no more Quirks Mode (Was: GUI Design: Cold sweat)

[David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>]

I am currently investigating the Forrest sitemap and
the Cocoon serializer capability to output the document
type declaration. At the moment, we are not writing any
declaration. Hence the "Quirks Mode" alerted by Chris below.

It is not sufficient to simply add the document type
declaration. I am also validating the output against
the declared DTD. That is where i am encountering a few
issues ... the various stylesheets need tweaking.

I have one question for the list. The last stylesheet
in our documentation pipeline is "site2xhtml.xsl".
I presume that the intention is to output XHTML. So i
am aiming for DTD XHTML Transitional. Does that sound OK?

If it gets too hard, then i am going to back down and go
for DTD HTML 4.2 to get something started.

Anyway, i just thought that i would let you know what
i am up to.
--David

David Crossley wrote:
> Christopher Bentley wrote:
> > I have reviewed the archives and some of your existing HTML and CSS and
> > I am concerned on your behalf by some of the discussions and decisions
> > being made about the design of the HTML and CSS....
> 
> Many thanks for your review efforts. This is all extremely
> valuable. I will try to answer a few bits here, then i think
> that we should split some of it off into separate threads.
> 
> First a little overview of why the generated pages are in this
> state. This is very early days in the Forrest project. So far,
> we have been concentrating on getting the infrastructure
> in place. We recently put the build system underneath it thanks
> to Krysalis Centipede. Cocoon is at the guts of Forrest, and
> is now working to generate Forrest's own docs.
> 
> Now it is time to fine-tune the various transformations,
> and feed some of the changes back to Cocoon. Forrest intends
> to be exemplary. We have the tools in place, so now we can
> gradually make it happen.
> 
> > The most urgent question in my mind is
> > 1. Why are you developing HTML and CSS in Quirks Mode?
>
> Not intentional. The transformers can certainly be made
> to output the document type declaration.

I am investigating this at the moment. The 
> > - Do you plan to continue this into production?
> > - If your are intending to switch Strict Mode on then
> > which DTD will your output be written against?
> 
> We will certainly have the declaration well before we reach
> production. Which DTD ... let us discuss this in a new
> thread. Perhaps we can use HTML 4.2 Transitional for now
> and gradually move to a better DTD. I do not see any
> reason for not ending up with XHTML Strict.
> 
> > If this is actually unresolved then it is very important you do.. your 
> > CSS is already poised to break all versions of Netscape (it's written 
> > against the IE Box model not the W3C Box model)
> > 
> > If you have no Idea what I'm taking about you can read about it here;
> > <http://www.alistapart.com/stories/doctype/>
> > <http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/enus/dnie60/html/
> > cssenhancements.asp>
> > <http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/quirks/>
> 
> Thanks for those useful pointers. I will try to find
> a relevant place in the documents to keep these handy.
>
<snip/>

Re: no more Quirks Mode (Was: GUI Design: Cold sweat)

[Chris Bentley <cj...@webguy.com.au>]

> At 13:30 28/05/2002 +0200, you wrote:
>>> From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au]
>> 
>>> I have one question for the list. The last stylesheet
>>> in our documentation pipeline is "site2xhtml.xsl".
>>> I presume that the intention is to output XHTML. So i
>>> am aiming for DTD XHTML Transitional. Does that sound OK?
>>> 
>>> If it gets too hard, then i am going to back down and go
>>> for DTD HTML 4.2 to get something started.
>>> 
>>> Anyway, i just thought that i would let you know what
>>> i am up to.
>> 
>> I would withhold that effort until Bert has finished updating the
>> forrest-site skin generating the new HTML that he is working on.
> 
> I second that.  Since the output will be generated by Forrest it's of no
> use to put a doctype in the page.  Content and other stuff will also be a
> factor to keep in mind.

> I must admit that some things that are discussed in this thread are pretty
> new to me.  I have never worried about doctypes and always used the
> standard HTML transitional.  Maybe I'm in an all new ball game and should
> start worrying now.

It's new to everyone!..
It's purpose was to be able to deploy the new browsers without breaking old
CSS...
by not using a DOCTYPE you are telling IE6, IE5mac to emulate IE4/5
rendering and Mozilla to emulate NS4 rendering.. which I think is what you
want.

the main trap is setting widths and heights on Block elements - avoid it
until you feel its needed as a solution.. then proceed with caution...

if you look at this page in Mozilla/Netscape7 you can see an extreme example
of some possible effects. compare it with IE.
<http://www.project-inspiration.com/sgentile/DotNet.htm>

* David, I raised this issue before Bert was coding.. the HTML-CSS I
originally saw was going to break (it already had, its just that you
couldn't see it) - I felt I should speak up. Bert threw out the old code -
problem solved.. Quirks mode is being used as a Feature now, it's no longer
a problem.

chris

> 
>> Bert, do you have an ETA?
> 
> I'll do my best to have the skin ready by Friday.  I have been at the
> funeral of my father in law today, so things are a bit crazy here.  I have
> to use my spare time to get it done, so it depends on how quickly I can
> migrate my HTML to XSL using the existing XSL. Actually I'm using *all* my
> spare time to get it done at the moment.
> 
> 
>> Nice work, guys!
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Bert
> 
> 
> 
>> </Steven>
> 

RE: no more Quirks Mode (Was: GUI Design: Cold sweat)

[Bert Van Kets <be...@vankets.com>]

At 13:30 28/05/2002 +0200, you wrote:
> > From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au]
>
> > I have one question for the list. The last stylesheet
> > in our documentation pipeline is "site2xhtml.xsl".
> > I presume that the intention is to output XHTML. So i
> > am aiming for DTD XHTML Transitional. Does that sound OK?
> >
> > If it gets too hard, then i am going to back down and go
> > for DTD HTML 4.2 to get something started.
> >
> > Anyway, i just thought that i would let you know what
> > i am up to.
>
>I would withhold that effort until Bert has finished updating the
>forrest-site skin generating the new HTML that he is working on.

I second that.  Since the output will be generated by Forrest it's of no 
use to put a doctype in the page.  Content and other stuff will also be a 
factor to keep in mind.
I must admit that some things that are discussed in this thread are pretty 
new to me.  I have never worried about doctypes and always used the 
standard HTML transitional.  Maybe I'm in an all new ball game and should 
start worrying now.


>Bert, do you have an ETA?

I'll do my best to have the skin ready by Friday.  I have been at the 
funeral of my father in law today, so things are a bit crazy here.  I have 
to use my spare time to get it done, so it depends on how quickly I can 
migrate my HTML to XSL using the existing XSL. Actually I'm using *all* my 
spare time to get it done at the moment.


>Nice work, guys!

Thanks,

Bert



></Steven>

Re: no more Quirks Mode

[David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>]

Chris Bentley wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
> > I am currently investigating the Forrest sitemap and
> > the Cocoon serializer capability to output the document
> > type declaration. At the moment, we are not writing any
> > declaration. Hence the "Quirks Mode" alerted by Chris below.
> > 
> > It is not sufficient to simply add the document type
> > declaration. I am also validating the output against
> > the declared DTD. That is where i am encountering a few
> > issues ... the various stylesheets need tweaking.
> 
> By process that Bert is building to, there a rational reason to stay in
> Quirks mode; the reasoning would be;
> 
> *I'm building to the standard of a "Non Standards Compliant" (quirky)
> browser.
> *If I switch "Standards Mode" on then it complicates the CSS and some HTMLy
> issues.
> *if I can keep the CSS simple and not go near Box models issues I can
> bootstrap the CSS form there.

Thanks for pointing that out. I had been contemplating the
effects that would arise from declaring a DTD. We certainly
want to take this in easy steps. There are many issues.
I am just exploring it now, so that when we finally want to
switch it on, then we can.

> > I have one question for the list. The last stylesheet
> > in our documentation pipeline is "site2xhtml.xsl".
> > I presume that the intention is to output XHTML. So i
> > am aiming for DTD XHTML Transitional. Does that sound OK?
> 
> Using this DTD now will force "Standards Mode and complicate Bert's life?...

My experiments are aiming for it, but it will not happen
for a while. As you say below, we can gradually move that way.

> but I think you can still output XHTML without the DOCTYPE .. if there is a
> reason. I'm pretty sure it just has to be well formed - not necessarily
> valid - its just really some form of markup that looks like HTML to the
> browser.
>
> eg No declaration, no DOCTYPE and <br> become <br /> etc.
>
> The only reason to do this now would be that your markup would be already
> well formed XML if at some point in the future you wish to do valid XML. And
> I'm reasonably sure (in lue of testing) that there is no backward
> compatibility probs as long as you don't try to Validate.

Today i have been running Forrest locally and experimenting
with configuring the Cocoon serializer to declare the DTD.
Then i have been running the results through validation.

Things are looking rosy. I only found one real XHTML
validation error in all of Forrest. There are still issues
with sometimes missing attributes (e.g. img alt, height, width).

So we can still fine tune our output by occasionally
switching this capability on locally. That is one beauty
of the Cocoon sitemap.

> > If it gets too hard, then i am going to back down and go
> > for DTD HTML 4.01 to get something started.
>
> If you go HTML 4.01 transitional leave off the URI part or you will force
> the "Quirks mode" issue.

I think that you are saying that we can declare that it
is HTML 4.01 Transitional using the Public Identifier
but leave off the System Identifier so that Quirks mode
is triggered (which is what we want for this initial stage).

> I think Bert will have some strong opinions about this.

Do not worry, it is not going to suddenly switch on.

> > Anyway, i just thought that i would let you know what
> > i am up to.
> > --David

Re: no more Quirks Mode (Was: GUI Design: Cold sweat)

[Chris Bentley <cj...@webguy.com.au>]

> I am currently investigating the Forrest sitemap and
> the Cocoon serializer capability to output the document
> type declaration. At the moment, we are not writing any
> declaration. Hence the "Quirks Mode" alerted by Chris below.
> 
> It is not sufficient to simply add the document type
> declaration. I am also validating the output against
> the declared DTD. That is where i am encountering a few
> issues ... the various stylesheets need tweaking.

By process that Bert is building to, there a rational reason to stay in
Quirks mode; the reasoning would be;

*I'm building to the standard of a "Non Standards Compliant" (quirky)
browser.
*If I switch "Standards Mode" on then it complicates the CSS and some HTMLy
issues.
*if I can keep the CSS simple and not go near Box models issues I can
bootstrap the CSS form there.

> I have one question for the list. The last stylesheet
> in our documentation pipeline is "site2xhtml.xsl".
> I presume that the intention is to output XHTML. So i
> am aiming for DTD XHTML Transitional. Does that sound OK?

Using this DTD now will force "Standards Mode and complicate Bert's life?...

but I think you can still output XHTML without the DOCTYPE .. if there is a
reason. I'm pretty sure it just has to be well formed - not necessarily
valid - its just really some form of markup that looks like HTML to the
browser.

eg No declaration, no DOCTYPE and <br> become <br /> etc.

The only reason to do this now would be that your markup would be already
well formed XML if at some point in the future you wish to do valid XML. And
I'm reasonably sure (in lue of testing) that there is no backward
compatibility probs as long as you don't try to Validate.

> If it gets too hard, then i am going to back down and go
> for DTD HTML 4.2 to get something started.

If you go HTML 4.01 transitional leave off the URI part or you will force
the "Quirks mode" issue.

I think Bert will have some strong opinions about this.

> Anyway, i just thought that i would let you know what
> i am up to.
> --David
> 
> David Crossley wrote:
>> Christopher Bentley wrote:
>>> I have reviewed the archives and some of your existing HTML and CSS and
>>> I am concerned on your behalf by some of the discussions and decisions
>>> being made about the design of the HTML and CSS....
>> 
>> Many thanks for your review efforts. This is all extremely
>> valuable. I will try to answer a few bits here, then i think
>> that we should split some of it off into separate threads.
>> 
>> First a little overview of why the generated pages are in this
>> state. This is very early days in the Forrest project. So far,
>> we have been concentrating on getting the infrastructure
>> in place. We recently put the build system underneath it thanks
>> to Krysalis Centipede. Cocoon is at the guts of Forrest, and
>> is now working to generate Forrest's own docs.
>> 
>> Now it is time to fine-tune the various transformations,
>> and feed some of the changes back to Cocoon. Forrest intends
>> to be exemplary. We have the tools in place, so now we can
>> gradually make it happen.
>> 
>>> The most urgent question in my mind is
>>> 1. Why are you developing HTML and CSS in Quirks Mode?
>> 
>> Not intentional. The transformers can certainly be made
>> to output the document type declaration.
> 
> I am investigating this at the moment. The
>>> - Do you plan to continue this into production?
>>> - If your are intending to switch Strict Mode on then
>>> which DTD will your output be written against?
>> 
>> We will certainly have the declaration well before we reach
>> production. Which DTD ... let us discuss this in a new
>> thread. Perhaps we can use HTML 4.2 Transitional for now
>> and gradually move to a better DTD. I do not see any
>> reason for not ending up with XHTML Strict.
>> 
>>> If this is actually unresolved then it is very important you do.. your
>>> CSS is already poised to break all versions of Netscape (it's written
>>> against the IE Box model not the W3C Box model)
>>> 
>>> If you have no Idea what I'm taking about you can read about it here;
>>> <http://www.alistapart.com/stories/doctype/>
>>> 
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/enus/dnie60/html
>>> /
>>> cssenhancements.asp>
>>> <http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/quirks/>
>> 
>> Thanks for those useful pointers. I will try to find
>> a relevant place in the documents to keep these handy.
>> 
> <snip/>

Chris

Fom continuations use-case :) Re: no more Quirks Mode

[Robert Koberg <ro...@koberg.com>]

David Crossley wrote:

>Steven Noels wrote: 
>  
>
>>ps: David, we are still allowed to make jokes on the list, no?
>>    
>>
>
>In my opinion, only if it is very clear that it is a joke.
>Otherwise all that happens is that people get confused and
>non-productive. It is especially hard for non-native English
>speakers to understand.
>
>Definitely no "jokes" should attempt to poke fun at any
>particular person, which was what prompted me to say that.
>--David
>
>
>  
>
Seriosly, this would be fun to use as an example :) Hopefully, because 
of Hollywood, ridiculing los angelians is universal?
((I won't do it again :-))

GREATER LOS ANGELES AREA DRIVER'S LICENSE APPLICATION:

Name: ___________________ Stage name: _____________________
Agent: ___________________ Attorney: _______________________ Therapist's 
name: ___________________

Sex: [ ] male [ ] female [ ] formerly male [ ] formerly female  [ ] both 
[ ] neither [ ] either

*If female, indicate breast implant size: _______

Will the size of your implants hinder your ability to safely operate a 
motor vehicle in any way?

Yes [ ] No [ ]

Please list brand of cell phone: __________________.

*If you don't own a cell phone, please explain:________________________

Please check hair color:

Females: [ ] Blonde [ ] Platinum Blonde

Teenagers: [ ] Red [ ] Orange [ ] Green [ ] Purple [ ] Blue [ ] Skinhead

Please check activities you perform while driving: (Check all that apply)

[ ] Eating
[ } Drinking Starbucks coffee
[ ] Applying make-up
[ ] Shaving (male or female)
[ ] Talking on the phone
[ ] Slapping kids in the back-seat
[ ] Applying cellulite treatment to thighs
[ ] Tanning [X] Snorting cocaine (already checked for your convenience)
[ ] Watching TV [ ] Reading Variety
[ ] Surfing the net via laptop
[ ] Discharging firearms / Reloading

Please indicate how many times per month:

[ ] you expect to shoot at other drivers _____
[ ] how many times you expect to be shot at while driving _____

If you are the victim of a carjacking, you should immediately:

[ ] Call the police to report the crime.
[ ] Call Channel 9 News to report the crime, then watch your car on the 
news in a high-speed chase.
[ ] Call your attorney and discuss lawsuit against cellular phone 
company for 911 call not going through.
[ ] Call your therapist.

In the event of an earthquake, you should:

[ ] stop your car.
[ ] keep driving and hope for the best.
[ ] immediately use your cell phone to call all loved ones.
[ ] pull out your video camera and obtain footage for Channel 9.

In the instance of rain, you should:

[ ] never drive over 5 MPH.
[ ] drive twice as fast as usual.
[ ] you're not sure what "rain" is.

Please indicate number of therapy sessions per week: ______.

Are you presently taking any of the following medications (check all 
that apply)?

[ ] Prozac
[ ] Zovirax [ ] Lithium [ ] Zanax [ ] Valium [ ] Zoloft [ ] All of the above
[ ] None of the above*

*If none, please explain: __________________.

Length of daily commute:

[ ] Less than 1 hour*
[ ] 1 hour
[ ] 2 hours [ ] 3 hours [ ] 4 hours or more

* If less than 1 hour, please explain:____________________.

When stopped by police, you should:

[ ] pull over and have your driver's license and insurance form ready.


[ ] try to outrun them by driving the wrong way on the 405 Freeway.
[ ] have your video camera ready and provoke them to attack, thus 
ensuring yourself of a hefty lawsuit.


When turning, you should always signal your intentions by:

[ ] using your directional signals.
[ ] what is a "directional signal"?


Which part of your car will wear out most often?

[ ] the wiper blades
[ ] the belts
[ ] the horn
Automatic door locks are good for:

[ ] security
[ ] convenience
[ ] messing with the heads of people trying to get in

The "bright" setting on your headlights is for:

[ ] dark, poorly lit roads
[ ] flashing to get the car ahead to move out of the way
[ ] revenge!

Your rear view mirror is for:

[ ] watching for approaching cars
[ ] watching for approaching police cars
[ ] checking your hair

RE: no more Quirks Mode

[David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>]

Steven Noels wrote: 
> ps: David, we are still allowed to make jokes on the list, no?

In my opinion, only if it is very clear that it is a joke.
Otherwise all that happens is that people get confused and
non-productive. It is especially hard for non-native English
speakers to understand.

Definitely no "jokes" should attempt to poke fun at any
particular person, which was what prompted me to say that.
--David

RE: no more Quirks Mode

[Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>]

> From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au]
> Subject: Re: no more Quirks Mode

> Steven Noels wrote:

> > I would withhold that effort until Bert has finished updating the
> > forrest-site skin generating the new HTML that he is working on.
>
> I will continue. It is something to experiment with locally.
> There are quite a few issues that arose from the few hours work
> that i did on it today. These are issues that need to be resolved
> anyway, so i can pursue them in parallel. I will send a summary
> sometime.

Needless to say that I fully trust you on doing this locally AND merging
it afterwards with the results of Bert's work.

Oops, I said it anyhow :-)

</Steven>

ps: David, we are still allowed to make jokes on the list, no?

Re: no more Quirks Mode

[David Crossley <cr...@indexgeo.com.au>]

Steven Noels wrote:
> > David Crossley
<snip/>
> > Anyway, i just thought that i would let you know what
> > i am up to.
> 
> I would withhold that effort until Bert has finished updating the
> forrest-site skin generating the new HTML that he is working on.

I will continue. It is something to experiment with locally.
There are quite a few issues that arose from the few hours work
that i did on it today. These are issues that need to be resolved
anyway, so i can pursue them in parallel. I will send a summary
sometime.
--David

RE: no more Quirks Mode (Was: GUI Design: Cold sweat)

[Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>]

> From: David Crossley [mailto:crossley@indexgeo.com.au]

> I have one question for the list. The last stylesheet
> in our documentation pipeline is "site2xhtml.xsl".
> I presume that the intention is to output XHTML. So i
> am aiming for DTD XHTML Transitional. Does that sound OK?
>
> If it gets too hard, then i am going to back down and go
> for DTD HTML 4.2 to get something started.
>
> Anyway, i just thought that i would let you know what
> i am up to.

I would withhold that effort until Bert has finished updating the
forrest-site skin generating the new HTML that he is working on.

Bert, do you have an ETA?

Nice work, guys!

</Steven>