Register - Login
Views: 99806148
 Main - Memberlist - Active users - Calendar - Wiki - IRC Chat - Online users
Ranks - Rules/FAQ - Stats - Latest Posts - Color Chart - Smilies 		05-03-22 08:02:24 AM
Jul - Craziness Domain - stupid html tags New poll - New thread - New reply
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
Peardian

  
Magikoopa

16/3/1: KvSG #479 is up!

Level: 157


Posts: 4431/7597
EXP: 48603100
For next: 976133

Since: 08-02-07

From: Isle Delfino

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 14 hours
Posted on 01-28-11 06:15:21 PM Link | Quote
Code is getting longer because we no longer have to worry about such tight technology limitations as we did. Plus, we now have programs that help write the code for us. Because of these, pieces are getting more wordy so that we can understand them as people. From a naive viewpoint, one of someone who is just starting to code and doesn't know the language, which of these names make sense to you, "stricmp" or "equalsIgnoreCase"? The first one seems like gibberish, while the second one tells you what it does. If you were scanning code, this would leap out at you quicker as the thing you want to find.



I've never seen a blink tag work, and I'm happy.

____________________
-Peardian-

"Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see." -Mark Twain


Gabu

Star Mario
Placeholder Ikachan until :effort: is found
Level: 172


Posts: 4589/9981
EXP: 67989704
For next: 112530

Since: 08-10-09

Pronouns: they/them, she/her
From: Santa Cruisin' USA

Since last post: 56 days
Last activity: 4 days
Posted on 01-28-11 06:56:47 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Imajin
<div> is pretty stupid, if only because it refuses to work consistently...


Case in point: My layout works perfectly here. When I tried converting it over to SMWC, it failed to work because of the
tags for reasons I can't even fathom.

____________________
Nicole

Disk-kun
Level: 146


Posts: 2274/6469
EXP: 38284919
For next: 228375

Since: 07-07-07

Pronouns: she/her
From: Boston, MA

Since last post: 78 days
Last activity: 1 day
Posted on 01-28-11 07:18:05 PM Link | Quote

Originally posted by Metal_Man88
Originally posted by Peardian
With HTML5 coming up, they're trying to separate the style and markup of the content, making tags like bold obsolete.


Wait, they were already doing this in 4.0 and failed. What's new this time--a gun to kill programmers who don't follow the rules?

(...Yes, I am serious. Browsers keep supporting those tags. I'm actually for a properly organized HTML--but how are they to stop people from continuing to use them?)

Well, that's the usual problem isn't it... And HTML5 ditches doctypes and the strictness of XHTML, so it seems that the HTML ideal will continue to drift further from how HTML is actually used...

I mean, <blink> and
<marquee>
are still supported (in Firefox, at least) and they were never even standard.

____________________
Joe
Common spammer
🍬
Level: 111


Posts: 1807/3392
EXP: 14501215
For next: 367145

Since: 08-02-07

From: Pororoca

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 9 hours
Posted on 01-28-11 08:09:43 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Gabu
for reasons I can't even fathom.
Your layout closes <div> with </font> and is missing a </td>. That's probably why it doesn't work.

____________________
Gabu

Star Mario
Placeholder Ikachan until :effort: is found
Level: 172


Posts: 4592/9981
EXP: 67989704
For next: 112530

Since: 08-10-09

Pronouns: they/them, she/her
From: Santa Cruisin' USA

Since last post: 56 days
Last activity: 4 days
Posted on 01-28-11 08:37:19 PM (last edited by Gabu at 01-28-11 05:39 PM) Link | Quote





I guess now's a good time to say that I have zero clue on anything past really basic HTML. Really, I just copypasted my layout from someone else, and it holds together somehow.

And yes, I tried fixing the errors it told me was wrong, but I ended up with more error messages that I believe said to correct was essentially to revert.

____________________
Post 1208/1311 (41 days), online 1 day ago
Posted on 01-28-11 08:55:35 PM Link | Quote




#59
<b><i><u> never confused me when I learned HTML, since I was already familiarized enough with [B][i][u] buttons in programs like Word

If they really have to make it longer just to be "more readable", <bold> and <italic> would make more sense than remembering <em> means emphasis (which in turn makes text italic), unless you're actually supposed to change <strong> and <em> with CSS ... <u>'s recommended replacement is even worse, since it's CSS only and definitely not easier to read or learn (text-decoration:underline)



I never knew about <q>, <dfn> and <address> either, but I wonder why 2 of them look the same as <i>

____________________
Peardian

  
Magikoopa

16/3/1: KvSG #479 is up!

Level: 157


Posts: 4434/7597
EXP: 48603100
For next: 976133

Since: 08-02-07

From: Isle Delfino

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 14 hours
Posted on 01-28-11 09:09:57 PM Link | Quote
Sure, it's not easier to remember, but you can't say that "text-decoration:underline" doesn't tell you exactly what it does.



And as I said, the reason they look the same is because they aren't there to change the appearance of the words, but to give them meaning. They are for denoting quotes, definitions, and addresses, respectively.

If you still don't see the point of them, try looking at it from the perspective of a Google spider. You get lots and lots of words, but you don't really understand it. But hey, what's this? An address tag? You have special instructions on what to do with addresses, so you can label it differently. Same thing with dfn. You can't read, so you don't understand what it says, but you can mark it as a term definition for when users are searching for the meaning of a word.

____________________
-Peardian-

"Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see." -Mark Twain


paulguy

Green Birdo
Level: 93


Posts: 1247/2294
EXP: 8032397
For next: 20413

Since: 09-14-07

From: Buffalo, NY

Since last post: 9.7 years
Last activity: 9.7 years
Posted on 01-28-11 09:40:28 PM Link | Quote
Paulguy's Post configuration
Also, the reason they removed underline specifically is that you should have a consistent use for it, like you can do em { text-decoration:underline; } if you want to emphasize words using underlines, so it has a proper emphasized intention, but also shows up underlined as expected.

____________________
Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 7826/12211
EXP: 99321501
For next: 552070

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years
Posted on 01-28-11 11:41:35 PM Link | Quote
Stats
Time/Date
01-28-11 05:41:35 PM
Posts
7826
Days Here
1305
Level
129
Metal_Man88's Post
Originally posted by Peardian
If you still don't see the point of them, try looking at it from the perspective of a Google spider. You get lots and lots of words, but you don't really understand it. But hey, what's this? An address tag? You have special instructions on what to do with addresses, so you can label it differently. Same thing with dfn. You can't read, so you don't understand what it says, but you can mark it as a term definition for when users are searching for the meaning of a word.


Yeaaah... except a regex can fish meaning out of those words too.

Those tags make it easier, but if the data you want has any pattern at all, and I mean any pattern at all, it can potentially be determined by a series of regexes.

Of course, what it is for is for end-users to tell bots what's important, and perhaps stylize those tags--technically you can just make up tags and stylize those too, since CSS isn't picky...

Removing doctypes is kind of backwards too. I agree that the extra slashes were stupid, but doctypes... man. I just got through adding those. Now I have to remove them? Why?

I typed them with my own two fingers, too. Why do those get removed, but yet other tags get lengthened?

Ah, but don't answer those questions. I already know the answers.

HTML was actually an extension of SGML, which then became screwed up by the following things:

  • Browsers innovating new tags to try and outdo their competitors

  • The composition of the WWW3 board that determines HTML standards changing over time

  • Internet Explorer's era of domination

  • Harmful plugins like flash taking away features that should be in tags and becoming closed boxes instead

  • The inability to force browsers to stop supporting ancient, horrible HTML



So in the end, it's more or less hopeless to try and clean it up fully, buuuut.

The silver lining is, each new HTML spec adds new fun toys to play with.

I used doctypes in 4 to force IE to respect my HTML 3.0-based stuff as well as make it respect my divs. And these new tags in 5 may come in handy too. But in the end, I just name it 'transitional' and throw in the best of everything.

____________________

Eisnaught - SSQ² - Mobius Roleplay - SSS
Peardian

  
Magikoopa

16/3/1: KvSG #479 is up!

Level: 157


Posts: 4437/7597
EXP: 48603100
For next: 976133

Since: 08-02-07

From: Isle Delfino

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 14 hours
Posted on 01-29-11 02:00:49 AM Link | Quote
Sure, there's an expression for phone numbers and email addresses and street addresses, but I'd like to see you write a regex for a definition or a news article.


Personally, I won't miss doctypes. And high-five for writing code manually! (I use notepad.)

____________________
-Peardian-

"Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see." -Mark Twain


Lyskar
12210
-The Chaos within trumps the Chaos without-
Level: 192


Posts: 7836/12211
EXP: 99321501
For next: 552070

Since: 07-03-07

From: 52-2-88-7

Since last post: 7.4 years
Last activity: 7.3 years
Posted on 01-29-11 11:06:25 PM Link | Quote
Stats
Time/Date
01-29-11 05:06:25 PM
Posts
7836
Days Here
1306
Level
130
Metal_Man88's Post
I use Madedit, a multi-tabbed editor. Got spoiled from the built-in ones on Ubuntu.

I will only miss Doctype for allowing me to force IE into standards-compliant mode.

____________________

Eisnaught - SSQ² - Mobius Roleplay - SSS
— Bloodstar —
11360
Buy me a trip to the moon
So I can laugh at my mistakes


Post 7885/11363

Joined 07-06-07
Active 1 day ago
Posted on 01-29-11 11:39:51 PM Link | Quote
I'll admit it - when I just slap together a simple page for something, I don't even bother with doctypes.

Great to see them go, in my opinion - it's really much less of a pain in the ass to remember to add in. (Admittedly, though, I've only ever seen pages I make break in Opera Mini on iOS... and said pages DO have doctypes.)

____________________
BMF IS A LEAPFROG
Rena
I had one (1) message in Discord deleted and proceeded to make a huge, huge mess about how it was a violation of free speech and how moderators are supposed to be spam janitors and nobody should have the right to tell me not to talk about school shootings
Level: 135


Posts: 4041/5390
EXP: 29075665
For next: 259340

Since: 07-22-07

Pronouns: he/him/whatever
From: RSP Segment 6

Since last post: 342 days
Last activity: 342 days
Posted on 01-30-11 04:06:41 AM (last edited by Rena at 01-30-11 01:09 AM) Link | Quote
Post #4041 · 01-29-11 11:06:41 PM
Originally posted by Peardian
Sure, there's an expression for [...] email addresses
And it's not pretty.

CSS just annoys the shit out of me. Never seems to do what you want. There's no way to make my posts take up 100% of the post area for example (other than writing a lot of text). "height: 100%"? You'd think so, but no, that only works if the parent element has a fixed height or relative position. Why this rule exists, I can't fathom. A lot of these rules only seem to exist to make life miserable for anyone using it.

____________________
Programs
stuffgoeshere
Log outShut down
Post #4041...[blag][Twitter][Freenet]
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
Jul - Craziness Domain - stupid html tags New poll - New thread - New reply


Rusted Logic

Acmlmboard - commit 47be4dc [2021-08-23]
©2000-2022 Acmlm, Xkeeper, Kaito Sinclaire, et al.

31 database queries, 1 query cache hits.
Query execution time: 0.295896 seconds
Script execution time: 0.036888 seconds
Total render time: 0.332784 seconds