From: Dan F <dfr...@cs...> - 2004-04-07 18:12:53
|
Jeroen Coumans wrote: > Reini Urban said the following on 04/07/04 01:42: > >> Jeroen Coumans schrieb: >> >>> I have no interest in supporting a browser whose rendering engine is >>> from 1997 and chokes on anything resembling valid CSS or HTML4. See >>> <http://www.alistapart.com/articles/netscape/> for a good argument >>> why everyone should drop support for NN4. >> >> >> I refuse to do that. Argument: http://www.anybrowser.org/campaign/ >> It's very easy to detect such an old browser and emit the necessary >> not xhtml-strict "wrap=virtual". > > > Well, it's unfortunately beyond my PHP-capabilities :-) (I'm still > learning) > >> We already do that. Advanced features (for the latest browsers) are >> @import'ed, while older browsers still got some food to display. I >> haven't tested it with CSS support off lately, but it should look >> fine for the "Portland" theme, which is such an ancient theme. >> >> Testing other XHTML conformity, esp. in Templates was done some time >> ago, and will be done on a regular basis. but not now, and not by me >> probably. our internal php code (from core and plugins) is >> automatically xhtml conformant. I know of no single other app which >> can say that. > > > I didn't mean to attack your current templates; they're pretty clean > and validate to XHTML-transitional. Your work is very much > appreciated! However, as they say, standing still is going back, and > there are certainly other apps with better default templates, esp. > recent versions of some advanced blog tools & CMS'es, like > MovableType, Wordpress, Drupal and Plone. > > I'd like to make the PhpWiki templates: > * more accessible (<http://www.accessify.com>, > <http://diveintoaccessibility.org/>) > * more usable (<http://usabilitygarage.com/>, <http://www.useit.com/> > * more semantically correct > (<http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2003/08/26/semantics_an/>, > <http://www.stopdesign.com/log/2003/08/26/semantics.html> and mainly > <http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/>) > > Attaining these goals is IMHO worth the "drop" of NN4 & friends by > giving it unstyled (but more usable) content through @import. It also > would simplify the stylesheets & template code while being more useful > & styleful for more modern browsers. I can't speak much to HTML, XHTML, CSS, standards, etc. I'm not really a web developer. However, I have opinions anyway, of course. :-) 1. It is interesting that both the "anybrowser" and AListApart claim to want to remain true to Tim Berners-Lee's vision. anybrowser says anyone should be able to view the page, AListApart says developers should develop to W3C recommendations (a standards body). 2. In general, I would encourage less support of everything, more features. It is true Phpwiki is not the most feature-rich solution for any particular problem yet, and IMHO that should change so it can survive. For example, one of my (potential) Phpwiki users and/or developers much preferred the look of MediaWiki (Wikipedia), since it had different fonts, colors, images, boxes, etc., looked graphically better. On the other hand, if it is cheap to support NN4.x, why not? It looked to me like Reini was claiming it is cheap. 3. I wonder if the ratings widget Javascript I programmed (currently in the experimental RateIt plugin) is NN4.x compliant? Javascript was updated since then. 4. I hope Phpwiki can use Jeroen somehow, who seems to have some energy around this subject! Dan |