Slashdot Mirror

>The obvious solution to the problem is to "fix" frames.
>In other words, introduce a standard for including webpages
>within other web pages where the browser treats the combined
>page as just one single entity.

Um, we have that ... it's called "frames". You use "_top"
in your links ;)

And I believe this link may be of some use to me!

(In my defense, coffee is stil 2~5 minutes away.)

Oh. Another article about the future of HTML specifications that fails to validate:

http://www.htmlhelp.org/cgi-bin/validate.cgi?url=h ttp%3A%2F%2Fwww-128.ibm.com%2Fdeveloperworks%2Flib rary%2Fx-futhtml1%2F%3Fca%3Ddgr-lnxw01FutureHTML&w arnings=yes

Enough said.

Don't take this article seriously. Instead of pursuing 3D appliances in web pages your time will much better be invested in playing a 3D game.

If you want to POST something, the only way to do that is to use a form. Forms cause a few problems.

With all due respect, even though forms aren't perfect, they've been around over a decade, and if you can't deal with them by now, don't bother calling yourself a web developer.

Wherever a form ends, the browser inserts vertical space in many situations, some of which are unavoidable.

You're kidding, right? If you don't want a bottom margin, say so with CSS. This is basic FAQ newbie stuff.

If you want a regular text link to submit a form, you have to use Javascript.

You can use CSS to make the button look like a text link.

This creates a dependancy on Javascript

No it doesn't. You can easily use Javascript without depending on it. That's the way it's supposed to be used. This too is basic newbie stuff.

Other issues with form POSTing include the inability to use the back button after POSTing.

Huh? Works fine here.

there's no way for webmasters to tell the browser not to pop up with the "Are you sure you want to resend the POST action again?" window.

That's not a bug, that's a feature! POST is not idempotent. Resubmitting a POST is something that absolutely needs to be warned about, because it's a fundamentally different action to reloading a page with GET.

GET followed by refresh == just GET it again

POST followed by refresh == send the server some more data

So, if we choose to follow the HTTP guidelines, we break UI and style guidelines even worse.

There is a reason submit buttons look different to links. It's because they do different things. There are semantics associated with clicking a button that aren't associated with clicking a link. If style guidelines instruct you to make submit buttons look like links, then the style guidelines are probably broken.

So, if we choose to follow the HTTP guidelines, we break UI and style guidelines even worse. If we want to use POST we have to give up having the page rendering correctly in major browsers, break the back button, break the ability to bookmark state information (unless you encode variables both in the URL in get fashion AND others in a POST), and make every link either an image(bad for accessability and download speeds) or use some Javascript magic (even worse for bookmarkability and accessability).

Wow. Get with the times. No really. I'd expect this kind of attitude from a newbie developer in the mid 90s.

> but you guys should at least have removed the [...] tags from his document. It is extremely bad form to insert a whole html document inside another one.

Huuuuhhh... You're talking about Slashdot, the website for standards-loving geeks and nerds who doesn't even validate (and note that they've forbidden entry to validator.w3.org to hide the fact). In comparison, another site where I dwell, LinuxFR; not only validates but doesn't use old-fashioned table-based layouts, ditched in favor of more modern and user-customisable floating layers. To this day, I'm still ashamed at the sheer number of sites (even Linux/OSS/Free Software ones) that don't even do the minimum to be good netizens : provide an error-free site with a DOCTYPE that triggers standards-compliance mode in browsers. I shouldn't maybe draw conclusions too fast (some of these sites could still use non-standards-compliant middleware like ad banners generators and the like. I believe I remember Wired's Douglas Bowman said this were the major cause hampering efforts towards compliance) but I think the main problem lies with the laziness and the usual if it works with IE, it works nearly everywhere state of mind. And you can throw all the blows and whistles you want into your new shiny standards to attract followers, you cannot overcome laziness... *sigh*

HTML is really a mess. According to the W3C, tags should be used to represent the structure of the document and style sheets should be used for how a page should look. Originally however, tags where used for everything. To provide backwards compatibility while still being valid HTML 4.0, the HTML 4.0 Transitional DTDs can be used:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">

This declares the document to be HTML 4.0 Transitional. HTML 4.0 Transitional includes all elements and attributes of HTML 4.0 Strict but adds presentational attributes, deprecated elements, and link targets. HTML 4.0 Transitional recognizes the relatively poor browser support for style sheets, allowing many HTML presentation features [such as BORDER] to be used as a transition towards HTML 4.0 Strict.

HTML is really a mess. According to the W3C, tags should be used to represent the structure of the document and style sheets should be used for how a page should look. Originally however, tags where used for everything. To provide backwards compatibility while still being valid HTML 4.0, the HTML 4.0 Transitional DTDs can be used:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">

This declares the document to be HTML 4.0 Transitional. HTML 4.0 Transitional includes all elements and attributes of HTML 4.0 Strict but adds presentational attributes, deprecated elements, and link targets. HTML 4.0 Transitional recognizes the relatively poor browser support for style sheets, allowing many HTML presentation features [such as BORDER] to be used as a transition towards HTML 4.0 Strict.

HTML is really a mess. According to the W3C, tags should be used to represent the structure of the document and style sheets should be used for how a page should look. Originally however, tags where used for everything. To provide backwards compatibility while still being valid HTML 4.0, the HTML 4.0 Transitional DTDs can be used:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd">

This declares the document to be HTML 4.0 Transitional. HTML 4.0 Transitional includes all elements and attributes of HTML 4.0 Strict but adds presentational attributes, deprecated elements, and link targets. HTML 4.0 Transitional recognizes the relatively poor browser support for style sheets, allowing many HTML presentation features [such as BORDER] to be used as a transition towards HTML 4.0 Strict.