[theforum] URL Schemas & missing data

[Seb Potter]

aardvark wrote:
> Martin Burns wrote:
> [...]
> 
>> No, not being silly at all. You say you want fantastic quality markup.
>> Fair enough. Now what do you mean? You've complained about nested divs...
>> now specify what you think would be of evolt-quality.
> 
> 
> actually, i complained about nested divs, on IRC, in a slightly 
> different context...
> 
>> Starter for 10:
>> Validates against chosen HTML/CSS standards. Now which ones..?
>> And what else.
> 
> 
> on IRC yesterday, i suggested HTML 4.01 Transitional and CSS 2.1... i 
> know there are people here who want a flavor of XHTML, and i'm not 
> debating the value of either in this post...
> 
> but minimums:
> - valid markup
> - valid CSS
> - accessible site (A, AA, or AAA?)
> - structural and semantic markup
> 
> this last one is the tricky one... those old-schoolers might recall the 
> debates rudy and i got into on the list about h1 to h3, etc...
> 
> but i wrote the HTML and CSS of the last site (although others have 
> since stepped up to maintain it), and i put together the code style 
> guide...
> 
> so that's our base...
> 
> now for divs and spans... by *default*, i will assume any use of divs or 
> spans is wrong... yes, there are always exceptions, but i have found 
> that unless you challenge people, they work their way into code when 
> other elements would be more appropriate...
> 
> now, what other specs are we gonna support, for things like:
> - privacy
> - syndication
> - uk accesskey standards (example)
> - image formats (not saying we should change it, but if we're going to 
> get granular to address evolt-quality...)
> - etc...
> 
> or have you all discussed this and i've missed it?

Actually, I think that the majority of discussion has just assumed all 
of this as a default position. Certainly validity of HTML and CSS isn't 
even a point of discussion. Structural and semantic markup isn't even 
remotely contentious unless you wanna get into a 5 year-old debate over 
whether you start your site with H1 or H2. (It's H1, if you're wondering 
;) Whilst AAA isn't a realistic objective until such time as Microsoft 
produce a web browser that works, AA is a damned good point to aim for. 
Privacy, syndication, accesskeys (us Brits have a standard that works 
pretty well), etc..., they're all on the list.

Image formats? Um, AFAIK it's GIF or JPG or PNG, unless 24bit with alpha 
is required, in which case we're stuffed. Anyone need 24bit images with 
an alpha channel? I'm going to avoid recommending SVG for now, but 
certainly it's something we wanna consider for our 10th birthday, at 
least for the HyperUltraWeb.

Next question?

> and why is that wiki so damn hard to use?

<shatner>

Wikis....

suck.

</shatner>


- Seb.