- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 17:55:03 -0500
- To: John McLaren <fieldlab@yahoo.com>, 'public-evangelist@w3.org' <public-evangelist@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <8586ADBD-4FB5-11D9-AE12-000A95718F82@w3.org>
Dear John, Le 16 déc. 2004, à 11:43, John McLaren a écrit : > A big problem with the W3C documentation is serious lack of practical > examples. That is true. :) But it's why I proposed the XHTML Best Practices Project at http://www.w3.org/mid/8F2BF636-2CD5-11D9-8D7E-000A95718F82@w3.org You are welcome to participate and submit the first explanation for one element. That would be more than appreciated and it will help a lot of people. > Look at all the differences in the syntax requirements of XHTML. Yes it's called simplification. The rules became stricter it's then easier to follow. As surprising as it can be, it's often for beginners a lot easier to follow a minimal set of rules which are always the same. "All tags closed, all attributes with their value quoted, all element names and attributes in lowercase, etc. " And I can even make an affirmation of that, because before working at W3C, I worked in a Web agency and before that in and I have taught W3C technologies. I can tell you that XHTML 1.0 is a lot easir to teach. I still have contacts with people teaching it… and it's still confirmed. :))) In fact those who have more difficulties with XHTML are often old SGML riders. :))) [ As a note I have started with HTML+ and ancestors, it seems I succeeded making the transition ] > ridiculous "/" requirements that any intelligent parser could > automatically :) yes HTML Tidy can do that for you, if you really can't cope with it. Make your text in HTML 4.01 and you can convert it in XHTML 1.0. Just as reminder. HTML 4.01 (SGML) ---> XHTML 1.0 (XML) And you can ensure you that there are plenty of tools that can deal with XML files. :) > It's like a circular, self-justifying form of tech-elitism. hehe it reminds me of comments when HTML appeared, and some people were using Word Processors like MacWrite. They were saying that HTML was tech-elitism. > actually CONTINUING a development branch to maintain a DTD for a > simple, highly intuitive type of HTML document intended for 99% of the > people outside the W3C. Well the 99% of the people outside of W3C and even inside should not hand-code HTML or XHTML. :) [Though I love to hand code but let's say I'm a bit weird. Even with this fact about me, I do not wish anyone to hand code] But you are right many softwares have to improve their User Interface. But I think that a typewriter with a postal email address would have been a lot simpler way of replying to you, more than using this computer which is intrinsically overly complicated. I apologize for this note of humour, but you are right in a sense, things are getting more complex, sometimes, but it also helps us to achieve more things, even for the 99% people out there (think about horse->car, balloon->plane, typewriter->computer, etc.) -- Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/ W3C Conformance Manager *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Friday, 17 December 2004 01:57:50 UTC