Give help. Get help.


Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 58 total)
  • in reply to: css coding
    # September 13, 2011 at 4:35 pm

    “What happens if you want to change the font-style of an element?”

    I do a mixture of that. I don’t have “.light-grey”, but I do have “.pown” for example (== only visible to owner, colors stuff red). attempting to make my own CMS, I simply don’t want to have a billion class names, so my “design” is rather LEGO brick like. I never want to change the style of “that box on this page”, I want to change the style of UI elements. and that I can do just fine with that approach.

    one thing in that article really made no sense to me, about .left for floating something left: I have .tleft and .tcent for aligning text, I use it for table cells usually. I do NOT want to have “.stats_something .hit_count {text-align:right;}” in my CSS, sorry! I’d rather have class=”tleft” in my HTML. if I wanted to align it differently, that would always be an effect of changes in the HTML, there is no way I would change some things just via CSS. so that sounds a bit theoretical for me, especially since it fails to answer how else to do it. specify a new class for something just to align it like you align a thousand other things? or put it in a wrapper? huh. try creating a stylesheet for hundreds, maybe thousands of pages while being semantic and staying under 50k, good luck :/

    in reply to: Divs
    # September 12, 2011 at 1:45 pm

    uhm sorry, the forums were totally crapping out just now.. what I said was: as you said, that’s unneed. any ID should only ever occur once per page, so the tag name doen’t add any information.

    in reply to: Make a Dynamic Sidebar
    # September 12, 2011 at 11:45 am


    .commentlist li
    .commentlist li div

    all have fixed widths! replace those with max-width. maybe there’s more… so you should get chrome or opera, and become friends with “inspect element” (right click any element to see its CSS and why it has it)… and use that to find the things keeping the page from resizing properly, and change the stylesheet accordingly.

    in reply to: Make a Dynamic Sidebar
    # September 11, 2011 at 1:49 am

    .commentlist has a a fixed width; maybe keep the value, but change it from width to max-width and see if that helps any?

    # September 9, 2011 at 7:50 am


    “So stop complaining about the HTML standard and use it to work for you.”

    Heh. I’m not complaining, I’m just responding to strawmen, and why not. If you make assumptions about me, why wouldn’t I feel entitled to respond? See how that works? I asked rather simple questions. So far none of you has been able to answer what the semantical difference is between div=”classname” and classname. Because there is none.

    Oh, and I wouldn’t expect browsers to do *anything* with void tags other than nest and style them — though the specs seem to suggest they should be completely ignored.

    “Just because div has been often abused and used strictly for styling or scripting, doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have meaning, even if that meaning may be obscure to many people.”

    Look, either you flat out state the semantic meaning, or you save me repeating that. Or maybe address what I and others said about their actual semantic meaning. Obscure, lol. Ad-hominem city this is.


    First of all, a div is a literal “division” of content — not all tags carry that meaning, even if they do separate content from other content. Here’s an example:

    Huh. In your example, tags do indeed separate content from other content — heading from paragraph for example.

    HTML 5 is trying to remedy that and actually has changed the role of div

    Has it? So what changed?

    “You should use [div] when there is no other more semantically appropriate element that suits your purpose. Its most common use will likely be for stylistic purposes — i.e., wrapping some semantically marked-up content in a CSS-styled container.”

    Nothing changed. Nothing semantical about a div, nothing semantical about an unkown tag. The only difference is, being able to use unknown tags is using browser behaviour, not standards, and is therefore risky. But semantically? lol!

    “but we “theoretical” people would appreciate it if you didn’t downplay the importance of standard elements.”

    Right. Where I am doing the above? I simply said div and span are void of semantic meaning. That’s a fact, ask the w3c if you don’t believe me. They group content, which all nestable tags do. In other words, they do nothing. Now THAT is what I call actually paying attention to theory, instead of just mindlessly repeating. “tables should never be used for layout”, haha.

    # September 9, 2011 at 6:34 am


    “I feel you, man. I know what it’s like when you’re wrong but you wanna be right.”

    Heh, the irony. Weak ad-hominems don’t make arguments, and so far that’s the arguments I get. And flat out incorrect statements about semantics, which I refuted — care to refute that in turn? No? So why comment, with that table guy bs for example? Heh… I know what it feels like, awww… alas, arguments you don’t really seem to have.

    And I hate to break it to you: tables do exist for layout. They exist to make tables of data look in a way that things are spatially related to which they are logically related to, without having to have any knowledge of the dimensions of the cells before hand. Sure, they are abused to layout on top of that, but the reason they came to exist IS layout (of tabular data). And they do what they do just fine, other elements don’t.

    I’ve seen phpBB skins that use definition lists for thread title, post count etc. It’s just silly. That is tabular data, and recreating it without tables doesn’t work half as well… but I bet you, someone felt as if they were being very semantic when they did that :P Prolly even mentioned to someone that they’re now “not using tables for layout” anymore, heh. Whatever makes people happy I guess, but I find it hard to keep a straight face with some of that stuff.

    # September 9, 2011 at 5:57 am

    “Perhaps my sarcasm wasn’t obvious enough :P”

    I catched that alright. Go figure :P

    # September 9, 2011 at 5:50 am

    In practice, they are used to list a lot of stuff with everything still being aligned, properly. Which of course only makes sense for tabular data… which 99% of the data on the web is though, it’s just that usually we have no use to display them that way.

    Consider this thread: is it a table, or a list? Maybe that’s MySQL speaking, but in my mind, that’s a table that doesn’t look like one. Each post has author, content, permalink, etc. When each listed iten has the same fields as the others, that’s a table, a spreadsheet, whatever you want to call it, and however you want to dress it up.

    People see differences where there aren’t any real ones. If instead of nesting divs you use unordered list items that get coerced into not looking like the bulleted lists they were “supposed to be”, you’re not adding one shred of information. Children are grouped by the parent they belong to. All of them, always. Essentially, that’s using ul and li instead of having to give divs classes, or the selectors having to taking more descendants into account. Nothing semantic about it at all, and that people would flame me for pointing that out, doesn’t make them correct. A lot of this posing around semantics is built on sand, really. A lot of stuff has good reasons, yeah, but people don’t seem to know them. And if you mistake my refuting of BS as advocating making up tags (see your table guy analogy), that’s yours ^^


    Sure, there are a billion ways to center stuff, and I might yet find a nicer one. But I was actually lying before: until I found out about the values for the display property, I did use tables for layout, that is, to get stuff to actually center. (I still have loads of that around, and will change it when I come across it — but until then I consider that bait for people who obsess about things that don’t actually matter :P)

    And none of the “cleaner” ways are actually remotely clean, even the ones that don’t work in IE… as always, doing just what you’re supposed to do doesn’t get you very far: you can have a semantic, clean site, or a good looking one. That is rapidly changing, but to pretend the web is semantic more than not is hilarious to me, sorry.

    # September 9, 2011 at 4:25 am

    the style.css.php page needs to have the content-type header – not your index.php! It’s the stylesheet that needs to be served as text/css.

    # September 9, 2011 at 4:21 am

    Well, I’m not the one arguing for something to be used, am I ;) Or the one making up stuff about semantic meanings of tags they don’t have… haha.

    Also, take a look at the wikipedia main page. Turn off stylesheets. Tada, still looks neat thanks to using a table. And no, I don’t use tables myself for layout, but when you, uhhh, need to put stuff in tables, they are perfect — yet some people seem to think it’s “better” not to use them, so they make something awkward with proportionally sized floats and what not: more HTML, more CSS, *still* doesn’t behave like a table….that’s exactly the mindlessness I will have zero to do with :P

    # September 9, 2011 at 3:56 am

    And that is? I’m curious, unless that was something where people mumbled stuff under their breath of course :P

    edit: “the table guy” is probably someone who never uses tables, but asked a question about them, lol?

    # September 9, 2011 at 3:46 am


    “On top of making tags that didn’t exist, I also added attributes”

    well, there’s data-xyz for that now. which is not even *supposed* to make sense to anything beyond the site they are used on.


    “The main reason creating your own elements is discouraged is similar to the reason you don’t make up your own words in any language: not everyone will understand you. Of course, you can use CSS (and some JS to make IE behave), and browsers will display your new tags as you tell them, but other user agents won’t have a clue what you’re talking about.”

    The same goes for spans and divs. They make no sense without the stylesheet, other than grouping content which all tags do.

    “It may seem like

    doesn’t have any meaning, but it actually does; it means this content is separate from other content — a division.”

    ehm. That goes for most tags, and all unknown ones. It’s what the DOM does, make pretty node trees. What you said about the div goes for a, span, h#, all of them. They are “a division”…

    Look, I do realize that if I wanted to save bandwith etc., I might as well send json and construct the HTML on the client via javascript. “Making up tags” is just a thing that is possible, but useless… However, I don’t get anything out of being talked to like a baby ^^

    “Maybe that isn’t an important meaning to you, but to HTML parsers, it could be a reliable way to group and separate content. “

    Not only does it matter to me, it’s a given, and goes for all tags. What you are talking about is moot.

    “Just make sure that you don’t go spreading it around and recommending it to others.”

    lol? How about, unless you actually have a good answer to even ONE of my questions, you don’t worry your head about what I might or might not do? Maybe consider it separation of theoretical questions and practical advice, and ask yourself, can you do it? Can you discuss something theoretically without thinking the sky is falling?

    “Most standards advocates have tried very hard to encourage a standard set of Web languages to make our lives easier, so they don’t take kindly to someone that wants to mess that up.”

    I “want to mess that up”? Hahah. I’m asking a question — which makes movies play in people’s heads, yeah, but that’s not my concern. My concern is what I’m actually doing, which when it comes to making up tags didn’t go farther than jsfiddle. Saying “div is a division”, ignoring that this goes for all tags, is just FUD. That’s not upholding any standard. I at least try to actually know the rules I’m breaking.

    You had to make it seem that way I guess, but ultimately you cannot answer either what the difference (semantically and in practice) between div’s with classes and made up tags is. You claim div tags have meaning even the W3C doesn’t seem to be aware of, and then I’m the one messing stuff up? Awww. ^^

    in reply to: Aligning text question
    # September 8, 2011 at 9:48 am

    I couldn’t get line-height to do anything.. this will look bad with multipline lines of text, but hey:

    # September 8, 2011 at 1:00 am

    but that’s the exact same menu of the OP, just “dynamic”? huh. but of course you can make it dynamic without javascript:

    and more importantly

    # September 6, 2011 at 10:29 pm

    @joshuanhibbert Well, to be honest, I’m not really doing it (yet)… I seriously found no good reason for it yet, and no reason to look real hard for one, either. But I’ll keep it in mind, and should I ever have to generate so many div’s (with classes and a few chars in them each) programmatically that using “dX” instead would save a reasonable amount of bytes, I’d do it. Hah! :P

    And I don’t feel offended as much as I worry about being offensive. It’s not a topic ranting a lot over I think. I just like to question everything every now and then ^^

    oops, edit:

    “A final thought, if you are doing to it save space, but then need to use JavaScript to create the DOM elements, well it probably isn’t saving any space.”

    You mean the shim taking up more space? As I said, just about anything else I could optimize would save more, I know that ^^ It’s a rather theoretical question really.

    “Have you had a look at haml?”

    Well, it’s ruby so that’s right out for me/my webhost :P

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 58 total)