[aida] Valid html and CSS

Nicolas Petton petton.nicolas at gmail.com
Mon Feb 4 15:23:34 CET 2008


Hi all,

What do you think about:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">

and also replace 
<!-- AIDA/Web, Smalltalk Web Application Server -->
<!-- (c) Eranova d.o.o., Ljubljana, Slovenia (www.eranova.si) -->

with: 
<meta name="generator" content="AIDA/Web, Smalltalk Web Application
Server (www.aidaweb.si)">

Cheers,

Nicolas

Le lundi 04 février 2008 à 14:32 +0100, Stefan Schmiedl a écrit :
> On Mon, 04 Feb 2008 11:18:22 +0100
> Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek at eranova.si> wrote:
> 
> > I think Aida is close to have a valid HTML 4.01 code and I think that's 
> > enough. We don't need XHTML conformance, which seems to be dead end 
> > anyway because a HTML5 is near release already. So what we can do is to 
> > add a doctype in header and change some things to be HTML 4.01 conformant.
> 
> That's pretty important, IMO. Browsers tend to render things differently
> depending on being in standard compliant mode or quirks mode. If HTML
> generated by Aida is "quirky be design" you're in for fun times
> debugging style sheets.
> 
> Besides, I would not hold my breath for widespread and reliable
> (as in mozilla, safari, ie treating it the same) support for HTML5.
> 
> On a side note: A well-formed XML document is easier to parse on the
> client side, too. You'll never know, when third party tools will be
> used to scrape Aida-generated content.
> 
> > > I think it's VERY important that Aida produce a valid html, we
> > > absolutely need to work on that.
> > > 
> > > It's the same with CSS.
> > 
> > It is important from a "marketing" perspective while I doubt in 
> > importance from pure technical standpoint. I read recently some 
> > benchmarks of valid vs. non valid HTML vs. XHTML pages and nowadays 
> > browsers can actually handle non-valid HTML as good as valid one.
> 
> But now you're relying on everybody fixing the markup bugs that
> should be fixed by the single producer. And the assumptions on what
> you meant might actually and unexpectedly be wrong. Somewhere in the
> RFC's is a "law" stating that you should be ready to accept the worst
> case, but produce only standards conformant data. Go with that.
> 
> s.
> _______________________________________________
> Aida mailing list
> Aida at aidaweb.si
> http://lists.aidaweb.si/mailman/listinfo/aida
-------------- section suivante --------------
Une pi�ce jointe non texte a �t� nettoy�e...
Nom: non disponible
Type: application/pgp-signature
Taille: 189 octets
Desc: Ceci est une partie de message
	=?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
Url: http://lists.aidaweb.si/pipermail/aida/attachments/20080204/c0652fc9/attachment.sig 


More information about the Aida mailing list