Re: [WSG] Safari problems
Thanks, Jan. I am going to take a screen shot today of the problem and
I'll post a link to it later. It's the image of the flower that is
misaligned on the nav list.
On 07/11/05, Jan Brasna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On my version of Safari (1.3)
The 1.3 branch is fairly OK, it implemented all the bugfixes and
features that are present in 2.x, but the odler one misbehave seriously.
My EUR 0.02 - try to play with
#navigation li {
background-position: 0.5em;
}
a bit, like: 5px 5px or 20% 20% to see whether it works or not. I'd say
it'd be enough to use something like 0.5em 0 or similar.
--
Jan Brasna aka JohnyB :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.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
**
**
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] Standards and The DataGrid
Chris Could you give me an example of what you are providing and what styles they are referring to. Is it a table css formatting issue or an output issue. could you provide a copy of the Datagrid declaration and the html output which the client has issue with. Please contact me off list if you would like. regards Peter From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris KennonSent: 07 November 2005 17:07To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] Standards and The DataGrid Hi, The client is having trouble: "Just to update you, we're having some issues making your styles work within the program, as the generated table does not have TD's and TH's in the traditional sense per se." The application is running on IE 6. Thanks, Christopher Kennon On Nov 7, 2005, at 6:18 AM, Peter Goddard wrote: Chris Just off the top of my head, but .net 2.0 offers the new GridView web control and most output I have tested in .net 2.0 has been compliant markup, if a little verbose. The DataGrid was a web control offered as part of .net 1.x and has now been replaced by the GridView. Most of the enhancements are to do with easier databinding routines and the the new declarative datasource controls. What issues with table markup does your client think they have? The data returned to a databound control is ideal for presentation on a tabular format. It is, after all a table of data that is being diplayed. If you have issues with the DataGrid, why not grab back control of the output in a Repeater control. There are even scripts that will allow paging with the repeater. Check out 4guysfromrolla or msdn. I wouldn't like to script sorting on columns however. HTH Peter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Chris Kennon Sent: 07 November 2005 13:54 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Standards and The DataGrid Hi, Can someone offer standards based guidelines when working with the MS .Net's standard grid component. According to my client this component has issues with td th elements. Respectfully, Chris ** 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 **
[WSG] Site Check : http://www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test3/index.html
Thanks for the reviews and suggestions from before. I have made some changes and added some more pages. I would appreciate your feedback once more. I still have some issues to address e.g.: the forms need to be made fully accessible the table needs to be madefully accessible Thanks again, Richard Morton QM Consulting LTd
[WSG] Server Side Includes
Are there any standards issues around using server side includes?For example a simple include of another file e.g. -- #include file="test.html" -- Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments (without wishing to start the debate about IE conditional code in comments again), or is it irrelevant because this will not be seen by the browser? Thanks, Richard Morton QM Consulting Ltd
[WSG] Standards and .NET
Hi,Yesterday I spoke with you all regarding issues with using CSS and .NET. Below is the site underdevelopment. I'm told div's are casuing a problem, in addition to tdthCould someone look over this and offer suggestions, on Standards based implementation with .NET"Today we found screen resolution Problem. Please test different screenresolutions also try to use tables instead of div tags."Try the following link to get an idea of what we are getting.http://www.red-threads.com/beacontest/processes.aspx
Re: [WSG] Server Side Includes
QM Consulting Ltd wrote: Are there any standards issues around using server side includes? For example a simple include of another file e.g. -- #include file=test.html -- Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments (without wishing to start the debate about IE conditional code in comments again), or is it irrelevant because this will not be seen by the browser? As the code is processed server side and never sent, you can do whatever you like, as long as the end result is valid. -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] css instead of JS(ajax)
Hi, any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ? http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.html if yes, please shot a kickstart -- Regards Jad madi Blog http://EasyHTTP.com/jad/ Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/ ** 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] css instead of JS(ajax)
The closest I've seen in css can be found at http://www.cssplay.co.uk/menus/expand.html. Good luck! CarolynOn 11/8/05, Jad Madi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ?http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.html if yes, please shot a kickstart--RegardsJad madiBloghttp://EasyHTTP.com/jad/Web standards Planethttp://W3planet.net/ **The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] css instead of JS(ajax)
Hi, any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ? http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.html if yes, please shot a kickstart -- Regards Jad madi Blog http://EasyHTTP.com/jad/ Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/ ** 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] css instead of JS(ajax)
That has about as much to do with AJAX as my mother does. Whats wrong with using the fisheye widget? Dojo code is standards compliant, effiecientJS. Why would you try to do something like that in _pure_ CSS? If your going to do that you might as well try to do it in plain text aswell. HTH w On 11/8/05, Jad Madi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi,any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ? http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.htmlif yes, please shot a kickstart--RegardsJad madiBloghttp://EasyHTTP.com/jad/Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] css instead of JS(ajax)
2005-11-08
Thread
Marko Mihelcic - founder of mcville.net (http.//www.mcville.net)|(http://board.mcville.net)
My point exactly why not use JS ? 2005/11/8, Wayne Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED]: That has about as much to do with AJAX as my mother does. Whats wrong with using the fisheye widget? Dojo code is standards compliant, effiecient JS. Why would you try to do something like that in _pure_ CSS? If your going to do that you might as well try to do it in plain text aswell. HTH w On 11/8/05, Jad Madi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ? http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.html if yes, please shot a kickstart -- Regards Jad madi Blog http://EasyHTTP.com/jad/ Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/ ** 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 **
Re: [WSG] Standards and .NET
http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/ASPNET2XHTML.asp VS2005 drastically improves this situ. hth :] w Chris Kennon wrote: Hi, Yesterday I spoke with you all regarding issues with using CSS and .NET. Below is the site underdevelopment. I'm told div's are casuing a problem, in addition to tdth Could someone look over this and offer suggestions, on Standards based implementation with .NET /Today we found screen resolution Problem. Please test different screen/ /resolutions also try to use tables instead of div tags./ / / Try the following link to get an idea of what we are getting. http://www.red-threads.com/beacontest/processes.aspx ** 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] Standards and .NET
Hi Chris, To echo what Wayne says - Visual Studio 2005 is MUCH better when it comes to css/standards layouts. Unfortunately it is still fairly new, and so not going to be commonly used for a wee while. When dealing with older .net stuff - like I also currently am - yes it is a headache. How closely do you work with these developers? Currently I am battling with 30 odd validation errors on each page because of what Visual studio is putting in. In short, it helps a lot to have the doctype as HTML 4 strict (unless you have to use xhtml?). If they are telling you to use tables for stuff other than data tables, then they need to get their act together. They should have no problems bringing your html in. One thing that could be causing a problem is if they are needing to use the id values for .net stuff then you need to change your styles into classes instead. However even that isn't a common occurrence. They need to make sure that they ARE using YOUR code and not putting their asp:Table stuff around everything. They don't need to be there! If you see they have put those around your opening div tags which I imagine is causing most of the problems at this stage. All the best! Rachel -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Wayne Douglas Sent: Wednesday, 9 November 2005 9:12 a.m. To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Standards and .NET http://www.codeproject.com/aspnet/ASPNET2XHTML.asp VS2005 drastically improves this situ. hth :] w Chris Kennon wrote: Hi, Yesterday I spoke with you all regarding issues with using CSS and .NET. Below is the site underdevelopment. I'm told div's are casuing a problem, in addition to tdth Could someone look over this and offer suggestions, on Standards based implementation with .NET /Today we found screen resolution Problem. Please test different screen/ /resolutions also try to use tables instead of div tags./ / / Try the following link to get an idea of what we are getting. http://www.red-threads.com/beacontest/processes.aspx ** 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 **
Re: [WSG] Standards and .NET
A few tips based on my experience of working with ASP.NET 1.1: * First up, consider sticking to an HTML 4 DOCTYPE. It's really not as big a deal as some advocates would have you think ;-) - Critically, if you try and force it to use XHTML and someone accidentally clicks 'Design View' your code is ruined. VS2003 works in HTML, you'll have an easier path if you do too. As has been said, .NET 2 and Visual Studio 2005 introduces XHTML support, you really need to upgrade your development tools if you want to work with it. * Avoid using the pre-wrapped ASP.NET controls. DataGrids aren't so bad, but you get much more mark-up control by using a Repeater. Similarly, rather than using an asp:label, there's a mark-upless version that doesn't insert span elements. I forget the name, sorry, but it does exist. * Don't use postback. Just give up, it's a badly implemented hack to maintain state in a webpage misusing forms and introducing complete JavaScript dependence. Just because Visual Studio makes it very easy to accidentally use it, doesn't make it ok. Just pretend it was never there. Also remember that you don't have to recompile when you make changes to an aspx file (only recompile for codebehind changes). It's probably insulting to be told that for some people, but when I started working with .NET last year I spent months not really understanding how the whole aspx thing worked in relation to compilation. Anyway, knock on effect is that once you've got something producing stable data, you can edit the page layout CSS and aspx components without recompiling, from any editor(s) you like and preview in whichever browsers you like. That's a huge help. I think that ultimately, it's all a case of learning to quirks of a very complex system. Once you trim off the cruft though, there's not much to go wrong! Good luck, Ben http://ben-ward.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 **
[WSG] Scalable background-image?
Is there any way using CSS to get a background-image to scale? I've created an accessible interface that uses em for layout and font sizing control. Everything scales beautifully as the font size changes except for background images, which remain at the size of the original image. I can't seem to find a way to get them to scale as the font size (em) changes - something akin to CSS3's background-size. And % is not an option as it scales based on the viewport size, not the font size. Jared ** 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] Standards and .NET
Avoid using the pre-wrapped ASP.NET controls. DataGrids aren't so bad, but you get much more mark-up control by using a Repeater. Similarly, rather than using an asp:label, there's a mark-upless version that doesn't insert span elements. I forget the name, sorry, but it does exist. I think Ben might be referring to the asp:literal control. I use this quite a lot as it gives you complete control over your HTML output. Also, I've implemented the free XHTML Strict filter from Rider Design. Works great. It essentially captures the HTTP stream before it hits the client and adjusts the stream to ensure compliance. http://www.riderdesign.com/products/ I must admit, I try and avoid the web controls that create the markup for you. I generally call on my own classes that generate compliant markup. Best Regards, Paul Hempsall Web Developer Lake Macquarie City Council Tel: (02) 4921 0713 Fax: (02) 4958 7257 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.lakemac.com.au This information is intended for the addressee only. The use, copying or distribution of this message or any information it contains, by anyone other than the addressee is prohibited by the sender. Any views expressed in this communication are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Council. ** 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] css instead of JS(ajax)
Using a PNG you could achieve a similar effect. This was actually demoed at WE05. You should be able to find the presentation and podcast on the WE05 website. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jad Madi Sent: Wednesday, 9 November 2005 6:17 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] css instead of JS(ajax) Hi, any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ? http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.html if yes, please shot a kickstart -- Regards Jad madi Blog http://EasyHTTP.com/jad/ Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/ ** 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 **
RE: [WSG] Scalable background-image?
I'm going with 'no' here. I've seen some cool stuff with % in layered divs but no bg images. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jared Smith Sent: Wednesday, 9 November 2005 8:34 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Scalable background-image? Is there any way using CSS to get a background-image to scale? I've created an accessible interface that uses em for layout and font sizing control. Everything scales beautifully as the font size changes except for background images, which remain at the size of the original image. I can't seem to find a way to get them to scale as the font size (em) changes - something akin to CSS3's background-size. And % is not an option as it scales based on the viewport size, not the font size. Jared ** 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 **
Re: [WSG] Scalable background-image?
As far as i know, there is no way to change the scaling of the background image - but, by changing the viewable area of the background, you can effectively change the size.the general way this is done is by intentionally making the background larger than it has to be, so that if the font size is increased, there is still background image provided for the now larger area. This can also use techniques such as sliding doors:http://www.stopdesign.com/present/2004/sydney/limits/?no=82 On 11/9/05, Jared Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there any way using CSS to get a background-image to scale?I've created an accessible interface that uses em for layout and fontsizing control. Everything scales beautifully as the font size changesexcept for background images, which remain at the size of the original image. I can't seem to find a way to get them to scale as the font size(em) changes - something akin to CSS3's background-size. And % is not anoption as it scales based on the viewport size, not the font size. Jared**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] css instead of JS(ajax)
Paul Noone wrote: Using a PNG you could achieve a similar effect. Did you mean SVG? -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] css instead of JS(ajax)
Damn these infernal acronyms. ;) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke Sent: Wednesday, 9 November 2005 9:10 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] css instead of JS(ajax) Paul Noone wrote: Using a PNG you could achieve a similar effect. Did you mean SVG? -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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 **
Re: [WSG] css instead of JS(ajax)
You would have to use javascript to detect the mouse position over the icons to correctly scale the image, you might be able to go from having a small icon to a large icon just using CSS. PNGs will allow you to have nice alpha blending around the edges of the images not matter what the background is behind them but you need a hack to implement it in IE6. I'd suggest altering the javascript a bit to make it a bit smoother, the apple dock scales the image your mouse is over to it's max size and scales the images on either side according to where the mouse is. At the moment it's very jumpy, responds even if you move your mouse a little bit, which is kind of annoying. Samuel Paul Noone wrote: Using a PNG you could achieve a similar effect. This was actually demoed at WE05. You should be able to find the presentation and podcast on the WE05 website. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jad Madi Sent: Wednesday, 9 November 2005 6:17 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] css instead of JS(ajax) Hi, any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ? http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.html if yes, please shot a kickstart -- Regards Jad madi Blog http://EasyHTTP.com/jad/ Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/ ** 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 ** ** 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] css instead of JS(ajax)
This seems to be a great way to illustrate one of the key points of the whole standards compliant, semantic web concept. Basically, XHTML - Content (what it says) CSS - Form (what it looks like) JavaScript/DOM - Behaviour (what happens when I do this ...) The Fisheye example looks like a perfect fit for JavaScript. Again, why would you try do this in anything but JavaScript? The page works when JS is turned off, so that's a good thing The ONLY thing I'd recommend is plugging in some DOM to access the an ID that you give to the DIVs instead of those proprietary attributes. R :o) - Original Message - From: Marko Mihelcic - founder of mcville.net (http.//www.mcville.net)|(http://board.mcville.net) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 6:40 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] css instead of JS(ajax) My point exactly why not use JS ? 2005/11/8, Wayne Douglas [EMAIL PROTECTED]: That has about as much to do with AJAX as my mother does. Whats wrong with using the fisheye widget? Dojo code is standards compliant, effiecient JS. Why would you try to do something like that in _pure_ CSS? If your going to do that you might as well try to do it in plain text aswell. HTH w On 11/8/05, Jad Madi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, any idea if it's possible to create menu like this one pure css without JS ? http://dojotoolkit.org/~alex/dojo/trunk/demos/widget/Fisheye.html if yes, please shot a kickstart -- Regards Jad madi Blog http://EasyHTTP.com/jad/ Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/ ** 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 ** ** 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] Server Side Includes
Richard, I use SSI's for my navigation, and I've never had any problems with validation, or structure. Kind regards, Mario Are there any standards issues around using server side includes? For example a simple include of another file e.g. -- #include file=test.html -- Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments (without wishing to start the debate about IE conditional code in comments again), or is it irrelevant because this will not be seen by the browser? Thanks, Richard Morton QM Consulting Ltd ** 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] Server Side Includes
It's not seen by the browser at all, unless SSI's are turned off or they are not being processed by the web server. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard, I use SSI's for my navigation, and I've never had any problems with validation, or structure. Kind regards, Mario Are there any standards issues around using server side includes? For example a simple include of another file e.g. -- #include file=test.html -- Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments (without wishing to start the debate about IE conditional code in comments again), or is it irrelevant because this will not be seen by the browser? Thanks, Richard Morton QM Consulting Ltd ** 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 **
RE: [WSG] Server Side Includes
SSI is irrelevant to standards, as the code is parsed by the webserver (and the include file placed in the output code) before the browser/client receives it Paul -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 1:10 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Server Side Includes Richard, I use SSI's for my navigation, and I've never had any problems with validation, or structure. Kind regards, Mario Are there any standards issues around using server side includes? For example a simple include of another file e.g. -- #include file=test.html -- Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments (without wishing to start the debate about IE conditional code in comments again), or is it irrelevant because this will not be seen by the browser? Thanks, Richard Morton QM Consulting Ltd ** 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 **
RE: [WSG] Server Side Includes
Paul, I don't entirely agree that the SSI is irrelevant to standards. I use XHTML Strict, and if my markup in the SSI file contains a deprecated property then it won't validate. Yes, the server needs to be configured to interpret the SSI file, and it's similar to PHP in that he code is parsed by the webserver, but the markup needs to valid and well-formed. Mario SSI is irrelevant to standards, as the code is parsed by the webserver (and the include file placed in the output code) before the browser/client receives it Paul -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 1:10 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Server Side Includes Richard, I use SSI's for my navigation, and I've never had any problems with validation, or structure. Kind regards, Mario Are there any standards issues around using server side includes? For example a simple include of another file e.g. -- #include file=test.html -- Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments (without wishing to start the debate about IE conditional code in comments again), or is it irrelevant because this will not be seen by the browser? Thanks, Richard Morton QM Consulting Ltd ** 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 ** ** 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] disabling autocomplete and validation
I'd have to agree with Patrick. Poking into the DOM and adding the autocomplete attribute is clean enough for the sort of thing you are doing. I look at it this way.. the markup is what the web server sends. The DOM gives us hooks into the document once its loaded into the browsers memory. I'm sure a lot of Kiosk extensions for Firefox do this sort of thing, does that make our markup any less valid? CB
RE: [WSG] Server Side Includes
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't entirely agree that the SSI is irrelevant to standards. I use XHTML Strict, and if my markup in the SSI file contains a deprecated property then it won't validate. I don't think anyone is arguing that the content of the include is irrelevant, the original question was about the syntax of the include statement and its effect on validity. Since the validator or browser never get to see the include statement, it is irrelevant. Of course the content of the include file would need to be valid to pass validation and hopefully display correctly in browsers. That seems to be a given. -- Peter Williams ** 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] Server Side Includes
I use XHTML Strict, and if my markup in the SSI file contains a deprecated property then it won't validate. This is an issue with the *code in the include* NOT with server side includes. This list is about standards-compliant code - SSI has no bearing on whether a site is or isn't standards compliant, hence the initial point still stands - SSI is irrelevant to standards compliance. Paul ** 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] Server Side Includes
I caught the comment from I think Richard. 'Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments' You might actually be a little confused. This is a comment !-- Something in here -- Note the '!'. In the code for a SSI, there is not '!'. In other words. This is not a comment. -- #include file=test.html -- And as for the other comments about standards and all. It really does not matter. As another Paul state the includes are put together on the server way before the HTML ever reaches the client (browser). And sure if you have errors in you include you will break validation but then again if you used a single file as opposed to include and an had an error you would see the same thing. Once again in other words the us of SSI does not and will not cause validation problems. P- --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Paul, I don't entirely agree that the SSI is irrelevant to standards. I use XHTML Strict, and if my markup in the SSI file contains a deprecated property then it won't validate. Yes, the server needs to be configured to interpret the SSI file, and it's similar to PHP in that he code is parsed by the webserver, but the markup needs to valid and well-formed. Mario SSI is irrelevant to standards, as the code is parsed by the webserver (and the include file placed in the output code) before the browser/client receives it Paul -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 1:10 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Server Side Includes Richard, I use SSI's for my navigation, and I've never had any problems with validation, or structure. Kind regards, Mario Are there any standards issues around using server side includes? For example a simple include of another file e.g. -- #include file=test.html -- Does it matter that this is making use of code within comments (without wishing to start the debate about IE conditional code in comments again), or is it irrelevant because this will not be seen by the browser? Thanks, Richard Morton QM Consulting Ltd ** 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 ** ** 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 **
Re: [WSG] Server Side Includes
Paul Menard wrote: You might actually be a little confused. This is a comment !-- Something in here -- Note the '!'. In the code for a SSI, there is not '!'. In other words. This is not a comment. -- #include file=test.html -- Good grief -- where did you get that idea? Your example `include` above /should/ be: !--#include file=test.html -- :: which is most certainly proper comment syntax, and has been since originally implemented in the NCSA server from which Apache evolved. See http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.0/howto/ssi.html for examples. FWIW, -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. ** 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] Next Wellington WSG meeting
Just a reminder that this will be on Thursday 17th November. More details here: http://webstandardsgroup.org/go/event50.cfm Free Webstock http://www.webstock.org.nz poster for everyone attending :) Mike ** 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] Server Side Includes
I wasn't arguing either. I was simply pointing out that the code still needs to be valid, well-formed and semantically correct. I teach a class at the local college and you'd be amazed at the number of students taking web-based courses with mimimal computer experience therefore I wouldn't assume that anything is a given, especially with beginners to CSS and the list, hence I took the liberty of emphasizing this point, which still stands. Mario From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I don't entirely agree that the SSI is irrelevant to standards. I use XHTML Strict, and if my markup in the SSI file contains a deprecated property then it won't validate. I don't think anyone is arguing that the content of the include is irrelevant, the original question was about the syntax of the include statement and its effect on validity. Since the validator or browser never get to see the include statement, it is irrelevant. Of course the content of the include file would need to be valid to pass validation and hopefully display correctly in browsers. That seems to be a given. -- Peter Williams ** 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 **
Re: [WSG] Naked metadata - RDF in HTML
Hi Ian, Liddy, Charles, Peter, Misha, Alan, Patrick, Andy, Geoff, DC-General and WSG Thank you for all your help and comments. In particular, thank you, Ian, for RDF in HTML. Last week, I wrote to the DC-General and the Web Standards Group mailing lists. I was lamenting the fact that Dublin Core metadata needed to be embedded in the head of the Web page, and that people often didn't update the metadata when they updated the Web page. I proposed a half-baked idea, and asked for comments. Everyone was extremely helpful, and gave me really valuable feedback. I learnt a lot. ** RDF in HTML ** In particular, I learnt that RDF in HTML [1] will do exactly what I want. It provides a valid way to embed Dublin Core (or other) metadata in the Web page. I can use class attributes, so it is CSS-friendly. It can be harvested using a Gleaning Resource Descriptions from Dialects of Languages [2] (GRDDL)-aware harvester. And Ian has built a GRDDL-aware harvester, Embedded RDF Extractor, [3] that I can use to test my pages. Now, I have built a page, and it works! http://purl.nla.gov.au/net/jod/tutorial/naked-metadata.html If anyone would like to have a look at it, I would appreciate feedback. Have I got it right? Are there things that I could be doing better? ** XHTML2 ** And Misha pointed out that XHTML2 [4] deals with this very nicely. In XHTML2, meta elements can appear in the body of the document, not just the head and any element can link to them. So, once again, thanks everybody. The Internet continues to blow my mind! ** References ** [1] RDF in HTML: http://research.talis.com/2005/erdf/wiki/Main/RdfInHtml [2] Gleaning Resource Descriptions from Dialects of Languages (GRDDL): http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/spec [3] Embedded RDF Extractor: http://research.talis.com/2005/erdf/extract [4] eXtensible HyperText Markup Language 2 (XHTML2): http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2 -- Jonathan O'Donnell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://purl.nla.gov.au/net/jod +61 4 2575 5829 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
