nesting instead of id ing??

02-13-2013

On 2/13/2013 10:04 AM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> 2013-02-13 15:53, Gus Richter wrote:
>
>> Coming back to your first quoted portion above, what would be a few
>> examples of your "There's a lot one could say about this" for the two
>> demos?
>
> A template should be evaluated as a template, not on the basis of some
> creations based on it. And I'm not sure whether it is useful to analyze
> your template, but on request, here are three comments that first came
> into my mind:

The demos use the contruct as per my Template. You were critical of my
Template, so I presented two demos which validate and requested your
critique on the demos. You choose instead to again refer to the Template.

> 1) <html lang="en">
> A template should not have a particular language code wired in. There
> are far too many web pages that claim to be in English but aren't,
> either because they were based on wrong templates or because some
> authoring software spits out lang="en" no matter what.

I remind you that it is a *simple* Template not to be muddled up with
details. If anyone, authoring in another language is unable to note that
s/he must modify this part, then that person is not up to par IMHO.

> 2) <head>
> Not needed, and does not serve a useful purpose.

You must have missed the part somewhere in this thread, or another,
where I advocate to disregard all optional methods in the specs and not
try to save keystrokes.

> 3) <title>Template for HTML5</title>
> No reason to put any text inside the element. It serves no purpose, it
> just needs to be erased when actually using the template, and there
> *are* people who just won't change the text.

I like to see the title of the page displayed on all my browsers and I
suspect that most people do as well.

As in my response to 1) I sadly must say that if s/he does not know
enough to replace the text between the start and end tags of the title
element, then that person is not up to par IMHO.

> 4) <style>
> Embedded style sheets should be avoided. There are situations where they
> are a comfortable tool, but a template should not encourage the use of
> embedded CSS.

Hmm, aside from your opinion, although you may be confusing Embedded
with Inline, the Template simply points out the difference in construct
in HTML5 from that of the old HTML 4.01

> 5) <script>
> Linked JavaScript files should be preferred. And if embedded JS is used,
> it should often go the end of the body, or otherwise inside the body,
> not in the head. (Think about simply referring to elements by their ids
> in straight code not wrapped in functions.)

Once again, whether the script is used in the head or body, the Template
simply points out the difference in construct in HTML5 from that of the
old HTML 4.01

--
Gus

02-13-2013

On 2/13/2013 3:44 PM, Gus Richter wrote:
>> 4) <style>
>> Embedded style sheets should be avoided. There are situations where they
>> are a comfortable tool, but a template should not encourage the use of
>> embedded CSS.
>
> Hmm, aside from your opinion, although you may be confusing Embedded
> with Inline, the Template simply points out the difference in construct
> in HTML5 from that of the old HTML 4.01

I thought on this since I felt uncomfortable with my response and here
is my new response:

Embedded exists and if used, the Template simply points out the
difference in construct in HTML5 from that of the old HTML 4.01 or are
you suggesting to not mention it and keep a reader in the dark?

For a simple page there is no problem in using Embedded or Inline. For a
larger site, use External stylesheets for maintenance benefit and faster
page(s) download with a single External stylesheet, or possibly a few
coordinated ones, for the entire site.

Don't you agree that this 4) went way off track?

--
Gus

02-13-2013

2013-02-13 22:44, Gus Richter wrote:

> You were critical of my
> Template, so I presented two demos which validate and requested your
> critique on the demos. You choose instead to again refer to the Template.

That's because it's the template that we discuss, not specific pages.

>> 1) <html lang="en">
[...]
> I remind you that it is a *simple* Template not to be muddled up with
> details.

The specific language code *is* an unnecessary detail. It is (meta)data
to be filled in, not part of a general template.

>> 2) <head>
>> Not needed, and does not serve a useful purpose.
>
> You must have missed the part somewhere in this thread, or another,
> where I advocate to disregard all optional methods in the specs and not
> try to save keystrokes.

The <head> tag still serves no useful purpose.

>> 3) <title>Template for HTML5</title>
>> No reason to put any text inside the element. It serves no purpose, it
>> just needs to be erased when actually using the template, and there
>> *are* people who just won't change the text.
>
> I like to see the title of the page displayed on all my browsers and I
> suspect that most people do as well.

The title of a page, not the name of the template it is based on.

> As in my response to 1) I sadly must say that if s/he does not know
> enough to replace the text between the start and end tags of the title
> element, then that person is not up to par IMHO.

Since the content of the element should *always* be replaced by
something else, why make this more difficult by putting there text that
needs to be removed?

I don't think this discussion can lead anywhere. But you asked for my
specific comments, and I have now made some, and even clarified them.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

02-14-2013

On 2/13/2013 4:52 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> 2013-02-13 22:44, Gus Richter wrote:
>
>> You were critical of my
>> Template, so I presented two demos which validate and requested your
>> critique on the demos. You choose instead to again refer to the Template.
>
> That's because it's the template that we discuss, not specific pages.

I made a specific request and as you know very well, the demos have no
problems and if so concluded, it would follow that the Template, upon
which the demos are based, is also the same.

>>> 1) <html lang="en">
> [...]
>> I remind you that it is a *simple* Template not to be muddled up with
>> details.
>
> The specific language code *is* an unnecessary detail. It is (meta)data
> to be

It is necessary since it *is to be used as shown* in the HTML5 construct.

>>> 2) <head>
>>> Not needed, and does not serve a useful purpose.
>>
>> You must have missed the part somewhere in this thread, or another,
>> where I advocate to disregard all optional methods in the specs and not
>> try to save keystrokes.
>
> The <head> tag still serves no useful purpose.

It does to me and I advocate its use. I also note that you use it on
your page(s).

>>> 3) <title>Template for HTML5</title>
>>> No reason to put any text inside the element. It serves no purpose, it
>>> just needs to be erased when actually using the template, and there
>>> *are* people who just won't change the text.
>>
>> I like to see the title of the page displayed on all my browsers and I
>> suspect that most people do as well.
>
> The title of a page, not the name of the template it is based on.

My page, my content, my Template and my title.

>> As in my response to 1) I sadly must say that if s/he does not know
>> enough to replace the text between the start and end tags of the title
>> element, then that person is not up to par IMHO.
>
> Since the content of the element should *always* be replaced by
> something else, why make this more difficult by putting there text that
> needs to be removed?

As an informative example.

> I don't think this discussion can lead anywhere. But you asked for my
> specific comments, and I have now made some, and even clarified them.

I agree since you are simply nit-picking IMHO.
Anyway, I use the Template as a reminder. You, and everyone else, are at
liberty to ignore it. Thanks for your time.

--
Gus

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
nesting instead of id ing	Tim W	HTML	0	02-06-2013 12:44 PM
nesting instead of id ing??	Tim W	HTML	1	02-05-2013 11:43 PM
Module.nesting -> Kernel#nesting	Trans	Ruby	10	09-16-2005 12:21 AM
group nesting	David K	MCSE	6	12-12-2003 04:54 PM
Nesting object tags in ASP 3.0, ASP.NET & Internet Explorer	DeadlyTedly	ASP .Net	2	10-16-2003 08:32 AM