You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@xml.apache.org by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> on 2001/12/19 15:19:32 UTC
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
Ugo Cei wrote:
>
> giacomo wrote:
>
> > I know :) but many sites only use *one* table to achieve the above which
> > (at least for older browsers) result in a need to have the hole page
> > downloaded prior to have it displayed in the browser. This above layout
> > can display the header as soon as it is available in the browser. This
> > way you don't have to wait in front of a blank screen too long.
>
> Many (well not that many, but they are starting to appear, see
> http://www.thenoodleincident.com/tutorials/design_rant/ for example, or
> my own http://cupva.cbim.it [C2 based]) sites use NO tables to achieve
> layout, but instead rely completely on *standard* CSS positioning
> properties to achieve layout.
>
> Let's face it: HTML <table>'s were never designed for laying out pages,
> but for laying out tabular data. Unfortunately, since the support for
> CSS was until recently very poor both in the browsers and in the design
> tools, 99.9% of current web pages use tables for layout. This is IMHO an
> ugly hack and we, as a community that strives to adhere to open
> standards and to the concept of separation of style from content, should
> avoid it like the plague. BTW, CSS-1 was published in 1996, so it's been
> out for more than FIVE years, it's time that people start using it for
> what it was meant for.
>
> Using a CSS-based layout also means that people using 4th generation
> browsers (NS 4, IE 4, etc.) must be "protected" from such a stylesheet
> or they will see utter garbage. Hiding the CSS from them means that they
> won't be able to appreciate the layout, but will nonetheless be able to
> read the full *content*, just not very well styled. But come on, this is
> a site devoted to *developers* developing for the Web. Can you imagine a
> web developer today using ONLY NS4 or IE4?
>
> Incidentally, adopting a pure-CSS based solution for both layout AND
> styling means that people using:
>
> - text browsers
> - screen readers for the sight impaired
> - mobile devices
> - anything you cannot conceive now but that will be make web
> access available from your washing machine or whatever :)
>
> will be able to access the site contents without their "screen" or
> reader being cluttered with spurious markup that is not in any way
> related to the content they need.
>
> Before you start mentioning Cocoon's ability to select a different
> stylesheet based on the User-Agent request parameter, keep in mind that:
>
> - we are talking about pregenerating a static version of the site
> for performance reasons
> - as I wrote above, you cannot foresee what user agents will browse your
> site in the near future.
>
> In other words, what I am proposing is that we stop worrying about being
> bacward compatible in order to accomodate old, buggy and non-compliant
> user agents, but instead start to be FORWARD compatible in order to
> accomodate FUTURE standard-compliant user agents.
>
> Let me know what you think about it and sorry for being slightly OT.
It's a strong position but, hey, I find resonating with what you're
saying :)
We have the *luxury* to know what our user base is and estimate their
needs very precisely.
Moreover, this is a site dedicated to new technologies for the web and a
site dedicated to evangelize open standard compliance thru reference
implementations and cooperation.
If we page a page on the 'about' section that talks about our reasons, I
think people might even appreciate our effort to both evangelize the
technology and 'put in practice' what we say.
What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
this)
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Mikhail Fedotov <mi...@kittown.com>.
Hi!
> Instead of working round crappy browsers, shouldn't we
> tell the user how crappy their browser is?
If your web page is standards-conformant but looks terrible
in old browser while others are looking good, then BOTH
your page and that browser are wrong.
That is more useful for you, to make you page more
accessible, or to sacrifice part of your audience in an
attempt to make world better (or lower costs) ?
This is the only one real question.
Mikhail
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Nicola Ken Barozzi <ba...@nicolaken.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefano Mazzocchi" <st...@apache.org>
To: <co...@xml.apache.org>; "Apache XML" <ge...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 3:19 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>
> Ugo Cei wrote:
> >
<snip/>
> > Incidentally, adopting a pure-CSS based solution for both layout AND
> > styling means that people using:
> >
> > - text browsers
> > - screen readers for the sight impaired
> > - mobile devices
> > - anything you cannot conceive now but that will be make web
> > access available from your washing machine or whatever :)
> >
> > will be able to access the site contents without their "screen" or
> > reader being cluttered with spurious markup that is not in any way
> > related to the content they need.
I like and agree on all you say, except that there is a real-world problem.
Netscape4 -crashes- with CSS set on the body tag.
@see http://www.alistapart.com/stories/died/
Not nice. :-(
Here is part of the article:
<article type="part" url="http://www.alistapart.com/stories/died/">
An actor never says to the crowd, "I'm a little old for this role, wouldn't
you say, folks?" And a Web designer never tells the viewer, "Whew! You
should see all the JavaScript I've put in the header to protect you from
realizing how crappy your browser is."
It is gauche to tell users that their browser stinks. It's like insulting
their clothing or their charming regional accent.
It's unfashionable to complain about a specific browser, though it's become
acceptable (as it should be) to complain about a general lack of support for
standards.
Yet, if information wants to be free, so does the truth.
I don't know about your shop, but in mine, we spend hours spewing out
torturous (often questionable) code to make stuff work in Navigator 4.
"Netscape and Style Sheets. They go together like peanut butter and bicycle
chains," I confided to a fellow Web designer recently.
It's become the dirty little secret of our Industry. The thing nobody wants
to say out loud.
</article>
Instead of working round crappy browsers, shouldn't we tell
the user how crappy their browser is?
How can market dynamics work if the user is unable to see
how really good a product is, and for "good" on the Web it
should be also "follows the standard".
If the browser isn't capable of performing sensibly on an old
and stable web standard, is it my fault?
Let the producer fix it.
I'm not sure that this is really the way to go, but it sure seems
sensible to me.
Nicola Ken Barozzi These are the days of miracle and wonder...
...so don't cry baby, don't cry
<xm...@nicolaken.com> Paul Simon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Martin Stricker <sh...@gmx.de>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>
> Ugo Cei wrote:
<snip type="not_important"/>
> > Using a CSS-based layout also means that people using 4th generation
> > browsers (NS 4, IE 4, etc.) must be "protected" from such a
> > stylesheet or they will see utter garbage. Hiding the CSS from them
> > means that they won't be able to appreciate the layout, but will
> > nonetheless be able to read the full *content*, just not very well
> > styled. But come on, this is a site devoted to *developers*
> > developing for the Web. Can you imagine a web developer today using
> > ONLY NS4 or IE4?
> >
> > Incidentally, adopting a pure-CSS based solution for both layout AND
> > styling means that people using:
> >
> > - text browsers
> > - screen readers for the sight impaired
> > - mobile devices
> > - anything you cannot conceive now but that will be make web
> > access available from your washing machine or whatever :)
> >
> > will be able to access the site contents without their "screen" or
> > reader being cluttered with spurious markup that is not in any way
> > related to the content they need.
> > In other words, what I am proposing is that we stop worrying about
> > being bacward compatible in order to accomodate old, buggy and
> > non-compliant user agents, but instead start to be FORWARD
> > compatible in order to accomodate FUTURE standard-compliant user
> > agents.
> >
> > Let me know what you think about it and sorry for being slightly OT.
> Moreover, this is a site dedicated to new technologies for the web and
> a site dedicated to evangelize open standard compliance thru reference
> implementations and cooperation.
>
> If we page a page on the 'about' section that talks about our reasons,
> I think people might even appreciate our effort to both evangelize the
> technology and 'put in practice' what we say.
>
> What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
> this)
Usually I always say KISS (keep it simple, sweetie) and "keep an eye for
older and text browsers" to web designers. Particularly text browsers
since I'm often working on *nix in text mode. Since the CSS-only design
will work at least somehow on all these (which nested tables don't do)
I'll give it a provisional
+1
(though I'm not a committer but a regular guest on the site)
When the new CSS-design is teady I'd like to test it in various browsers
so I can find any difficulties. Just put it up somewhere on the web,
ideally together with Stefano's Forrest proposal and the current
xml.apache.org design for broad testing.
giacomo@apache.org wrote:
> I know of manager visiting the sites to verify we told them the truth
> about open source, licensing, cool projects when we do evangelize OS
> products to them.
>
> Those people are not on the edge of the technology (read use
> IE6/NS6.2/Mozilla browsers). They have corporate PCs with the software
> someone else has installed there and they usually are not able to
> change that.
>
> I don't want to say we shouldn't go the CSS way, but we might not be
> able in all cases to show our cool sites (in terms of technology used)
> to the ones having something to say in companies where others here
> like to bring in OS software.
That's an important point! We want our software to be used by the
corpararte world. I recommend going on with the CSS approach and then
doing heavy testing and tweaking. If the outcome is "manager-approved"
we go ahead, if not we'll conduct the real vote then when we have all
the facts to decide on.
Best regards,
Martin Stricker
--
Homepage: http://www.martin-stricker.de/
Registered Linux user #210635: http://counter.li.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Tim Myers <ph...@stserv.hcf.jhu.edu>.
http://stserv.hcf.jhu.edu/~phantom/div2.html
Here's another one, and i think i discovered something important about css for
layout-- width as a percentage effectively can't be applied to the same element
as border, margin, or padding. That's because width is the width of the
content... and if you do that in percentage, adding a pixel here and a pixel
there on the edge goes over the alotment. I wish the css width would equal
contentwidth+borderwidth+paddingwidth so that padding and border would cut in
on the content width rather than overflowing and making it impossible to
control the left and right side of a box simultaneously without nesting. Alas
it is not so, i have read the spec--and the spec basically said "too bad."
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visudet.html#propdef-width
So, my rant about the recent browsers was fairly off base (although 50% width
is still buggy in ie so 49.9 will have to do). The browsers are doing what
they are supposed to. to set padding/border within a percentage widthed box,
the padding must be set on a box nested inside the percentage widthed box.
Make sense?
Tim
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 10:04:12PM -0500, Tim Myers wrote:
> I've got something along those lines that works in ie5 and mozilla:
>
> http://stserv.hcf.jhu.edu/~phantom/div.html
>
> 50% is a funny number. And so is 100 for that matter.
> The different browsers do very different things with roundoff error.
>
> I'm not saying how practical it is and i have no idea what opera does to it.
> I wish tables would go away, but i also wish css would render correctly in any browser.
>
> Tim
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 02:46:59PM -0800, Robert Koberg wrote:
> > it's pretty, but I did not see anything about the design I was talking
> > about??
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paulo Gaspar" <pa...@krankikom.de>
> > To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 12:58 PM
> > Subject: RE: [OT] Design Rant
> >
> >
> > > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > > fixed-width and the
> > > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
> > >
> > > I think this article holds the answer to your question, with outer margins
> > > and all:
> > > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
> > >
> > >
> > > Have fun,
> > > Paulo Gaspar
> > >
> > > http://www.krankikom.de
> > > http://www.ruhronline.de
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> > > > To: general@xml.apache.org
> > > > Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > > fixed-width and the
> > > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
> > > > approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
> > > > columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> > > > problems, I
> > > > have clients who would.
> > > >
> > > > best,
> > > > -Rob
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
> I've got something along those lines that works in ie5 and mozilla:
>
> http://stserv.hcf.jhu.edu/~phantom/div.html
>
> 50% is a funny number. And so is 100 for that matter.
> The different browsers do very different things with roundoff error.
>
> I'm not saying how practical it is and i have no idea what opera does to it.
> I wish tables would go away, but i also wish css would render correctly in any browser.
>
> Tim
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 02:46:59PM -0800, Robert Koberg wrote:
> > it's pretty, but I did not see anything about the design I was talking
> > about??
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paulo Gaspar" <pa...@krankikom.de>
> > To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 12:58 PM
> > Subject: RE: [OT] Design Rant
> >
> >
> > > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > > fixed-width and the
> > > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
> > >
> > > I think this article holds the answer to your question, with outer margins
> > > and all:
> > > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
> > >
> > >
> > > Have fun,
> > > Paulo Gaspar
> > >
> > > http://www.krankikom.de
> > > http://www.ruhronline.de
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> > > > To: general@xml.apache.org
> > > > Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > > fixed-width and the
> > > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
> > > > approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
> > > > columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> > > > problems, I
> > > > have clients who would.
> > > >
> > > > best,
> > > > -Rob
> > > >
> > > > ...
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Tim Myers <ph...@stserv.hcf.jhu.edu>.
I've got something along those lines that works in ie5 and mozilla:
http://stserv.hcf.jhu.edu/~phantom/div.html
50% is a funny number. And so is 100 for that matter.
The different browsers do very different things with roundoff error.
I'm not saying how practical it is and i have no idea what opera does to it.
I wish tables would go away, but i also wish css would render correctly in any browser.
Tim
On Wed, Dec 19, 2001 at 02:46:59PM -0800, Robert Koberg wrote:
> it's pretty, but I did not see anything about the design I was talking
> about??
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paulo Gaspar" <pa...@krankikom.de>
> To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 12:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [OT] Design Rant
>
>
> > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > fixed-width and the
> > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > >
> > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
> >
> > I think this article holds the answer to your question, with outer margins
> > and all:
> > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
> >
> >
> > Have fun,
> > Paulo Gaspar
> >
> > http://www.krankikom.de
> > http://www.ruhronline.de
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> > > To: general@xml.apache.org
> > > Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> > >
> > >
> > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > fixed-width and the
> > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > >
> > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
> > > approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
> > > columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> > > problems, I
> > > have clients who would.
> > >
> > > best,
> > > -Rob
> > >
> > > ...
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
I looked again and still don't see it.
can you point it out to me? maybe copy some text so I can search for it?
note: floats won't work for this
...trying to have fun,
-Rob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paulo Gaspar" <pa...@krankikom.de>
To: "Robert Koberg" <ro...@koberg.com>; <co...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 7:14 AM
Subject: RE: [OT] Design Rant
> As far as I understand, if you browse down trough it they describe
> step by step the CSS principles to do what you asked.
>
> Have fun,
> Paulo Gaspar
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:47 PM
> > To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org; paulo.gaspar@krankikom.de
> > Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> >
> >
> > it's pretty, but I did not see anything about the design I was talking
> > about??
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Paulo Gaspar" <pa...@krankikom.de>
> > To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 12:58 PM
> > Subject: RE: [OT] Design Rant
> >
> >
> > > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own
> > stuff. The only
> > > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a
> > "good" four+
> > > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > > fixed-width and the
> > > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
> > >
> > > I think this article holds the answer to your question, with
> > outer margins
> > > and all:
> > > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
> > >
> > >
> > > Have fun,
> > > Paulo Gaspar
> > >
> > > http://www.krankikom.de
> > > http://www.ruhronline.de
> > >
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> > > > To: general@xml.apache.org
> > > > Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own
> > stuff. The only
> > > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a
> > "good" four+
> > > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > > fixed-width and the
> > > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if
this
> > > > approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three
> > columns (outer
> > > > columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> > > > problems, I
> > > > have clients who would.
> > > >
> > > > best,
> > > > -Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Paulo Gaspar <pa...@krankikom.de>.
As far as I understand, if you browse down trough it they describe
step by step the CSS principles to do what you asked.
Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 11:47 PM
> To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org; paulo.gaspar@krankikom.de
> Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
>
>
> it's pretty, but I did not see anything about the design I was talking
> about??
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paulo Gaspar" <pa...@krankikom.de>
> To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 12:58 PM
> Subject: RE: [OT] Design Rant
>
>
> > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own
> stuff. The only
> > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a
> "good" four+
> > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > fixed-width and the
> > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > >
> > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
> >
> > I think this article holds the answer to your question, with
> outer margins
> > and all:
> > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
> >
> >
> > Have fun,
> > Paulo Gaspar
> >
> > http://www.krankikom.de
> > http://www.ruhronline.de
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> > > To: general@xml.apache.org
> > > Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> > > Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> > >
> > >
> > > I really like this type of design and use it for my own
> stuff. The only
> > > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a
> "good" four+
> > > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > > fixed-width and the
> > > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> > >
> > > Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
> > > approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three
> columns (outer
> > > columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> > > problems, I
> > > have clients who would.
> > >
> > > best,
> > > -Rob
> > >
> > > ...
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> > For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
it's pretty, but I did not see anything about the design I was talking
about??
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paulo Gaspar" <pa...@krankikom.de>
To: <co...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 12:58 PM
Subject: RE: [OT] Design Rant
> > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > fixed-width and the
> > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> >
> > Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
>
> I think this article holds the answer to your question, with outer margins
> and all:
> http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
>
>
> Have fun,
> Paulo Gaspar
>
> http://www.krankikom.de
> http://www.ruhronline.de
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> > To: general@xml.apache.org
> > Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
> >
> >
> > I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> > problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> > column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> > fixed-width and the
> > two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
> >
> > Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
> > approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
> > columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> > problems, I
> > have clients who would.
> >
> > best,
> > -Rob
> >
> > ...
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Paulo Gaspar <pa...@krankikom.de>.
> I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> fixed-width and the
> two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
>
> Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
I think this article holds the answer to your question, with outer margins
and all:
http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar
http://www.krankikom.de
http://www.ruhronline.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> To: general@xml.apache.org
> Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
>
>
> I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> fixed-width and the
> two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
>
> Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
> approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
> columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> problems, I
> have clients who would.
>
> best,
> -Rob
>
> ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Paulo Gaspar <pa...@krankikom.de>.
> I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> fixed-width and the
> two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
>
> Hopefully someone knows how to do that??
I think this article holds the answer to your question, with outer margins
and all:
http://www.alistapart.com/stories/practicalcss/
Have fun,
Paulo Gaspar
http://www.krankikom.de
http://www.ruhronline.de
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Koberg [mailto:rob@koberg.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 9:14 PM
> To: general@xml.apache.org
> Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
>
>
> I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
> problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
> column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are
> fixed-width and the
> two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
>
> Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
> approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
> columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any
> problems, I
> have clients who would.
>
> best,
> -Rob
>
> ...
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are fixed-width and the
two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any problems, I
have clients who would.
best,
-Rob
> >
> > What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
> > this)
>
>
> +1
>
> It produces faster pages, and is easier to work with!
>
>
> --
>
> "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
> deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> - Benjamin Franklin
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>.
I really like this type of design and use it for my own stuff. The only
problem I have (might be ignorance?) is that you can't do a "good" four+
column layout. By that I mean the two outer columns are fixed-width and the
two+ inner columns are are variable based on window width.
Hopefully someone knows how to do that?? If not, I don't know if this
approach should be evangelized. You are limited to three columns (outer
columns fixed-width, inner is variable). While I don't have any problems, I
have clients who would.
best,
-Rob
> >
> > What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
> > this)
>
>
> +1
>
> It produces faster pages, and is easier to work with!
>
>
> --
>
> "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
> deserve neither liberty nor safety."
> - Benjamin Franklin
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Gerhard Froehlich <g-...@gmx.de>.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:bloritsch@apache.org]
>Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 7:01 PM
>To: general@xml.apache.org
>Cc: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [OT] Design Rant
>
>
>Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
>> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>>
>> It's a strong position but, hey, I find resonating with what you're
>> saying :)
>>
>> We have the *luxury* to know what our user base is and estimate their
>> needs very precisely.
>>
>> Moreover, this is a site dedicated to new technologies for the web and a
>> site dedicated to evangelize open standard compliance thru reference
>> implementations and cooperation.
>>
>> If we page a page on the 'about' section that talks about our reasons, I
>> think people might even appreciate our effort to both evangelize the
>> technology and 'put in practice' what we say.
>>
>> What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
>> this)
>
>
>+1
+1, of course
Gerhard
"Sorry, but my karma just ran over your dogma."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>
> It's a strong position but, hey, I find resonating with what you're
> saying :)
>
> We have the *luxury* to know what our user base is and estimate their
> needs very precisely.
>
> Moreover, this is a site dedicated to new technologies for the web and a
> site dedicated to evangelize open standard compliance thru reference
> implementations and cooperation.
>
> If we page a page on the 'about' section that talks about our reasons, I
> think people might even appreciate our effort to both evangelize the
> technology and 'put in practice' what we say.
>
> What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
> this)
+1
It produces faster pages, and is easier to work with!
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Berin Loritsch <bl...@apache.org>.
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>
> It's a strong position but, hey, I find resonating with what you're
> saying :)
>
> We have the *luxury* to know what our user base is and estimate their
> needs very precisely.
>
> Moreover, this is a site dedicated to new technologies for the web and a
> site dedicated to evangelize open standard compliance thru reference
> implementations and cooperation.
>
> If we page a page on the 'about' section that talks about our reasons, I
> think people might even appreciate our effort to both evangelize the
> technology and 'put in practice' what we say.
>
> What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
> this)
+1
It produces faster pages, and is easier to work with!
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by "Kevin A. Burton" <bu...@openprivacy.org>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> writes:
> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>
> Ugo Cei wrote:
> >
> > giacomo wrote:
> >
<snip>
> > Using a CSS-based layout also means that people using 4th generation
> > browsers (NS 4, IE 4, etc.) must be "protected" from such a stylesheet or
> > they will see utter garbage. Hiding the CSS from them means that they won't
> > be able to appreciate the layout, but will nonetheless be able to read the
> > full *content*, just not very well styled. But come on, this is a site
> > devoted to *developers* developing for the Web. Can you imagine a web
> > developer today using ONLY NS4 or IE4?
OK. Some day we are going to have to tell these people to "upgrade".
NS4 is about 4 years old now. IE4 is about the same. I think it is acceptable
to tell them to go to hell :)
CSS2 is way too cool to not support :)
<snip>
- --
Kevin A. Burton ( burton@apache.org, burton@openprivacy.org, burtonator@acm.org )
Location - San Francisco, CA, Cell - 415.595.9965
Jabber - burtonator@jabber.org, Web - http://relativity.yi.org/
The philosophy of this column is simple: if you have good language skills, you
will be respected and admired; whereas if you clearly have no clue about grammar
or vocabulary, you could become president of the United States.
--Dave Barry, writing in the Miami Herald.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Get my public key at: http://relativity.yi.org/pgpkey.txt
iD8DBQE8IR53AwM6xb2dfE0RAo00AJ9HLsZ7cHqwFWsRnL6yEIVys23htACgiHUi
bqBa+A+HZw40rgIaBhfiRRU=
=yeIm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Matt Sergeant <ma...@sergeant.org>.
On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Michael Hartle wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
>
> >I was wondering this too - we need to use Cocoon's own
> >capabilities to solve these very real issues. There was a
> >thread on this, but it went quiet. The discussion came around
> >to "why is Cocoon not generating the content on the
> >xml.apache.org/cocoon/ site".
> > [Vote] Improving Cocoon Site
> >http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100765145112325&w=2
> >
> Well, I'd +1 it, if I was allowed to vote. For obvious reasons like
> showing off the capabilities of Cocoon in a consistent, aesthetic way
> and not educating people by force, I consider adapting the web content
> to the browsers of visitors superior compared to any technological
> evangelism.
The Apache servers run on FreeBSD, and changing that isn't going to
happen, and FreeBSD doesn't run Java too well (that's the argument I heard
anyway). One way to do it would be to use mod_proxy or something, to proxy
all content to a new server somewhere else. But then it'll be even slower.
Or run AxKit, which runs fine on FreeBSD, but kinda defeats the point :-)
--
<!-- Matt -->
<:->Get a smart net</:->
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Michael Hartle <mh...@hartle-klug.com>.
David Crossley wrote:
>I was wondering this too - we need to use Cocoon's own
>capabilities to solve these very real issues. There was a
>thread on this, but it went quiet. The discussion came around
>to "why is Cocoon not generating the content on the
>xml.apache.org/cocoon/ site".
> [Vote] Improving Cocoon Site
>http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100765145112325&w=2
>
Well, I'd +1 it, if I was allowed to vote. For obvious reasons like
showing off the capabilities of Cocoon in a consistent, aesthetic way
and not educating people by force, I consider adapting the web content
to the browsers of visitors superior compared to any technological
evangelism.
Best regards,
Michael Hartle,
Hartle & Klug GbR
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
John Morrison wrote:
> <snip/>
> > Ugo Cei wrote:
> > > In other words, what I am proposing is that we stop worrying about being
> > > bacward compatible in order to accomodate old, buggy and non-compliant
> > > user agents, but instead start to be FORWARD compatible in order to
> > > accomodate FUTURE standard-compliant user agents.
> > >
> > > Let me know what you think about it and sorry for being slightly OT.
>
> If we are using a live Cocoon then we can select different views
> based on the browser no?
> J.
I was wondering this too - we need to use Cocoon's own
capabilities to solve these very real issues. There was a
thread on this, but it went quiet. The discussion came around
to "why is Cocoon not generating the content on the
xml.apache.org/cocoon/ site".
[Vote] Improving Cocoon Site
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100765145112325&w=2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>.
John Morrison wrote:
> <snip/>
> > Ugo Cei wrote:
> > > In other words, what I am proposing is that we stop worrying about being
> > > bacward compatible in order to accomodate old, buggy and non-compliant
> > > user agents, but instead start to be FORWARD compatible in order to
> > > accomodate FUTURE standard-compliant user agents.
> > >
> > > Let me know what you think about it and sorry for being slightly OT.
>
> If we are using a live Cocoon then we can select different views
> based on the browser no?
> J.
I was wondering this too - we need to use Cocoon's own
capabilities to solve these very real issues. There was a
thread on this, but it went quiet. The discussion came around
to "why is Cocoon not generating the content on the
xml.apache.org/cocoon/ site".
[Vote] Improving Cocoon Site
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=xml-cocoon-dev&m=100765145112325&w=2
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
RE: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by John Morrison <jo...@ntlworld.com>.
<snip/>
> >
> > In other words, what I am proposing is that we stop worrying about being
> > bacward compatible in order to accomodate old, buggy and non-compliant
> > user agents, but instead start to be FORWARD compatible in order to
> > accomodate FUTURE standard-compliant user agents.
> >
> > Let me know what you think about it and sorry for being slightly OT.
>
If we are using a live Cocoon then we can select different views based on
the browser no?
J.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
giacomo wrote:
> > > Using a CSS-based layout also means that people using 4th generation
> > > browsers (NS 4, IE 4, etc.) must be "protected" from such a stylesheet
> > > or they will see utter garbage. Hiding the CSS from them means that they
> > > won't be able to appreciate the layout, but will nonetheless be able to
> > > read the full *content*, just not very well styled. But come on, this is
> > > a site devoted to *developers* developing for the Web. Can you imagine a
> > > web developer today using ONLY NS4 or IE4?
>
> I know that not only developers view the apache sites.
Correct. In fact, the apache sites should target users (I mean people
that *use* our technology to implement something), developers (those
that actually *develop* our software) and lurkers (those that don't fit
in the other categories: i.e. managers, journalists, politicians, your
mom and what not)
> I've been told
> that system administrators go here as well because the developers in
> their company like to use open source in their own software and thus the
> administrators want to know more about what they will face to
> administer.
Right, but as long as Lynx works well on our pages (and it will work
even better if we use CSS instead of HTML positional hacks)
> I know of manager visiting the sites to verify we told them the truth
> about open source, licensing, cool projects when we do evangelize OS
> products to them.
>
> Those people are not on the edge of the technology (read use
> IE6/NS6.2/Mozilla browsers). They have corporate PCs with the software
> someone else has installed there and they usually are not able to change
> that.
CSS2 works decently well (besides a few bugs and missing
functionalities) on IE 5.0+ and on Netscape 6.0+
The only client that is not CSS-capable is NS4.
> I don't want to say we shouldn't go the CSS way, but we might not be
> able in all cases to show our cool sites (in terms of technology used)
> to the ones having something to say in companies where others here like
> to bring in OS software.
Absolutely.
> I know my own customers which are still using IE4 and NS4 (both have
> very diffrent implementation of CSS features)
Here is what I propose: since Sam volunteered to digest and process the
logs, why don't we come out with the percentage of people that have
non-compliant CSS2 browsers and decide with the numbers on the table?
I'd also love to see the trend, so I'd process each month separately for
the last 6 months and show a table with the results.
Sam, can we count on you for this? it would be very useful to avoid some
heat here.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
giacomo wrote:
> > > Using a CSS-based layout also means that people using 4th generation
> > > browsers (NS 4, IE 4, etc.) must be "protected" from such a stylesheet
> > > or they will see utter garbage. Hiding the CSS from them means that they
> > > won't be able to appreciate the layout, but will nonetheless be able to
> > > read the full *content*, just not very well styled. But come on, this is
> > > a site devoted to *developers* developing for the Web. Can you imagine a
> > > web developer today using ONLY NS4 or IE4?
>
> I know that not only developers view the apache sites.
Correct. In fact, the apache sites should target users (I mean people
that *use* our technology to implement something), developers (those
that actually *develop* our software) and lurkers (those that don't fit
in the other categories: i.e. managers, journalists, politicians, your
mom and what not)
> I've been told
> that system administrators go here as well because the developers in
> their company like to use open source in their own software and thus the
> administrators want to know more about what they will face to
> administer.
Right, but as long as Lynx works well on our pages (and it will work
even better if we use CSS instead of HTML positional hacks)
> I know of manager visiting the sites to verify we told them the truth
> about open source, licensing, cool projects when we do evangelize OS
> products to them.
>
> Those people are not on the edge of the technology (read use
> IE6/NS6.2/Mozilla browsers). They have corporate PCs with the software
> someone else has installed there and they usually are not able to change
> that.
CSS2 works decently well (besides a few bugs and missing
functionalities) on IE 5.0+ and on Netscape 6.0+
The only client that is not CSS-capable is NS4.
> I don't want to say we shouldn't go the CSS way, but we might not be
> able in all cases to show our cool sites (in terms of technology used)
> to the ones having something to say in companies where others here like
> to bring in OS software.
Absolutely.
> I know my own customers which are still using IE4 and NS4 (both have
> very diffrent implementation of CSS features)
Here is what I propose: since Sam volunteered to digest and process the
logs, why don't we come out with the percentage of people that have
non-compliant CSS2 browsers and decide with the numbers on the table?
I'd also love to see the trend, so I'd process each month separately for
the last 6 months and show a table with the results.
Sam, can we count on you for this? it would be very useful to avoid some
heat here.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by giacomo <gi...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>
> Ugo Cei wrote:
> >
> > giacomo wrote:
> >
> > > I know :) but many sites only use *one* table to achieve the above which
> > > (at least for older browsers) result in a need to have the hole page
> > > downloaded prior to have it displayed in the browser. This above layout
> > > can display the header as soon as it is available in the browser. This
> > > way you don't have to wait in front of a blank screen too long.
> >
> > Many (well not that many, but they are starting to appear, see
> > http://www.thenoodleincident.com/tutorials/design_rant/ for example, or
> > my own http://cupva.cbim.it [C2 based]) sites use NO tables to achieve
> > layout, but instead rely completely on *standard* CSS positioning
> > properties to achieve layout.
> >
> > Let's face it: HTML <table>'s were never designed for laying out pages,
> > but for laying out tabular data. Unfortunately, since the support for
> > CSS was until recently very poor both in the browsers and in the design
> > tools, 99.9% of current web pages use tables for layout. This is IMHO an
> > ugly hack and we, as a community that strives to adhere to open
> > standards and to the concept of separation of style from content, should
> > avoid it like the plague. BTW, CSS-1 was published in 1996, so it's been
> > out for more than FIVE years, it's time that people start using it for
> > what it was meant for.
> >
> > Using a CSS-based layout also means that people using 4th generation
> > browsers (NS 4, IE 4, etc.) must be "protected" from such a stylesheet
> > or they will see utter garbage. Hiding the CSS from them means that they
> > won't be able to appreciate the layout, but will nonetheless be able to
> > read the full *content*, just not very well styled. But come on, this is
> > a site devoted to *developers* developing for the Web. Can you imagine a
> > web developer today using ONLY NS4 or IE4?
I know that not only developers view the apache sites. I've been told
that system administrators go here as well because the developers in
their company like to use open source in their own software and thus the
administrators want to know more about what they will face to
administer.
I know of manager visiting the sites to verify we told them the truth
about open source, licensing, cool projects when we do evangelize OS
products to them.
Those people are not on the edge of the technology (read use
IE6/NS6.2/Mozilla browsers). They have corporate PCs with the software
someone else has installed there and they usually are not able to change
that.
I don't want to say we shouldn't go the CSS way, but we might not be
able in all cases to show our cool sites (in terms of technology used)
to the ones having something to say in companies where others here like
to bring in OS software.
I know my own customers which are still using IE4 and NS4 (both have
very diffrent implementation of CSS features)
Giacomo
> >
> > Incidentally, adopting a pure-CSS based solution for both layout AND
> > styling means that people using:
> >
> > - text browsers
> > - screen readers for the sight impaired
> > - mobile devices
> > - anything you cannot conceive now but that will be make web
> > access available from your washing machine or whatever :)
> >
> > will be able to access the site contents without their "screen" or
> > reader being cluttered with spurious markup that is not in any way
> > related to the content they need.
> >
> > Before you start mentioning Cocoon's ability to select a different
> > stylesheet based on the User-Agent request parameter, keep in mind that:
> >
> > - we are talking about pregenerating a static version of the site
> > for performance reasons
> > - as I wrote above, you cannot foresee what user agents will browse your
> > site in the near future.
> >
> > In other words, what I am proposing is that we stop worrying about being
> > bacward compatible in order to accomodate old, buggy and non-compliant
> > user agents, but instead start to be FORWARD compatible in order to
> > accomodate FUTURE standard-compliant user agents.
> >
> > Let me know what you think about it and sorry for being slightly OT.
>
> It's a strong position but, hey, I find resonating with what you're
> saying :)
>
> We have the *luxury* to know what our user base is and estimate their
> needs very precisely.
>
> Moreover, this is a site dedicated to new technologies for the web and a
> site dedicated to evangelize open standard compliance thru reference
> implementations and cooperation.
>
> If we page a page on the 'about' section that talks about our reasons, I
> think people might even appreciate our effort to both evangelize the
> technology and 'put in practice' what we say.
>
> What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
> this)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
In case of troubles, e-mail: webmaster@xml.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xml.apache.org
Re: [OT] Design Rant
Posted by giacomo <gi...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 19 Dec 2001, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Copied to general@ since this is a general discussion.
>
> Ugo Cei wrote:
> >
> > giacomo wrote:
> >
> > > I know :) but many sites only use *one* table to achieve the above which
> > > (at least for older browsers) result in a need to have the hole page
> > > downloaded prior to have it displayed in the browser. This above layout
> > > can display the header as soon as it is available in the browser. This
> > > way you don't have to wait in front of a blank screen too long.
> >
> > Many (well not that many, but they are starting to appear, see
> > http://www.thenoodleincident.com/tutorials/design_rant/ for example, or
> > my own http://cupva.cbim.it [C2 based]) sites use NO tables to achieve
> > layout, but instead rely completely on *standard* CSS positioning
> > properties to achieve layout.
> >
> > Let's face it: HTML <table>'s were never designed for laying out pages,
> > but for laying out tabular data. Unfortunately, since the support for
> > CSS was until recently very poor both in the browsers and in the design
> > tools, 99.9% of current web pages use tables for layout. This is IMHO an
> > ugly hack and we, as a community that strives to adhere to open
> > standards and to the concept of separation of style from content, should
> > avoid it like the plague. BTW, CSS-1 was published in 1996, so it's been
> > out for more than FIVE years, it's time that people start using it for
> > what it was meant for.
> >
> > Using a CSS-based layout also means that people using 4th generation
> > browsers (NS 4, IE 4, etc.) must be "protected" from such a stylesheet
> > or they will see utter garbage. Hiding the CSS from them means that they
> > won't be able to appreciate the layout, but will nonetheless be able to
> > read the full *content*, just not very well styled. But come on, this is
> > a site devoted to *developers* developing for the Web. Can you imagine a
> > web developer today using ONLY NS4 or IE4?
I know that not only developers view the apache sites. I've been told
that system administrators go here as well because the developers in
their company like to use open source in their own software and thus the
administrators want to know more about what they will face to
administer.
I know of manager visiting the sites to verify we told them the truth
about open source, licensing, cool projects when we do evangelize OS
products to them.
Those people are not on the edge of the technology (read use
IE6/NS6.2/Mozilla browsers). They have corporate PCs with the software
someone else has installed there and they usually are not able to change
that.
I don't want to say we shouldn't go the CSS way, but we might not be
able in all cases to show our cool sites (in terms of technology used)
to the ones having something to say in companies where others here like
to bring in OS software.
I know my own customers which are still using IE4 and NS4 (both have
very diffrent implementation of CSS features)
Giacomo
> >
> > Incidentally, adopting a pure-CSS based solution for both layout AND
> > styling means that people using:
> >
> > - text browsers
> > - screen readers for the sight impaired
> > - mobile devices
> > - anything you cannot conceive now but that will be make web
> > access available from your washing machine or whatever :)
> >
> > will be able to access the site contents without their "screen" or
> > reader being cluttered with spurious markup that is not in any way
> > related to the content they need.
> >
> > Before you start mentioning Cocoon's ability to select a different
> > stylesheet based on the User-Agent request parameter, keep in mind that:
> >
> > - we are talking about pregenerating a static version of the site
> > for performance reasons
> > - as I wrote above, you cannot foresee what user agents will browse your
> > site in the near future.
> >
> > In other words, what I am proposing is that we stop worrying about being
> > bacward compatible in order to accomodate old, buggy and non-compliant
> > user agents, but instead start to be FORWARD compatible in order to
> > accomodate FUTURE standard-compliant user agents.
> >
> > Let me know what you think about it and sorry for being slightly OT.
>
> It's a strong position but, hey, I find resonating with what you're
> saying :)
>
> We have the *luxury* to know what our user base is and estimate their
> needs very precisely.
>
> Moreover, this is a site dedicated to new technologies for the web and a
> site dedicated to evangelize open standard compliance thru reference
> implementations and cooperation.
>
> If we page a page on the 'about' section that talks about our reasons, I
> think people might even appreciate our effort to both evangelize the
> technology and 'put in practice' what we say.
>
> What do others think? (we must have a wide agreement to go forward on
> this)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org