«

"Luigi Donatello Asero" <> wrote:
>"Steve Pugh" <> skrev i meddelandet
>news:.. .
>> "Luigi Donatello Asero" <> wrote:
>> >"Steve Pugh" <> skrev i meddelandet
>> >news:.. .
>> >>
>> >> >> Pages should not link to themselves so the best course of action is
>> >> >> to edit your menu so that it doesn't contain links to the current
>> >> >> pages.
>> >
>> >Well, they did link to the current page!
>> >http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-charmod-20050215/
>>
>> Twice.
>> That's a slightly case. That document should never be edited and so
>> when a new version comes out and is placed at
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/ then the existing page will stay exactly
>> where it is at the URL you give.
>>
>> So the page at http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/ links to the permament
>> home of that version at
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-charmod-20050215/ and the page at
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-charmod-20050215/ links to the latest
>> version at http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/. At the moment they're both
>> the same page and because we're dealing with a technical specification
>> the page shouldn't really be edited so must contain both links.
>>
>> On the other hand, W3C web pages are full of all sorts of bad
>> practice. XHTML 1.0 Transitional?
>
>Do you mean that the use of
>XHTML 1.0 Transitional is a bad practice?

XHTML 1.0 Transitional is just a reformulation of HTML 4.01 into XML
syntax. HTML 4.01 was designed to ease the transition between pre-1997
HTML markup and HTML 4.01. Why use it for a page published in 2005?
It's not an updating of a pre-1997 page and they can't be expecting
many pre-1997 browsers to be accessing it. So why use an inferior
version of (X)HTML?

>Isn´t W3C supposed to indicate what is good practice and what is not
>concerning the web?

It's an industry consortium. The members decide what it's supposed to
do. Suggesting best practice may be one goal they set themselves.
Whether they live up to that goal is another matter. They are only
human.

>Yes, of course they refer to different versions of the same page.

At the moment they refer to the same page. It can just be reached via
two different URLs. In the future one of those URLs will probably
point to a different page.

>That´s very similiar to what I tried to do on the page
>https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/de...g-sizilien.php
>for example.

I presume you're talking about making the same page available via http
and https? We've already been over this.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

"Steve Pugh" <> skrev i meddelandet
news:...


[cut]





> >Do you mean that the use of
> >XHTML 1.0 Transitional is a bad practice?
>
> XHTML 1.0 Transitional is just a reformulation of HTML 4.01 into XML
> syntax. HTML 4.01 was designed to ease the transition between pre-1997
> HTML markup and HTML 4.01. Why use it for a page published in 2005?
> It's not an updating of a pre-1997 page and they can't be expecting
> many pre-1997 browsers to be accessing it. So why use an inferior
> version of (X)HTML?
>
> >Isn´t W3C supposed to indicate what is good practice and what is not
> >concerning the web?
>
> It's an industry consortium. The members decide what it's supposed to
> do. Suggesting best practice may be one goal they set themselves.
> Whether they live up to that goal is another matter. They are only
> human.



Yes, of course. They are human.
But they are still so to say the reference authority concerning the web,
aren´t they?
Or is there any other which is more accredited than they are?

> >Yes, of course they refer to different versions of the same page.
>
> At the moment they refer to the same page. It can just be reached via
> two different URLs. In the future one of those URLs will probably
> point to a different page.


Yes.

> >That´s very similiar to what I tried to do on the page
> >https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/de...g-sizilien.php
> >for example.
>
> I presume you're talking about making the same page available via http
> and https? We've already been over this.

That was only a little part of it.
There are the html version and the php version.
As a whole I have tried lately to link the page to the latest and to an
older version of the same page if there is one.


--
Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)
https://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/oversattning.php

"Steve Pugh" <> wrote in message

> >I have finished getting the layout sorted, and finally move all the
> >information onto the pages, there will be to many to go through by hand
> >removing all the links. Use see at the moment I use an include for the
> >menu.
>
> Then change the coding in the include to dynamically write out the
> links depending on the page.

Steve would you happen to have a page link for the above information, to
explain how I would go about this.

Many thanks in advance,
Kate