On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 07:03:14PM +0100, Edd Barrett wrote:
>
> Here is the patch: http://arameus.net/users/edd/vim-test/2html.vim.diff
>
> Also in the same directory you will see the output of my tests, please
> test them on other browsers.
I viewed the output using the following systems and browsers:
Linux, Mozilla 1.7.12
Windows XP, Mozilla 1.7.12 and IE 6.0.2900.2180.xpsp_sp2_gds.050301-1519
Mac OS X, Mozilla 1.7.12, IE 5.2.3, OmniWeb 4.5, and Safari 1.3.2
Note that two of the Mac browsers are a couple of years old.
The pages all looked pretty much the same. On IE/Mac, the CSS
versions seemed to use slightly smaller fonts than the non-CSS versions.
In several browsers, the CSS versions had a little more "white" space at
the top of the screen than the non-CSS versions. (Maybe because of the
<pre> tags?)
I do not see any problems in my browsers, so I vote in favor of
improved compliance with the W3 standards.
Minor point: in
http://arameus.net/users/edd/vim-test/xhtml_no_css.html
(XHTML without CSS) there are some "empty" tags such as <br/>. Isn't
the standard advice to add a space before the slash, as in <br />? I
think this still complies with the standard, and it is supposed to be
easier for some older browsers to parse.
> I am completely new to your development community (but I've been using
> vim for many years), so I aplogize if I have broken any coding style
> rules/other rules. =)
I like to think that we are not too picky. Thanks for the
contribution.
HTH --Benji Fisher
