SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 148
  1. #51
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,836
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    those pretty recent pages with transitional doctype ("modern" transitional).
    A transitional doctype indicates that the page contains HTML 3.2 tags such as <center>. It has no more to do with what you are trying to achieve than claiming that all of your posts here are written in Spanish. Your page is no more written in transitional than your posts are in Spanish so both are equally wrong.

    If your page is written in HTML 4 strict then use an HTML 4 strict doctype. Just because the code isn't as semantic as you want doesn't mean it isn't HTML 4 strict just as using poor English grammar doesn't mean you are writing in German.

    Identifying the page with the wrong language is NOT the answer to anything - unless every word you have ever spoken is actually in Klingon (in which case you ought to be banned from this forum for not complying with the rule that posts must be in English).
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  2. #52
    SitePoint Evangelist Ed Seedhouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Victoria, B.C. Canada
    Posts
    592
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Immerse View Post
    Lets not forget that a large portion of the sites on the Internet are created by developers for their clients. As long as the client is the one with the money, how far are you going to go in telling them they can't have rounded corners because then there'll be superfluous div tags in his pages.
    Well presumably the client is going to want people to visit and use their site and possibly to drop some money there. So if you educate them as to what is important that will benefit both you, your client, and their clients.

    If the client really thinks that curvy corners are important, as opposed to merely decoration, then that client doesn't understand what is important and you as a professional should be educating them.
    Ed Seedhouse

  3. #53
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    A transitional doctype indicates that the page contains HTML 3.2 tags such as <center>. It has no more to do with what you are trying to achieve than claiming that all of your posts here are written in Spanish. Your page is no more written in transitional than your posts are in Spanish so both are equally wrong.
    when you refer only to a validator, maybe, yes. but transitional means also a transitional state of your html document... but we've been through all this (and this) before. and from a validator point of view, one may have the icon on his web site, but also can have a messy markup that doesn't comply with specs. see here.

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    If your page is written in HTML 4 strict then use an HTML 4 strict doctype. Just because the code isn't as semantic as you want doesn't mean it isn't HTML 4 strict just as using poor English grammar doesn't mean you are writing in German.
    you're saying it's the wrong use for a doctype. i'm saying, is it worse that using xhtml doctype just to justify a better way of coding? am i a bigger sinner than most of the other web developers that use xhtml doctype for completely the wrong reasons? shouldn't they be also banned? if their page is written in html 4 then they should use it, not xhtml 1. right? do they? how many?

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    Identifying the page with the wrong language is NOT the answer to anything - unless every word you have ever spoken is actually in Klingon (in which case you ought to be banned from this forum for not complying with the rule that posts must be in English).

  4. #54
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,836
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    when you refer only to a validator, maybe, yes.
    NO NO NO NO and again NO.

    The doctype is defining a language in accordance with the SGML standards. It has nothing whatever to do with validation. A validator might have been constructed so as to test if particular content complies with the particular language standard but the doctype exists long before any validator can be built and long before any pages can be written to use that doctype since the doctype is a language definition that uses SGML rules to set out how the language is defined.

    It doesn't matter how many times you claim to be writing all your posts in Russian - you can keep claiming that forever and they will still be written in English. Similarly no matter how many times you write that your page is written in RSS 7 or YELLOW, if it is written in HTML 4 strict without an HTML 4 strict doctype then your language identifier is wrong.

    Unless your page contains an HTML 3.2 tag it is NOT written in transitional.

    What's the big deal about placing a comment regarding how closely your HTML 4 strict page complies with all your extra standards that you want to apply on top of what HTML 4 strict dictates anyway.

    And with regard to using XHTML 1.0, if the page is actually written to that standard then it can be served as slightly invalid HTML, as XHTML or as XML. The actual SGML standard allows all three options.

    Just because Microsoft invented a new use for the doctype that has nothing to do with what it really means is no justification for anyone else to do so. Microsoft has already created enough confusion about what a doctype is with the way they have misused it.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  5. #55
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Ed Seedhouse View Post
    Well presumably the client is going to want people to visit and use their site and possibly to drop some money there. So if you educate them as to what is important that will benefit both you, your client, and their clients.

    If the client really thinks that curvy corners are important, as opposed to merely decoration, then that client doesn't understand what is important and you as a professional should be educating them.
    i totally agree. even more, if you decide that the visual needs of your client are all it takes, and decide that bad habbits are excusable as long as the outcome is the same, you can have unexpected surprises. he can employ a councelor (big clients always do so) to double check what you're selling. and there you go losing your client, no matter how much you protest: "but this is what you wanted isn't it?"

  6. #56
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    Unless your page contains an HTML 3.2 tag it is NOT written in transitional.
    so a page having a layout based on tables is strict, this is my understanding of you're above comment, if it's not using an HTML 3.2 tag.

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    It doesn't matter how many times you claim to be writing all your posts in Russian - you can keep claiming that forever and they will still be written in English. [...] if it is written in HTML 4 strict without an HTML 4 strict doctype then your language identifier is wrong.
    i could say the same thing: no matter how hard you say you've written a strict markup, you never achieved a 100&#37; separation between content and presentation, using those techniques. it's like my broken english, it's not really a good clean english, and i'm the first to acknowledge this

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    What's the big deal about placing a comment regarding how closely your HTML 4 strict page complies with all your extra standards that you want to apply on top of what HTML 4 strict dictates anyway.
    no big deal. i didn't dissmised your commenting idea at all. i just went more radical.

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    And with regard to using XHTML 1.0, if the page is actually written to that standard then it can be served as slightly invalid HTML, as XHTML or as XML. The actual SGML standard allows all three options.
    if you use xhtml to write an actual html doc, it's like you use shakespeare to show off in front of preschool. and equally useless.

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    Just because Microsoft invented a new use for the doctype that has nothing to do with what it really means is no justification for anyone else to do so. Microsoft has already created enough confusion about what a doctype is with the way they have misused it.
    i don't know how MS got into this. i really don't care about what they are doing. i'm trying to follow standards, and following them it's not doing so at all.

  7. #57
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,836
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    so a page having a layout based on tables is strict, this is my understanding of you're above comment.
    Yes it is. The doctype defines what tags the browser is supposed to accept as a part of the language. It does not define how those tags should be used.

    How the tags should be used is an entirely different matter that has nothing whatever to do with the doctype.

    I have been suggesting for years that a web standard for the people who actually write web pages would be useful but have never been able to figure out how to get a group started on developing such a standard and so all we have is the one that is intended for those who write the browsers that tell them what tags are to be allowed.

    Basically the standard we currently have is no more than a dictionary where the standard that web page writers need is a book on grammar.

    Vocabulary and grammar are two entirely different aspects to a language and a doctype defines the vocabulary. We are missing a formal standard to define the grammar.

    There are legitimate uses for tables in web pages and so the vocabulary allows their use but says noting about when they should or shouldn't be used.

    All we have with respect to HTML grammar is a few unofficial best practices that various people promote usually referring to it as "semantic HTML". We do need a standard for that but it needs to be a grammar guide and so it is NOT appropriate to try to incorporate it into the vocabulary standard.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  8. #58
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    1. i never said: kill rounded corners. i said, put a proper name for them: transitional. until a better way comes along. then, if that better way involves also getting rid of that unnecessary (form the actual content point of view) markup, than put a strict on the markup, and probably this time it will be more truthfully.
    ... and that is why I believe you failed not only to comprehend what transitional markup is, but also failed to grasp the intent of STRICT and even the purpose of HTML.

    Since something like round corners and the techniques for applying them should have NO INFLUENCE WHATSOEVER on the HTML specification. It provides hooks for doing them, but really that's none of it's business one way or the other; This is WHY generic containers like DIV and SPAN exist, it's WHY using them in this manner is completely ok... and it's why DIV and SPAN do NOT apply any meaning or presentation to the content they wrap; excepting DIV's default behavior as a block-level element.

    To say "Using DIV and SPAN as presentational hooks should be considered transitional markup" is just... gah, I'm really hoping it's your English skills (or lack therein) that are making you come up with these most odd conclusions... that border upon the absurd.

  9. #59
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    Yes it is. The doctype defines what tags the browser is supposed to accept as a part of the language. It does not define how those tags should be used.
    the doctype it is an instruction to the web browser about what version of the markup language the page is written in, that conforms to a particular syntax. so i'm pretty sure it says a lot about how this tags should be used. vocabulary is only part of the specs. also, it's not something out of context, with no links whatsoever to specs.

    if the sole purpose for html 4 was to have less tags than html 3 (vocabulary), i don't see the point of jumping ranks. it should have been 3.8.5.6. and doctype describes a vocabulary in a context. that context means rules. it seems to me that you're stripping it down while i'm doing the exact opposite

    but html 4 wants a change in doing things. maybe i see this doctype thing as a obviously impeding solution against that validation icon that shines a fools gold colour, and against this "superior way" of writing "superior code", like using xhtml doctype to pretend i coded a better page.

    i don't believe you would buy (or appreciate) a microprocessor only for it's vocabulary (set of instructions it supports). those instructions must also be used efficiently in order to count for something on the market. so you won't put a wrong sticker (doctype declaration) on it because you're gonna get burned.

    doctype, at the moment, it's wrongly used as a way to state that that code it's a better markup. so, i'm saying, let's put the right sticker on it. a comment won't do much good, as long as the valid icon still lies (or "lies", if it bothers you) about the actual techniques and content. if that's the way it is (and it is, many use a doctype to impress you, and argue that if it validates then it must be ok), it has to be countered the same way. that's my whole point.

  10. #60
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    To say "Using DIV and SPAN as presentational hooks should be considered transitional markup" is just... gah, I'm really hoping it's your English skills (or lack therein) that are making you come up with these most odd conclusions... that border upon the absurd.
    and this is where i don't agree with your method of doing things. i never said that: "Using DIV and SPAN as presentational hooks should be considered transitional markup". you are spinning things to make a more dramatic point, i get it go on, knock your self out.

    what i've said is: "Using DIV and SPAN as presentational hooks, when there is no actual content involved, should be considered transitional markup".

    and it is so. it's only for the moment (longer or shorter moment, that depends on you). like tables for layout.

  11. #61
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    the doctype it is an instruction to the web browser about what version of the markup language the page is written in, that conforms to a particular syntax. so i'm pretty sure it says a lot about how this tags should be used.
    Syntax != meaning. The specs say "this is the syntax". What tags and attributes are legal to use. Obese senior citizens in bikinis walking through the busy beach are not violating the nudity laws. They are wearing bikinis.

    If you want to read a spec about how tags should be used, you want to read the WCAG2.

  12. #62
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    so, an apple is an apple. you should eat one a day to keep the doctor away. as long as it has a label saying so. confirming it was grown in a tree, it's round. that should be enough for us. what if the apple is poisoned. or rotten. do you still call it an apple? or do you call it what it is: a poisoned/rotten apple. don't you put a different label on it? or, better yet, do you still sell it as a good apple, or do you put that apple away, along with it's kind? after all, it only takes one bad apple. and that is what i think happened at one moment in time. someone took advantage of the doctype and validator icon, making it official: go on, you can say it's gold using a fake stamp.

    syntax is meaning. it also says how/where to use tags and attributes. what they mean, it's the author's job. you can absolutely change meaning using syntax alone. take a look at my broken english (for good examples, please refer to shakespeare's works)

    Off Topic:

    this way of comparing things should stop before this turns into a horror story which some already think it is...


    so, you sanction my use of doctype for outlining compromises web developer use. but you are in favor of using this way when it comes to xhtml doctype, which so many use to show off as better coders. if i degrade my markup is bad. if they are inexcusably praise their markup it's ok. this one it's not ok to me.

  13. #63
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    what if the apple is poisoned. or rotten. do you still call it an apple?
    Yes. It didn't change to something not an apple.

    Whether it's a good one or a bad one has no bearing on what you call it.

    You know, I thought apples were technically berries but they are not. Oranges, however, can be described as a berry. As can a pumpkin and a tomato, but not raspberries. Weird.

  14. #64
    Programming Since 1978 silver trophybronze trophy felgall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    16,836
    Mentioned
    25 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    syntax is meaning. it also says how/where to use tags and attributes. what they mean, it's the author's job. you can absolutely change meaning using syntax alone. take a look at my broken english (for good examples, please refer to shakespeare's works)
    You need to remember that the doctype defines HTML for those writing web BROWSERS. It does not define how is should be used by those writing web pages. They are two different things and the doctype applies to what the browser is required to accept and not to what the web page author should be using.

    As was mentioned earlier take a look at WCAG2 for more information relevant to people writing web pages.

    Yes you can change meanings be using the wrong syntax (eg. by using the HTML table tag for something that isn't tabular data) but that doesn't mean that the table tag is invalid HTML, it means you used it wrong. The browser is required to handle table tags and so it is a part of the standard that the doctype defines that the browser needs to follow but that doesn't mean that using the table tag around anything or everything is correct. It is not the doctype's job to define what is and isn't correct usage of tags, just what tags are valid and where they are valid. It has nothing to say about when they are valid.
    Stephen J Chapman

    javascriptexample.net, Book Reviews, follow me on Twitter
    HTML Help, CSS Help, JavaScript Help, PHP/mySQL Help, blog
    <input name="html5" type="text" required pattern="^$">

  15. #65
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    what i've said is: "Using DIV and SPAN as presentational hooks, when there is no actual content involved, should be considered transitional markup".
    The 'span' element cannot be considered a transitional element in any sense. To my knowledge, it was introduced in html4 and does not exist in html3.2. :shrug:

    I find it hard to believe that you have remained so obdurate regarding just what the DTD is and what the specs define. The DTD is ignored by the browser except as a quirks/standards mode switch. The DTD tells the validator which set of grammar rules to use when parsing the document for errors. Why do you still insist on applying some nebulous reasoning that does not have any basis in fact?

    There is a parlor game that begins with a paragraph or three in which the nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs have been left blank. The syntax, or grammar, is definitely proper English. Each player, without having seen the story, is to write down a list of nouns, verbs, &c., to fill the blanks. The player then reads the story, inserting his words in the appropriate places. To say that hilarity ensues is an understatement. The story ends up making no sense, but is still perfectly grammatical English. Would you, by your reasoning, call it French?

    My point is, html4 is what it is grammatically, and it doesn't matter whether an author makes sense or not if he follows the rules of the grammar.

    Please stop arguing from self-imposed ignorance, and take a moment to learn.

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials

  16. #66
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I was going to take Stephen to task over his vocabulary/grammar discussion, but he jumped up and completely exonerated himself with this:
    It is not the doctype's job to define what is and isn't correct usage of tags, just what tags are valid and where they are valid. It has nothing to say about when they are valid.
    Fantastic summation!

    cheers,

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials

  17. #67
    SitePoint Author silver trophybronze trophy

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Ankh-Morpork
    Posts
    12,158
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    the doctype it is an instruction to the web browser about what version of the markup language the page is written in, that conforms to a particular syntax.
    No, this is a common misunderstanding, but the doctype declaration is really not intended for browsers at all. It's for validators.

    Browsers used to ignore the doctype declaration altogether, until Microsoft began to use it in an attempt to detect whether a document was 'modern' or 'old school': a practice now known as doctype sniffing. This was a kludge to allow them to start implementing CSS more along the W3C recommendations without breaking too many previously written documents that relied on their earlier, non-conforming implementation.

    A browser supports a number of HTML element types, and doesn't care about versions. So if the browser supports <center> that tag will work even if you have declared an HTML 4.01 Strict DTD.
    Birnam wood is come to Dunsinane

  18. #68
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    The 'span' element cannot be considered a transitional element in any sense. To my knowledge, it was introduced in html4 and does not exist in html3.2. :shrug:
    you need to be more open minded. after all, you still use xhtml transitional on your page. if you are stating the obvious (again) about div and span, you only put us in obduratus

    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    I find it hard to believe that you have remained so obdurate regarding just what the DTD is and what the specs define. The DTD is ignored by the browser except as a quirks/standards mode switch. The DTD tells the validator which set of grammar rules to use when parsing the document for errors. Why do you still insist on applying some nebulous reasoning that does not have any basis in fact?
    and for that, your goal it's completely useless. why use it so specifically at all, like strict, transitional and so on, if it's only as switch.

    you can, in fact, make severe errors regarding syntax, that will not be caught by the validator. such as block elements inside a <p> (see this). so your DTD declaration it's useless, used this way. do you still use it? are you complacent in your self-imposed ignorance?

    Off Topic:

    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    Please stop arguing from self-imposed ignorance, and take a moment to learn.

    gary
    i've tried to find something civil to respond to that, but i could not find anything. so i leave it to that, master gary sir.

  19. #69
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    You need to remember that the doctype defines HTML for those writing web BROWSERS. It does not define how is should be used by those writing web pages. They are two different things and the doctype applies to what the browser is required to accept and not to what the web page author should be using.
    well, if doctype establishes what elements you can use, then i believe it also defines html for those writing web pages.

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    As was mentioned earlier take a look at WCAG2 for more information relevant to people writing web pages.
    thanks again

    Quote Originally Posted by felgall View Post
    Yes you can change meanings be using the wrong syntax (eg. by using the HTML table tag for something that isn't tabular data) but that doesn't mean that the table tag is invalid HTML, it means you used it wrong. The browser is required to handle table tags and so it is a part of the standard that the doctype defines that the browser needs to follow but that doesn't mean that using the table tag around anything or everything is correct. It is not the doctype's job to define what is and isn't correct usage of tags, just what tags are valid and where they are valid. It has nothing to say about when they are valid.
    the browser always does more and beyond to keep a page functional, to the very least. and it's partly the doctype's job to define what is and isn't correct usage of tags, because it also says about where (in the head, in the body) and when (if the content to be wrapped is inline, or if it's block-level). it's not very clear on how not to use them (for some), and this is my problem (thanks again for WCAG2 ).

  20. #70
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by AutisticCuckoo View Post
    No, this is a common misunderstanding, but the doctype declaration is really not intended for browsers at all. It's for validators.

    [...]

    A browser supports a number of HTML element types, and doesn't care about versions. So if the browser supports <center> that tag will work even if you have declared an HTML 4.01 Strict DTD.
    my point is, if doctype has so little meaning, how do i hurt it when i use it as a flag for my "compromised markup"? when others (some that argue against my use) use it as a flag for their "superior markup" (like xhtml DTD when there is no reason to, other than coding rules).

  21. #71
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    you need to be more open minded. after all, you still use xhtml transitional on your page. if you are stating the obvious (again) about div and span, you only put us in obduratus
    Yes, I do. My Amazon ads are in iframes because IE cannot embed an html document properly with the object element. Therefore the proper DTD is transitional.

    and for that, your goal it's completely useless. why use it so specifically at all, like strict, transitional and so on, if it's only as switch.

    you can, in fact, make severe errors regarding syntax, that will not be caught by the validator. such as block elements inside a <p> (see this). so your DTD declaration it's useless, used this way. do you still use it? are you complacent in your self-imposed ignorance?
    What's your point? Who cares? The validator is a tool, but not a perfect one.

    Off Topic:


    i've tried to find something civil to respond to that, but i could not find anything. so i leave it to that, master gary sir.
    From the tone of your comment and from a similar earlier comment, I shall assume you think you've been attacked personally, ad hominem, rather than your argument. This points to a misunderstanding on your part. If I were to say someone acted stupidly, that does not imply he is stupid, only that his actions were. If that person were to infer that it was a personal attack, it would indicate the person's curriculum vitae has had certain holes in its education.

    cheers,

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials

  22. #72
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:

    i've let your post last. it's always a pleasure to read your posts. they are full of delight, like AutisticCuckoo's are full of wisdom. but enough shameless behind buss from my part.


    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    Yes. It didn't change to something not an apple.

    Whether it's a good one or a bad one has no bearing on what you call it.

    You know, I thought apples were technically berries but they are not. Oranges, however, can be described as a berry. As can a pumpkin and a tomato, but not raspberries. Weird.
    did i said it has become something else as a fruit? it's still an apple (html), but is fresh (strict), poisoned (frameset), or rotten (transitional). once you take out the bad parts (rotten/transitional) you have an eatable apple (strict). frameset it's only for the bad witch

  23. #73
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    4727′35″N 2618′0″E
    Posts
    1,789
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    Yes, I do. My Amazon ads are in iframes because IE cannot embed an html document properly with the object element. Therefore the proper DTD is transitional.
    yes, but any particular piece of your markup justifies the xhtml DTD? you use DTD to appear educated in web technologies.

    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    What's your point? Who cares? The validator is a tool, but not a perfect one.
    it appears that i didn't care that much so far, and you were. now you're switching sides.

    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    From the tone of your comment and from a similar earlier comment, I shall assume you think you've been attacked personally, ad hominem, rather than your argument. This points to a misunderstanding on your part. If I were to say someone acted stupidly, that does not imply he is stupid, only that his actions were. If that person were to infer that it was a personal attack, it would indicate the person's curriculum vitae has had certain holes in its education.

    cheers,

    gary
    i have a tone? you are indeed using the wrong approach. an educated person surely doesn't resort to unfair, harsh, gratuitous conclusions at the end of the post, if it's not attacking a person in order to discredit an idea. you are doing it over and over again. i don't mind. i only pointed that out as a sign to you that the discussion has elements outside a civil one. that's all.

    Quote Originally Posted by gary.turner View Post
    Please stop arguing from self-imposed ignorance, and take a moment to learn.
    you assume it's me that needs to learn. it's possible you need to see some things in a different light? why do you need me so bad to stop arguing (and not from ignorance)? looking at one thing from all sides it's called knowledge. i try to stay away from knowledge that is only a poem well repeated.

  24. #74
    SitePoint Wizard rguy84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Posts
    1,659
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    noonnope, I ask if you have read through a DTD. This article shows you how to write your own DTD, which may help you some: http://csharpcomputing.com/XMLTutorial/Lesson8.htm

    replace xml with html for that page.
    Ryan B | My Blog | Twitter

  25. #75
    Resident curmudgeon bronze trophy gary.turner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Dallas
    Posts
    990
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by noonnope View Post
    yes, but any particular piece of your markup justifies the xhtml DTD? you use DTD to appear educated in web technologies.
    I have no idea what my site or its coding have to do with this discussion, but I will humor you with an answer. For several years I maintained an intranet site that took full advantage of the xhtml extensibility. All my tools are configured to support xhtml syntax, and I see no compelling need to change them or my coding habits.

    it appears that i didn't care that much so far, and you were. now you're switching sides.
    I have no idea where you get that idea. You're apparently skimming contents and picking those parts that conform to your prejudice.

    i have a tone? you are indeed using the wrong approach. an educated person surely doesn't resort to unfair, harsh, gratuitous conclusions at the end of the post, if it's not attacking a person in order to discredit an idea. you are doing it over and over again. i don't mind. i only pointed that out as a sign to you that the discussion has elements outside a civil one. that's all.
    As I have said already, you fail to comprehend the English language, or as above, you see what you want to see.

    you assume it's me that needs to learn. it's possible you need to see some things in a different light? why do you need me so bad to stop arguing (and not from ignorance)? looking at one thing from all sides it's called knowledge. i try to stay away from knowledge that is only a poem well repeated.
    I recall reading of a professor who was filling in for another in a senior level course on Jewish culture. When he started out the first day by assigning several books for the course, and assigning a large amount of reading for the next class, his students protested that they thought the course would be discussion only. He replied that you can't discuss what you don't know, or you're only sharing your collective ignorance.

    I have seen no evidence that you have a reasonably complete understanding of the recommendations or of the doctype declaration and its functions. This incomplete knowledge base leaves your arguments appearing sophomoric at best, and otherwise trollish.

    gary
    Anyone can build a usable website. It takes a graphic
    designer to make it slow, confusing, and painful to use.

    Simple minded html & css demos and tutorials


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •