Megan — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:18:14 +0000

dk01 wrote: Yes this is true. And at the moment tags are more semantically valid than the abstract tag.

I don't know, I think this could lead to mis-use of the p tag. P is for paragraph - that's it. So defining layout elements that aren't paragraphs as paragraphs is the same sort of abuse discussed above with the tables and lists as layout elements.

The DIV tag is meant for this sort of purpose. It is a generic contaniner meant to hold collections of other elements.

http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/html40/block/div.html
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#edef-DIV

EGS — Sun, 12 Feb 2006 03:19:03 +0000

Simply just use XHTML / CSS because it loads faster. It's really that simple.

dk01 — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:17:46 +0000

mrksoliz wrote: just a quick reply you don't have to use DIV's with css it is possible to use the tags with the class or id inside the tag. you get the same outcome.

Yes this is true. And at the moment tags are more semantically valid than the abstract tag.

mrksoliz — Sat, 11 Feb 2006 16:16:05 +0000

just a quick reply you don't have to use DIV's with css it is possible to use the tags with the class or id inside the tag. you get the same outcome.

dk01 — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 21:55:59 +0000

Busy wrote: Just wanted to mention FF does allow sloppy code, they didn't use to but now do. Netscape is still the strickest browser but they too are becoming relaxed. All browsers allow sloppy code to an extreme - A step backwards to allow IE to catch up?

This is true but it's only thanks to the XHTML 1.0 DTD (allows for transitional) and depends on whether you are serving your page as html or as xml. If you serve your document as XHTML 1.1 or as XHTML 1.0 Strict then you should be serving the page as XML. If you make an error in your XML then Firefox will throw an error.

You are correct though that at the moment FF allows for older/sloppy code. The next step is to go from Transitional to Strict (not all sites need to do so yet until IE7 comes out).

Busy — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 21:14:03 +0000

dk01 wrote: Have you ever used Firefox?!?! It parses tables perfectly if your code is correct (closed all tags, no typos). I think you must have some incorrect code in your page and this causes Firefox to barf out your page. Firefox should not go fixing your sloppy code whereas IE does this for you but includes many bugs. It is generally accepted by coders that Firefox is the best browser at parsing code because it does not allow you to cut corners and write bad code. ...

Just wanted to mention FF does allow sloppy code, they didn't use to but now do. Netscape is still the strickest browser but they too are becoming relaxed. All browsers allow sloppy code to an extreme - A step backwards to allow IE to catch up?

DaveyBoy — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 20:54:18 +0000

ahhhh nothing beats this thread for arguments

WOW! I can't believe this.

dk01 — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 19:55:39 +0000

steve40 wrote: I wont change it for any reason!

So why are you in the debate?!? You are criticizing people for conforming to what the hypothetical "man" says yet you are so hard headed you can't aren't even willing to look at any other views! Hypocrisy abound!

steve40 wrote: I have found the more you mess with anything, the worse it gets Not Better. Every time a software mfg., comes out with a new version of a program. I give it a look, most of the time the older one is better. People seem to not be able to stay with anything, that works well. But instead like to create confusion. This confusion they call progress; Ha Ha.

This statement is exasperating really. According to your view of the world we should all go back and live in caves?

steve40 wrote: As far as polotics go; I wont even get into that, it's worse than this issue. But find me anything! that is not infested with it anymore. Thats exactly what this debate is.

No its not about politics so if you could stop bringing it into the debate we could get back on topic.

steve40 wrote: As far as a standard goes, tables are far more less trouble prone to problems than any other method.

True but just because something is the easiest does not make it the best solution. Development is a process. Sometimes code gets bloated and you need to find a more sleek solution. Standards help expand the web's capabilities and help cut out useless and purposeless table code. Adding meaning to the web is something you should read about. Its very interesting and helps people while still cutting code. I guess that's a theory being pushed by uninformed techies right?

steve40 wrote: All browsers see them the same, with exceptions of the little red fox. I hate that piece of crap, and don't see for the life of me who even thinks it's better. I guess it's because the "great ones" told them it was.

Have you ever used Firefox?!?! It parses tables perfectly if your code is correct (closed all tags, no typos). I think you must have some incorrect code in your page and this causes Firefox to barf out your page. Firefox should not go fixing your sloppy code whereas IE does this for you but includes many bugs. It is generally accepted by coders that Firefox is the best browser at parsing code because it does not allow you to cut corners and write bad code. What are your reasons for not using it? So far I have seen no sources or examples from you. Just meaningless propaganda.

steve40 wrote: So in the end it's nothing to worry about, from what I read they are going to shut us down anyway. So have fun while the sun is shining, dark days are coming.

Who are you talking about? Is the "us" you speak of the people who want to reverse time and think all change is bad change? If so, I say good to shutting you down, and good riddance.

I'm sorry and I respect everyone's views here but there is so much unsubstantiated fodder in this last post that I had to respond with hostility to this apparently hard headed member.

Due to the fact that I want this discussion to move forward in a positive way I beg for steve40 to start quoting sources or at least keep this discussion on topic. Its fine to disagree, but coming up with evil conspiracy theories, not addressing questions posed to you, and calling software a "piece of crap" does nothing to further the debate. Show us something of subject or step aside and let those of us who are serious about this debate go forward.

I suggest you and anyone in this post read The World is Flat by Thomas L. Freidman for a basic review of the history of protocols, the history of the web, and browser wars.

-Jim

steve40 — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:30:10 +0000

I work at making my sites conform to the standards, although I really don't know why. I have an old site that does not conform to any, and strangely it looks the same in any browser. I do use some css, and tables, I personally like tables it's the way I learned. And I wont change it for any reason!.

I have found the more you mess with anything, the worse it gets Not Better. Every time a software mfg., comes out with a new version of a program. I give it a look, most of the time the older one is better. People seem to not be able to stay with anything, that works well. But instead like to create confusion. This confusion they call progress; Ha Ha.

As far as polotics go; I wont even get into that, it's worse than this issue. But find me anything! that is not infested with it anymore. Thats exactly what this debate is.

As far as a standard goes, tables are far more less trouble prone to problems than any other method. All browsers see them the same, with exceptions of the little red fox. I hate that piece of crap, and don't see for the life of me who even thinks it's better. I guess it's because the "great ones" told them it was.

So in the end it's nothing to worry about, from what I read they are going to shut us down anyway. So have fun while the sun is shining, dark days are coming.

DaveyBoy — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:04:21 +0000

Some of us just don't want to