Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Knowledge Base
Documentation
Terry's Tips
Darren's Tips

w3c compliance

I just realized a test to adapt a table template
http://www.elanceur.org/CityDeskWeblog/CityDeskFrance/TableauHTML.html

It seems to work... ouf ;-)

I'm still searching to find an easy way to insert a picture in the sidebar... and keep the validation ?

Christophe Ducamp (France)
Tuesday, May 21, 2002

Sorry ... I did not see that link before...
http://discuss.fogcreek.com/CityDesk/default.asp?cmd=show&ixPost=3368&ixReplies=1

So to be w3c compliance, I manually clean the code in the html view... Afterwards, cut and copy

- clean <span> and </span> and cd:pos... that'all !
and the page seems to be compliant.

CityDesk is really amazing and a pleasure... thanks

Christophe Ducamp (France)
Thursday, May 23, 2002

Just finished (with some difficulties but that's done) a template of tableless w3c compliant xthml 1.0.

The CSS sheet is directly coming from Pascale en Normandie
The idea of putting a variable of the TOCTable comes from BrianStPierre.

http://www.elanceur.org/CityDeskWeblog/CityDeskFrance/FaireunTableauSansTableau.html (en français ;-)

Thanks CityDesk rocks...

xtof

Christophe Ducamp (France)
Saturday, May 25, 2002

I'm a novice at HTML and my French isn't so hot, but I think I have at least some of the idea. Neat stuff. The two-column layout looks good in IE 6.0, NS 6.2 and Opera 6.02. (Except for what I assume is a minor error in previously clicked links.) For the  the 4-column layout, NS and Opera both have difficulty when horizontal size is made too small.

What are the oldest versions of these browsers that could use W3C compliant XHTML 1.0? What happens in an older version browser that can't handle XHTML if a web site uses it?
Thanks.

Y
Sunday, May 26, 2002

It depends, really, on how much you are relying on. In general, a site that's designed for XHTML 1.0 Strict and CSS 2 is going to require a version 6+ browser across the boards.

You can, however, design a site w/ XHTML 1.0 Transitional and still allow it to support older browsers while being compliant. That's really what it's for: as a transition from 4.x to 6.x browser code.

The differences, though, are going to be quite large when you consider how the pages are built. Most people these days make heavy, heavy use of <table> for layout purposes. You're going to end up sticking with this kind of a system for 4.x compatibility. In a pure 6+ layout system, you'll be making heavy use of <div> and <span> to divide up sections and apply formatting.

I bit the bullet recently and went with a 6+ layout system for my site (with the exception of my weblog; I don't have strong enough control over the display generation system to ensure that it's XHTML compliant). If you browse there with an old browser, all the information is there, but it's largely unformatted (much like what you'd get if you browsed places with a text-only browser like Lynx). If you do a "View | Source" on my XHTML pages, you'll see that it's primarily <div>-based (even the forms). I reserve <table> now for actual tabular data.

http://www.quality.nu/

Brad Wilson
Sunday, May 26, 2002

Thanks Brad for you example,

I have finished to search for a W3C XHTML compliance. CityDesk writes the code in capital letters. But HTML4.0 is sufficient and really nice too for the layers.

Still searching to build Tableless templates, I tried a few days ago to insert the "Eric Meyer's Menu Rollover here :
http://www.elanceur.org/CityDeskWeblog/CityDeskFrance/ConstructionBarreMenu.html. The page looks really light.

My favorites tips and links on CSS based templates are here (in French) : http://www.elanceur.org/CityDeskWeblog/CityDeskFrance/CentredeRessourcesCSS.html.

Just discovering HTML and CSS, the task is quite tough. But once you've fixed the template, it's a pleasure to keep w3c HTML compliance.

I will be always happy if you drop any suggestion on the optimization.

Christophe Ducamp (France)
Tuesday, June 04, 2002

oops the links don't work. The dot at the end of the URL has to be removed ! sorry

Christophe Ducamp (France)
Tuesday, June 04, 2002

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home