Jump to content

What The Heck Is Going On With This Website?

Fledermaus

By Fledermaus
in Website

Followers 3

Recommended Posts

Fledermaus

Fledermaus

Posted
Posted

Copy sent to Jeremy!

 

Was the use of TIDY your idea of someone elses?

 

By doing this, you have now eliminated the ability of writing a cache page that is both XHTML & Handicap compatible!

 

Example: <br /> is now <br>, this is "OLD" HTML format.

 

Also, the <ol></ol> and <li></li> functions no longer function.

 

I wonder how much damage control I have now?

 

Thanks a lot!

 

/\/**\/\

Link to comment
LSUMonica

+LSUMonica

Posted
Posted

Okay -- help enlighten me...

 

Why do you think that <br> is an "OLD" tag?

 

As far as I can research this is still a valid HTML 4.01 (the latest version) tag.

 

Also, what do you mean by "handicap" compatible?

 

Do you really mean "Web Content Accessibility" for persons with disabilities? If so, why does using HTML "eliminate" that possibility? I can write HTML pages that are follow the web content accessibility guidelines using HTML.

Link to comment
TheAprilFools

+TheAprilFools

Posted
Posted
Okay -- help enlighten me...

 

Why do you think that <br> is an "OLD" tag?

 

Its not really "OLD" format. There is an effort by some to make HTML code XML compatible and adding the / to the end of the br tag does that as it closes the tag. Otherwise standard XML parsers would expect a </br> somewhere later in the page.

Link to comment
Mopar

+Mopar

Posted
Posted
Copy sent to Jeremy!

 

Was the use of TIDY your idea of someone elses?

 

By doing this, you have now eliminated the ability of writing a cache page that is both XHTML & Handicap compatible!

 

Example: <br /> is now <br>, this is "OLD" HTML format.

 

Also, the <ol></ol> and <li></li> functions no longer function.

 

I wonder how much damage control I have now?

 

Thanks a lot!

 

/\/**\/\

Have you notified LE about this?

 

Apology accepted!

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Fledermaus

Fledermaus

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
Okay -- help enlighten me...

 

Why do you think that <br> is an "OLD" tag?

 

Its not really "OLD" format. There is an effort by some to make HTML code XML compatible and adding the / to the end of the br tag does that as it closes the tag. Otherwise standard XML parsers would expect a </br> somewhere later in the page.

The next step from HTML 4.01 is XHTML and the tag <br> is changed to <br />, thus adding a close function. Take note of the empty space, followed by the " /", for this applies to these tags: <hr />, <img... /> and others, because they don't have a "closing" function.

 

In addition, the <table...> tag can have the: summary="abcdefg." function added , much like the: alt="abcdefg.". Take note of the ".", it means the "end of the line" and interacts with text readers as a"stop" function for the "vision impaired".

 

I will leave it to others, those more familiar with XML, to explain more fully, if they choose to do so.

 

BTW, never try to use the <body></body> tags. The former was allowed, but not now, which involved the "background" tag. However, we are not allowed to do that any more. The latter closing tag was never to be used(I don't know why).

 

If you want to see how my personal webpage is written, using XHTML, check it out. It might not be perfect, but I'm doing the best I can with what I know, and there's much more to learn.

 

Should the "vision impaired" be denied the right to know what the cache text says? That's what happens when you take away the sound function! Never mind, "blind" people, partial or otherwise, shouldn't be caching anyway, right? Got echolocation?!

 

/\/**\/\

Edited by Fledermaus
Link to comment
Miragee

+Miragee

Posted
Posted (edited)

When I saw this being discussed, I checked the cache pages on which I used HTML. My <li></li> lists still show up just fine and the background images still appear. I didn't see any difference with the pages I created.

 

Edit to add:

 

. . . If you want to see how my personal webpage is written, using XHTML, check it out.

 

/\/**\/\

:wacko::blink::lol: :lol: ;)

Edited by idiosyncratic
Link to comment
the hermit crabs

+the hermit crabs

Posted
Posted

When I saw this being discussed, I checked the cache pages on which I used HTML. My <li></li> lists still show up just fine and the background images still appear. I didn't see any difference with the pages I created.

 

Did you just bring up the cache page and look at it, or actually edit the page? I think that the html-tidy is only run on pages when the "Edit listing" button is clicked; old pages aren't automatically updated.

Link to comment
The Leprechauns

+The Leprechauns

Posted
Posted (edited)
are there low-vision or blind cachers? i am continually amazed by some of the people who cache with disabilities...

Absolutely. I've had the pleasure of caching with a team that includes a visually impaired geocacher. It is truly amazing to watch this person beat the rest of the group to a microcache, by using brains rather than eagle-sharp eyes. EDIT: I am quite sure that odragon and I are thinking of the same remarkable individual!

 

There are settings to increase the font display, screen resolution, etc., that help someone with poor vision. A plain text cache page is, I am guessing, a bit easier for such a person to read than one which is chock full of dark background images with colored fonts on top, scrolling banners, and other extraneous junk that does nothing to help someone find the geocache.

 

So yeah, WHAT THE HECK IS GOING ON with this website? They keep making things run better, from where I sit. New features come online, and fixes are added to rein in unintended and unsupported "features" that have caused problems for many.

Edited by The Leprechauns
Link to comment
vree

+vree

Posted
Posted

thanks for the info! that is totally cool. :lol: my work sometimes involves helping visually impaired people with their computers, so i am aware that Jaws can have problems reading webpages... including the one that my employer requires people to use to register their computers :lol: i am frustrated that the guy who wrote the registration page won't fix it.

 

glad to hear both that TPTB are cleaning things up and also that they are workin' on fixing things that come up as a result of implementing the new features.

Link to comment
JanniCash

+JanniCash

Posted
Posted
There are settings to increase the font display, screen resolution, etc., that help someone with poor vision. A plain text cache page is, I am guessing, a bit easier for such a person to read than one which is chock full of dark background images with colored fonts on top, scrolling banners, and other extraneous junk that does nothing to help someone find the geocache.

Haven't come across a cache page like it yet, but I have seen web pages that use images only (including all the text) to force a certain layout. No font size change, no braille reading devices, no text-to-speech, no mobile access. It's as if all these people know is powerpoint or paintshop, and their web pages are screenshots of that.

 

Jan

Link to comment
LSUMonica

+LSUMonica

Posted
Posted

Okay -- now to return to my original questions...

 

The next step from HTML 4.01 is XHTML and the tag <br> is changed to <br />, thus adding a close function. Take note of the empty space, followed by the " /", for this applies to these tags: <hr />, <img... /> and others, because they don't have a "closing" function.

 

I do understand your point that XHTML is the next step but it is not currently the HTML standard -- this is still 4.01. So if the pages are to be coded in HTML (which I do by hand) they should be adhering to the HTML 4.01 specs.

 

We can debate about the "standards" but on to my next question that I did not see answered...

 

Also, what do you mean by "handicap" compatible?

 

Do you really mean "Web Content Accessibility" for persons with disabilities? If so, why does using HTML "eliminate" that possibility? I can write HTML pages that are follow the web content accessibility guidelines using HTML.

Link to comment
Fledermaus

Fledermaus

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

What you need to know about HTML & XHTML Standards & Code Validation!

 

W3School's Home Page

or

W3School's "Introduction to XHTML"

or

W3School's "HTML vs XHTML"

or

W3School's "Why XHTML?"

 

For those that write code the old fashion way, without "Cheater Programs" such as Frontpage and the like, or want to improve their skills, go to this website and download the FREE PROGRAM:

CSE HTML Validator Lite v6.52

 

/\/**\/\

Edited by Fledermaus
Link to comment
LSUMonica

+LSUMonica

Posted
Posted

Yes, I know the difference between XHTML and HTML and am very aware of the W3 website and validators. I have used this site for years for validating my code and keeping abreast of the latest HTML guidelines.

 

My point is that the site asks you if you want to code HTML not XHTML. So why should the HTML Tidy program be an issue if you code in HTML as the site indicates.

 

Once again, my question to you is not being answered...

 

Also, what do you mean by "handicap" compatible?

 

Do you really mean "Web Content Accessibility" for persons with disabilities? If so, why does using HTML "eliminate" that possibility? I can write HTML pages that are follow the web content accessibility guidelines using HTML.

Link to comment
Maclir

+Maclir

Posted
Posted
My point is that the site asks you if you want to code HTML not XHTML. So why should the HTML Tidy program be an issue if you code in HTML as the site indicates.

 

The basic point is HTML - 4.01 or earlier version - is not the current standard for web page markup languages. XHTML is recommended as the current standard for marking up documents to be displayed by a web browser.

 

Of course, this means having the correct document type (strict or transitional) included in the page header.

 

XHTML replaced HTML some 5 or 6 years ago. It's well past time that web developers caught up.

Link to comment
SeabeckTribe

+SeabeckTribe

Posted
Posted

I don't know much about all the above... But maybe there is more going on with this site than we know... Tonight after I logged in, I was browsing through some of the caches our clan will be logging soon. I did a search by zip. When I opened a cache, either by clicking on the link or doing a right click to open in another window, I was in a page that I had to "Log In" AGAIN. :blink: Thinking that this must be a fluke, I tried several other pages. They ALL said that I had to log in. It happened to me also when I trying to view the maps. :blink: Now this is really annoying. :laughing: Also... after logging in, clicking to another page (which wanted you to log in again) and then trying to back click to the first page that I was logged in. Once again I was asked to log in again! :unsure:

 

:blink: Well, I am giving up for tonight. Maybe when I get up in the morning, I'll find that the little purple goblins have exited from my computer and went on to terrorize someone else!!! Or maybe I am having day dreams. Nightmares are looking might good right now!

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 3
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...