XHTML/CSS pages can be viewed nicely in graphical and text-based browsers, cell phones, pdas, on paper, blind-terminals, as audio through a speech synthesizer etc. - User-supplied style sheets can override author-provided ones, for example letting people with poor sight use larger fonts and colors with better contrast. - Much easier to maintain - just change your css file, and the design of your entire site is updated. It is also much easier to read and understand the code. - Less bandwidth use and faster load times (better responsiveness) - I have myself reduced a ~1000 line HTML document to around 100 lines of XHTML/CSS. - It also provides many, many features which would be completely impossible to do with standard html, such as block-justifying text in a column or having content flow around a document element. For an example of the truly amazing things you can accomplish with css, check out http://www.csszengarden.com/ The best way to learn css is probably by reading the book HTML Utopia: Designing Without Tables Using CSS: http://www.sitepoint.com/books/css1/ w3c has an extensive list of resources for learing css at http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/learning You can also check out http://www.w3schools.com/ for many nice introductory articles on xhtml and css, or read the spec at http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/ - I always keep it open when developing websites. -- Erik Grinaker http://erikg.wired-networks.net This signature has been rot13-encrypted twice, reading it is illegal under the terms of the DMCA. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Best Practices: CGI.pm & CSS2 ???
I can tell you some stuff about that right now. CGI.pm is just a quick and dirty module that will save on some typing in your perl script. Emphasis on some. If you're doing anything more than basic html tags it quickly becomes not worth it anymore. Writing tag attributes takes up more time and space than just writing out the html itself. The one thing it's really good for is writing out tables. If you have an array with all your row data you can write something like print Tr( td([EMAIL PROTECTED]) ). That saves a lot of typing. The perldoc has most of the gritty details. Cascading Style Sheets. Deprecated. I have seen so many bad uses of style sheets it makes me want to cry out in anger. So just don't use them unless there's no other way to do it. They are almost guaranteed to cause compatibility problems. The problem is that some bonehead writes a style sheet that makes a webpage look good on *their* computer. To hell with everybody else who doesn't have the same monitor, resolution, fonts, browser, etc. The one thing they are "good" for is making themes but be careful that it's still ledgible on other machines. I have them turned off in my browser. At 10:50 PM 12/29/03 -0600, Michael D Schleif wrote: >Please, somebody point me to URL's that provide examples and best >practices of using CSS2, CGI.pm and XHTML v1.x. > >-- >Best Regards, -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
