Re: Can't find a bunch of stuff

>Although maybe not too serious for the main questions, missing that
>library may render your installation useless as "expat" is a
>(HTML/XHTML/XML) parser... But I leave this question to more
>experienced users, as I don't know enough about Amaya's implementation
>- will it try using other possibly available parsers such as
>"libxml"?. Maybe someone else can comment on this...

The use of Fedora Core 7 is short lived, as I am putting together a new
system that I will be loading with Solaris 10, so I'll be compiling the
code.

The non-pre relese version installed just fine.  I just wanted to note that
the pre-release of the next version will not install on generic FC7 systems.
It is very possible that FC8 and FC9 users won't have an issue.  It is just
one of those "just in case" notices.

>This seems to be a general (unrelated to Amaya) question. ;-)

Try, but I do not know how other software handles it.  I'm just hoping that
there is a way to tell Amaya what the "root" is.

> * When using local files, it will map to "SomeFile.ext" inside
>"SomePath" folder located in the _root_ file system!

It seems that Amaya can't figure out the "root" filesystem.

>Just remove the trailing slash from your URL(s). For your sample,
>instead of '/styles/tvshows.css' simply using './styles/tvshows.css'
>(I personally prefer this notation) or 'styles/tvshows.css' will work
>(if files are really there and relative to the referring file as
>you've stated).

Um, that is the leading slash :-)

Unfortunately that will not work.  At least not for the two examples you
give, because the stylesheet directory is actually ../styles/tvshows.css
in this particular location.  The reason I use the absolute path is for
ease of copying HTML files and using them as templates and that I can forget
about having to fix the stylesheet directory location.  Same goes for all of
the other files involded.  Absolute means code one and forget.

You'd think it would be easy to set a root path such that when a file is
loaded that is further down that leading portion of the path, it would know
to prepend the "root" path to absolute references.

>Yes, I somehow agree on this one. Maybe text highlight could/should be
>configurable (used colors or even allowing the feature to be disabled
>for improved contrast).

I don't know how the developers haven't gone blind trying to see/read the
very light text :-)  It is really hard to work with.  So, based upon your
response, I have to assume that it isn't configurable. :-(

>Well, it seems your fear has come true - FONT is deprecated [3],
>meaning it should _not_ be used anymore. Please consider improving
>your skills on CSS [4] - trust me, your life will become much easier
>after you've mastered just a bit of it! ;-)

Oh, I know it is deprecated, which is why my web pages are not marked as
strict :-)  For the life of me, I do not understand my the distaste for
the FONT element.

As seen by the example, I do use style sheets.  In some cases what you need
to do does adhere to the KISS principle.  Making some text appear to vanish
from the screen is very easily, and simply done, with FONT.  Whatever is done,
there has to be something wrapped around the text.  In the examples, given,
<STRONG> is available for creating a class to change the font color.  So,
either I add a CLASS attribute to strong, or I enclose the text within <FONT>,
the amount of text is all that much different.  Yes there a little more when
done withing the HTML document itself.  Plus, you came "see" what you are
wanting to do with the text right there in the HTML document.  With CSS,
you have to open the stylesheet file and see what you were doing.  After time
it would become 2nd nature to know that the class did.

Having to load a stylesheet brings up another point.  The load to the server
to provide a page to a requestor has increased, as now you are not only
sending out the HTML document, you are also having to send out the style
sheet.  In some cases, it is possible that the style sheet could actually
be larger than the HTML document (if the style sheet was written as a one
sheet does all, which I certainly do not believe in.  KISS.  The point is
that the internet is not a limitless resource in which one can just spit
out bytes and bytes of data.

A prime example of abuse is Yahoo and their mail lists.  Someone could
send out a simple two line posting, but the e-mail I end up getting can be
300 lines long, containing crap loads of HTML crap about Yahoo, or whatever.
A total waste of valuable resources.  Hey, bigger is better!!! :-(

So, my point is why kill a perfect useful element like FONT.  Sure, for more
complicated font things, and/or pages that make tons of use of the same
font display characteristic, the use of style sheets is perfect.  I most
certainly do that.  I haven't gone back and converted old pages, but for many
pages I have gone back and "updated" to style sheets, as the total amount of
bytes between the style sheet and the HTML document are reduced.

Call me an old die-hard, or fuddy-duddy, but to me, throwing out FONT is
kinda like throwing out the baby with the bath water. :-)

Just so you don't think that FONT is the only element, there are many that
I don't understand the need to deprecate.

I think CENTER is another one.  Not sure why and not sure what it can be
replace with in order to create a class.  Unless there is something that
I am missing in my understanding of CSS, but CLASS has to be used with an
element.  So, does this mean that I have to create a class called CENTER
and then use it with an element like DIV?  Just what does that accomplish?
The CENTER element is just 6 characters long.  Creating a CENTER class will
require more chracters and to just use it will mean something like:

	<DIV CLASS="center">

The character count just went from six to twelve.  What happened to KISS?

I'll climb off my soapbox now.  I tend to get long winded about stuff like
this.  The KISS logic, to me, appears to have been thrown out of the window.

>[1] http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#bespecific
>[2] http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html#id306968

I try my best to do the above.  I don't always succeed.  I've "grown up"
with doing support in one way or another in the electronics and computer
industry for 30+ years and know the value of having data that can help solve
the problem.  As seen above, I can get off-topic though.

>[4] http://www.w3schools.com/css/

Thanks for the link.  I didn't know about this resource.

As indicated, I do use CSS on many of my pages and I do use them on different
pages of the same type of content.  I admit that I have a lot to learn about
writing CSS files.

Your point about using relative paths is a good one.  On many pages there
are relative paths instead of absolute.  I've explained why I did it the
way I did.  That is now haunting me with Amaya, and quite possibly with
any other editer.  I'll probably fix the pages on a need-be basis.

In the case of this particular page, I added the ".." before the style sheet
path and nothing happened.  Amaya didn't attempt to read the changed path,
which I would have expected.  I had to close the tab and reopen the file.
Then it rendered using the contents of the style sheet.

Ah, I think I see what needs to happen.  I added the ".." to three images
and the page didn't update until the file was saved.  I would think that
Amaya would show you what it would look like before saving the document,
since maybe the appearance of the change might not be to your liking.

In any event, your suggestion does indeed work, thanks.

Time to watch Wednesday's Jeopardy in HD today.

MB
-- 
e-mail: vidiot@vidiot.com                                /~\ The ASCII
[I've been to Earth.  I know where it is.         ]      \ / Ribbon Campaign
[And I'm gonna take us there.    Starbuck  3/25/07]       X  Against
Visit - URL: http://vidiot.com/                          / \ HTML Email

Received on Tuesday, 24 June 2008 04:35:27 UTC