| Author |
Message |
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 31 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Martin_Zuidervliet: Quote:
The last couple of day I've been busy adding HTML text effects to my Overviews and I think it would be best if the standard Overview window would support HTML like the Notes window does now. If however it will be locked to a small number of effects I think at least these should be supported:
<b> and </b> for Bold
<i> and </i> for Italic
<u> and </u> for Underline
<sup> and <sup> for Superscript (example: for the Registered trade mark (®) behind "Oscar")
<big> and </big> to increase font size by one (example: Headlines)
<small> and </small> to decrease font size by one (example: Asterisk Notes) According to W3C, some of your HTML code is obsolete : <b> and </b> needs to be replaced by <strong> & </strong><i> and </i> needs to be replaced by <em> & </em> | | | | arcade games database. |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 5,918 |
| | Posted: | | | | Obsolete but the browsers will be backward compatible because nobody wants to break potentially millions of websites that have the old <b> tags and the older HTML editors which still use them. Many website developers still use them (I do, less typing) and even modern sites do (such as Invelos). |
|
| Registered: March 28, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,299 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
Many website developers still use them (I do, less typing) and even modern sites do (such as Invelos). Same here. Never did see the point of switching to em and strong. KM | | | Tags, tags, bo bags, banana fana fo fags, mi my mo mags, TAGS!
Dolly's not alone. You can also clone profiles.
You've got questions? You've got answers? Take the DVD Profiler Wiki for a spin. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 31 |
| | Posted: | | | | When you browse Invelos.com sources, you can see that the webmaster plan to do a XHTML 1.0 website. In XHTML, <b> and <i> are not valid. They was replaced by <strong> & <em>. Speaking of XHTML, invelos.com has a lot of works to do to be valid => 149 errors as of this writing. | | | | arcade games database. | | | | Last edited: by alexis.bousiges |
|
| Registered: May 19, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 5,918 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't trust the results of that. It's saying the anchor tag doesn't have an href attribute and doesn't seem to properly parse out (ignore) javascript. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 630 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
I don't trust the results of that. It's saying the anchor tag doesn't have an href attribute and doesn't seem to properly parse out (ignore) javascript. Ehh.. It's the w3c validator you do not trust. These guys do not implement the standard, they define it.  I do think the error list is not as clear as it could be though. For the example with the href on the anchor tag the problem really is that the anchor tag itself is wrong (the anchor tag is a lowercase "a" while uppercase "A" is an undefined tag) - and it would have been better if the validator simply listed the use of an invalid element on it's own without including each single attribute as an independent error. Too bad browsers render pages with errors like this.  | | | Regards
Lars |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 630 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Astrakan: Quote:
Quoting Dr. Killpatient:
Quote:
Many website developers still use them (I do, less typing) and even modern sites do (such as Invelos). Same here. Never did see the point of switching to em and strong.
KM The "point" is basically the spearation of content and layout introduced with CSS (or rather "meant to be introduced with CSS" as CSS is not nearly powerfull enough to do this). With "em" and "strong" you simply signals the text should "stand out" from the remaining text, leaving it to the stylesheet to determine how it should be rendered. While you could still do this keeping the tags "i" and "b" they had come to signal "italic" and "bold" specifically - which could be a bit messy when you think you have indicated text should render it bold, and the stylesheet the overides this leaving it as "normal" text but changing the color or something like that.... not to mention if it overrides <b> to be rendered with an italic font. | | | Regards
Lars |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 2,694 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Dr. Killpatient: Quote:
If by fundamental you mean the number of profiles that would need to be updated, I addressed that in my original post. It would be something that takes effect over time, not all at once.
If you mean that many, many hours went into deciding that bold and italics should be represented by a single quote, well, progress brings change. It didn't stop the people who spent months building the 286 CPU core even though they know it would be obsolete in a couple years. Do you really think saying you can't do it except for when you make several changes is going to stop people from doing it anyway? God, look at Genres. How many hundreds of times have people submitted just that change alone despite it being against the rules? No matter how you slice it, it would be a real pain in the neck and require a LOT of extra time to change all those profiles over. If Ken can do a global for part of it, that's great; but any time you do that sort of thing, the potential for hosing the entire setup is always lurking in the background. | | | John
"Extremism in the defense of Liberty is no vice!" Senator Barry Goldwater, 1964
Make America Great Again! |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 630 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Rifter: Quote:
Do you really think saying you can't do it except for when you make several changes is going to stop people from doing it anyway?
The upload system could detect this was the only change. Quote:
God, look at Genres. How many hundreds of times have people submitted just that change alone despite it being against the rules? No matter how you slice it, it would be a real pain in the neck and require a LOT of extra time to change all those profiles over.
I do not think anyone disagree it will be a pain. The discussion is just if the gain is worth the time - which will always be a personal call. Quote:
If Ken can do a global for part of it, that's great; but any time you do that sort of thing, the potential for hosing the entire setup is always lurking in the background. The method I outlined should be faily safe - the only real danger here is someone uploading overviews using bold where it should have been italics etc, but I doubt it would be a problem of any noticable magnitude. | | | Regards
Lars |
|
| Registered: March 15, 2007 | | Posts: 366 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting lmoelleb: Quote:
The "point" is basically the spearation of content and layout introduced with CSS (or rather "meant to be introduced with CSS" as CSS is not nearly powerfull enough to do this). Sure it is. My graphic designer and I have been working toward converting our sites over to CSS-only layouts. The issue isn't CSS, it's microsoft's refusal to correctly implement it in IE, which requires extra hours of CSS tweaking. It just takes a little practice and experience. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 13,203 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting skipnet50: Quote:
Martin:
Question for you. I worry about people arguing over font size. How would you suggest avoiding that. That is why I have not encouraged font size selection, BUT if there is a rational method of not starting Font Wars and Font Arguments. then....maybe.
Skip The solution would be to allow only 3 font sizes. FONT SIZE="X" for normal textFONT SIZE="X - 2" for footnotesFONT SIZE="X + 2" for large textAnything else would not be allowed. I don't know how difficult it would be to program, but it is something to think about. | | | No dictator, no invader can hold an imprisoned population by force of arms forever.
There is no greater power in the universe than the need for freedom.
Against this power, governments and tyrants and armies cannot stand.
The Centauri learned this lesson once.
We will teach it to them again.
Though it take a thousand years, we will be free.
- Citizen G'Kar |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 |  Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | Just allowing <big> and <small> is sufficient IMHO. The thing is will users abuse these sizes for text that does not have to be bigger or smaller. And this has to be made clear in the rules to prevent that from happening. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,029 |
| | Posted: | | | | I still fail to see the benefit of having something other than plain text in the Overview. I want to read the overview, and I want to search for text in the overview. Both is perfectly possible with the current implementation (well, ok, the search is somewhat limited, but that doesn't get fixed by htmlizing it). If I'm interested in the stylistic choices the designer made, I look at the back cover scan. | | | | Matthias | | | | Last edited: by goodguy |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 |  Posts: 775 |
| | Posted: | | | | I agree with that, goodguy. There does come a point where there's too much data being included that isn't of any real value. |
|
| Registered: March 14, 2007 | | Posts: 2,366 |
| | Posted: | | | | The point is: What looks better? "Ticks" or (HTML) "text effects". I know what I would choose. | | | Martin Zuidervliet
DVD Profiler Nederlands |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 775 |
| | Posted: | | | | I think goodguy was suggesting neither, since the only purpose of that field is to read and/or search the text. |
|