Re (tilly) 3: PerlMonks XHTML+CSS: an implementation

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: (AidanLee) 4: PerlMonks XHTML+CSS: an implementation by AidanLee (Chaplain) on Feb 26, 2002 at 20:53 UTC
Hi tilly, I've seen you bring this point up in response just about every time CSS is mentioned for use at the Monastery, and I can sympathize. You and probably many others are in a situation where these particular tools in the web design toolbox aren't just impractical, they're downright disabling. While I usually consider myself to be relatively leading edge in my _knowledge_ of web standards, I know that it is foolish to try to use technologies that are to young to have gained a solid foothold. The rest of this post, since I'm going to rant, is no longer directed at anyone in particular. CSS has been around since 1996. 7 years is ancient history for most computer-related technologies. So it isn't as if web authors are chomping at the bit to take their shiny new toy out for a test drive. They're sitting there waiting till they can wipe the layers of dust off of this very useful tool without getting their hand slapped. I would hate to lose any member of this community over something that should be as trivial as the medium through which we communicate. But I would really like to see some progress made in said medium. As a comprimise, I think it would be wonderful if we could set up a XHTML/CSS-theme that registered users could optionally switch to. Again, I'd like to volunteer some of my backordered tuits to help make this happen.	[reply]
Re: Re (tilly) 3: PerlMonks XHTML+CSS: an implementation by Masem (Monsignor) on Feb 26, 2002 at 17:59 UTC
(Not necessarily replying to tilly, but my comments pick up where he leaves off). My understanding of what those working with the CSS additions have been saying is that they are simply planning on adding CSS classes and IDs to nearly all tags so each aspect of the page can be customized by the end user. The styles that the user can select on their user settings would basic now just switch between different stylesheets that is added to each delievered page, as opposed to hardcoding the FONT, BGCOLOR and other tags in a template file. Positioning would still be done by TABLE layout as no browser including the 6.0 versions does CSS layout well; this is also the area that NS4 had the most trouble. Additionally, using `<FONT><SPAN>...</SPAN></FONT>` (or SMALL, TT, or any other character level tag in place of FONT) would allow CSS definitions to override the FONT settings, but would allow FONT settings to work for those not using CSS or with that specific class undefined. The biggest problem is that NS4's CSS support, if used, required that all tags be closed including P's, which can be a major problem since these come from the bulk of the posts here. (It's also very touchy on the format of the CSS, but that's not important here). So implimenting the CSS correctly, using only the class and id attributions for any tag, and specifying the style aspects in the stylesheet only, should make the site usable but otherwise bland for all users if no stylesheet is specified, even if they are using NS4, etc; (since basically there are no class definitions, and therefore, no styles to use). Again, pointing out above, we should still rely on Table layouts to format the page (ugh, but that's another issue altogether). Assuming that we can verify that the site works under those conditions under all browsers, then we can start reworking the styles that we currently render the pages as CSS sheets; there should remain a default style that has none and/or minimialistic CSS that is known to work on all browsers. Additionally, we still have the option of the user supplying their own, overriding, CSS. I wouldn't expect any problems with the above (using css classes/ids, but no sheet specified), but there might be. If there is a problem with CSS use on any browser, then for the cost of a few additional cycles, it should be possible to implement user-triggered CSS tags that, if a flag is set in the user profile, the tag is otherwise not rendered. EG, using DIV_CSS and SPAN_CSS that either resolve to DIV and SPAN if the user wants CSS, or disappear entirely if not. We may also be able to strip class and id attributes from other tags if this flag is set, such that NO CSS-related tags or attributes are present. Again, the resulting page would be bland but still usable. I have not looked yet at the CSS offered at the root of this thread to see how it works, but I suspect based on additional comments that it can be improved. I'll try to take a look in the next day or so and see what can be done such that those using older browsers still get a good experience. Of course, if/when the CSS is finallized, I strongly suggest that it's run on a special virtual/second server for about a week or three to make sure that no one has problems, bugs are reported, etc., so that the current version of the PM HTML remains in tact and uninterrupted. Update: I just took a look at the CSS file, and while it appears to do much of what I suggest, it has a big huge 'error' of using the float: attribute. Sadly, as mentioned, CSS positioning is a horrible horrible mess. Years ago, I tried setting up a site with sidebar tables using float, and whatever trick I used, the table failed in one of the major browsers (IE4 PC or Mac, NS4, etc), typically NS4 getting the buzz. I know it would be great to allow people to float these sections but (X)HTML and CSS is just not made for that yet. We need to stick to the main table layout that we have now for this to work. Possibly we can add another variable to the user settings that allows people to put the nodelet bar on the left, but otherwise, leave the tables as they are. ----------------------------------------------------- Dr. Michael K. Neylon - mneylon-pm@masemware.com \|\| "You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain "I can see my house from here!" It's not what you know, but knowing how to find it if you don't know that's important	[reply] [d/l]
Re: Re: Re (tilly) 3: PerlMonks XHTML+CSS: an implementation by ignatz (Vicar) on Mar 04, 2002 at 00:09 UTC
It would be next to impossible to do anything fancy without serving different style sheets for older browsers. As a rule when I have to get fancy I disable them on IE3, and do seperate ones for NN4.x, IE4.x and a fancier one for later browsers. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ()-() ()-() \"/ DON'T BLAME ME, I VOTED FOR PACO! \"/ ` ` ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~	[reply]
Re: Re: Re: Re (tilly) 3: PerlMonks XHTML+CSS: an implementation by Masem (Monsignor) on Mar 04, 2002 at 01:00 UTC
There will be no problem that if, after we CSS the site, the only style information that is sent is one that is specified in the theme the user has selected (assuming, of course, that there's a "no style" theme), or in the stylesheet that the user specifies. Just because the CSS classes or ids are there, does not imply that CSS will be applied correctly. (Now, extending this further, it would be interesting to allow two different stylesheets that a user can specified, one for NS4, and one for everything else, but I don't think we need to go that far.) ----------------------------------------------------- Dr. Michael K. Neylon - mneylon-pm@masemware.com \|\| "You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain "I can see my house from here!" It's not what you know, but knowing how to find it if you don't know that's important	[reply]
Re: Re (tilly) 3: PerlMonks XHTML+CSS: an implementation by belg4mit (Prior) on Mar 03, 2002 at 21:32 UTC
I voluntarily stick with an older browser (NN4) because I'm hooked on Roaming Access, though I fought the move to NN4 and stuck with NN3 for some time. Personally I too do not care so much about explicit "support" (aesthetics) for my older browser as long as it doesn't get explicitly locked out, which of course the monastery would never do. As for you browser issue, what platform? If Linux have you tried Galleon? If Windows have you tried K-meleon? `-- perl -pe "s/\b;([st])/'\1/mg"`	[reply]
Re (tilly) 5: PerlMonks XHTML+CSS: an implementation by tilly (Archbishop) on Mar 03, 2002 at 23:59 UTC
I am on a Linux 2.0 system. I looked at Galleon, but its dependencies are beyond what is left free on my machine. (Currently 35 MB, I should clean up again...) Trust me. I wouldn't say there was a problem upgrading unless there was...	[reply]