You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@jakarta.apache.org by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org> on 2001/12/18 16:55:01 UTC
Re: Forrest (a.k.a. xml.apache.org 2.0)
Ugo Cei wrote:
>
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>
> > 3) layout
> > ---------
> >
> > The layout previously proposed on this list was a solution to the
> speed
> > problem but I couldn't adapt it to the depth needs identified in the
> > rest of the goals.
> >
> > So, I resurrected my rusty web design skills and came up with the
> layout
> > you find attached. I've tested it on IE 5.5, NS 4.78 and Moz 0.9.5
> on
> > win2k.
> >
> > Feedback, suggestions and criticisms are appreciated.
>
> Ok, hope this is considered constructive criticism ;).
Of course.
> I really think that we, as a community that thrives on open standards
> like XML, should do our best to adhere to such standards.
Oh, absolutely.
> I've tested
> your page with the W3C validator and it reports 43 conformance errors
> if
> validated against the HTML 4.01 Transitional DTD and too many errors
> to count if validated against the XHTML 1.0 Transitional DTD.
Well, I didn't aim to XHTML compliance, so that doesn't surprise me.
> As I said before, this is intended to be constructive criticism, so I
> rolled up my sleeves and transformed it into a valid XHTML 1.0
> Transitional document. I even added the nice W3C validation logo ;).
Thanks for doing this.
> I've tested it on Mozilla 0.9.6 and Opera 6.0 beta on Linux. Mozilla
> is
> fine and Opera shows a little glitch that I think could be easily
> fixed,
> I just have no time at this momento to look after it. Sorry but I
> couldn't test it under IE 5/6 at the moment.
>
> What about NS4 and IE4 and earlier? Well ... read
> http://www.alistapart.com/stories/netscape/ then come back to talk
> about
> it (maybe off these lists if this is considered OT).
hmmmm, what do others think on this?
> Speaking of standards conformance, besides validation, I'd like to
> rewrite this page to use a more structural markup, take all
> stylistical
> attributes (colors, sizes, margins, etc.) to CSS, and refrain from
> using
> tables and spacer gifs for layout. More on this in the coming days, if
> I
> can find an hour or two to work on it.
As long as you achieve the same visual content and you don't sacrifice
portability, I'll be very happy to include your work and give proper
credits (of course) :)
--
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: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: Forrest (a.k.a. xml.apache.org 2.0)
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@verizon.net>.
> From: Torsten Curdt [mailto:tcurdt@dff.st]
>
> > > What about NS4 and IE4 and earlier? Well ... read
> > > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/netscape/ then come back to talk
> > > about
> > > it (maybe off these lists if this is considered OT).
> >
> > hmmmm, what do others think on this?
>
> I have to admit that this article is quite true.
> And we don't have a customer telling us "but it
> needs to look good on old browsers, too"
>
> http://www.alistapart.com/stories/tohell/
>
> Maybe we could analyse the logs and see what percentages
> we are talking about...
Looking into apache.org logs dated 30-Nov-2001:
2518571 TOTAL 100%
639719 MSIE 5.5 25.4
538746 MSIE 6+ 21.3
647472 MSIE 5+ 25.7
25102 MSIE 4+ 0.99
202024 Mozilla/5.0 8.02
173854 Mozilla/4.7+ 6.90
62338 Mozilla/3.0+ 2.47
51407 Mozilla/4.5+ 2.04
7817 Mozilla/4.0+ 0.31
170092 OTHER 6.75
PS: MSIE entries includes compatibles (e.g.: "Mozilla/4.0 (compatible;
MSIE 5.0; Windows 2000) Opera 6.0 [en]"), Mozilla entries - also (e.g.:
" Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/2.2.1; Linux)")
Regards,
Vadim
> --
> Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Forrest (a.k.a. xml.apache.org 2.0)
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@dff.st>.
> > What about NS4 and IE4 and earlier? Well ... read
> > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/netscape/ then come back to talk
> > about
> > it (maybe off these lists if this is considered OT).
>
> hmmmm, what do others think on this?
I have to admit that this article is quite true.
And we don't have a customer telling us "but it
needs to look good on old browsers, too"
http://www.alistapart.com/stories/tohell/
Maybe we could analyse the logs and see what percentages
we are talking about...
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org
Re: Forrest (a.k.a. xml.apache.org 2.0)
Posted by Torsten Curdt <tc...@dff.st>.
> > What about NS4 and IE4 and earlier? Well ... read
> > http://www.alistapart.com/stories/netscape/ then come back to talk
> > about
> > it (maybe off these lists if this is considered OT).
>
> hmmmm, what do others think on this?
I have to admit that this article is quite true.
And we don't have a customer telling us "but it
needs to look good on old browsers, too"
http://www.alistapart.com/stories/tohell/
Maybe we could analyse the logs and see what percentages
we are talking about...
--
Torsten
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>