W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-translators@w3.org > October to December 2006

RE: COMMENTARY on Tutorials (English this time)

From: CE Whitehead <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 19:42:33 -0500
Message-ID: <BAY114-F8FFF63CF877BA7F2A265EB3E30@phx.gbl>
To: w3c-translators@w3.org
Cc: dsr@w3.org


Correction to the comment, 2.a (below)
a relative font size can be a problem for both tables of a particular size 
(if specified in pixels; the alternative is to specify table size in em 
which is relative to the font size set by the user at the user's end) and 
tables set to fit window size; it's almost impossible to predict what font 
size will create what effects according to window size.

Sorry about that!

Let me know if I can comment on these pages!

--C. E. Whitehead
cewcathar@hotmail.com

>From: "CE Whitehead" <cewcathar@hotmail.com>
>To: w3c-translators@w3.org
>CC: www-html-editor-request@w3.org
>Subject: COMMENTARY on Tutorials (English this time)
>Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2006 19:28:12 -0500
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>X-Originating-IP: [209.133.185.129]
>X-Originating-Email: [cewcathar@hotmail.com]
>X-Sender: cewcathar@hotmail.com
>Received: from frink.w3.org ([128.30.52.16]) by 
>bay0-mc4-f19.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.2444); Tue, 
>21 Nov 2006 16:33:28 -0800
>Received: from lists by frink.w3.org with local (Exim 4.50)id 
>1Gmfz2-0004wV-N2for w3c-translators-dist@listhub.w3.org; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 
>00:29:00 +0000
>Received: from lisa.w3.org ([128.30.52.41])by frink.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 
>4.50)id 1Gmfyk-0004uT-Ks; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:28:42 +0000
>Received: from bay0-omc1-s29.bay0.hotmail.com ([65.54.246.101])by 
>lisa.w3.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)id 1Gmfyf-0003P4-IZ; Wed, 22 Nov 2006 
>00:28:42 +0000
>Received: from hotmail.com ([65.54.169.13]) by 
>bay0-omc1-s29.bay0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 
>21 Nov 2006 16:28:13 -0800
>Received: from mail pickup service by hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC; 
>Tue, 21 Nov 2006 16:28:12 -0800
>Received: from 65.54.169.200 by by114fd.bay114.hotmail.msn.com with 
>HTTP;Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:28:12 GMT
>Received: pass (lisa.w3.org: domain of cewcathar@hotmail.com designates 
>65.54.246.101 as permitted sender)
>X-Message-Info: txF49lGdW42fvUhOT6LWEL70f6Tg4QOD2RKoJkG7d5k=
>X-OriginalArrivalTime: 22 Nov 2006 00:28:12.0970 (UTC) 
>FILETIME=[1840B8A0:01C70DCD]
>X-W3C-Hub-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6
>X-W3C-Scan-Sig: lisa.w3.org 1Gmfyf-0003P4-IZ 
>6a33ad635cbff8a4f58e5dc47aab6ba3
>X-Original-To: w3c-translators@w3.org
>X-Archived-At: 
>http://www.w3.org/mid/BAY114-F3B7E8A7CB125BF893AA83B3E30@phx.gbl
>Resent-From: w3c-translators@w3.org
>X-Mailing-List: <w3c-translators@w3.org> archive/latest/3049
>X-Loop: w3c-translators@w3.org
>Resent-Sender: w3c-translators-request@w3.org
>Precedence: list
>List-Id: <w3c-translators.w3.org>
>List-Help: <http://www.w3.org/Mail/>
>List-Unsubscribe: 
><mailto:w3c-translators-request@w3.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>Resent-Message-Id: <E1Gmfz2-0004wV-N2@frink.w3.org>
>Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:29:00 +0000
>Return-Path: w3c-translators-request@listhub.w3.org
>
>
>
>
>Hi, I am thinking of commenting on the following tutorials (in English this 
>time):
>
>Dave Raggett, "More Advanced Features" (of HTML),
>http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Guide/Advanced.html
>
>and
>
>Dave Raggett, "Adding a Touch of Style" (to HTML pages),
>http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Guide/Style.html
>
>Please let me know if such commentary would be in order
>(if Dr. Raggett is about to update either page, then I can skip this 
>commentary and wait and see if this commentary is in order)?
>
>Thanks.
>
>--C. E. Whitehead
>cewcathar@hotmail.com
>
>The main notes I have are:
>
>1.  GENERAL:
>XML served as a form of HTML, with XHTML, is now starting to be preferred 
>over HTML on the World Wide Web (XML is important in the semantic web; it's 
>possible to create one's own semantic categories using XML; XML uses tree 
>structures; trees--with roots, branches, and branches from the branches 
>(though I myself tend to think of the XML structures as parenthetical 
>comments inside of other parenthetical comments) are one kind of data 
>structure; tables--or arrays of arrays--are another).
>The XHTML has some similarities to HTML, but has its own peculiarities.  
>Persons interested in learning HTML might also be interested in learning 
>about XML and XHTML!  See the W3C Recommendation, XHTML 1.0, for 
>information about XHTML.
>
>2.  TABLES ("More Advanced Features"); FONT ("Adding a Touch of Style")
>
>The focus of the information/examples about Tables in "More Advanced 
>Features"/font size in "Adding a Touch of Style," seems to be in general 
>aimed at telling HTML writers how to create Tables that are more accessible 
>to all, with the font size relative to the user settings, and the cell size 
>flexible to accommodate when words are not wrapped.
>
>2.a.  Tables of Pre-defined size (versus tables where the width is defined 
>as a percentage of window width; or tables where the width is undefined) 
>("More Advanced Features"):
>Some writers however still use Tables to format pages; though style codes 
>that define divisions within the page today can similarly format a page 
>into rows and columns.
>If one opts to set the size of one's table in pixels, then perhaps one 
>should also specify the exact size of the font rather than a relative font 
>size, or the table size and column widths might be resized anyway (the 
>Mozilla browser, which never wraps longer text strings in a table cell, 
>does this; while the Internet Explorer browser can also wrap longer text 
>strings, for example, when the text string indicates a link).
>It's wise thus to opt for a relatively large font I guess to begin with in 
>pre-sized tables, to accommodate all users.
>It's of course possible to control word-wrapping completely in table cells 
>by inserting an additional division (a paragraph or other division) within 
>the cells, but word-wrapping is not one of the possible attributes of table 
>cells so it does not work with style definitions of table cells; you have 
>to add the division  (for HTML versions 4.0, 4.01).
>
>3.  The Banner Add java script code in the section on Adding Java Script to 
>HTML Pages ("More Advanced Features")
>
>Onload is an action which can be called on only once in a page; the 
>"onload" code is normally placed in the Body tag and when placed in the 
>Body tag will generally happen about the same time the page loads  (I do 
>not know that much java script though; oh well; want to comment on it 
>anyway).
>
>4.  ("Adding a Touch of Style")
>It's generally argued that the style codes (normally placed in the headers; 
>ideally place these in the headers, just above the body tag, if there are 
>no java script functions; otherwise place these in the headers just before 
>any java script functions are defined as java script functions sometimes 
>make use of the style definitions; of course, some web hosts incorporate 
>one's page into the body of a host-created page and then the only place to 
>place the style and java script function definitions is under the body tag 
>alas) are the best way to specify paragraph and division formats.
>To change the style of a page using style definitions at the page top, one 
>just has to redo the style codes at the top and then check the new display 
>in a few browsers to make sure the page looks right.
>MS Word of course places the style information in the page division tags 
>themselves, in the body, so it's not so easy to edit Word created pages 
>using HTML; additionally, style definitions at the top of the page are 
>overwritten when edited by MS Word.
>(For someone who did not want to get Front Page or learn much HTML, I redid 
>her pages with the style codes in the page division tags so that the page 
>would not be automatically changed by Word.)
>
>
>I've got a few other notes as well, but nothing else major.
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>MSN Shopping has everything on your holiday list. Get expert picks by 
>style, age, and price. Try it! 
>http://shopping.msn.com/content/shp/?ctId=8000,ptnrid=176,ptnrdata=200601&tcode=wlmtagline
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get the latest Windows Live Messenger 8.1 Beta version. Join now. 
http://ideas.live.com
Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2006 00:43:05 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:27:38 UTC