Click here to get back home

DTD? Is address element block or inline?
 Home | NewsGroups | Search | About
Login Password
Register Now!
 comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html    Post an article   get this group's latest topics as an RSS feed add this group's latest topics to your My MSN content add this group's latest topics to your My Yahoo content
Subject Author Date
DTD? Is address element block or inline? Eric Lindsay 12-15-2005
Posted by Eric Lindsay on December 16, 2005, 7:15 am
Please log in for more thread options


>
> > I'm trying to learn how to read a DTD I wanted to use,
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd
>
> Why? It hasn't any relevance for HTML.

I had seen comments elsewhere as to the irrelevance of the association
between rendering web pages and SGML. Thanks to web pages from people
who participate in this group about tag soup parsers, I also (now)
realise that user agents are not going to run an SGML parser.

However in trying to unlearn old bad habits about HTML and CSS, I keep
finding tutorials and guides (and even books) that are just plain wrong.
I've been advised previously in this group that reading the W3C pages
and the DTD are the only way to be sure of what the standards actually
say. So however flawed the combination of my lack of understand and the
differences of the standard from the reality of web pages in general, it
still seems a better way to learn how to write a standards compliant web
page than reading some of the tutorials.

I have tried about 25 HTML editors recently (not yet through them all).
So far all of the HTML editors I have tried have left me free to write
web pages that are not standards compliant. They mostly provided
minimal guidance as to allowed elements and attributes at any stage in
writing (despite the pick lists). I could just keep writing my pages in
vi and TextEdit, but it increasingly seems plain silly not to have
better tools than that 15 years after the web appeared.

So I thought I would prototype up some sort of content management system
and web page generator for myself. The result should be easier for me
than just using a text editor. More importantly, by prototyping, I get
a better idea of what I really need to be looking for in editors and
CMS. I was contemplating extracting my pick lists for generating pages
direct from the DTD. Hence the need to understand it.

> Anyway, if you want to understand SGMLese

I really would prefer not to have to extend into that area, if I can
learn enough to pull apart a DTD without doing so. Thank you for the
helpful references however.

> I don't see the point, though, except if you have plans to mangle a
> private DTD for usage in SGML aware authoring tools.

I hope I never do anything that elaborate.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com

Posted by Eric B. Bednarz on December 16, 2005, 12:43 am
Please log in for more thread options


> However in trying to unlearn old bad habits about HTML and CSS, I keep
> finding tutorials and guides (and even books) that are just plain wrong.

You don't say. :^)

> I've been advised previously in this group that reading the W3C pages
> and the DTD are the only way to be sure of what the standards actually
> say.

Right. But, erm... What *standards*?
The W3C HTML 4.01 recommendation is a fine common denominator to start
with, as long as you don't take its normative references to real
standards all too serious.

> I have tried about 25 HTML editors recently (not yet through them all).
> So far all of the HTML editors I have tried have left me free to write
> web pages that are not standards compliant.

Oh if that's all you want...

<http://aquamacs.org/> (I suppose your user-agent field isn't forged ;-)

I suggest writing XHTML in nxml mode, schema-validates while you type
out of the box. You may prefer to use a XHTML 1.0 strict schema instead
of the XHTML modules, you can translate the DTD to RELAX NG with trang:

<http://www.thaiopensource.com/relaxng/trang.html>


For text/html, old-fashioned PSGML (parses the document type declaration
and provides contextual editing based upon that) might be more
appropriate but also way more difficult to set up to its full potential
(*especially* on OS X, which is little more than pretty fonts on an
inherently broken file system).


--
||| hexadecimal EBB
o-o decimal 3771
--oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
205 goodbye binary 111010111011

Posted by Eric Lindsay on December 17, 2005, 8:52 am
Please log in for more thread options




> Right. But, erm... What *standards*?
> The W3C HTML 4.01 recommendation is a fine common denominator to start
> with

HTML 4.01 Strict for the moment. My old pages are close enough that I
can get them to comply within a reasonable time span. I did a light
HTML and CSS makeover about 4-5 years ago, based on advice from this
group back then.

I can not see any point in moving to XHTML if it was just going to be
served as text/html to ensure IE displays a page. I sort of figure I
will be back in this news group in about 5 years asking about updating
to XML.

> > So far all of the HTML editors I have tried have left me free to write
> > web pages that are not standards compliant.
>
> Oh if that's all you want...

Well, it is not all I want, but it is a part of this move. The main
point of this move is to get my web site update routine to a point where
it isn't any worse than I had 10 years ago at a university.

> <http://aquamacs.org/> (I suppose your user-agent field isn't forged ;-)

I never did get into Emacs, so I hadn't even put it on my list of
editors to check. Thanks for pointing out Aquamacs. No, the user agent
isn't forged. I really should add the Eric conspiracy secret labs
header however. Thanks for reminding me of that also.

> I suggest writing XHTML in nxml mode, schema-validates while you type
> out of the box. You may prefer to use a XHTML 1.0 strict schema instead
> of the XHTML modules, you can translate the DTD to RELAX NG with trang:
>
> <http://www.thaiopensource.com/relaxng/trang.html>

That sounds pretty good, if I do go with XHTML. The URL won't open, but
it looks like information on trang is widespread. Thanks.

> For text/html, old-fashioned PSGML (parses the document type declaration
> and provides contextual editing based upon that) might be more
> appropriate but also way more difficult to set up to its full potential
> (*especially* on OS X, which is little more than pretty fonts on an
> inherently broken file system).

Thanks very much for pointing out PSGML, which I didn't realise even
existed. The first page of Google hits listed someone I know mentioning
PSGML in the comp sci lecture notes they give. I'll ask them whether
they actually use it on their Macintosh. Speaking of which, the major
alternative left me wanting to defenestrate my computer, so that left me
without many choices.

--
http://www.ericlindsay.com

Posted by Leonard Blaisdell on December 16, 2005, 6:42 pm
Please log in for more thread options




> > (*especially* on OS X, which is little more than pretty fonts on an
> > inherently broken file system).

> I'll ask them whether
> they actually use it on their Macintosh. Speaking of which, the major
> alternative left me wanting to defenestrate my computer, so that left me
> without many choices.

Perhaps Mr. Bednarz would enlighten _me_ in <news:comp.sys.mac.sys>.
That seems an appropriate forum in which to trash Macs without going to
the extreme of advocacy. Far more savvy people than I will be happy to
argue his *broken file system* statement. And some may even agree. I
might learn something. But not here.

leo

--
<http://web0.greatbasin.net/~leo/>

Posted by Eric B. Bednarz on December 18, 2005, 9:36 pm
Please log in for more thread options



> Perhaps Mr. Bednarz would enlighten _me_ in <news:comp.sys.mac.sys>.

Mr. Bednarz apparently preferred to enjoy his weekend.

> That seems an appropriate forum in which to trash Macs without going to
> the extreme of advocacy. Far more savvy people than I will be happy to
> argue his *broken file system* statement. And some may even agree. I
> might learn something. But not here.

Thanks, but no thanks. The only thing on earth that I can imagine to be
even less appealing than arguing with Linux bigots is arguing with Apple
fangirls. I wouldn't consider one snippy remark in parentheses an
invitation for discussion, BTW; I see propaganda on less solid ground
(remarks about bad performance of HFS+ in general and incompatibility
with Unix in particular shouldn't really come as a shock these days)
aimed at Redmond flying under the political correction radar every other
day, here, there and everywhere.


--
||| hexadecimal EBB
o-o decimal 3771
--oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
205 goodbye binary 111010111011

Similar ThreadsPosted
Inline-Element with higher font-size inside A: Hover about full height? November 21, 2006, 7:55 pm
Can TR element be direct child node of TABLE element? February 13, 2005, 12:17 pm
table inside div block - no joy April 2, 2006, 6:26 pm
How to make block elements flow? May 15, 2005, 6:50 pm
IE7 Display:BLock and line breaks March 27, 2008, 2:41 pm
DOM CSS display:none/block switching hover problem December 29, 2004, 5:08 pm
XHTML Validation fails with nested block elements. January 10, 2005, 5:38 am
W3C Spec: Block level content within ? Style in ? Why? June 9, 2005, 6:20 am
Mozila Firefox: iframe keep relocate its position when set display block/hiden of another html component? October 11, 2004, 3:57 pm
inline frames September 21, 2005, 8:48 pm

Our other projects:

Art Dolls, Fairies and Mermaids - Sunnyfaces.net

Roy's Linux, Programming and Search Engines messages

1-Script XML SitemapXML Sitemap