- From: Vidiot <brown@mrvideo.vidiot.com>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:34:50 -0500 (CDT)
- To: www-amaya@w3.org (Amaya mail list)
>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