IRC Logs

Network: freenode Channel: #html

	Enter your search terms Submit search form
	Web www.irclog.org

[12:08]<mnzmzjjv>less academic and more economics?
[12:09]<pfraaym>and its annoying when you see this in the assignment sheet: This unit is not about design of Web pages, but do try and make your site attractive and all text easily readable
[12:09]<pfraaym>nah this unit is called dynamic web development
[12:09]<pfraaym>i don't see what is dynamic if we are doing static html/css
[12:10]<pfraaym>hows this for semantics??
[12:10]<pfraaym>- The content provided is just raw text. It is up to you to mark all this text up appropriately. There will be parts which should be headings, parts which should be in paragraphs, parts which should be emphasised, parts which should be in a table, etc. etc. etc. and it is entirely up to you to determine which parts are which and how best to mark up the text. Marks will be awarded so long as it seems reasonable and sensible
[12:11]<pfraaym>reasonable and sensible? what about conforming to w3c spec?
[12:17]<mnzmzjjv>html is rather reasonable and sensible about marking up text
[12:18]<pfraaym>it doesn't mark itself up..
[12:20]<mnzmzjjv>if it could, then we wouldn't need to write web pages because the computers can do it for us
[12:21]<pfraaym>but saying 'reasonable and sensible' could mean anything
[12:21]<pfraaym>there is not reference point or context
[12:22]<mnzmzjjv>well, wouldn't marking a paragraph with <p></p> be reasonable and sensible? just how many other HTML tags could you use to replace the <p> for paragraphs? none.
[12:24]<pfraaym>common sense does not equal common practice
[12:24]<pfraaym>besides thats not concise
[12:25]<mnzmzjjv>considering that the majority of the developers out there is still working under old assumptions, that is true
[12:25]<pfraaym>its subjective
[12:25]<pfraaym>and is proven by the amount of people in class still using the wrong elements
[12:25]<pfraaym>but it was reasonable and sensible in their mind
[12:26]<wg22gg>deadroot: at the risk of being tendentious, how about div for paragraphs that include block quotations
[12:26]<mnzmzjjv>webben: but divs do not carry the meaning that it is a paragraph
[12:27]<pfraaym>but its reasonable in the mind of people that do it
[12:27]<wg22gg>deadroot: that's true, but p cannot convey the meaning of a paragraph containing a block quotation
[12:27]<wg22gg>deadroot: so div is the next best thing
[12:27]<mnzmzjjv>html blockquote
[12:27]<mnzmzjjv>`html blockquote
[12:27]<rtfs>html blockquote: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#edef-BLOCKQUOTE
[12:27]<wg22gg>deadroot: because p cannot contain blockquote
[12:27]<wg22gg>(until xhtml2 of course)
[12:27]<mnzmzjjv>why would you want a p to contain a blockquote?
[12:28]<pfraaym>it seems sensible..
[12:28]<wg22gg>deadroot: as i had to explain at tedious length on one of these channels, it's extremely common in normal English writing (books) for paragraphs to contain block quotes
[12:28]<wg22gg>deadroot: because paragraphs are meant to express a single idea
[12:28]<wg22gg>deadroot: not just blocks of text
[12:28]<mnzmzjjv>i see
[12:29]<wg22gg>deadroot: look at the blockquotes in a book sometime, and you'll notice that sometimes the text after the blockquote is indented and sometimes not
[12:29]<wg22gg>that typographic convention reflects the difference between a paragraph containing a blockquote
[12:29]<wg22gg>and a paragraph containing a blockquote followed by another paragraph
[12:43]<pfraaym>deadroot: have a laugh at the assignment sheet http://www.ids.org.au/~fordhamc/soc/kxt105/Assignment1.pdf
[12:48]<mnzmzjjv>not much to laugh at actually. only the using .html for xhtml stuff and the sample text
[12:48]<mnzmzjjv>otherwise, this would have stumped the vast majority of my class
[12:50]<mnzmzjjv>s/class/year/
[12:53]<pfraaym>serious
[12:54]<pfraaym>its just funny 'we teach the new xhtml'
[12:54]<pfraaym>bleh
[12:54]<zdrud9166>join #svnprecursors
[13:01]<mnzmzjjv>Nanobot: around?
[14:36]<snzryjf>is there a way to get a filter *.PDF for input type=file?
[14:37]<mjzwzzm>sergiol: Not in practise
[14:59]<axnssrud>`validate http://cscl.ist.psu.edu/~awagner/test.html
[15:00]<axnssrud>ergh, wrong channel
[15:00]<20rv>No, wrong switch.
[15:01]<axnssrud>that too
[15:24]<mld>hi guys
[15:25]<mld>is there really nothing one can do te prevent a relative <div> to become 100% width instead of "just the width that it needs" ?
[15:25]<mjzwzzm>display: table; works in browsers that support CSS 2...
[15:26]<mld>I figure that's not meant for me ?
[15:26]<mjzwzzm>It was meant for you
[15:27]<mld>I don't understand the connection, sorry
[15:27]<mjzwzzm>Thinks which are display: table shrink wrap.
[15:27]<mld>http://ruby-dlx.rubyforge.org/types.html
[15:27]<mld>how do I get the code snippet to only occupy the space that it needs ?
[15:27]<mjzwzzm>s/Thinks/Things/
[15:27]<mld>well I use a table
[15:28]<mld>can you see that page ?
[15:28]<mjzwzzm>Yes
[15:28]<vzdgdvd>hey guys, any ideas how i can use an image on the lowest z-index but make it relative to the users resolution?
[15:28]<mjzwzzm>dpy: XHTML 1.1? Served as text/html? That's rather broken.
[15:29]<mld>how should it be served then ?
[15:29]<mld>text/xml ?
[15:29]<mjzwzzm>dpy: As application/xhtml+xml
[15:29]<20rv>Trinity: I'm trying to draw a connection between scaling and z-index and I can't. And note that the resolution is almost always irrelevant. Don't you mean the window dimensions?
[15:29]<mld>ok, I'll look into it, it's probably my webserver
[15:29]<mjzwzzm>dpy: http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-xhtml-media-types-20020430/
[15:30]<vzdgdvd>b0at: sorry yeh, i have an image that i want to fill the entire background of the page and i need it to be relative to the size of the browser window
[15:31]<20rv>The simplest way to do that is to use an img element with width and height specified in percentages and placed before everything so it's under that when it's positioned
[15:32]<vzdgdvd>b0at: but the image has to be on the lowest layer and therefore absolute-positioned, so the image can only be resized via non-relative numbers
[15:32]<20rv>Just because it's positioned doesn't mean you can't use width: 100%;
[15:32]<vzdgdvd>width:100% gives me th efull size of the pic
[15:33]<20rv>Of course in any case resizing the image will be slightly slow and ugly, don't forget that
[15:33]<vzdgdvd>the*
[15:33]<20rv>From CSS, it should size it relative to a container
[15:33]<vzdgdvd>ah i was using width within the tag
[15:34]<vzdgdvd>so is it the image or the div i should be settin width of?
[15:34]<vzdgdvd>within css i mean
[15:34]<20rv>I would imagine you'd need to size the img element most importantly
[15:35]<mld>Dorward: lol, I was trying to fix it on my own webserver, but that one gives application/xhtml+xml correctly
[15:35]<mld>Dorward: it's rubyforge that is broken in this regard and I cannot do anything about it
[15:35]<mjzwzzm>dpy: Then don't use XHTML 1.1?
[15:36]<mld>Dorward: no, I want to use xhtml1.1
[15:36]<mjzwzzm>It isn't like it can give you any advantage over HTML 4.01 Strict since you're serving it as text/html
[15:36]<mld>read the link you gave
[15:36]<mld>it's not an error
[15:36]<mld>and it's not broken
[15:36]<mjzwzzm>You want to use XHTML 1.1, but the server won't let you do it right. So why?
[15:36]<mld>read up abouth the MAY, COULD, WOULD and SHOULD for RFC and IETF documents
[15:37]<mjzwzzm>Its labeled "SHOULD NOT", which means "Don't do this underless you understand the consequences." Since there are only negative consequences and no benefits - why?
[15:37]<mjzwzzm>s/underless/unless/

Back to #html
Or go to some related logs:
#netbsd
#gentoo
#gentoo
#php
#gentoo