Slashdot Mirror
Dynamic HTML: The Definitive Reference (2nd Ed.)
Goodman has tackled a complex subject. With changing standards and even quicker changing browser compatibility it can be a nightmare trying to get a dynamic web site working across disparate browsers and operating systems. A guide that tells you exact syntax and exact compatibility can be invaluable, but is only as good as the research behind it, an area where I cannot fault Goodman.
This volume covers XHTML, CSS and DOM with a large smidgeon of JavaScript. It's not an easy book to get into and consume in large chunks as it does little hand holding but as I was prepared to knuckle down and work at the topics (with much help from various web sites such as CSS Zen Garden) I found it perfect for me. Goodman has recently released JavaScript & DHTML Cookbook which I have found to be a marvelous volume to assist the process of understanding these technologies, though I am still looking for a good, up to date tutorial on CSS (recommendations welcome).
The target audience would be best summed up as those who have done a fair amount of HTML hand coding and some work in dynamic HTML. The book also adds that you should have "the basics of client-side scripting in JavaScript" and I would agree, when I first acquired this book my JavaScript skills were exceptionally primitive (mainly at the 'plug in example' stage) and found the latter sections of this book heavy going and not much help; now that I am a better JavaScript programmer I find these parts much easier to understand and use.
The book is divided into four parts, 'Applying Dynamic HTML,' 'Dynamic HTML Reference,' 'Cross References,' and 'Appendixes'. I found the first part particularly helpful when converting my old site across to a more dynamic CSS-based site as it helps with various strategies for making sure your content works across browsers and various methods for making sure that visitors with older browsers and search engines can still retrieve valid pages. Goodman's approach of increasing complexity through this part also suited a movement from a straight HTML site to one using XHTML and CSS. This is also where Goodman's writing can shine: it's an excellent guide to all the technologies and acronym soup. The appendices are marvelous, from 'A,' a list of colour names with their RGB value, through a list of character entities to a 50-page list of all HTML tags, their attributes and if they are supported in the two HTML 4 and three XHTML 1 standards.
The reference parts are well structured with extensive notes on browser support and which particular standard (DOM 1, DOM 2, CSS 1, CSS 2, or none) the tag or attribute comes from. For example, in the DOM section the reference gives you the object name, which versions of Navigator and Explorer support it, the DOM version (if any), a short explanation, then an object reference example, list of properties, methods and event handlers. For each of the properties it gives an example, the type and if it is read-only or read/write. For methods it gives the return value and parameters. This sort of attention to fine detail is taken throughout the book. You end up with a book 1343 pages long and a 51 page index. Goodman mentions in his preface that the book now encompasses 'more than 15,000 unique instances of properties, methods and event handlers,' a figure I'd believe.
O'Reilly have their usual page for this book that includes a sample chapter in PDF, the Index, Table of Contents and an Errata page. There are few Errata and only one in the code examples. Speaking of examples, you can download the complete set of code examples from the book.
There is also a page at O'Reilly for the author, Danny Goodman with links to some excellent articles and book excerpts on dynamic HTML and JavaScript.I found this a hard book to review, as are most references. The questions I asked were: one, Does the book cover all the material?; two, Is it correct?; three, Is it easy to find the entry you want? and four, Are the entries laid out in an easy to understand manner? In these criteria this volume rates well, with the added bonus of some good material in the first section for understanding the nuances of dynamic HTML in a multiple browser, multiple operating system world.
If you are doing a lot of work in dynamic HTML then this book is probably an essential. While I don't consult it every time I start working on HTML when I run into trouble it is the first place I turn to make sure my syntax and browser compatibility are straight. This book ain't cheap, and it ain't small but I'd recommend it for your desk if you're working with web sites.
You can purchase the Dynamic HTML: The Definitive Reference (2nd Ed.) from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
Waiting around for everyone to start writing fully standards-compliant DOM-based DHTML is like waiting for the world to learn Esperanto.
I guess the First Edition was not Definitive enough
"Some things have to be believed to be seen." - Ralph Hodgson
... you haven't written dynamic html until you've written javascript that generates perl that generates html that generates javascript that builds perl code to filter the html. Heh, sometimes I miss the dot-com days.
This one is a great addition to the book shelf,, you all know how to do certain things in HTML/DHTML but this book clarifies nicely why you are actually doing it. Also, it introduces nice DOM concepts which WYSIWYG web designers might not have come across before
There is no god
This article was actually useful and free from bias.
/.?
Could this be the end of
And I would have had FP if I hadn't fucked up my reply. Which is ironic, if you think about it.
Hmmm.
Looks like a good book, as are most O'Reilly tech books. I'm still wondering, though: What's with the animals on their covers? What does a flamingo (!) have to do with Dynamic HTML?!
If you need a good web site, I find these guys have a very good reference for JS, HTML, ASP, vbScript, CSS, XHTML etc, etc
"I can not bring myself to believe that if knowledge presents danger, the solution is ignorance" - Isaac Asimov
The framework would be enhanced by the experience and hard work of the Open Source developer community.
Which is nice.
Navigator is dead. So why the effort?
No, I would rather see a book covering Explorer, Mozilla and Opera.
Look at Slashdot. With just a few lines of elegant Perl, Taco et al have created a slick, funcational, speedy, high-reliability site that eschews beauty in favor of pure information. Take your queue from these guys, web monkey.
This book was already reviewed for /. here. Yeesh, can't anyone be troubled to do a quick search before posting?
For what its worth, I owned a copy of the first edition and liked it so much I bought a copy of the second edition before the review mentiond above.
- -
Are you an SF Fan? Are you a Tru-Fan?
My first one is all dog-eared and out of date, but it still sits on my shelf and I occasionally refer back to it. Great book for learning and as a reference.
Sadly, the only book I ever use these days is the Dynamic HTML Reference and SDK from Micro$oft (basically the same info you can get for free from msdn). If you're only supporting IE and just need a quick reference, that book is the bomb. Oh, am I not supposed to use the word bomb anymore? It is the bawm.
I don't have a signature.
The parent poster is using a common pet peeve among /.ers while complimenting /. itself to obtain "Insightful" mod points. Please mod it with that in mind.
That was so transparent. Anyone with an alias like that must be a troll.
But does it show how to make gratuitous use of the tag :)
Rus
Cheap UK and US VPS
don't remember, but i was going to pick this one up @ Barnes & Noble, but they said they dropped most of the information on older browsers from this edition... so i went for the first edition @ half.com for $20 or whatever instead.
This book covers a huge amount of material. After all, DHTML is just a name used for the interaction of a bunch of different things, and this book seems to try to cover all of them. I wonder whether Goodman is really an expert on all of it (or whether anyone can be). I'd be a lot more comfortable trusting a book like this if it were written by a group of authors with different areas of expertise.
Looking at what I can find about the book's coverage of CSS (which I know a lot about), I'm not optimistic. He seems to make up his own terminology, which can cause significant confusion in any public discussions. He uses the word "attributes" instead of "properties" (e.g., the CSS 'position' property) in the sample chapter available at O'Reilly. This is a mistake that's become very common these days, perhaps due to earlier editions of this book, and causes lots of confusion when people really need to discuss attributes (in HTML). The table of contents also shows sections titled by terms that he seems to have made up: "Common Subgroup Selectors" and "Advanced Subgroup Selectors".
It could be that he's decided he doesn't like the terminology used by the CSS specification so he's making new terminology. Such a decision has significant costs for communication between and among web developers and standards organizations. However, I fear it may not even be a conscious decision, but rather than he just doesn't know enough about CSS to know the correct terminology. (Not that I would expect any one person to be able to learn enough about all the topics covered in this book to be an authority on all of them.)
(If you want a good book on CSS, look for Eric Meyer's books on CSS, one of which is also published by O'Reilly.)
FYI: This book has been reviewed on Slashdot before.
----- rL
During a two-hour marathon at my local bookstore, I was surprised to discover that "Dynamic HTML" was by far the best in O'Reilly's series of HTML guides. Their "HTML & XHTML" tome was padded with a lot of questionable legacy information, including detailed descriptions of obsolete/proprietary browser tags. The Dynamic guide's section on HTML was much better, being more informative / modern in scope and coverage. Old tags are still identified, but we are actively discouraged from using them. This is an attitude that's generally lacking in the HTML publishing industry, which really sucks.
If you only buy one all-round HTML guide, my vote's for "Dynamic HTML". It's the best I've found in many different categories.
There's nothing dynamic about HTML. It's a flat staid format, which while often has bits and pieces added to it, is anything but dynamic.
When we say DHTML or 'Dynamic HTML', aren't we really referring to the OTHER non-HTML technologies which make Web pages 'come alive'? For example, JavaScript and CSS. Without these the whole concept of 'DHTML' can't even be entertained.
DHTML really doesn't exist in a concrete sense. It's just a vague concept. If you're going to write a book about JavaScript and CSS, then just say so.
mogorific carpentry experiments
though I am still looking for a good, up to date tutorial on CSS (recommendations welcome).
Good thing I held off on my purchase at B&N earlier today. I literally had this book on Cascading Style Sheetsin my hand before I decided to hold off and get Definitive HTTP instead (because of the recent review on this site. I didn't even notice that the copyright on the Style Sheets book is like from the Year 2000! Weren't we still carving TCP/IP packets byte for byte in stone and using the seeing stones of Anuminas for faster communications at that point?
I have such admiration for O'Reilly, I wonder when will they get on the stick with an updated book on this topic? Are there any good ones by anyone else that are a little more up to date?
Quod scripsi, scripsi.
Enough trolling for mod points, okay? Odds are, you dont know what the fuck you are talking about. CSS used properly is the best thing that ever happened to web sites. It makes sites smaller Idiot, by replacing tables with div tags. The gratuitous plug for /. is so fucking phony you should be banned.
I'm wondering if DHTML could be the next GUI platform. We always hear that the "browser is the next platform", but DHTML could really make it happen.
I recently programmed a groupware application with DHTML. Not the "little javascript trinket on my web site", but user interfaces created entirely by accessing the DOM, document, and window. There is no static HTML sent to the browser at all. It is entirely created in Javascript. A hidden window refreshes ever 5 seconds to pull GUI events from the server, and a client-side, DHTML event system processes the events to change the screen.
The result is a fully dynamic, non-refreshing (at least to the user) GUI that approximates traditional applications. Except it runs within the browser with no plugins and no installation. I didn't even realize how powerful it could be until the application was done.
For example, using a DOM/Javascript-based graphics library, we could create a diagramming application that ran fully within DHTML and the browser. No Flash, no Java, no extra plugins.
There's a lot of problems to overcome. I had to be extremely careful so it worked in Mozilla and IE6+. It's not *truly* real time, but it sure looks like it. The components aren't as powerful as traditional components.
Despite the problems, though, the benefits that it is pure web, no install, and standard browser can't be overstated. DHTML is really a powerful GUI language.
BTW, the reviewed book was invaluable to my creating the program. It is a must have for any DHTML developer.
damn tootin, bruddah --
recent studies have shown that 99.51% of the viewing populace prefers a constant stream of raw binary! down with unicode! we shall destroy the micromacroadobeaolsoft running dogs like the craven infidels they are!
--brought to you courtesy the Binary Liberation Front
Avoiding your flamebait "coders" comment, I'll agree with you on this one.
These days, Javascript is good for one thing only, and that's client-side manipulation of forms using the DOM (dynamically generating form fields, for instance). In terms of simplicity of information display, I'm finding more and more that the answer lies in using XML (notably XPath and XSLT) for complex data display.
I use flash as well, but I use it for tools internally that need to be available through a browser that also require some GUI elements. Other designers need to take a hint though, and recognize that minimalism is the way to go for effective presentation of information.
the definitive reference for HTML is located at the W3C.
This book is also available on Safari. Heck, three months membership covers the cost of the book :)
Here's what the book says about the Flamingo:
.......
---
Our look is the result of reader comments, our own experimentation, and feedback from distribution channels. Distinctive covers complement our distinctive approach to technical topics, breathing personality and life into potentially dry subjects.
The animal on the cover of Dynamic HTML: The Definitive Reference, Second Edition, is a flamingo. Flamingos are easily identifiable by their long legs and neck, turned-down bill, and bright color, which ranges from white to pink to bright red. There are five living species of flamingo, encompassing the family Phoenicopteridae. Flamingos are found in Asia, Africa, Europe, South American, and the Caribbean islands. Although wild flamingos are sometimes seen in Florida, they do not naturally nest in the United States.
In the wild, flamingos tend to live in remote, difficult-to-reach areas. In the suburbs, however, they stand guard over many a front lawn.
-------
So, really that doesn't answer your question, but I thought I'd note the book at least talks about it!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Troll!
DHTML is a waste of coder time, a waste of bandwidth, a waste of CPU processing and a waste of my time.
Besides, most DHTML coders only test their crap on Win/MSIE...
Also, what about people without javascript (turned off or incompatible with their crappy code), they can't use your websites? Too bad, they'll just go SOMEWHERE ELSE (and God knows there's a lot of "somewhere else" on the Web).
IMO "Dynamic HTML" is a vague term which is usually used by people who do not know about the subject. However, not letting that put me off, I think that this book might be useful to a professional web hacker; although they might be better off with the individual O'Reilly books on the different subjects (e.g.: DOM, CSS, HTML, XHTML, ECMAScript) (or just tree-killed standards (while learning techniques by example on the good ol' WWW or in tutorials) for those of us that can understand standards &c or cannot afford the books).
I looked at the first edition of this book in a shop and considered buying it, but decided against it due to its high price, the fact that I did not like the style (unlike most of the publisher's books which are IMO written excelently), and, mainly, my conclusion that HTML & XHTML: The Definitive Guide would be best for everyday design (as it has a little on other technologies (which are secondary to (X)HTML itself), and I can find about the details of these when I need them), though I'm not a professional.
I bought HTML & XHTML: The Defintive Guide, 5th Ed and it was a good read (as O'Reilly books always are), although I was a little dissapointed with a few aspects: quite a few mistakes (not just typos or such like, but the authors not actually understanding (X)HTML and giving false information in contradiction to the W3C standards), the attitude the authors took of saying "you should do foo but here is how to do bar instead", and the lack of many real-world tips, tricks and tutorials (the kind of stuff that you cannot get from the W3C). However, I found that much of the content (like extensions to HTML, browsers and history) was useful to some extent. The HTML & XHTML book is probably a good book for non-professionals and those who do not want to shell out for Dynamic HTML: The Definitive Reference , but still want a book. Maybe, there is an argument that to learn something well, it is best not using a book.
I am considering buying the CSS guide (and just bought XML in a Nutshell which is very comprehensive (yet reasonably concise) and well written so I it recommend highly).
Joe Llywelyn Griffith Blakesley
[This post is in the public domain (copyright-free) unless otherwise stated]
Does this give more credibility to the claims by SCO?
Is this marketing stuff or does Sun find merit in the claims?
I don't know, that's why I'm asking, so be nice please!
I thought this was a joke. But look for yourself:
First, I went to the URL mentionned above and thought it could be unrelated. But click on the PDF News item on the right side!
It's true!
Since I have had the recent freedom of no longer being concerned w/ NN 4.7-, I have been untilizing dhtml much more. I picked up the Defenitive guide along w/ it's perfect companion, JavaScript & DHTML Cookbook, also written by Danny Goodman. Like the rest of the cookbook series, it is more of a how to aimed at teaching one how to do the common tasks involved w/ DHTML, from conversions, use of objects & arrays to creating an xml (tree|dropdown|right click) navigation menu.
IMO, these are the only two books you need to learn DHTML.
But seriously, the web design community has learned a lot over the years about usability. Ultimately the issue for the *real* general public is that they want sites that look good, are easy to navigate, and provide them with helpful information and/or transactional capability.
Users do like "dynamic" things, as long as they're applied in a way that doesn't detract from the user experience. Your unattributed comment about 95% of bandwidth being "wasted" is without a frame of reference. Wasted in what sense? If you mean that there are meaningless graphics and user interface elements, you're presupposing that every viewer would stick with a site that isn't visually appealing. Give us a link so we can find out the basis of this 95% figure.
I agree that many sites suffer from hopeless bloat, but I'm not sure that you understand how web development at large organizations works. Everyone has their paws on the "web effort", and it takes Herculean effort to get basic things like thorough architecture, usability testing and the like. It's maddening as hell when you're the person who is supposed to put the lipstick on the pig.
Remember that the web development community has come along way over the past few years. If you look at the most successful commercial sites (Amazon, eBay, etc.) you'll see that in general they are able to balance marketing and advertising needs with highly useful interfaces.
Finally, by grouping Java, Flash, Javascript and CSS in one category, you're betraying an ignorance of which technologies cause bloat, and which can relieve it. Well-applied XHTML and CSS looks better and loads faster than the old-school HTML that you so love.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
IMHO i don't think that the web should be "dynamic" at all. Some dynamics do add useful functionality. But the problem is, for every 1 serious web developer that uses the technology properly, there's 50 drag-n-drop self-proclaimed "web designers" that will abuse it as a form of dick-waving.
Just today someone was trying to interest me in some service that embeds sound recordings into a website. Useless annoying technology.
And while we're on the subject, I also say that HTML, sound, animated gifs, or any of that shit does NOT belong in email.
Plain text email, simple web pages. Let's get our Innerweb back!
We've pretty much given up on DHTML-driven apps - they are too hard to modify and maintain. Use some Javascript to do some form validation and light stuff like that, but at some point you really are better off just repainting the darn screen instead of delving into DOM madness trying to hide table rows and the like. Being a Microsoft shop, we've pushed hard to move to using .NET web forms, and we've been able to forget that we are writing for web browsers. =)
No, you listen up.
All your servers are belong to us. We write the code, we control all the doors, we hold all the keys. You will take what we decide to give you, and you will bloody well like it.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Since the parent post was moderated -1 (off-topic, which it is), my changed subject line made no sense without seeing the parent post as context, so I posted this too to help.
... what is the air-speed velocity of an unladen African or European flamingo?
I use two references for CSS.
The first is the book Cascading Style Sheets- 2nd ed: Designing for The Web by Hakon Wium Lie and Bert Bos. From what I understand, these two guys basically invented CSS. You can find it on Amazon and at the publisher, Addison-Wesley.
(BTW, I've never been disappointed by an AW book. They're up there with O'Reilly in my mind.)
The other resource is on the web, the ZVON.org CSS1 Reference and CSS2 Reference.
The book has a couple minor shortcomings (you can read about them in Amazon's customer reviews). Those shortcomings are overwhelmed by 1) the authority of the authors, 2) the functional organization, and 3) the readability.
The authors know their stuff. They invented the technology for crying out loud.
The book is organized by function meaning typography control is one chapter, positioning is another, and so on regardless of which standard the property comes from or which browser supports it. This book is where you go when you can't remember, or need to learn, how to do something.
(There are notes for each property on browser support, but they are outdated. For that quickly changing information I recommend The Noodle Incident's CSS Panic Guide Browser Reference.)
The author's use a very readible voice. The examples are a bit simplistic but functional and they express the concept.
I like ZVON.org because it offers a no nonsencse reference. It's basically a clean cut dictionary of CSS. No other site I've seen is as quick to provide the answer for which you are looking. Use it when you need to refresh yourself on the exact order of values for shortcut properties (like background , font , etc.).
obviously no deficiencies vs. no obvious deficiencies
I don't believe this is at +4 interesting and I will get modded down as flaimbait or a troll. You know what I'm talking about. Do you have the formula for flubber as well?
WTF do I care if Sun replaces AIX with solaris?
Who am I?
Does it write IBM on my forehead?
I don't get it. Are we supposed to be IBM zealots or something here?
Think before you are pissed about something.
No you are not a troll. Feel better?
Also wrote "The Javascript Bible", which almost single-handedly carried me through my first job out of college.
but perhaps it's just that someone named "honestpuck" is reviewing a book by a "Goodman".
- Every browser has a default set of style rules.
- If you don't like the way a style is rendered, you can either associate a style sheet with your page, or do in-line style stuff
- html is about structuring documents (head, body, title, h1 thru h6, p, meta, etc). Remember that html is a subset of sgml (standard generalized markup language), which is also concerned with the structure of a document, not its' appearance.
- using html tags to dictate style is bad practice
- css isn't that hard to learn: a tutorial from the w3c standards organization
- The document structure can be thought of as the layout only in the same sense that a book has covers, a table of contents, chapters, and maybe an index.
- The document layout can be thought of as the fonts, paragraph indentation type, line spacing, colors, etc.
- What you are complaining about when you are complaining about the rendering of tables with a default border style is controlled by css, not html
take the plunge, combine css and javascript and you've got a kick-ass system.How can a DHTML guide can pretend to be definitive ??? Client Javascript is implemeted diffrently in each browser... and worst... each browser VERSION !
"Insanity in individuals is something rare, but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule." - Nietzsche
"And that doesn't include the cost of beefing up the suspension in the car, to get the book home..."
If you have to beef up the suspension to get this book home? Then I guess you have to beef up the road to get the Sendmail book home.
BTW When will reference books start coming on CD, or DVD?
And the browser is free to render that border any way it chooses to according to the 4.x specification. For example, if you put <table border="1">, the browser may make just a 1-pixel line. But then it may also have a built-in rule that the default for tables is a 3-d look, in which case, it will attempt to render your 1-pixel border with a 3-d look, which ends up looking strange if you have a white background (the left and top disappear).
The spec can be found here along with other cool stuff.
"Taking your example, even something as providing feedback in the form of an hourglass cursor while a lengthy operation is taking place has a measurable effect on the usability of these applications, especially for our target users (which is clearly not you). The browser is much more of an application platform than a simple layout engine."
And yet XUL, nor XBL hasn't taken off.
This would be an EXCELLENT reference... I've had the first for a few years, and use it to help train my employees on (and remind myself about) proper use and functionality.
It was much better than "Cats".
Tis I: Me.
Just a quick heads-up: I think you were looking for, "all your server are belong to us." Don't be too hard on yourself, as it's probably the most common AYB mis-reference, but please do try to take more care in the future.
Keeping All Your Base parodies correct since AD 2002.
Thank you for bringing us yesterday's news. What, are you trying to get a place on the slashdot editorial staff?
And markup for a table with individual cells with links to all sort of info, on a row-by-row or cell-by-cell basis, is more efficiently generated by a script, especially if you can offload the script generation onto the client's machine with a few lines of javascript.
And then there's the side benefit of having the page dynamically generated, so all those links can be updated in real time, as opposed to having to code them by hand -)
Throw in a bit of css, some event handlers, and you've got something that just can't be done in static html.
Maybe when OpenGL Windowing systems become more popular then maybe browsers can keep up. After all there's many an example were the idea was ahead of the technology.
You can do everything you really need to do with HTML tables. If you're doing web-based entertainment, then you can use Flash. Most JavaScript either does something the user doesn't want you doing, like popups, or something you shouldn't have to be doing, like browser recognition. (Yes, you can do form validation, and that's about all you should be doing. Simple form validation should have been done in a declarative way in HTML, anyway. IBM had that working on green-screen terminals twenty years ago.)
Just stay with classic HTML 3.2, compose with Dreamweaver 3, and your sites will work well in all browsers. The users will never notice the difference, except that everything will work. After all, web sites look today pretty much like they did with HTML 3.2.
The above was moderated Flamebait, and it was retarded, but I do agree with the poster about the lack of valuable information in O'Reilly books. Their books tend to be poorly organized, short on good examples (with good explanations), and long on the author's "expert" comments on the specific subject. At times I've had to set an O'Reily book down simply because I felt the author was trying to impress me with his knowledge instead of teach me the subject.
I've read several O'Reilly books about Java, HTML, DHTML, JS, CSS, etc. I have been impressed with none of them. Each one of them was a "definitive guide" (except the Java book; I believe it was a "nutshell" book), but ended up looking elsewhere for good learning resources. I ended up simply going to the internet to find good tutorials on web dev. I like echoecho.com for simple/beginner HTML. I liked the CSS spec for CSS, Ivor Horton's Beginning Java for Java. There are several good DHTML tutorials at the W3C website.
That's why you should use a "Cascade" of style sheets, and not just one, or (horrors) in-line styles.
This way, most of your css is in a default sheet, and any per-page or per-area customizations can be pretty small files, instead of including all the rules.
The same applies to the javascript used for dynamic effects, validation, etc. Common functions in a default file, rarely-used functions in other included files.
2 or three lines of extra <style src=/css/default.css> and <script src=/js/default.js> go a long way.
server side content generation doesn't really have anything to do with CSS. Client side creation of tables is a tossup - I go with generating the HTML (and the CSS for styling, and the javascript) on the server, because then my pages work without requiring Javascript. And it's a cleaner interface to the user, and faster rendering on the browser.
Everything the parent says is right on the button, especially the point about overdesigned sites.
Simple, static HTML is good - even frames are an abomination that should be banned.
If someone wants to create a new mark-up language (OBML - Overdesigned Bollocks Markup Language, perhaps) and use that for ugly tarty websites, then good luck to them.
For myself, I'll continue to browse with Javascript disabled, and if a site doesn't display properly in flat HTML, then I won't use it.
oh brave new world, that has such people in it!
Danny Goodman's been publishing computer books since before most of the people reading /. have been alive. His greatest strengths are certainly with JavaScript and working with the DOM, but if you've ever wondered, for instance, something like document.getElementById("doh").style.top comes out as "auto" and not the 100px you set it to, you'd appreciate his understanding of CSS and how it interacts with JS and the DOM as well. If I could hazard a guess, I'd bet that Goodman uses "attributes" since (1) the book is really centered on the DOM and "property" has a rather specific meaning within an object-based framework, and (2) since CSS properties are parallel to HTML tag attributes, the term isn't all that alien.
True, if what you want is a CSS reference, then Eric Meyer is the one to look to -- but for a pure reference, I'd recommend his Cascading Style Sheets 2.0: Programmer's Reference by Osborne. The O'Reilly book was dated the day it was published, since they didn't want to cover some of the more advanced CSS2 subjects.
Those two books -- Goodman's DHTML and Meyer's Osborne-CSS references -- are the only one's I need to keep chained to my desk so that my colleagues don't walk off with them.
This book sits on my shelf along with Thomas A. Powell's HTML: The Complete Reference, Second Edition. These are 2 of the best reference books I've ever seen. I pick up so-called "reference" books all the time that are nothing more than product walk-throughs, case studies, or vague overviews. A good reference book is hard to find and invaluable once found.
The truth doesn't care what I think.
but think of it - any time you can get the client to do the work, you've taken a load off the server. For a 10-line table, we're not talking any difference, but for a 200-line table with each cell being clickable, and a different url for each row (to contain the necessary data and user info), we're talking a significant lessening of the load on the server.
Client-side scripting sucks.
And clearly I need to learn how to post links. Sorry about that.
a good, up to date tutorial on CSS
I second the AC's recommendation of anything by Eric Meyer, especially Cascading Style Sheets: The Definitive Guide (O'Reilly). His latest, Eric Meyer on CSS, is a hands-on tutorial/workbook.
speaking as a big CSS fan:
Using HTML tags to dictate style is the only reason you or I ever even heard of this internet thing.
HTML is not about structuring documents. Neither was SGML, in practice. It's primary use has always been for formatting. Besides, HTML is not "generalized." It is specifically designed for marking up hypertext. And hypertext is not a universal data format. Maybe that's what XML is for. Hypertext not just a method of linking documents either. One tag takes care of that. It is a way to present text, not a way to organize it.
Not really. I remember browsing the web w. a text-based browser thru compuserve way back when (early '90s)...
The guy who invented it back in 1991 (Tim Berners-Lee, not Al gore) would disagree with you. Here's what the W3C says:
As to the other comments,
- I never said HTML was "gneralized". rather that it derived/was inspired by sgml.
- I never claimed that hypertext was a universal data format
HTML is a way to organize text by semantics.Presentation has nothing to do with HTML, as this is completely controled by the user agent. HTML declares something is a title, a list, a document body, a paragraph, a table, etc. It doesn't specify how user agents render the content. For example, audio user agents would render a document differently than visual agents, cell phones would be another case, text-mode browsers another, etc.
Does it have an object->CSS cross reference yet? Although I use the 1st edition a lot, it lacks a way of quickly checking which css styles an element supports in which browsers.
A Haiku needs to have seven syllables in line 2, not eight, dumbass.
YOU FAIL IT!
I'll try and get it right in the future.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
slashdot lets you use only a few tags. Otherwise, all kinds of shit could fuck it up.
Slashdot could be rewritten XHTML1.0 strict compliant, still function in all reasonably recent browsers, but truthfully, no one cares. No one does deep semantic analysis based on HTML, and everyone's browser renders it fine. Hence, slashdot is fine. Now, the ugly ass green theme, and the new, even uglier games section, well that needs fixing.
Photos.
I also bought Goodman's JavaScript & DHTML Cookbook and it's excellent as well. I refer to it for ideas quite often.
I recommend both books highly. Nice job by Mr. Goodman.
wordclock records
A "Nutshell" or "Definitive Guide" book isn't a learning resource; it's a reference.
If you can't be bothered to find out what a book is for before you buy it, that's your problem. O'Reilly have full details of all their books on their website, with sample chapters. Just check it out before you buy it; if you don't know enough about the subject to make use of the book, go elsewhere.
Java in a Nutshell is what it says - an encapsulation; not "Everything You Might Ever Want to Know About Java in 28 Days!!!". That's why it has that title, and is part of that series.
The Definitive Guides won't teach you the basics; that's why they aren't called "The Definitive Tutorial". They are the best reference books on their subjects, and the best to consult when you're most of the way there.
I believe some people do produce books with "For Dummies" in the title, but as you know enough to read O'Reilly books, they really should be beneath you ;-) But please don't expect a book to do something other than what it says it will. I use O'Reilly's books every day, but I go elsewhere when I'm beginning.
And to get back on topic: I have well-worn copies of the first and current editions of this book, and it is the book to look stuff up in. But it won't get you through the start of the learning curve. That's what the web is for.
Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
Sounds like Siebel...
Your haiku is weak
But still, you are trying hard
Ultimate power!
Don't give me none of this "nature theme" business.