I've long hated this approach. With a good design and good markup a site
can be flashy (CSS, Java, JavaScript, Images, etc) AND still be usable for
the wireheads. If you don't like Java, JavaScript, CSS, and Images - I got
news for you, the site works without them. The site is perfectly usable
in Lynx, or in Netscape with all of those options turned off, etc. No one
is MAKING you use the bells and whistles.
Did the first rev to pop up have some problems - you bet. And May whipped
them into shape within a day. How about you all take a moment to appreciate
that little tidbit.
See <URL:http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.livingston.com%2F>
I'll run them down here - leave now if you don't want to see it.
It isn't perfect yet, but the errors are understandable:
Error at line 11:
<SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript">
required attribute "TYPE"
not specified
-OK, this should be <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="JavaScript" TYPE="text/javascript">
Simple oversight, 'TYPE' was introduced in HTML 4.0.
Impact on browsers - nil, for now.
Error at line 291:
/images/home.off.gif" ALT="[Home] " border=0 NAME="home"></A><a href="
there is no attribute "NAME" (explanation...)
-OK, this is a JavaScript legacy. Netscape decided to slap the NAME
attribute on several elements. But in the final HTML 4.0 standard NAME
was NOT adopted, instead 'ID' is the official standard. Technically ID
is what should be used here - however, older JS enabled browsers do not
recognize ID, and it is even unreliable today. In the future ID should
be used, and NAME deprecated.
Impact on browsers - nil, for now.
Error at line 354:
<strong>Thursday, July 23, 1998</strong><br></font>
end tag for element "FONT" which is not open (explanation...)
-Ok, this looks like a simple error. There is no opening tag for this
in the document. I suspect there WAS, and in an edit this lone closing
tag was missed.
Impact on browsers - nil.
Error at line 365:
SRC="/images/quick.gif" ALT="Quick Search" width="77" height="14" hsp
there is no attribute "WIDTH" (explanation...)
Error at line 365:
s/quick.gif" ALT="Quick Search" width="77" height="14" hspace="5" bord
there is no attribute "HEIGHT" (explanation...)
Error at line 365:
ALT="Quick Search" width="77" height="14" hspace="5" border="0"></for
there is no attribute "HSPACE" (explanation...)
Error at line 365:
Search" width="77" height="14" hspace="5" border="0"></form></th>
there is no attribute "BORDER" (explanation...)
-Ok, all of these result form the same thing. An INPUT element of TYPE
IMAGE is being used. Unlike the IMG element, the standard doesn't allow
for the HEIGHT, WIDTH, HSPACE, or BORDER attributes. However, some browsers
(like NS) WILL honor them. And, since any unknown attribute is to be
ignored, it will not impact other browsers. Now, there may be some other
way to achieve the same effect, but that I won't get into here.
Impact on browsers - nil.
Error at line 368:
<option name=products value="/">Select a Product
there is no attribute "NAME" (explanation...)
This is the same issue as with the IMG above - NS used NAME for JS, and
the standard decided to use ID. (There are many good reasons for ID,
believe me.)
Impact on browsers - nil, for now.
Frankly the markup on this page is really very good. These issues could
bug a total purist, but the fact is they won't impact any standards compliant
browser.
Bonus - check this out, Livingston imortalized in the HTML 4.0 spec:
<URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#idx-menu-3>
(scroll down a bit, this is the closest link into the document.)
-MZ
-
To unsubscribe, email 'majordomo@livingston.com' with
'unsubscribe portmaster-users' in the body of the message.
Searchable list archive: <URL:http://www.livingston.com/Tech/archive/>