An incredible Web site
Joseph Davidson
Go to www.entropy8.com
NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Davidson Ph.D.
InterGuru -- Internet Training and Consulting
Computer and Network Consulting, Win 95 and Mac
1501 Dublin Drive, Silver Spring, Md. 20902
voice 301 593 4152 ; fax 301 593 2541
jdav...@interguru.com, http://www.interguru.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael S. Manley/RCP
Joseph Davidson writes:
>Go to www.entropy8.com
>
>NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
>and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
Like Hell.
1) She spaced out her company's name in the <TITOLE>, thereby hiding it
from indexing robots. Smooth move there.
2) <FRAMES> without a <NOFRAMES> option.
3) The large graphic doesn't appear. The ALT text is useless.
4) The only link on the page, a non-descript ENTER, is broken.
5) She uses <P><BR> tricks to try to manipulate the vertical spacing of
whatever is on the page.
6) She sets background and text colors without setting the rest. I can,
with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
The only way we can benefit from looking at that page is by avoiding damn
near every construct on it.
And you, sir, need to learn how to specify URLs: http://www.entropy8.com/
Good luck,
M.
--
--- man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu http://iies.ecn.purdue.edu/~manley/ ---
MSM/RCP |BSE 1992: Software Engineering | Quod
101-308 Andrew Place |MA 1995: Creative Writing, Fiction| Scripsi
W. Lafayette IN 47906| You got a problem with that? | Scripsi.
Troy Denkinger
In article <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net>, j...@Radix.Net (Joseph Davidson) wrote:
>Go to www.entropy8.com
>
>NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
>and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
Well, while I don't hate the site as much as Michael seems to, I have to say
that I don't think the site's all that incredible. The simple fact that she
insists that only netscape 2+ can view the site is off-putting enough. I'll
overlook the fact that she has blinking text on her first page. I also have a
general aversion to Javascript. That one must resize one's browser to keep
the site from looking like complete crap is an insult to the browsing public.
For those who are interested mainly in design, this site is probably pretty
good. And, though I appreciate a good design, I think that it is at least as
important to get one's message across without making one's interlocutor jump
through hoops and be annoyed by technical gaming.
Troy Denkinger -- Internet Developer & Rabbit Wrangler
http://www.webcom.com/hrs/
Ben Turner
[ subject URL: http://www.entropy8.com/ ]
man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Manley/RCP) wrote:
>6) She sets background and text colors without setting the rest. I can,
> with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
> she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
Well that's what happens when you mess with the defaults on your
browser unnecessarily. If you turn things like underlining off, you
should *expect* some pages not to look correctly mainly because some
people don't care at all about HTML as much as you do.
>The only way we can benefit from looking at that page is by avoiding damn
>near every construct on it.
Did that make you feel good?
>And you, sir, need to learn how to specify URLs: http://www.entropy8.com/
Gimme a break. Nitpick nitpick.
>http://iies.ecn.purdue.edu/~manley/
I suppose besides the errors in HTML, the difference between your page
and hers is that she gets many more hits. ;) And it DOES look better,
if you use the browser specifications she asks for...
I specifically liked those pages and pages of links you maintain.
That's really useful, I guess. I can tell you're one of the people
who decide they'll throw in nothing questionable if they can't have it
be supported on every single browser... :P I really left your page
with a good impression of what you're really like. Yawn.
B.
_/ \
"Nature has no boundaries to its beauty..." / ^: `\ ./^\
/^\ / % . ;`\/ ;
Ben Turner at Connect On-Line! ,/^ _ `\. . ;^ /' ^
_____ E-Mail: infi...@conline.com _____/.___._.__\_____../'_%_,__^
Homepage: http://www.conline.com/~infinity/ , .____________________
~ ~ . ~. ~ ~ . ~ ~ ; ~. . :~,. ; , ; ~ ,.
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ " . ~ .: : ,, , ~ ;. ; ~
~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ `!' ~ `. . ~,
Billy D'Augustine
Ben Turner wrote:
>
> >6) She sets background and text colors without setting the rest. I can,
> > with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
> > she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
>
> Well that's what happens when you mess with the defaults on your
> browser unnecessarily. If you turn things like underlining off, you
> should *expect* some pages not to look correctly mainly because some
> people don't care at all about HTML as much as you do.
>
Excuse me, but I take this to mean - don't change the defaults? What the
hell is the use of offering different options, if "that's what happens"
when you change them. If I want my text colours MY text colours, and not
overridden, that is my concern, and the author should be aware of that.
--
Billy D'Augustine
az...@worldnet.att.net
All is lost, none have won.
John H. Boyd III
In <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net> j...@Radix.Net (Joseph Davidson) writes:
>Go to www.entropy8.com
>NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
>and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
I looked at it. Here's what I saw:
E N T R O P Y 8 . C O M
introductory message
ENTER
(Spacing as in original)
Needless to say, the ENTER link was broken. Incredible grasp of web
technology indeed!
--
John H. Boyd III bo...@troi.cc.rochester.edu
Dept. of Economics, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA
http://terminus.econ.rochester.edu
http://terminus.econ.rochester.edu/ukiyoe
Christian Wagner
In article <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net>, Joseph Davidson <j...@Radix.Net> wrote:
>Go to www.entropy8.com
>NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
>and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
First page, viewed with Lynx, says "introductory message" (which is not a
link) in an ALT element, and a broken link labled "ENTER". Source is all on
one line, with lots of DOS-like ^M characters scattered around. No <BASE
HREF=> tag, and she uses <a href="./entropy.html"> and the like as
anchors instead of giving a working URL. No <NOFRAMES> section. No way
for a Lynx user to get anywhere from the first page.
<sarcasm>
Very impressive grasp of "web technology".
</sarcasm>
--
And in the dawn, there came a song, | Christian Wagner
Of some sweet lady, singing in his ear, |
Your God has gone, and from now on, |
You'll have to learn to hate the things you fear. | cwa...@io.com
David Fung
I certainly don't disagree with you being able to set you system up as you
like, but if that makes the author's design unreadable I think that that's
YOUR problem, not the author's... I could set my background and text
colors both to black and complain that people aren't acknowledging my
preferences, but I doubt that I'd get a whole lot of sympathy.
David Fung
Bradley Thompson
> She sets background and text colors without setting the rest. I can,
> with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
> she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
I almost always set bgcolor, but I would only change the others if the
bgcolor is something that standard colors would look bad on. It's a
trade-off: accept the user's bgcolor or accept the text colors.
I usually use DDDDFF as my bgcolor, and I believe the standard is DDDDDD.
Not much of a difference, but I prefer the looks of DDDDFF, and it looks
fine with defaults of NS,MSIE,MacMosaic, and Lynx;).
--Brad
_______________________________
/ \
| Bradley Thompson |
| mailto:bra...@conan.ids.net |
| http://www.ids.net/~bradley |
| http://www.ids.net/tollgate |
\_______________________________/
Jason Thomas Hitesman
In article <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net>, Joseph Davidson <j...@Radix.Net> wrote:
>Go to www.entropy8.com
>
>NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
>and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
Well at least those of us with super high-speed connections and unheard of
color depths can learn a lesson in what not to do from it.
I won't argue that she has a grasp (not necessarially incredible though)
of art. But I will say she has NO idea what the web is or how it should
be utilized.
I found this site, slow, difficult to navigate, impossible to read, and
very low on content.
If you have at least a 56k line and want a lesson on how not to make a
web-site please do check it out.
If you want a site which will actually help you make your own site better,
I'd suggest www.w3.org or any of the many validators.
----
Jason Hitesman
webm...@osborn.com http://www.osborn.com
http://oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu/personal/jhitesma.html
Alan J. Flavell
On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Ben Turner wrote:
> [ subject URL: http://www.entropy8.com/ ]
>
> man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Manley/RCP) wrote:
>
> >6) She sets background and text colors without setting the rest.
That is indeed a recipe for trouble.
> > I can,
> > with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
> > she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
>
> Well that's what happens when you mess with the defaults on your
> browser unnecessarily.
Who defines "unnecessarily" here? Someone who is using a monochrome
display, for example, may find it's impossible to read many pages at
all without insisting on their own colours, because the author hasn't
understood the need to have brightness contrasts as well as colour
contrast. My colleague who is extremely colour-blind also finds it
difficult to read many pages for this reason.
> If you turn things like underlining off,
Netscape doesn't honour underlining.
Were you perhaps referring to "configuring the browser's
rendering of links"?
> should *expect* some pages not to look correctly mainly because some
> people don't care at all about HTML as much as you do.
A truth, indeed. But this here is the HTML authoring group, not
the browser-users self-help group. Don't you think it's better that
we discuss better authoring skills, rather than accusing readers of
unnecessary fiddling when in fact what they want to do is take
advantage of the power of HTML i.e render the logical structure in
the way that pleases them best.
If you want to get exact layouts and colours onto a screen, there
are good ways of achieving that, and HTML will be glad to link to
them for you.
> I suppose besides the errors in HTML, the difference between your page
> and hers is that she gets many more hits. ;) And it DOES look better,
> if you use the browser specifications she asks for...
That's not what the WWW is about, though.
best regards
Ben Turner
"Alan J. Flavell" <fla...@mail.cern.ch> wrote:
>On Tue, 2 Jul 1996, Ben Turner wrote:
>> [ subject URL: http://www.entropy8.com/ ]
>>
>> man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Manley/RCP) wrote:
>> > I can,
>> > with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
>> > she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
>>
>> Well that's what happens when you mess with the defaults on your
>> browser unnecessarily.
>Who defines "unnecessarily" here?
<sigh> In his case, he was doing it unnecessarily. Of course there's
that small percentage of people out there who will have problems
viewing the Web... Reminding us of the few exceptions for Web viewing
seems to be a cheap shot, in my opinion.
>> If you turn things like underlining off,
>Netscape doesn't honour underlining.
>Were you perhaps referring to "configuring the browser's
>rendering of links"?
Give me a break. Because you HAD to type that, it took THAT much
longer for me to download this post. Obviously link underlining was
the subject. Do meanings have to be spoonfed to you or can you do a
little assuming on your own?
>> should *expect* some pages not to look correctly mainly because some
>> people don't care at all about HTML as much as you do.
>A truth, indeed. But this here is the HTML authoring group, not
>the browser-users self-help group.
Oh, really? And all this time I thought I was trying to get you to
understand that not everyone is as aware of HTML traps as readers of
THIS group are. Some people criticize beginner HTML writers like they
think they should know better. Why don't they help out instead of
treating them with a condescending tone?
>If you want to get exact layouts and colours onto a screen, there
>are good ways of achieving that, and HTML will be glad to link to
>them for you.
I'm trying to see when I disagreed with you, and unfortunately, I
can't find it. Thanks for playing. :)
>> I suppose besides the errors in HTML, the difference between your page
>> and hers is that she gets many more hits. ;) And it DOES look better,
>> if you use the browser specifications she asks for...
>That's not what the WWW is about, though.
Did I say it was? Did you reply to the right post? Because you seem
to be arguing with someone else.
Her page isn't perfect, but it looks better than his does if you're
using something like Netscape 3.0. <shrug>
Michael S. Manley/RCP
Ben Turner writes:
>Well that's what happens when you mess with the defaults on your
>should *expect* some pages not to look correctly mainly because some
>people don't care at all about HTML as much as you do.
Define unnecessarily.
>>The only way we can benefit from looking at that page is by avoiding damn
>>near every construct on it.
>
>Did that make you feel good?
Yep. Sure did. I see someone doing shoddy work, I point it out. Yours isn't
the only set of prejudices on the Net, pal.
>I suppose besides the errors in HTML, the difference between your page
>and hers is that she gets many more hits. ;) And it DOES look better,
>if you use the browser specifications she asks for...
Whoop-de-fucking-do. My site's a stupid little home page where I store a
few things. I really don't give a damn how many hits it gets. And who is
she to specify my browser settings?
> I can tell you're one of the people
>who decide they'll throw in nothing questionable if they can't have it
>be supported on every single browser... :P
Damn straight.
>I really left your page
>with a good impression of what you're really like. Yawn.
Did that make *you* feel better, visual bigot?
Heavens! Ben Turner is bored by my pages! I am pierced to the marrow with
grief and shall throw myself off a cliff posthaste!
Right.
Michael S. Manley/RCP
Ben Turner writes:
>Her page isn't perfect, but it looks better than his does if you're
>using something like Netscape 3.0. <shrug>
There's that verb, "look" again used in discussing HTML. Tell me, Ben,
what does HTML have to do with visual appearance (aside from anomalies
like <B>, <I>, )? The World Wide Web might be able to deliver visual
content, but where is that intrinsic link between structure and appearance
you seem to believe exists in HTML?
Just asking,
Alan J. Flavell
On Wed, 3 Jul 1996, Ben Turner wrote:
...
> >> man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Manley/RCP) wrote:
>
> >> > I can,
> >> > with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
> >> > she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
>
>
> >Were you perhaps referring to "configuring the browser's
> >rendering of links"?
>
> Give me a break. Because you HAD to type that, it took THAT much
> longer for me to download this post. Obviously link underlining was
> the subject.
The immediate subject was, I thought, the colour of various kinds of text
relative to the background.
> Do meanings have to be spoonfed to you or can you do a
> little assuming on your own?
OK, I've just worked out what you were getting at. But if links are being
displayed in colour C set by the reader, on a background of colour C set
by the author, or vice versa, then it hardly matters whether they are
displayed underlined or not. The issue was particularly in my mind
because I had just been trying to read the Eurostar pages in which some of
the text was displayed in their choice of white, on a background which, at
the time, happened to be our local configuration choice of - white. I was
attending to the issue of colour that the previous poster, MSM, had
raised, and it simply hadn't occurred to me that you thought turning the
underlining of links on or off would help in that situation. Sorry
for the misunderstanding.
Gordon K. Werner
Christian Wagner wrote:
No way
> for a Lynx user to get anywhere from the first page.
>
> <sarcasm>
> Very impressive grasp of "web technology".
> </sarcasm>
>
easy solution...don't use lynx...especially if you want to view web
sites that are about or contain lots of visual information.
Maybe the www was once intended for dull text only information...but
that is not where it is going.
Gordon.
Monika DeMire
Troy Denkinger (tro...@ix.netcom.com) typed:
. .: In article <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net>, j...@Radix.Net (Joseph Davidson) wrote:
. .: >Go to www.entropy8.com
. .: >
. .: >NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
. .: >and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
. .:
. .: Well, while I don't hate the site as much as Michael seems to, I have to say
. .: that I don't think the site's all that incredible. The simple fact that she
. .: insists that only netscape 2+ can view the site is off-putting enough. I'll
. .: overlook the fact that she has blinking text on her first page. I also have a
. .: general aversion to Javascript. That one must resize one's browser to keep
. .: the site from looking like complete crap is an insult to the browsing public.
. .:
. .: For those who are interested mainly in design, this site is probably pretty
. .: good. And, though I appreciate a good design, I think that it is at least as
. .: important to get one's message across without making one's interlocutor jump
. .: through hoops and be annoyed by technical gaming.
. .:
. .:
. .: Troy Denkinger -- Internet Developer & Rabbit Wrangler
. .: http://www.webcom.com/hrs/
The site is interesting... For the whole 5 seconds I stayed. I will
go back when I am at work - we have a few T-3's. That might help.
Monika
Christian Wagner
In article <31DAC1...@one.net>, Gordon K. Werner <fly...@one.net> wrote:
>Christian Wagner wrote:
>No way
>> for a Lynx user to get anywhere from the first page.
>> <sarcasm>
>> Very impressive grasp of "web technology".
>> </sarcasm>
>easy solution...don't use lynx...especially if you want to view web
>sites that are about or contain lots of visual information.
<sarcasm>
Hmmm. I ought to write a web page where all the text is enclosed in
<BLINK> tags. If anyone complains, I'll answer:
"Easy solution. Don't use Netscape, especially if you want quick access
to actual useful information in text format, instead of annoying graphics."
How about I put a 600k imagemap on my homepage, with no text links to any
other location? If anyone complains, I'll answer:
"Easy solution. Get ISDN or a T1."
</sarcasm>
In other words, if someone writes a page that is impossible for a whole
group of browsers to view, one can hardly say that they have a good grasp
of "web technology". The web is about -information access-, not about
pretty pictures, frames, and whiz-bang proprietary extensions.
>Maybe the www was once intended for dull text only information...but
>that is not where it is going.
If you consider text information to be "dull" then I don't think I'm ever
going to need to read any pages that you created.
Jason Thomas Hitesman
In article <4rbqvs$h...@news.unicomp.net>,
>browser unnecessarily. If you turn things like underlining off, you
>should *expect* some pages not to look correctly mainly because some
>people don't care at all about HTML as much as you do.
NO you should always *expect* any page which isn't written well to appear
however it feels that particular day and hour. HTML is not designed to
controll how a page looks. It's designed to "Markup" you information to
make it easier to digest.
>>The only way we can benefit from looking at that page is by avoiding damn
>>near every construct on it.
>
>Did that make you feel good?
Yes it did, I always enjoy a good bad example. I really enjoyed Slate as
a bad example.
>I suppose besides the errors in HTML, the difference between your page
>and hers is that she gets many more hits. ;) And it DOES look better,
>if you use the browser specifications she asks for...
But the user should not be required to set their browser how an author
wants. What about the blind man who's browser reads the text to him.
What about the college student who's school only gives him a dialup with
access to Lynx. What about.....
>I specifically liked those pages and pages of links you maintain.
>That's really useful, I guess. I can tell you're one of the people
>who decide they'll throw in nothing questionable if they can't have it
>be supported on every single browser... :P I really left your page
>with a good impression of what you're really like. Yawn.
Methinks you should take a few minutes (Trust me it dosen't take long) and
read through some of the BASIC information about the web. Step down a try
to find out why and how it was concieved and designed in the first place.
Maby if you completely understood the thinking behind the web you would
appreciate good HTML and not just snazzy new non-HTML tricks some browsers
support.
----
Jason Hitesman
webm...@osborn.com http://www.osborn.com
http://oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu/personal/jhitesma.html
Free your information!
Jason Thomas Hitesman
In article <31DAC1...@one.net>, Gordon K. Werner <fly...@one.net> wrote:
>Christian Wagner wrote:
>
>No way
>> for a Lynx user to get anywhere from the first page.
>>
>> <sarcasm>
>> Very impressive grasp of "web technology".
>> </sarcasm>
>>
>
>easy solution...don't use lynx...especially if you want to view web
>sites that are about or contain lots of visual information.
>
>that is not where it is going.
Perhaps but even with the recomended browser I had to highlight the text
before I was legible.
Besides, the web was never intended for text only. It was intended for
information and content, not design and flash.
Liam Quinn
Bradley Thompson <bra...@conan.ids.net> wrote:
>I almost always set bgcolor, but I would only change the others if the
>bgcolor is something that standard colors would look bad on. It's a
>trade-off: accept the user's bgcolor or accept the text colors.
>I usually use DDDDFF as my bgcolor, and I believe the standard is DDDDDD.
>Not much of a difference, but I prefer the looks of DDDDFF, and it looks
>fine with defaults of NS,MSIE,MacMosaic, and Lynx;).
There are no standard colours in HTML.
Liam Quinn
aqu...@hookup.net
http://www.hookup.net/~aquinn/liam.html
mathew
In article <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net>, Joseph Davidson <j...@Radix.Net> wrote:
>Go to www.entropy8.com
- - page 1 - -
E N T R O P Y 8 . C O M
introductory message
ENTER
- - - -
Well, so far so good, but "enter" is a little bit terse as an
introductory message. Let's go in anyway...
- -
404 Not Found
404 Not Found
The requested URL /entropy.html was not found on this server.
- -
Oh dear.
>NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
>and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
Yeah, right. And I'm the Pope.
mathew
--
me...@pobox.com http://www.pobox.com/~meta/
Wanted: Digital CD copy of "Plunderphonics" CD
think globally - declare locally
Callie
jhit...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Jason Thomas Hitesman) wrote:
>In article <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net>, Joseph Davidson <j...@Radix.Net> wrote:
>>Go to www.entropy8.com
>>She has an incredible grasp of art
>>and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
She has a front page that says:
{introductory image} and a link that says "enter:
not promising.
The intro.gif gave me a large blank page, and when I tried to load it
seperately I got a 404 not found error. Hardly an incredible grasp of
the basics, let alone Web technology. What I can't access I can't
benefit from.
>I found this site, slow, difficult to navigate, impossible to read, and
>very low on content.
Totally agree ... but I'd say impossible to navigate, and found only
three words to actually read.
Here's the source - frames with no alternate will severely limit the
numbers who benefit from this marvel of advanced design, thank your
favorite diety.
<html>
<head>
<META NAME="description" CONTENT="Artistic webspace exploring many
modes of expression. Design services available.">
<META NAME="keywords" CONTENT="entropy chaos art images visuals
hallucinations family project disease manifesto surrealism thought
body brain creation gif89 animation sketchbooks satan journals angst
history evolution evil quotations frankenstein corpses immortallity
entropy8 infinity entropy8.com">
<TITLE>E N T R O P Y 8 . C O M</Title>
</head><frameset rows="35,*"><frame src="intro_top.html" marginwidth=0
marginheight=0 noresize scrolling="no" name="intro_top"><frame
src="wof.html" marginwidth=0 marginheight=0
name="intro_bottom"></frameset></frameset><BODY bgcolor="000000"
text="ffffff"><center><p><br><p><br><p><br><p><br><IMG
SRC="./images/intro.gif" ALT="introductory message" ALIGN=TOP
WIDTH="405" HEIGHT="436" BORDER="0"><p><A HREF="./entropy.html"
TARGET="_top">ENTER</a></center></BODY></HTML>
Callie
Cal...@writepage.com | Captain, HTML Police
http://www.writepage.com | Keeper of the HTML Flame
Christian Wagner
In article <31DC5B...@dvp.com.au>,
Andrew Davison <and...@dvp.com.au> wrote:
>Christian Wagner wrote:
>> In article <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net>, Joseph Davidson > First page, viewed with Lynx, says "introductory message" (which is not a
>> link) in an ALT element, and a broken link labled "ENTER". Source is all on
>> one line, with lots of DOS-like ^M characters scattered around. No <BASE
>> HREF=> tag, and she uses <a href="./entropy.html"> and the like as
>> for a Lynx user to get anywhere from the first page.
>> <sarcasm>
>> Very impressive grasp of "web technology".
>> </sarcasm>
>Monet Exhibition you'd complain as well.
>It's supposed to be *ART*. To be appreciated visually. A graphical
>browser seems a good tool for displaying visual imagery IMHO.
I'm not complaing that I couldn't see the pictures. I didn't -expect- to
be able to see the pictures. I -expected- to be able to at the very least
navigate the site for whatever text was present. I -expected- to find
decent HTML source. I -expected- the links to work properly. A browser
without frames capability would be in the same boat as Lynx users.
I suppose that these days, one can get away with all sorts of terrible
design decisions. All you have to say is, "It's ART!", and it doesn't
matter that you've broken half (if not all) the rules for descent HTML,
put dark blue text over black background, or made your pages into an
inpenetrable web of nested frames...
Tero Paananen
>I certainly don't disagree with you being able to set you system up as you
>like, but if that makes the author's design unreadable I think that that's
>YOUR problem, not the author's...
Wow!
I assume then that you design your WWW pages for yourself as an author
and not for the user??
Wonderful...
>David Fung
-TPP
Andrew Davison
Alan J. Flavell
On Fri, 5 Jul 1996, Andrew Davison wrote:
> I suppose if you were blind and went to an Art Gallery displaying a
> Monet Exhibition you'd complain as well.
Monet - or any other painter for that matter - doesn't usually employ
the portable hypertext markup language for making their pictures.
> It's supposed to be *ART*. To be appreciated visually. A graphical
> browser seems a good tool for displaying visual imagery IMHO.
Certainly. However, the c.i.w.authoring.html group isn't the
place to discuss the finer points of visual art. When someone
reviews a WWW page here, we tend to assess its usage of HTML. If
you want to assess its artistic merit, or indeed its painting techniques,
you should look for an appropriate usenet group for that topic first.
best regards
Chris Gray
In article <31DC5B...@dvp.com.au>, Andrew Davison <and...@dvp.com.au> writes:
>
>It's supposed to be *ART*. To be appreciated visually.
>
Reminds me of a cartoon in _Punch_ magazine sometime in the 70's.
A man in overalls is contemplating a contorted metal object in an
art gallery and saying to himself,
"It may be art but it's bloody poor welding".
--
__________________________________________________________________________
Chris Gray Chris...@bcs.org.uk Compuserve: 100065,2102
http://columbia.digiweb.com/kiffer/chris_gray/
Note: The "From:" address in the header is wrong. Use the "Reply to:".
__________________________________________________________________________
Andrew DeLancey
Andrew Davison (and...@dvp.com.au) wrote:
> I suppose if you were blind and went to an Art Gallery displaying a
> Monet Exhibition you'd complain as well.
> It's supposed to be *ART*. To be appreciated visually. A graphical
> browser seems a good tool for displaying visual imagery IMHO.
The site was hyped as a great example of web authoring, not as just
a nice art gallery. And it was announced in an HTML authoring group,
not in some digital art group.
Too bad it isn't a good example of *either* type of website. :)
Andrew
Reinier Post
>easy solution...don't use lynx...especially if you want to view web
>sites that are about or contain lots of visual information.
Look, 'visual information' is a painting, or a map, or a course on writing
mathematical formulas, or a picture of someone's head. Most of the times,
I visit sites trying to obtain information that is non-visual in nature:
the list of movies running this week, someone's phone number, a recipe,
the latest release of a software package.
Very few of the images in sites are part of the information I'm out
to find there. Most often, they just serve to present the information in
a pleasing way. It's *easy* for a site designer to allow me to skip all that
and only switch it on when I want to. This will save me between 10% and 99%
of the time I need to browse the site. In a museum, I use my time to watch
just the pictures I choose to see. In the WebLouvre, I do the same. In
magazines, I'll skip the dull pages - usually the pages with text about
uninteresting topics, or uninteresting images. On the Web, text is easy
to skip, but images take up a lot of time, unless the sites are designed to
be usable with image loading disabled, and that's easy to do.
>Maybe the www was once intended for dull text only information...but
>that is not where it is going.
The WWW is rapidly establishing itself as a medium for information
dissemination. As a medium for interactive TV or interactive
glossy magazines, its future is much more uncertain.
>Gordon.
Reinier
Padraig Coogan
Ben Turner wrote (in response to Flavell):
> I'm trying to see when I disagreed with you, and unfortunately, I
> can't find it. Thanks for playing. :)
He does it all the time :-)
Alan Barasch
John H. Boyd III wrote:
>
> In <4rbddb$l...@news1.radix.net> j...@Radix.Net (Joseph Davidson) writes:
>
> >Go to www.entropy8.com
>
> >NOTE: I have no relation to the author. She has an incredible grasp of art
> >and Web technology and we all can benefit fromm looking at it.
>
>
> E N T R O P Y 8 . C O M
>
>
> ENTER
>
> (Spacing as in original)
>
> Needless to say, the ENTER link was broken. Incredible grasp of web
> technology indeed!
>
> --
> John H. Boyd III bo...@troi.cc.rochester.edu
> Dept. of Economics, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627, USA
> http://terminus.econ.rochester.edu
> http://terminus.econ.rochester.edu/ukiyoe
That's awesome! I turned 3 friends on to it already.
Alan Barasch
al...@i1.net
http://www.i1.net/~alanb
Peter Saxton
On Tue, 02 Jul 1996 18:48:08 GMT, infi...@conline.com (Ben Turner)
wrote:
>[ subject URL: http://www.entropy8.com/ ]
>
>man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Manley/RCP) wrote:
>
>>And you, sir, need to learn how to specify URLs: http://www.entropy8.com/
>
>Gimme a break. Nitpick nitpick.
>
It's not nitpicking.
I have a newsreader that automatically finds URL's but the one that
was quoted wasn't valid and so has to be typed in full.
Peter
Peter Saxton, from London
pe...@psaxton.demon.co.uk
Laura®
>Like Hell.
>
>1) She spaced out her company's name in the <TITOLE>, thereby hiding it
> from indexing robots. Smooth move there.
>2) <FRAMES> without a <NOFRAMES> option.
>3) The large graphic doesn't appear. The ALT text is useless.
>4) The only link on the page, a non-descript ENTER, is broken.
>5) She uses <P><BR> tricks to try to manipulate the vertical spacing of
> whatever is on the page.
>6) She sets background and text colors without setting the rest. I can,
> with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
> she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
>
>The only way we can benefit from looking at that page is by avoiding damn
>near every construct on it.
>
>And you, sir, need to learn how to specify URLs: http://www.entropy8.com/
>
>Good luck,
>
> M.
>
>
>--
>--- man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu http://iies.ecn.purdue.edu/~manley/ ---
>MSM/RCP |BSE 1992: Software Engineering | Quod
>101-308 Andrew Place |MA 1995: Creative Writing, Fiction| Scripsi
>W. Lafayette IN 47906| You got a problem with that? | Scripsi.
Nonetheless,
I think it was beautifully and tastefully done,
Speedo
Michael Macrone
In article <4rpfjf$g...@ratty.wolfe.net>, la...@spl.org (Laura®) wrote:
+ Nonetheless,
+ I think it was beautifully and tastefully done,
+
+ Speedo
It's terrific. Not entirely to my taste, but fun, interesting, and
playful. It's true that some of the HTML is careless and/or abnormal, but
she got the whole thing to work by hacking around.
Good old validated HTML is nice, but in this case only as a clean-up
operation. People have always bent rules to do something new and exciting,
and others have always complained that avant-garde stuff is exclusionary.
Her HTML is going to break some browsers. So what? If you don't have a TV,
then you probably weren't all that interested in the show.
Michael
@tlas
--
mac...@well.com * mac...@ccnet.com
http://www.well.com/user/macrone/
Eugene Moon
Ben Turner <infi...@conline.com> wrote:
>
>man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Manley/RCP) wrote:
>>6) She sets background and text colors without setting the rest. I can,
>> with a click of the mouse, make any links on her page invisible. If
>> she's going to force colors, she'd best force them all.
>
>Well that's what happens when you mess with the defaults on your
>browser unnecessarily. If you turn things like underlining off, you
>should *expect* some pages not to look correctly mainly because some
>people don't care at all about HTML as much as you do.
I checked this page out using Netscape 2.02 (which I believe
is one of the browsers supported by this page) and I left text
color choices up to the author of the page. You know what?
Some of the text is STILL hard to read. That, IMHO, is poor
execution on the part of the author.
What really cracks me up though is, after I went to the trouble
of resizing my browser window to the specified width, text still
disappeared off the right edge of the window. Bug in the browser?
Maybe, since the offending text was rendered using <FONT TEXT="+2">
which AFAIK is supported only by Netscape. Or maybe it's
because these pages were designed for Netscape 2.0+ for Mac
and I'm stuck on a lowly PC (well, not REALLY stuck, but I'm
not going to sacrifice my Telnet window to use a notoriously
crash-prone browser to view some "cool web page").
>>The only way we can benefit from looking at that page is by avoiding damn
>>near every construct on it.
Well, I wouldn't go quite THAT far, but I've seen much better
pages (ones that didn't sacrifice readability to the god
called "art").
>>And you, sir, need to learn how to specify URLs: http://www.entropy8.com/
>Gimme a break. Nitpick nitpick.
Ehhhhh, even if your newsreader allows following URLs, picking
on someone for an improperly specified URL really is nitpicking.
[Lame personal attack by ...
> Ben Turner at Connect On-Line! ,/^ _ `\. . ;^ /' ^
... deleted]
Another thing that cracked me up about this page is that
it crashed Netscape the first time I tried to access it
(though it loaded up just fine the other three times I
tried it). Another one of those irreproducible bugs
(though it might have something to do with the fact that
I'm running Korean Windows 3.1). ;)
And as long as we're on the subject of poorly done web
pages, here's another one (also of an artsy nature):
** Anime Favorites ************* Eugene Moon ************** VG Favorites *
... and the .sig is TOAST!
**************************************************************************
Peter Saxton
On Sun, 07 Jul 1996 18:37:26 -0700, mac...@well.com (Michael Macrone)
wrote:
>Her HTML is going to break some browsers. So what? If you don't have a TV,
>then you probably weren't all that interested in the show.
>
I don't understand why someone would put content on the Web and not
care if some people can't view it. I'm not saying you should make a
lot more effort for just a few people but if you can make it more
accessible with a little thought I would think it should be worth the
effort.
Sean Dotson
well forget all the people who like to use MSIE 3.0 b1
since it does not support window.open the nav menu is lost.
And please.... I have a FAST ISDN connection and it still took a full
35-40 secs to fully load the opening page. If i had a slower
connection I wouldn't stick around to see what it was about. Lose a
few of the graphics....
Very pretty though...
------------------------------------------------
Sean Dotson --Mercury Productions Inc.
sdo...@mpinc.com --Digital Design and
http://www.mpinc.com --Distribution
------------------------------------------------
Meredith Foster
ICK.
First rule of graphic design: Graphics should enhance the message, not
obliterate it. Once the message is gone, the graphics are worthless.
Jack
[Regarding http://www.entropy8.com/]
I've read enough complaints about the coding of this site. This site is an
art site - an awesome one at that. I appreciate good code as much as anyone
but this is not the type of site that should be sacrificing expression for
compatibility. Sure, if this was meant to sell a product or convey important
information then it would be understandable to place more care in the
conformity of the code - but this site is not for either of these two purposes.
Awesome art.
-jack
Adam Berns
I kind of liked it. It took a little long to load, but we are tols so. I
which that opening image stayed longer. It's a nice LOOKING web page (I
did not go into depth with it however)
In article <4s4n60$4...@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>,
ja...@prc-wwwdevel.idap.indiana.edu (Jack) wrote:
--
______________________________________________________
Dolphinative Images Web site under development )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(
Adam Berns ( http://www.dolphinative.com )
ad...@dolphinative.com ) dol...@dolphinative.com (
( 916.242.1594 (voice) )
) 916.242.1597 (fax) (
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
on the leading edge of creative imaging
Jason Thomas Hitesman
In article <4s4n60$4...@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu>,
Jack <ja...@prc-wwwdevel.idap.indiana.edu> wrote:
>[Regarding http://www.entropy8.com/]
>
>I've read enough complaints about the coding of this site. This site is an
>art site - an awesome one at that. I appreciate good code as much as anyone
>but this is not the type of site that should be sacrificing expression for
>compatibility. Sure, if this was meant to sell a product or convey important
>information then it would be understandable to place more care in the
>conformity of the code - but this site is not for either of these two purposes.
Actually as far as I can tell it is trying to sell something. Apparantly
the author claims to be a Graphics Designer of some sorts.
However, I can't see how any Graphic Designer worth anything would put
small uncontrasty text over a needlessly busy background. To read any
text at all on this site I had to highlight it so the bacground woulen't
show.
>Awesome art.
This is debatable as well, while there are a few interesting works
available, finding them is next to impossible.
I won't even go into why this site shoulden't even be discussed in a HTML
group since it's so loosly based on true HTML.
Mike Zorn
In <Pine.SUN.3.93.960702...@conan.ids.net> Bradley Thompson <bra...@conan.ids.net> writes:
[. . .]
>I usually use DDDDFF as my bgcolor, and I believe the standard is DDDDDD.
>Not much of a difference, but I prefer the looks of DDDDFF, and it looks
>fine with defaults of NS,MSIE,MacMosaic, and Lynx;).
ffffe0 turns out to be really good. I forget where I saw that.
It was in a discussion of background and link colors. (He advises
against using black or starry backgrounds, but there are cases where
it works quite well - just don't make text or alink &c black.)
The other advice is to leave the xLINK values alone, or at least
keep LINK brighter than VLINK.
Mike Zorn oz...@kaiwan.com
http://www.kaiwan.com/~ozma/
Mike Zorn
In <Dtyux...@boss.cs.ohiou.edu> jhit...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Jason Thomas Hitesman) writes:
[. . . everything relevant omitted . . .]
>Yes it did, I always enjoy a good bad example. I really enjoyed Slate as
>a bad example.
I saw Slate. I thought it is quite well done - except that they
took a print magazine, lifted it up and laid it down on the Web.
OK, that, and the strange extension on their html files: .adb or
some such? I suppose, though, that Microsoft has always been one to
strike out in its own,
Well, then there's the "download it and look at it in Word" angle.
Almost any nontrivial document gets lit up with things spellcheck
doesn't recognize.
I did learn a lot about tables, though, from it.
Mike Zorn
>There are no standard colours in HTML.
Have you tried something like
<FONT COLOR="blue">
or
<BODY BGCOLOR="aqua">
Mike Zorn
In <4rj717$9...@crcnis3.unl.edu> dela...@herbie.unl.edu (Andrew DeLancey) writes:
>Andrew Davison (and...@dvp.com.au) wrote:
>Too bad it isn't a good example of *either* type of website. :)
The original poster did say "incredible". It sounds as though it
qualifies quite handily.
Mike Zorn
In <4rbifu$e...@mozo.cc.purdue.edu> man...@iies.ecn.purdue.edu (Michael S. Manley/RCP) writes:
[... everything relevant omitted ...]
>And you, sir, need to learn how to specify URLs: http://www.entropy8.com/
Actually, I would have typed .entropy8.com
I think most of us here know about the http: part - at least my
Netscape does. And the '/'s. When I use lynx I know I have to remind
it about that. Netscape even [sometimes] knows about the 'www' and
'com' parts. I tried finding 'discovery.com' (leaving off the www, as
usual), without success. So I tried just 'discovery'; that worked just
fine.
To be honest, typing 'www.' is such a trivial effort, I do it anyway.
Mike Zorn
In <macrone-0707...@news.sirius.com> mac...@well.com (Michael Macrone) writes:
>In article <4rpfjf$g...@ratty.wolfe.net>, la...@spl.org (Laura®) wrote:
>Her HTML is going to break some browsers. So what? If you don't have a TV,
>then you probably weren't all that interested in the show.
As a scholar once said, "When you learn to speak good HTML, who
are you going to speak it to?"
Liam Quinn
oz...@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (Mike Zorn) wrote:
>In <4rfdus$g...@nic.wat.hookup.net> aqu...@hookup.net (Liam Quinn) writes:
>>There are no standard colours in HTML.
> Have you tried something like
><FONT COLOR="blue">
> or
><BODY BGCOLOR="aqua">
I think you misunderstood my posting. My point was that there is no
"standard" for colours which browsers use for background, text, and
links. Blue and aqua are not standard colours either.
Liam Quinn
aqu...@hookup.net
http://www.hookup.net/~aquinn/liam.html
DJ Delorie
In article <1996Jul14.1...@pinet.aip.org> bos...@pinet.aip.org (jonathan_boswell) writes:
> : it about that. Netscape even [sometimes] knows about the 'www' and
> : 'com' parts. I tried finding 'discovery.com' (leaving off the www, as
> : usual), without success. So I tried just 'discovery'; that worked just
> : fine.
>
> Now that's really interesting, and if you figure out what's happening,
> you'll know more than 99% of all web authors out there. Basically your
> TCP/IP software (not necessarily Netscape) is attempting to make sense
> out of domain names. After all, it has to evaluate the darn text name
> right-to-left in order eventually to get the actual IP address.
Actually, Netscape touted this feature in their release notes a while
back. If you just type the host name, like these:
www.delorie.com
ftp.delorie.com
gopher.delorie.com
wais.delorie.com
(etc)
It figures out the transport (http://, ftp://, etc) based on the first
part of the machine name. Further, if you just type the middle part:
delorie
yahoo
netscape
lycos
(etc)
It then assumes http://www.<whatever>.com/
Note that NO domain resolution software does anything to try to
"guess" what you meant, except to try a default domain (like if I type
"foo" it will try "foo.delorie.com" and then just "foo" because my
default domain is delorie.com).
Does this mean I know more than 99% of the web authors out there, or
just that only 1% of the web authors actually read the documentation
that comes with the browsers?
jonathan_boswell
oz...@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (Mike Zorn) writes:
: I think most of us here know about the http: part - at least my
: Netscape does. And the '/'s. When I use lynx I know I have to remind
Actually, the latest Lynx V2.5 (aka Lynx2.4-FM) will accept domain names
without a scheme ahead of them, and it assumes you mean http:// by default.
: it about that. Netscape even [sometimes] knows about the 'www' and
: 'com' parts. I tried finding 'discovery.com' (leaving off the www, as
: usual), without success. So I tried just 'discovery'; that worked just
: fine.
Now that's really interesting, and if you figure out what's happening,
you'll know more than 99% of all web authors out there. Basically your
TCP/IP software (not necessarily Netscape) is attempting to make sense
out of domain names. After all, it has to evaluate the darn text name
right-to-left in order eventually to get the actual IP address.
So, if you simply specify a server name, most IP software will implicitly
add your own domain to it, in order to make sense out of it. So, in your
example of "discovery.com", leaving off the ".com" will work for you since
your ISP is in the ".com" domain. But it of course would NOT work for me
since I'm in the ".org" domain. There are obvious potential pitfalls if
you do whacky things with multi-part domain names. So, if you really truly
want to AVOID this automatic attempt by your machine to make a sensible
domain name for you, add the final dot to all your addresses, like so
Note that the final "dot" is not my sentence punctuation!
As for your leaving off the "www." portion of the address, I think this
is also not Netscape's doing, but probably an alias set up by the Discovery
Channel which points to www.discovery.com if you happen to leave this part
off. But I'm not sure about that. I recommend nslookup or some such utility
to find out what "discovery.com" really points to, vis a vis "www.discovery.com".
Jonathan Boswell
_________________________________________________________________
Just say "No" to NCC and MS greed-driven proprietary markup tags.
They're invented for one purpose, and that is to gain market share
by breaking competitor's browsers. After all, how could you
differentiate your product if it simply follows the same standards
everybody else does? Web authors have control of this process,
however. If none of us use proprietary markup, thereby making
our pages accessible to everyone, then there will be no reason
to shell out money to NCC or MS or download the latest buggy beta.
Proprietary markup is exclusionary BY DESIGN. Don't use it.
Liam Quinn
bos...@pinet.aip.org (jonathan_boswell) wrote:
[Followups redirected to comp.infosystems.www.browsers.misc.]
>oz...@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (Mike Zorn) writes:
>: Netscape even [sometimes] knows about the 'www' and
>: 'com' parts. I tried finding 'discovery.com' (leaving off the www, as
>: usual), without success. So I tried just 'discovery'; that worked just
>: fine.
>Now that's really interesting, and if you figure out what's happening,
>you'll know more than 99% of all web authors out there. Basically your
>TCP/IP software (not necessarily Netscape) is attempting to make sense
>out of domain names. After all, it has to evaluate the darn text name
>right-to-left in order eventually to get the actual IP address.
>So, if you simply specify a server name, most IP software will implicitly
>add your own domain to it, in order to make sense out of it. So, in your
>example of "discovery.com", leaving off the ".com" will work for you since
>your ISP is in the ".com" domain. But it of course would NOT work for me
>since I'm in the ".org" domain.
No, it's Netscape. I can type "yahoo" or "nba" and Netscape will
assume "http://www.yahoo.com/" and "http://www.nba.com/" when it
realizes it can't handle "yahoo" or "nba" otherwise. This is
apparently a "feature" of Netscape 2.0+, though I'm not sure it's been
documented. (I do remember reading about it in a browsers newsgroup
shortly after Netscape 2.0 came out in beta.) Note that I'm in the
".net" domain, not the ".com" domain.
John Hellstrom
>part of the machine name. Further, if you just type the middle part:
>
> delorie
> yahoo
> netscape
> lycos
> (etc)
>
>It then assumes http://www.<whatever>.com/
Using a proxy server, if I type "test", netscape displays "http://test/",
and I get an error page from the proxy server telling me there is no DNS
entry for test.anu.edu.au.
I have "No proxy on:" set to "anu.edu.au", but this doesn't stop netscape
going through the proxy server if I just type "test" - I guess you'd need
a "no proxy on default domain" checkbox in the proxy options.
If I turn the proxy server option off, typing "test" gets me
http://www.test.com/, and an error dialog telling me there is no DNS entry
for www.test.com
Whats this got to do with html? Oops. Actually, one or two of the local
servers here used to point to each other with markup like <A
HREF="http://online/">, which was fine for local browsers if they used the
default domain, but not so good for netscape without the proxy server..
John.
Jason Thomas Hitesman
In article <4sa27a$f...@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com>,
Mike Zorn <oz...@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com> wrote:
>In <Dtyux...@boss.cs.ohiou.edu> jhit...@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Jason Thomas Hitesman) writes:
>
> [. . . everything relevant omitted . . .]
>>Yes it did, I always enjoy a good bad example. I really enjoyed Slate as
>>a bad example.
> OK, that, and the strange extension on their html files: .adb or
>some such? I suppose, though, that Microsoft has always been one to
>strike out in its own,
Well the fact that they didn't even try to call them HTML files only made
it slightly more tolerable to me. Since you appear to have taken a look
at the RAW "adb or mhtml" or whatever markup language it claims to be
written in did you notice that among other things they but <HEAD> inside
of <BODY>!
I espically liked the article about why Microsoft isn't evil, it's really
great to see big business defend themselves in their own forum. So much
for unbiased reporting.
Glyn Hanton
Laura (la...@spl.org) scribbled franticaly:
: >5) She uses <P><BR> tricks to try to manipulate the vertical spacing of
: > whatever is on the page.
What's so awful about that. I suppose an empty <P> container is
technicaly incorrect, but I don't really see it as a big deal, It
doesn't stop anyone getting at any of the information, and I'm not
aware that this would break any browers.
Note, I'm not commenting on the page in question, as I couldn't
actually get hold of it, just asking for comment about 'abusing'
<P> and <BR> tags in this fashion.
--
Descartes thought an animal, _ .
That couldn't talk, /##.,.##\ Glyn Hanton
Couldn't think, or so he taught, #### ###### http://www.herts.ac.uk/cc/glyn/
But I surmise, ###@ @### g.ha...@herts.ac.uk
My cat thinks otherwise. ##/ v \##
` ~ '
John Pozadzides
On 15 Jul 1996 16:19:56 GMT, ccs...@herts.ac.uk (Glyn Hanton) wrote:
>Laura (la...@spl.org) scribbled franticaly:
>
>: >5) She uses <P><BR> tricks to try to manipulate the vertical spacing of
>: > whatever is on the page.
>
>What's so awful about that. I suppose an empty <P> container is
>technicaly incorrect, but I don't really see it as a big deal, It
>doesn't stop anyone getting at any of the information, and I'm not
>aware that this would break any browers.
>
>Note, I'm not commenting on the page in question, as I couldn't
>actually get hold of it, just asking for comment about 'abusing'
><P> and <BR> tags in this fashion.
Technically, there is nothing wrong with putting 500 line breaks in a page.
You could also include 50 table, 300 graphics and any other HTML tags you
want.
Now if we are going to talk about good design, that is a matter of taste.
And we will not all be happy with the same thing- EVER! :-)
John
jonathan_boswell
d...@delorie.com (DJ Delorie) writes:
: > TCP/IP software (not necessarily Netscape) is attempting to make sense
: > out of domain names. After all, it has to evaluate the darn text name
: > right-to-left in order eventually to get the actual IP address.
: Actually, Netscape touted this feature in their release notes a while
: back. If you just type the host name, like these:
I see that I was only half right, in that "discovery.com" does not exist
as a domain name, so Netscape is apparently trying to guess the "www."
part for you. However, as far as most TCP/IP packages I've seen, they do
indeed tack on your own host's domain name, if you happen to leave it off.
However, what I'm used to are workstations and above, so perhaps this
common feature on big computers is unavailable on PCs.
: Note that NO domain resolution software does anything to try to
: "guess" what you meant, except to try a default domain (like if I type
That is precisely what I meant by "guessing", since it cannot possibly
know that you wanted a server in your own domain, and since there are
a variable number of names in between the dots. Try the final dot to
inhibit this. Oh, pardon me. You have only PC TCP/IP stacks, which
may not provide this function.
I guess we can, however, agree to provide complete domain names, unless
you're among the "Buy Netscape or Leave" crowd.
: Does this mean I know more than 99% of the web authors out there, or
: just that only 1% of the web authors actually read the documentation
: that comes with the browsers?
Sorry about the gratuitous 99% comment. I had just gotten through my
hundredth brain-dead white-space injection recommendation on this newsgroup.
There are a few geniuses around here who still believe in standards and
platform independence. But you've got to admit that most of the posts
betray a profound ignorance of HTML, and a ready willingness to exclude
people merely because they don't own the web author's favorite browser
of the week.
And knowledge of the rooted domain name (one with the final dot) is quite
rare indeed.
Jonathan Boswell
David L. Wasylenko
HEY! Code is Code
-
This is a _C_O_O_L_ site!
=======
If we all had be bandwidth we really would LIKE to have, this site would
be even BETTER! Give it a year or two. When we all get cable modems,
we are gonna expect stuff like this site and more!
-
--
______ ______ _ -----Business Home Page:------ ___ __ _
(_____ \ (_____ \ (_) http://www.pick.com ( / \ o / ( / /
_____) ) _____) ) _ -----Personal Home Page:------ / / __, _ ,_, __/ / / /
| ____/ | ____/ | | http://www.inlink.com/~dlw (/\_/ (_/(_/ |/ (_(_/_ (_/_/ o
| | | | | | -- Email David L. Wasylenko --
|_| |_| |_| mailto:d...@inlink.com
Allan Mikkelsen
On 13 Jul 1996 23:02:31 -0700, oz...@kaiwan009.kaiwan.com (Mike Zorn)
wrote:
>In <4rfdus$g...@nic.wat.hookup.net> aqu...@hookup.net (Liam Quinn) writes:
>>There are no standard colours in HTML.
> Have you tried something like
><FONT COLOR="blue">
> or
><BODY BGCOLOR="aqua">
Yep! Did nothing for me on the mono terminal I looked at it on.
Also, the fact that my personal browser recognises
<TELL THE USER HE IS AN IDIOT>
does not mean that the statement is part of HTML.
>Mike Zorn oz...@kaiwan.com
> http://www.kaiwan.com/~ozma/
---------------------------------------------------------------
Allan Mikkelsen amik...@melbpc.org.au
Melbourne PC User Group