|
|
Posted by Sherm Pendley on 04/21/07 02:54
Neo Geshel <gotcha@geshel.org> writes:
> Sherm Pendley wrote:
>> Neo Geshel <gotcha@geshel.org> writes:
>>
>>> Sherm Pendley wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You begin by cross-posting, shouting, and then telling us that we should
>>>> read an article "properly", even though you can't be bothered to post it
>>>> that way.
>>> Would you rather I multi-post?
>>
>> No, I would rather you choose one group. This doesn't belong in .misc, or
>> in .site-design, and alt.html is well-nigh useless.
>
> okay, .misc was useless. I agree. But .site-design was chosen because,
> had you actually read to the end of the post, you would have seen that
> I am also requesting design critiques.
I did read the whole post. Why would I respond to something I hadn't read?
You asked for advice about technical problems you're having with XHTML, not
about the layout, navigability, color palette, or other design issues.
> But alt.html is one of the busiest NG for html/xhtml.
I didn't say it wasn't busy, I said it was useless. Alt.html is where amateurs
go where they can feed of one another's ignorance without being interrupted by
facts and good advice.
Come to think of it, the advice you'd get there is probably exactly what you'd
call "proper" - workarounds and hacks that compensate to varying degrees for a
basically flawed idea, with no one pointing out to you that it'd be much easier
to simply avoid the problem in the first place.
>>>> My advice is, since using XHTML is causing problems, use HTML instead.
>>>> Problem solved.
>>> I have far more problems with HTML and “quirks mode” rendering
>>> differences between browsers
>>
>> This is getting to be a common theme for you, complaining about problems
>> you've created for yourself. If quirks mode causes problems, use a DTD
>> that doesn't trigger it. Problem solved.
>
> There is no DTD that can, by itself, do as good a job as { XHTML 1.1
> DTD + [application/xml for IE | application/xhtml+xml for everything
> else] + XML Prolog [ + XSLT Transformation for IE] } across the “big
> three” of IE, Firefox and Opera.
First you come here talking of the difficulties your "solution" is causing
you, now you're claiming it does "as good a job" of avoiding quirks mode as
the recommended solution. Make up your mind.
Plain HTML with a DTD that triggers standards-mode requires no browser
sniffing, no games with the MIME type, and no XSLT transforms to make it
work with IE. Something that does require you to jump through these hoops
is most certainly *not* doing as good a job.
> Should I start spoon-feeding the Usenet community the specifics of
> what I look for? Is it really that hard to properly read a post before
> answering??
I know what you're looking for - you're looking for the magic silver bullet
that will make XHTML work perfectly for every browser.
There is none. Get over it.
> Hence, my attempt to “focus” readers into the same direction
> that I am attempting to go.
You are going in the wrong direction; no amount of "focus" will change that.
> I wasn’t looking for advice.
Too bad. This is usenet - you get advice whether you want it or not. One
would think, in all those many years of experience you claim to have, you
would have learned that.
> Or in other words, RTFP.
I did read it. I'm just not the slightest bit interested in helping you jump
through the hoops you're creating for yourself with your stubborn insistence
on using XHTML. It offers no benefits to you or the end user, and (as you've
discovered) cannot be delivered in a reliably compatible fashion.
sherm--
--
Web Hosting by West Virginians, for West Virginians: http://wv-www.net
Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|