Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
more problems with target blank
0 views
Skip to first unread message
thedarkman
Jan 18, 2012, 7:34:20 AM1/18/12
to
On my main site
http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/
these links don't jump to wear I want them to go; the first should
jump to note 10; the second should jump to the photo of Muhammad Ali.
They work all right without the target_blank. C
<a href="id_harbinger_notes.html#n10" target="_blank">
<a href="image-gallery.html#tahagreat" target="_blank">
regarding doc type and css; I have actually looked at this; I
certainly don't want to use one css file to control my entire site, so
I suppose I could put one in the header of each file, but I don't see
the point.
I rarely use more than 3 colours, and what would it enable me to
remove?
I also don't see the point of inserting DOC type in a file. After all,
the version of HTML you use is determined solely by the code you
write. I have no doubt they'll bring out further versions.
As to my being a right wing loon, if you prefer plausible liberals who
will smile to your face then lie with utter sincerity, here is Clive
Stafford Smith
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eU3Ni8dS7oE
and here is the ugly truth brought to you by the man who prefers
substance to style every time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fdf9Bhv6lsE
http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/
these links don't jump to wear I want them to go; the first should
jump to note 10; the second should jump to the photo of Muhammad Ali.
They work all right without the target_blank. C
<a href="id_harbinger_notes.html#n10" target="_blank">
<a href="image-gallery.html#tahagreat" target="_blank">
regarding doc type and css; I have actually looked at this; I
certainly don't want to use one css file to control my entire site, so
I suppose I could put one in the header of each file, but I don't see
the point.
I rarely use more than 3 colours, and what would it enable me to
remove?
I also don't see the point of inserting DOC type in a file. After all,
the version of HTML you use is determined solely by the code you
write. I have no doubt they'll bring out further versions.
As to my being a right wing loon, if you prefer plausible liberals who
will smile to your face then lie with utter sincerity, here is Clive
Stafford Smith
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eU3Ni8dS7oE
and here is the ugly truth brought to you by the man who prefers
substance to style every time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fdf9Bhv6lsE
Captain Paralytic
Jan 18, 2012, 7:49:11 AM1/18/12
to
On Jan 18, 12:34 pm, thedarkman <A_Ba...@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> wrote:
> On my main site
>
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/
>
> these links don't jump to wear I want them to go;
I don't think you want to wear them, they certainly wouldn't keep you
> On my main site
>
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/
>
> these links don't jump to wear I want them to go;
warm.
Doug Miller
Jan 18, 2012, 8:16:14 AM1/18/12
to
thedarkman <A_B...@ABaron.Demon.Co.UK> wrote in news:d749f643-33f7-4d84-bb68-
4dfb89...@g41g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
> On my main site
>
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/
>
> these links don't jump to wear I want them to go; the first should
> jump to note 10; the second should jump to the photo of Muhammad Ali.
>
> They work all right without the target_blank. C
>
> <a href="id_harbinger_notes.html#n10" target="_blank">
>
> <a href="image-gallery.html#tahagreat" target="_blank">
The URL you gave above doesn't contain either of those links; the only hyperlinks it contains are
these:
<A HREF="ITMA.html">Click Here For HomePage</A>
<A HREF="ITMA.html#HomePageIndex">Click Here For Site Index</A>
If you would provide the correct URL, someone might be able to help you.
>
> regarding doc type and css; I have actually looked at this; I
> certainly don't want to use one css file to control my entire site, so
> I suppose I could put one in the header of each file, but I don't see
> the point.
CSS makes it easier to maintain a consistent look and feel to your site, and dramatically reduces
the amount of HTML you need to write in each page to format it the way you want it. It also
dramatically reduces the likelihood of coding errors that foul up the format, such as those which
have so bedeviled you on your limericks page.
The choices are not between "one CSS file to control [the] entire site" and "one in the header of
each file". Rather, the more common practice is to use one master CSS file as a formatting template
for the entire site -- which is referenced by URL in each individual page, rather than being
incorporated in toto -- and making small tweaks to that in the <head> sections of the individual
documents if and as needed.
> I rarely use more than 3 colours, and what would it enable me to
> remove?
It would enable you to remove nearly all of the formatting tags that so litter your pages. This in turn
means that your pages would load faster, but the biggest advantages are:
a) it ensures consistency
b) it reduces the error rate
c) it enables changing the appearance of the entire site by altering the style sheet, in one place in
one file, instead of changing formatting tags in multiple places in multiple files.
Here's one specific example of what it would enable you to remove. Putting only these entries in a
style sheet
body {
color: #000000;
}
h2 {
text-align:center;
color: #FF0000;
}
would enable you to change ALL of your second-level headings throughout a document from this
</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#FF0000">
<center><h2>Heading Text</h2></center></FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">
to this:
<h2>Heading Text</h2>
If you later decide you want those headings to be blue instead of red, or the body text fuchsia
instead of black, all you need do is to change the color: attribute[s] in the style sheet. One change in
one place is instantly propagated across the entirety of every document that uses that style sheet.
> I also don't see the point of inserting DOC type in a file.
To ensure consistent rendering of your pages from one browser to the next. With no DOCTYPE, the
browser will render your page in quirks mode, which may or may not give the appearance you wish.
There's a reasonably good overview here:
http://webdesign.about.com/od/dtds/a/aa071007.htm
Having a proper DOCTYPE definition in your web documents also means that it will be easier for
you to find your coding errors when you validate your pages, because the error messages resulting
from invalid HTML will not be mixed in with error messages resulting from a missing DOCTYPE.
Please note the phrase "*proper* DOCTYPE". :-)
>After all,
> the version of HTML you use is determined solely by the code you
> write. I have no doubt they'll bring out further versions.
Google "quirks mode".
4dfb89...@g41g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
> On my main site
>
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/
>
> these links don't jump to wear I want them to go; the first should
> jump to note 10; the second should jump to the photo of Muhammad Ali.
>
> They work all right without the target_blank. C
>
> <a href="id_harbinger_notes.html#n10" target="_blank">
>
> <a href="image-gallery.html#tahagreat" target="_blank">
these:
<A HREF="ITMA.html">Click Here For HomePage</A>
<A HREF="ITMA.html#HomePageIndex">Click Here For Site Index</A>
If you would provide the correct URL, someone might be able to help you.
>
> regarding doc type and css; I have actually looked at this; I
> certainly don't want to use one css file to control my entire site, so
> I suppose I could put one in the header of each file, but I don't see
> the point.
the amount of HTML you need to write in each page to format it the way you want it. It also
dramatically reduces the likelihood of coding errors that foul up the format, such as those which
have so bedeviled you on your limericks page.
The choices are not between "one CSS file to control [the] entire site" and "one in the header of
each file". Rather, the more common practice is to use one master CSS file as a formatting template
for the entire site -- which is referenced by URL in each individual page, rather than being
incorporated in toto -- and making small tweaks to that in the <head> sections of the individual
documents if and as needed.
> I rarely use more than 3 colours, and what would it enable me to
> remove?
means that your pages would load faster, but the biggest advantages are:
a) it ensures consistency
b) it reduces the error rate
c) it enables changing the appearance of the entire site by altering the style sheet, in one place in
one file, instead of changing formatting tags in multiple places in multiple files.
Here's one specific example of what it would enable you to remove. Putting only these entries in a
style sheet
body {
color: #000000;
}
h2 {
text-align:center;
color: #FF0000;
}
would enable you to change ALL of your second-level headings throughout a document from this
</FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#FF0000">
<center><h2>Heading Text</h2></center></FONT>
<FONT COLOR="#000000">
to this:
<h2>Heading Text</h2>
If you later decide you want those headings to be blue instead of red, or the body text fuchsia
instead of black, all you need do is to change the color: attribute[s] in the style sheet. One change in
one place is instantly propagated across the entirety of every document that uses that style sheet.
> I also don't see the point of inserting DOC type in a file.
browser will render your page in quirks mode, which may or may not give the appearance you wish.
There's a reasonably good overview here:
http://webdesign.about.com/od/dtds/a/aa071007.htm
Having a proper DOCTYPE definition in your web documents also means that it will be easier for
you to find your coding errors when you validate your pages, because the error messages resulting
from invalid HTML will not be mixed in with error messages resulting from a missing DOCTYPE.
Please note the phrase "*proper* DOCTYPE". :-)
>After all,
> the version of HTML you use is determined solely by the code you
> write. I have no doubt they'll bring out further versions.
Jukka K. Korpela
Jan 18, 2012, 8:40:05 AM1/18/12
to
2012-01-18 15:16, Doug Miller wrote:
> If you would provide the correct URL, someone might be able to help you.
Please don’t feed the troll. It’s not fun any more. It was somewhat
> If you would provide the correct URL, someone might be able to help you.
amusing to see someone repeatedly advertise a 1996-style web site asking
purported “questions” and consistently rejecting all advice and
attacking it. But after the umpteenth round, it got boring.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
thedarkman
Jan 18, 2012, 8:59:19 AM1/18/12
to
The problem appears to have righted itself now
http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/id_harbinger_text.html
I had another problem re displaying but that has sorted too.
Amazing these machines don't obey the laws of physics.
Thanks for the advice but I think the proof of the pudding is in the
eating; the main thing is does the ordinary visitor see what I want
him to see? The answer appears to be yes. This is again substance over
style. Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/id_harbinger_text.html
I had another problem re displaying but that has sorted too.
Amazing these machines don't obey the laws of physics.
Thanks for the advice but I think the proof of the pudding is in the
eating; the main thing is does the ordinary visitor see what I want
him to see? The answer appears to be yes. This is again substance over
style. Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
Message has been deleted
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Jan 18, 2012, 10:34:19 AM1/18/12
to
thedarkman wrote:
> The problem appears to have righted itself now
No, it is still an awful set of pages.
> The problem appears to have righted itself now
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/id_harbinger_text.html
...
> Thanks for the advice but I think the proof of the pudding is in the
> eating; the main thing is does the ordinary visitor see what I want him
> to see? The answer appears to be yes.
You apparently prefer amateur-looking hard-to-read pages. I can't imagine
> eating; the main thing is does the ordinary visitor see what I want him
> to see? The answer appears to be yes.
anyone actually sticks around for any length of time.
Are there any *design* schools in your neighbourhood?
> This is again substance over
> style. Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
--
-bts
-Maybe your site "gets prettier at closing time."
idle
Jan 18, 2012, 11:17:57 AM1/18/12
to
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 05:59:19 -0800 (PST), thedarkman wrote in alt.html:
> This is again substance over
> style. Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
None. You're in quirks mode.
> This is again substance over
> style. Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
--
idle
Why do they call it an asteroid when it's outside the hemisphere, but
call it a hemorrhoid when it's in your ass?
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 18, 2012, 1:19:54 PM1/18/12
to
thedarkman wrote:
> The problem appears to have righted itself now
Wow! The Devil gone skying! The perpetuity in thedarkman actually
> The problem appears to have righted itself now
replied *in* the thread!
>
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/id_harbinger_text.html
Must be magic, eh? Nothing to do with your markup.
>
> I had another problem re displaying but that has sorted too.
>
> Amazing these machines don't obey the laws of physics.
>
> Thanks for the advice but I think the proof of the pudding is in the
> eating; the main thing is does the ordinary visitor see what I want
> him to see? The answer appears to be yes. This is again substance over
> style.
> Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
thedarkman
Jan 18, 2012, 2:26:05 PM1/18/12
to
> Except that your site looks like shit. I might have been marginally
> interested in the content, but I got eyeball ache after the first couple
> of sentences, so I gave up.
My Motigo counter tells a different story; my site is largely
educational. I will educate those who will listen. Those who don't can
go elsewhere. Those who would attempt to stop me can go and fuck
themselves.
thedarkman
Jan 18, 2012, 2:37:13 PM1/18/12
to
Okay, let's get this straight, I am NOT some sort of wind up merchant.
I use a 3 colour coding for my site which is overwhelmingly text. Many
such sites are just as prosaic, they are meant to be read, not adored.
We have established I am not using any sort of HTML, so I presume that
means I can omit the DOCTYPE. BARONDOCTYPE would not work, I guess. As
I said, I don't want to use any sort of global template, but take this
short page. Whether or not you like the poem, the puns or neither, it
displays well. It's only with a really long page in Firefox or some
other minor browser that trouble develops.
Without a global template, how can this code be improved? Probably in
a lot of ways in your universe, but how can the display be improved?
If you are content with 3 colours, I would suggest no way.
<HTML><HEAD>
<TITLE>ODE FROM THE FRIESIAN CHURN: a poem by Alexander Baron</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<FONT COLOR=#FF0000>
<H1><i>Ode From The Friesian Churn</i></H1>
<FONT COLOR=#000000>
<b>
<p>My darling Buttercup, how fine though art,
<br>Your beauty so refined, your charm so rare,
<br>For though you're not renowned for being smart,
<br>In all Creation none can match your stare.
<p>You stand entranced in yonder clover field
<br>And gaze magnetically; I feel your pull,
<br>I try to draw away but I must yield
<br>And creep towards you, spellbound, like a bull.
<p>Your nose is big and black and always wet,
<br>Your grace reflects in every moo-ve you make,
<br>I always feel a morsel of regret
<br>And think of you when I eat beef, Miss Steak.
<p>The farmer treats you awfully, my pet,
<br>You're outside in most every kind of weather,
<br>But not to worry, I'll ask my Aunt Bet
<br>To knit a jersey to protect your leather.
<p>You'll wear that, but you'll never wear my ring
<br>Because we're worlds apart, but I'll be true,
<br>I'll never even think of marrying,
<br>And never have no udder love but moo.
<p>
[This was written for a punning competition. Sadly the judges didn't
like it as much as I did].
<p>
<A HREF="poetry.html"> Back To Poetry Index</A>
<p>
</HTML>
I use a 3 colour coding for my site which is overwhelmingly text. Many
such sites are just as prosaic, they are meant to be read, not adored.
We have established I am not using any sort of HTML, so I presume that
means I can omit the DOCTYPE. BARONDOCTYPE would not work, I guess. As
I said, I don't want to use any sort of global template, but take this
short page. Whether or not you like the poem, the puns or neither, it
displays well. It's only with a really long page in Firefox or some
other minor browser that trouble develops.
Without a global template, how can this code be improved? Probably in
a lot of ways in your universe, but how can the display be improved?
If you are content with 3 colours, I would suggest no way.
<HTML><HEAD>
<TITLE>ODE FROM THE FRIESIAN CHURN: a poem by Alexander Baron</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<FONT COLOR=#FF0000>
<H1><i>Ode From The Friesian Churn</i></H1>
<FONT COLOR=#000000>
<b>
<p>My darling Buttercup, how fine though art,
<br>Your beauty so refined, your charm so rare,
<br>For though you're not renowned for being smart,
<br>In all Creation none can match your stare.
<p>You stand entranced in yonder clover field
<br>And gaze magnetically; I feel your pull,
<br>I try to draw away but I must yield
<br>And creep towards you, spellbound, like a bull.
<p>Your nose is big and black and always wet,
<br>Your grace reflects in every moo-ve you make,
<br>I always feel a morsel of regret
<br>And think of you when I eat beef, Miss Steak.
<p>The farmer treats you awfully, my pet,
<br>You're outside in most every kind of weather,
<br>But not to worry, I'll ask my Aunt Bet
<br>To knit a jersey to protect your leather.
<p>You'll wear that, but you'll never wear my ring
<br>Because we're worlds apart, but I'll be true,
<br>I'll never even think of marrying,
<br>And never have no udder love but moo.
<p>
[This was written for a punning competition. Sadly the judges didn't
like it as much as I did].
<p>
<A HREF="poetry.html"> Back To Poetry Index</A>
<p>
</HTML>
thedarkman
Jan 18, 2012, 2:29:02 PM1/18/12
to
> > Amazing these machines don't obey the laws of physics.
>
> Must be voodoo then.
letter extension, after a crash I had two or more files in the same
directory with the same name, something they said could never happen.
I worked out later what this was. File names could in fact contain
more than 8 letters but anything over the 8 was hidden. I think this
is what they call undocumented DOS.
Message has been deleted
dorayme
Jan 18, 2012, 3:22:02 PM1/18/12
to
In article
<82852595-93cd-42b7...@a40g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>,
>
...
> This was written for a punning competition.
> Sadly the judges didn't like it as much as I did
You *are* using HTML. Your poem below shows great sensitivity and you
should console yourself with the thought that the judges rejected it
on a mere technicality - like that it is not really very punny.
...
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <TITLE>ODE FROM THE FRIESIAN CHURN: a poem by Alexander Baron</TITLE>
> </HEAD>
>
> <FONT COLOR=#FF0000>
> <H1><i>Ode From The Friesian Churn</i></H1>
> <FONT COLOR=#000000>
> <b>
> <p>My darling Buttercup, how fine though art,
> <br>Your beauty so refined, your charm so rare,
> <br>For though you're not renowned for being smart,
> <br>In all Creation none can match your stare.
>
...
--
dorayme
<82852595-93cd-42b7...@a40g2000vbu.googlegroups.com>,
thedarkman <odemgolde...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> We have established I am not using any sort of HTML, so I presume that
> means I can omit the DOCTYPE. ...
> We have established I am not using any sort of HTML, so I presume that
>
...
> This was written for a punning competition.
> Sadly the judges didn't like it as much as I did
should console yourself with the thought that the judges rejected it
on a mere technicality - like that it is not really very punny.
...
> <HTML><HEAD>
> <TITLE>ODE FROM THE FRIESIAN CHURN: a poem by Alexander Baron</TITLE>
> </HEAD>
>
> <FONT COLOR=#FF0000>
> <H1><i>Ode From The Friesian Churn</i></H1>
> <FONT COLOR=#000000>
> <b>
> <p>My darling Buttercup, how fine though art,
> <br>Your beauty so refined, your charm so rare,
> <br>For though you're not renowned for being smart,
> <br>In all Creation none can match your stare.
>
--
dorayme
Message has been deleted
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 18, 2012, 3:30:29 PM1/18/12
to
thedarkman wrote:
> Okay, let's get this straight, I am NOT some sort of wind up merchant.
> I use a 3 colour coding for my site which is overwhelmingly text. Many
> such sites are just as prosaic, they are meant to be read, not adored.
>
> We have established I am not using any sort of HTML, so I presume that
> means I can omit the DOCTYPE.
Apparently we have all been too subtle for you. Your coding is so broken
> Okay, let's get this straight, I am NOT some sort of wind up merchant.
> I use a 3 colour coding for my site which is overwhelmingly text. Many
> such sites are just as prosaic, they are meant to be read, not adored.
>
> We have established I am not using any sort of HTML, so I presume that
> means I can omit the DOCTYPE.
that is does not conform to any version, you you feel breaking it
further by omitting a DOCTYPE is a solution?
> BARONDOCTYPE would not work, I guess. As
> I said, I don't want to use any sort of global template, but take this
> short page. Whether or not you like the poem, the puns or neither, it
> displays well. It's only with a really long page in Firefox or some
> other minor browser that trouble develops.
valid, not break it more.
>
> Without a global template, how can this code be improved? Probably in
> a lot of ways in your universe, but how can the display be improved?
> If you are content with 3 colours, I would suggest no way.
is might actually fix your site and make it easier to maintain?
From all your posting it looks like you prefer to have all your poem
titles in red and italic, and you love to center everything. So instead
of peppering every page over and over with FONT, CENTER & I, & B
elements you could add just 1 line in each page's HEAD element
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="poems.css">
and create a text file "poems.css":
/* start of stylesheet */
h1 { color: #ff0000; font-style: italic; text-align: center; }
p { color: #000000; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; }
/* end of stylesheet */
Now you have been told repeatedly that you are NOT closing elements that
REQUIRE closing tags like the FONT & B elements below:
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>ODE FROM THE FRIESIAN CHURN: a poem by Alexander Baron</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="poems.css">
</head>
<body>
<h1>Ode From The Friesian Churn<h1>
<p>
My darling Buttercup, how fine though art,<br>
Your beauty so refined, your charm so rare,<br>
For though you're not renowned for being smart,<br>
In all Creation none can match your stare.
<p>
You stand entranced in yonder clover field<br>
And gaze magnetically; I feel your pull,<br>
I try to draw away but I must yield<br>
And creep towards you, spellbound, like a bull.
<p>
Your nose is big and black and always wet,<br>
Your grace reflects in every moo-ve you make,<br>
I always feel a morsel of regret<br>
And think of you when I eat beef, Miss Steak.
<p>
The farmer treats you awfully, my pet,<br>
You're outside in most every kind of weather,<br>
But not to worry, I'll ask my Aunt Bet<br>
To knit a jersey to protect your leather.
<p>
You'll wear that, but you'll never wear my ring<br>
Because we're worlds apart, but I'll be true,<br>
I'll never even think of marrying,<br>
And never have no udder love but moo.
<p>
[This was written for a punning competition. Sadly the judges didn't
like it as much as I did].
<div><a href="poetry.html"> Back To Poetry Index</a></div>
</body>
</html>
If you later decided you did not what those poem titles in italic but
maybe in small caps and blue not red than all you would have to do it
change ONE file, the stylesheet "poem.css"
/* start of stylesheet */
h1 { color: #0000ff; font-variant: small-caps; text-align: center; }
p { color: #000000; font-weight: bold; text-align: center; }
/* end of stylesheet */
That is it, just one file and ALL your poems on all your pages will now
have blue small caps titles without having to change each and every
document. For poems I might suggest where layout is so important with
spacing like this
A line to the left
but the next offset
maybe a bit here
and here
That you could just make your pages preserve the special spacing like
this:
<p class="freeform">
A line to the left
but the next offset
maybe a bit here
and here
</p>
and an one-liner in your stylesheet:
p.freeform { white-space: pre; }
Now if you cannot see the advantage then I would suggest that you should
go away, that you are either incapable or unwilling to do web design and
no one will be able to help you here.
Jonathan N. Little
Jan 18, 2012, 3:33:38 PM1/18/12
to
with a character ASCII number > 126 that Windows could not deal with.
dorayme
Jan 18, 2012, 3:34:41 PM1/18/12
to
In article <timstreater-435C...@news.individual.net>,
Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net> wrote:
> If you use the trivial doctype:
>
> <!DOCTYPE html>
>
> then you can at a minimum ensure that it'll look the same on all
> browsers.
Not quite at a minimum, but you are right that it improves your
chances.
--
dorayme
Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net> wrote:
> If you use the trivial doctype:
>
> <!DOCTYPE html>
>
> then you can at a minimum ensure that it'll look the same on all
> browsers.
Not quite at a minimum, but you are right that it improves your
chances.
--
dorayme
Jukka K. Korpela
Jan 18, 2012, 4:05:32 PM1/18/12
to
2012-01-18 22:30, Jonathan N. Little wrote:
> Your coding is so broken
> that is does not conform to any version, you you feel breaking it
> further by omitting a DOCTYPE is a solution?
I suppose, and surely hope, that nobody reads this troll-driven thread
> Your coding is so broken
> that is does not conform to any version, you you feel breaking it
> further by omitting a DOCTYPE is a solution?
seriously and trying to learn. But just in case...
If someone has been writing crappy HTML code that (knowingly or
unknowingly) relies on crappy behavior of old browsers, then *adding* a
conforming DOCTYPE is the thing that would likely break the pages. It
would make browsers run in "standards mode", which is bad if they have
been written for broken mode ("quirks mode").
I have seen pages become literally empty just because a proper DOCTYPE
was added.
The morale is that you should not use proper DOCTYPE if your markup is
not proper.
--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
P E Schoen
Jan 18, 2012, 4:22:43 PM1/18/12
to
"Jonathan N. Little" wrote in message news:jf7a53$8a4$1...@dont-email.me...
[huge snip]
> Now if you cannot see the advantage then I would suggest that you
> should go away, that you are either incapable or unwilling to do web
> design and no one will be able to help you here.
I am amazed that people here still continue to respond and try to help "the
darkman". Maybe some perverse curiosity about his latest attempts to
circumvent even the most reasonable conventions of HTML and still complain
about erratic problems? I am also not really up to speed on CSS, but I
realize its power and I use it where I need to. I have some HTML dating back
to 1996 when I was a total newbie, and some of it (maybe most) would not
pass the validator. But for anything I care about (and darkman does seem to
care, at least about himself and his website), I will make the effort to
determine if it passes validation and at least understand why some lines may
not be according to standard, and I may choose to ignore them if they are
not critical. But if there were problems I would certainly fix them so as to
make it validate before I wasted peoples' time with badly broken code, and
ignore or demean their efforts to help.
He certainly gets a lot of attention. Maybe THAT is the issue! This may be
his entire social life!
Paul
www.muttleydog.com
[huge snip]
> Now if you cannot see the advantage then I would suggest that you
> should go away, that you are either incapable or unwilling to do web
> design and no one will be able to help you here.
darkman". Maybe some perverse curiosity about his latest attempts to
circumvent even the most reasonable conventions of HTML and still complain
about erratic problems? I am also not really up to speed on CSS, but I
realize its power and I use it where I need to. I have some HTML dating back
to 1996 when I was a total newbie, and some of it (maybe most) would not
pass the validator. But for anything I care about (and darkman does seem to
care, at least about himself and his website), I will make the effort to
determine if it passes validation and at least understand why some lines may
not be according to standard, and I may choose to ignore them if they are
not critical. But if there were problems I would certainly fix them so as to
make it validate before I wasted peoples' time with badly broken code, and
ignore or demean their efforts to help.
He certainly gets a lot of attention. Maybe THAT is the issue! This may be
his entire social life!
Paul
www.muttleydog.com
Doug Miller
Jan 18, 2012, 7:09:12 PM1/18/12
to
thedarkman <odemgolde...@googlemail.com> wrote in news:b76e51ad-459d-456d-a432-
0e1d9b...@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com:
> The problem appears to have righted itself now
>
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/id_harbinger_text.html
Which, oddly enough, is not the same URL you posted earlier.
been given. I'm done.
mode, which makes the version question quite moot.
0e1d9b...@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com:
> The problem appears to have righted itself now
>
> http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/id_harbinger_text.html
>
> I had another problem re displaying but that has sorted too.
>
> Amazing these machines don't obey the laws of physics.
The really amazing thing is that you keep asking for help, while refusing to accept the help you've
> I had another problem re displaying but that has sorted too.
>
> Amazing these machines don't obey the laws of physics.
been given. I'm done.
>
> Thanks for the advice but I think the proof of the pudding is in the
> eating; the main thing is does the ordinary visitor see what I want
> him to see? The answer appears to be yes. This is again substance over
> style. Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
It doesn't matter. Due to the lack of a DOCTYPE declaration, your pages are rendered in quirks
> Thanks for the advice but I think the proof of the pudding is in the
> eating; the main thing is does the ordinary visitor see what I want
> him to see? The answer appears to be yes. This is again substance over
> style. Just for the record, what version of HTML am I using?
mode, which makes the version question quite moot.
Doug Miller
Jan 18, 2012, 7:10:05 PM1/18/12
to
"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkor...@cs.tut.fi> wrote in news:jf6i3j$m73$1...@dont-email.me:
> 2012-01-18 15:16, Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> If you would provide the correct URL, someone might be able to help you.
>
> Please don’t feed the troll. It’s not fun any more. It was somewhat
> amusing to see someone repeatedly advertise a 1996-style web site asking
> purported “questions” and consistently rejecting all advice and
> attacking it. But after the umpteenth round, it got boring.
>
That was my last attempt. Henceforth, he's killfiled.
> 2012-01-18 15:16, Doug Miller wrote:
>
>> If you would provide the correct URL, someone might be able to help you.
>
> Please don’t feed the troll. It’s not fun any more. It was somewhat
> amusing to see someone repeatedly advertise a 1996-style web site asking
> purported “questions” and consistently rejecting all advice and
> attacking it. But after the umpteenth round, it got boring.
>
0 new messages