Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > Won't validate...why not?

Reply
Thread Tools

Won't validate...why not?

 
 
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
Liz wrote:

> David Dorward wrote:
>
>> This is 2004. Browsers which lack support for style sheets
>> generally also lack support for presentational attributes and
>> elements also. There is no need to use Transitional this
>> millenium.

>
> Hmmmm I can't speak about 'generally' but I use RiscOS.


Do you consider yourself a significant portion of the browsing public?
What stats show that Risc OS is popular?

> We have five browsers that I know about. None of them support CSS
> totally: most not at all. One of the latter is the fastest,
> therefore, I suspect, the most used on our platform. All of them
> support tables used for presentation, which I realise is
> deprecated; in fact hereabouts it is a capital offence.
>
> I'm always grateful when a site uses Transitional (they look so
> awful here otherwise, even if the information is 'legally' there,
> and buy from them (e.g. amazon, Lands End) and I will be using
> Transitional for my own authoring for the foreseeable future.


I would suggest you author using an OS where more than an
infinitesimal percentage of users are concerned.

>> There is no need to use Transitional this millenium.

>
> There is clearly a need for me, and other RiscOS users, to use
> Transitional. I'm sure I read somewhere that some huge proportion
> of websites don't validate. Surely validating 4.01 Transitional is
> better than not validating at all?


One can still use a Transitional doctype and place all the
presentation in a css file. What will your Risc browser do then?

> Please don't make sweeping statements things from your own
> perspective/knowledge.


Your statement isn't from your own perspective? We must cater to Risc
OS's now?

All Risc users in this group: please identify yourself! <g>

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Liz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
In message <gB2qd.21288$(E-Mail Removed)>
"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Liz wrote:
>
> > David Dorward wrote:
> >
> >> This is 2004. Browsers which lack support for style sheets
> >> generally also lack support for presentational attributes and
> >> elements also. There is no need to use Transitional this
> >> millenium.

> >
> > Hmmmm I can't speak about 'generally' but I use RiscOS.

>
> Do you consider yourself a significant portion of the browsing public?

That's why I said "I can't speak generally".

> What stats show that Risc OS is popular?

You won't see it in stats.
Because so many sites are invalid, especially historically (it's better now)
RiscOS browsers are usually set to fake versions of IE. I leave mine
on the default of IE4.
As well as RiscOS, a UK equivalent of WebTV, Bush Internet TV also uses
Fresco, the fastest RiscOS browser which has no CSS support at all.


> One can still use a Transitional doctype and place all the
> presentation in a css file. What will your Risc browser do then?

Show the pix and text 'all over the place', of course.
Sort-of like it does in Opera when you switch CSS off.

> Your statement isn't from your own perspective? We must cater to Risc
> OS's now?

I didn't say that.
David said there was 'no need to use Transitional'.
I was just saying that in some circumstances, there *is* that need, and
there's no harm in it.

I wasn't saying that CSS shouldn't be used, even though it's a zillion times
more difficult to learn than HTML.

Risc-OS users are a 'bijou' market: we know which websites to use, and let's
face it, there are very few (about five, I think) Risc-OS users in the US;
we're mostly in the UK, Holland and Germany, with antipodean outposts.

Besides, trying to identify the RiscOS users on this group is silly (<g>
noted).
By definition, we aren't likely to spend much time on a group which trashes
people who dare to write websites which look good on our browsers!

I've posted here before, my sister works for a university.
She *has* to use IE4 at work: her network actually stops her from using
anything else (I couldn't believe this, I tried, and got a threatening
message about losing my, i.e. her, job if I tried to upgrade. She doesn't
know the reason for this, but that's an entire university network.
Again, a UK university, so not much of an issue for US authors (though they
have several thousand US students at any one time) but the 'to Hell with bad
browsers' mentality which thinks that "everyone can and should upgrade their
browsers" is unrealistic.


Slainte

Liz
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
Liz wrote:

> "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>> Do you consider yourself a significant portion of the browsing
>> public?

>
> That's why I said "I can't speak generally".
>
>> What stats show that Risc OS is popular?

>
> You won't see it in stats. Because so many sites are invalid,


...which has nothing to do with your Risc problem. Most invalid sites,
in my experience, either have no doctype, or a Transitional one placed
there by the wysiwyg software.

> especially historically (it's better now) RiscOS browsers are
> usually set to fake versions of IE. I leave mine on the default of
> IE4. As well as RiscOS, a UK equivalent of WebTV, Bush Internet TV
> also uses Fresco, the fastest RiscOS browser which has no CSS
> support at all.
>
>> One can still use a Transitional doctype and place all the
>> presentation in a css file. What will your Risc browser do then?

>
> Show the pix and text 'all over the place', of course. Sort-of like
> it does in Opera when you switch CSS off.


But at least you get all the content, right?

>> Your statement isn't from your own perspective? We must cater to
>> Risc OS's now?

>
> I didn't say that. David said there was 'no need to use
> Transitional'. I was just saying that in some circumstances, there
> *is* that need, and there's no harm in it.


Please explain. What does your browser do with a Strict doctype
document that uses presentational HTML instead of CSS? (It of course
won't validate, but that doesn't appear to be the issue you have.)

> I wasn't saying that CSS shouldn't be used, even though it's a
> zillion times more difficult to learn than HTML.


Zillion? No ... Two? Maybe ... When I first discovered CSS a number
of years ago, it took about two days to get the hang of it. Quite
simple, actually. The benefits of using CSS are outstanding.

> Risc-OS users are a 'bijou' market: we know which websites to use,
> and let's face it, there are very few (about five, I think) Risc-OS
> users in the US; we're mostly in the UK, Holland and Germany, with
> antipodean outposts.


Five users in the US. A few more in the UK, etc. You are arguing for
the rest of us (Windows, Linux, Mac ...) to dump modern authoring for
a few dozen people. Doesn't make any sense to me at all.

> Besides, trying to identify the RiscOS users on this group is silly
> (<g> noted). By definition, we aren't likely to spend much time on
> a group which trashes people who dare to write websites which look
> good on our browsers!


<lol> Noted.

> I've posted here before, my sister works for a university. She
> *has* to use IE4 at work: her network actually stops her from using
> anything else (I couldn't believe this, I tried, and got a
> threatening message about losing my, i.e. her, job if I tried to
> upgrade. She doesn't know the reason for this, but that's an entire
> university network. Again, a UK university, so not much of an issue
> for US authors (though they have several thousand US students at
> any one time) but the 'to Hell with bad browsers' mentality which
> thinks that "everyone can and should upgrade their browsers" is
> unrealistic.


Perhaps one day, Risc OS will catch up.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Lauri Raittila
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
in alt.html, Liz wrote:
> > One can still use a Transitional doctype and place all the
> > presentation in a css file. What will your Risc browser do then?

> Show the pix and text 'all over the place', of course.
> Sort-of like it does in Opera when you switch CSS off.


No, exactly oppposite. If website has done well enough. Problem is those
clueless websites using HTML+CSS wrong way. Unfortunately, many big sites
only use CSS incorrectly.

> David said there was 'no need to use Transitional'.
> I was just saying that in some circumstances, there *is* that need, and
> there's no harm in it.


There is harm in it. I constantly have problems with transitional and
other poor HTML.

> I wasn't saying that CSS shouldn't be used, even though it's a zillion times
> more difficult to learn than HTML.


No it is not. HTML was just as hard on stone age when you had to think
about weather something works with this and that browser or not.

In fact CSS for layout is much easier than HTML. I have seen many CSS
based sites I couldn't think how to make them much better. I haven't seen
many HTML (table) layouted page which I could not make better (using
table layout).

> Risc-OS users are a 'bijou' market: we know which websites to use, and let's
> face it, there are very few (about five, I think)


That is very, very low percentage.

> Risc-OS users in the US;
> we're mostly in the UK, Holland and Germany, with antipodean outposts.


I wonder why you only use RiscOS? After all, you can get PC that runs
Opera just fine for few euros, and one that runs FF for maybe 20euros?

> I've posted here before, my sister works for a university.
> She *has* to use IE4 at work: her network actually stops her from using
> anything else (I couldn't believe this, I tried, and got a threatening
> message about losing my, i.e. her, job if I tried to upgrade.


I think there is universities and universities. In my university, it is
now suggested that nobody should use IE...

But, strict HTML with some hiding trick would look quite good on IE4.
(last time I used IE4 was 2 weeks ago, when I updated it to FF for my
godparents)

> She doesn't
> know the reason for this, but that's an entire university network.
> Again, a UK university, so not much of an issue for US authors (though they
> have several thousand US students at any one time) but the 'to Hell with bad
> browsers' mentality which thinks that "everyone can and should upgrade their
> browsers" is unrealistic.


It seems that there great differences in university systems. I was
disappointed when I was on seminar in another Finnish university, as it
didn't have wireless network to me access using my laptop... (In another
Finnish university, they do/consider to lend (free of charge) laptops to
people to use while they study)



--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
 
Reply With Quote
 
Duende
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
While sitting in a puddle Spartanicus scribbled in the mud:

> Duende <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>> You should not use a Transitional doctype for newly authored material,
>>> use Strict.

>>
>>Why?

>
> Web pages should be coded to separate content and styling, then it
> should be labeled appropriately by using a Strict doctype so that
> validation becomes slightly more useful (validating isn't particularly
> useful).
>


FrontPage is a lot less trouble so why mess around with all the dumb code and
css junk.

--
Duende (irregular)
Friends help you move.
Real friends help you move bodies.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Duende
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
While sitting in a puddle Eric B. Bednarz scribbled in the mud:

> apparently it is still possible to just make
> things up while typing, a reliable indicator of a physically healthy and
> wealthy environment.
>


You're a politician are'nt you?

--
Duende (irregular)
Friends help you move.
Real friends help you move bodies.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Duende
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
While sitting in a puddle Liz scribbled in the mud:

> I can't speak about 'generally' but I use RiscOS.


What is RiscOS.

--
Duende (irregular)
Friends help you move.
Real friends help you move bodies.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Duende
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
While sitting in a puddle Beauregard T. Shagnasty scribbled in the mud:

> When I first discovered CSS a number
> of years ago, it took about two days to get the hang of it.


I see now that I should be worshiping at your feet instead of that imposter
brucie.

--
Duende (irregular)
Friends help you move.
Real friends help you move
bodies.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Toby Inkster
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
Liz wrote:

> Show the pix and text 'all over the place', of course.
> Sort-of like it does in Opera when you switch CSS off.


A well-designed site using CSS for the presentational aspects will still
look fine when CSS is not present. Not the *same* of course, but fine. The
same is an unrealistic goal anyway -- no site will always look the same
when you take into account the myriad of different environments in which
it will be rendered. So "fine" is a worthy goal.

> I've posted here before, my sister works for a university.
> She *has* to use IE4 at work:


FWIW, my CSS layout works just fine in IE4. And Opera 3.62.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
Now Playing ~ ./matchbox_twenty/more_than_you_think_you_are/02_disease.ogg

 
Reply With Quote
 
Liz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      11-27-2004
In message <Wo3qd.20920$(E-Mail Removed)>
"Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Liz wrote:
>
> > "Beauregard T. Shagnasty" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >
> >> Do you consider yourself a significant portion of the browsing
> >> public?

> >
> > That's why I said "I can't speak generally".
> >
> >> What stats show that Risc OS is popular?

> >
> > You won't see it in stats. Because so many sites are invalid,

>
> ..which has nothing to do with your Risc problem. Most invalid sites,
> in my experience, either have no doctype, or a Transitional one placed
> there by the wysiwyg software.

Actually, I wasn't strictly correct.
Lots of sites don't validate but seem to read perfectly well in Fresco.
As you suggest, the problem is generally with older sites written in Front
Page.
Nowadays, the problem is sites written totally in Flash.
You're obviously not advocating doing that.
Even though at least one college round here is actually teaching future 'web
designers' to do just that ((
Another problem is some commercial sites which use Java (not JS) to complete
orders. We have no support at all for Java because of the cost of porting it
to our platform.

> >> One can still use a Transitional doctype and place all the
> >> presentation in a css file. What will your Risc browser do then?

> > Show the pix and text 'all over the place', of course. Sort-of like
> > it does in Opera when you switch CSS off.

> But at least you get all the content, right?

I already said that.

> >> Your statement isn't from your own perspective? We must cater to
> >> Risc OS's now?

> > I didn't say that. David said there was 'no need to use
> > Transitional'. I was just saying that in some circumstances, there
> > *is* that need, and there's no harm in it.

> Please explain. What does your browser do with a Strict doctype
> document that uses presentational HTML instead of CSS? (It of course
> won't validate, but that doesn't appear to be the issue you have.)

The same as it would with a Transitional with CSS, I'd imagine.
I don't actually know.
I've just started using some CSS, but with tables for presentation, and
validating transitional.

> > I wasn't saying that CSS shouldn't be used, even though it's a
> > zillion times more difficult to learn than HTML.

> Zillion? No ... Two? Maybe ... When I first discovered CSS a number
> of years ago, it took about two days to get the hang of it. Quite
> simple, actually. The benefits of using CSS are outstanding.

So everyone keeps saying.
But what are the benefits again?
Easier to change - not so for us.
There is a great little RiscOS prog called WebChange, where you can easily
make global changes to a whole site in a very short time.

Smaller code in the HTML page?
I haven't found this to be so, usually between 100 and 250 bytes more for
the markup per page, but as I said, I'm still using tables.

Compatible with more devices?
Maybe so, I couldn't possibly say.
But since I have two sites, one for an artist and one for a photographer, I
wouldn't even expect my own mother to visit them with a mobile phone or
speech parser.
My site looks essentially similar in the four RiscOS browsers I have, IE5,
5.5, 6, Opera, Natscape6, Safari and some other Mac browser I checked out at
the Science Centre.
I have a much bigger problem with resolution: I'm designing here on 800x600
(flexible tables, of course). I don't like the way it 'spreads out' on my
hi-res pc monitor, but it's the same for every other site I've visited which
doesn't use fixed-width tables, so I just have to live with it.

> > Risc-OS users are a 'bijou' market: we know which websites to use,
> > and let's face it, there are very few (about five, I think) Risc-OS
> > users in the US; we're mostly in the UK, Holland and Germany, with
> > antipodean outposts.

>
> Five users in the US. A few more in the UK, etc. You are arguing for
> the rest of us (Windows, Linux, Mac ...) to dump modern authoring for
> a few dozen people. Doesn't make any sense to me at all.

A few thousand UK users at least, I don't know about 'abroad'.
I have *never* argued for you or anyone else to dump modern authoring.
I just didn't accept the sweeping statement "There is no need to use
Transitional this Millenium - and have demonstrated where there is a case.
Another one is my little subsection where I have tutorials for a piece of
RiscOS software, which only RO users will be interested in.

There seems to have been some problem with amazon.co.uk over the past week
or two, which hasn't been accepting some RO users, alternatively not
recognising them as existing customers, hasn't been letting them complete
their orders, emptying their baskets, deleting their wishlists etc. The
problems are inconsistent, but over at least 3 RO browsers. (I don't
understand it: I received goods today, ordered with Fresco last Sunday with
no problems, and this morning my pending items were still in my basket. I
suspect they're trying out something new on one/some but not all of their
servers.) But already, the mailing lists are full of suggestions of where
else to get the same things with RO browsers. Now I know I've spent about 2k
ukp on amazon this year. Multiply this by even 200, and it could be
significant (maybe not to amazon, though). And strangely, it's difficult to
find out how to report these problems to amazon.co.uk: their visible support
is only for 'return of goods'.


> > I've posted here before, my sister works for a university. She
> > *has* to use IE4 at work: her network actually stops her from using
> > anything else (I couldn't believe this, I tried, and got a
> > threatening message about losing my, i.e. her, job if I tried to
> > upgrade. She doesn't know the reason for this, but that's an entire
> > university network. Again, a UK university, so not much of an issue
> > for US authors (though they have several thousand US students at
> > any one time) but the 'to Hell with bad browsers' mentality which
> > thinks that "everyone can and should upgrade their browsers" is
> > unrealistic.

>
> Perhaps one day, Risc OS will catch up.

Perhaps, I'm not holding my breath.
The recent pd browser is under active development (in fits and starts: I
think the authors are students and I suspect they'll never be able to catch
up and keep up) but that won't help those on my sister's university network.

Slainte

Liz

--
Virtual Liz now at http://www.v-liz.com
Kenya; Tanzania; Namibia; India; Seychelles; Galapagos
"I speak of Africa and golden joys"
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Advertisments