|
Posted by Stefan Ram on November 28, 2008, 10:07 am
Please log in for more thread options
show/hide quoted text
>problems (so far). It turned out I didn't even need any server changes,
>since files with an xhtml extension were served correctly by default.
This sounds as if all URIs were changed upon changing the language.
http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI
|
|
Posted by Eric Lindsay on November 28, 2008, 4:12 pm
Please log in for more thread options
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> >problems (so far). It turned out I didn't even need any server changes,
> >since files with an xhtml extension were served correctly by default.
>
> This sounds as if all URIs were changed upon changing the language.
>
> http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI
That is correct. The URI were all changed, except for index.html and
browser.html Luckily the web site is very new, and searches indicate
very few links to it, except a few I can change and those in this
newsgroup.
I also took advantage of the xhtml change to improve the naming of the
pages. I have been used to sticking with very short (one word) file
names, but perhaps it is time for me to use more descriptive names.
That seems to indicate I should have also thought more about information
architecture, and planned the site names and relationships right from
the start. What I mostly do is start typing a file about a topic, and
when I first save it, make up some convenient short name. Thank you for
raising that matter.
For the moment I have also left the original pages available.
--
http://www.ericlindsay.com
|
|
Posted by Stefan Ram on November 28, 2008, 4:41 pm
Please log in for more thread options show/hide quoted text
>What I mostly do is start typing a file about a topic, and
>when I first save it, make up some convenient short name.
That's perfect! Just don't change it.
Any attempt to »improve« a URI really is the culprit.
Imagine, for example, someone at Google, Inc. would have
the idea to change »Google« into a »more descriptive name«.
So, instead of »www.google.com« one would have to use
»www.excellent-search.com«. Would this be a good idea?
Recently, a site name »WTF« renamed itself to
»worsethanfailure«. Some months later, they changed the name
back to »WTF«.
|
|
Posted by dorayme on November 28, 2008, 6:39 pm
Please log in for more thread options In article
show/hide quoted text
> In article
>
> > In article
> >
> > > One of those problems is IE users. There is a solution for that.
> >
> > A good one is not to use XHTML until the figure of 80% plus of users in
> > the world can benefit from it.
>
> Another is to stop catering to broken browsers.
All this is pretty easy to say, it is even technically easy enough for a
knowledgeable website maker to do.
One hears these sweeping brave statements from people on all sorts of
issues regularly, in a keen desire to see something bad stamped out.
Almost always from people not in the firing line themselves though.
The people who should make these decisions (in conjunction with good
briefing from experts if they know little of the technical issues) are
the people who put up their money to have websites made and are prepared
to take losses for being in the vanguard of a protest movement.
I doubt if you have separated the two issues and suppose people are
objecting to *you* doing whatever. No reasonable person worries what
*you* do for your own website or with *your* money. But many people here
work for companies and societies and individuals and have primary
obligations to these people.
--
dorayme
|
|
Posted by Adrienne Boswell on November 28, 2008, 11:44 am
Please log in for more thread options Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Scott Bryce
@news.motzarella.org:
show/hide quoted text
> Eric Lindsay wrote:
>> One of those problems is IE users. There is a solution for that. IE
>> users need to also get a browser that works the way W3C says browsers
>> should work.
>
> That would be nice, but your site is not important enough to force a
> user to install a new browser just to view your site. Nobody is going
to
show/hide quoted text
> go to the trouble.
>
> I have a variety of browsers on my computer. If a site does not render
> correctly in my favorite browser, there needs to be an awfully good
> reason for me to launch a different browser to view it. The greater
> majority of the time I won't. Don't expect me to install one just to
> view your site.
>
I too, have a variety of browsers, my favorite being Opera. Sometimes a
site doesn't play nicely, so I open it in Firefox (nice that Opera has
that Open in Firefox button), and if it still isn't playing nicely, I
open it in IE. I really hate having to do that, simply because IE has a
nasty habit of still running even though I have closed it (I can see it
in my process list). I have to have a REALLY good reason to open
something in IE.
I know more and more people who have switched from IE to Firefox, mostly
for security reasons. They still use IE if a site doesn't play nicely.
You see, IMHO, the problem is really the deeziners who do not know how
to write good markup, and who depend on their editor to spit out bloated
IE specific client side script. There are a lot of them, and that is
why IE still continues, because it does error correction so well (and
yes, it often over compensates, or mucks up perfectly good markup).
Developers are more savvy now, and are writing better markup. Users are
more savvy as well, and are switching to better browsers that let them
browse the way they want to. IE is losing market share.
--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info Please respond to the group so others can share
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | XHTML served as text/html considered harmless? | July 6, 2005, 3:04 pm |
| Web-page that *BOTH* changes current page + displays a Pop-up page from JavaScript | May 15, 2009, 1:53 pm |
| Need help creating a "Click absolutely ANYWHERE on this page" link for an HTML page with no content | February 7, 2007, 5:40 pm |
| Activating parent page link from 'child page' - revised | June 3, 2005, 11:30 am |
| referencing the index.html page from another page in the same directory | July 26, 2004, 12:48 am |
| extract page structure from page source? | September 19, 2006, 1:46 pm |
| how to make a link to an old page go to a new page without displaying anything | August 20, 2007, 3:08 am |
| Update a web page with contents from another web page. | January 8, 2005, 1:59 pm |
| I would like to sell my web page - You can run your own business with this web page! | June 6, 2007, 4:24 pm |
| I would like to sell my web page - You can run your own business with this web page! | June 8, 2007, 5:22 am |
|
>since files with an xhtml extension were served correctly by default.