digitalmars.D.announce - no frames
- Walter (2/2) Aug 21 2005 Improvement? Keep it?
- Regan Heath (7/8) Aug 21 2005 I'm still seeing frames (meaning I have 2 menus).
- Don Clugston (9/22) Aug 21 2005 Regan,
- Derek Parnell (13/16) Aug 21 2005 Yes an improvement, though I didn't have a problem with frames. It looks
- zwang (2/19) Aug 21 2005 I often run into the same situation. Without an index, I have to grep.
- Walter (4/6) Aug 22 2005 Want to take a whack at it? It could be done as a melding of wc and the ...
- Derek Parnell (9/16) Aug 22 2005 Actually I've already started on something. It's a little more generic i...
- ElfQT (9/11) Aug 22 2005 Why not D/phobos/any other libs use something similar to "XML Comment" (...
-
Stewart Gordon
(23/31)
Aug 23 2005
- Derek Parnell (12/14) Aug 23 2005 I had a go at it but it's a lot of work patching things up like that. I
- Stewart Gordon (19/32) Aug 23 2005 Do you mean a tool to compile HTML files from some source documentation
-
Stewart Gordon
(37/41)
Aug 24 2005
- Stewart Gordon (16/17) Aug 24 2005 Oops, I meant to run it through the validator before posting it! The
- Walter (7/7) Aug 24 2005 charset="iso-8859-1"
- Brad Anderson (2/7) Aug 26 2005 http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_list.asp
- Walter (5/8) Aug 23 2005 Currently, the pages *are* generated using a simple text macro preproces...
- John Demme (2/5) Aug 22 2005
- Uwe Salomon (5/6) Aug 22 2005 Yes, very good!
- Dejan Lekic (16/16) Aug 22 2005 Mr. Bright,
- Uwe Salomon (7/20) Aug 22 2005 I think it is not so much the design that needs to be changed, but the
- Dejan Lekic (10/10) Aug 22 2005 Sure, but if someone as skillfull as Trevor offers to do the job all by
- Walter (5/14) Aug 22 2005 I
- Ben Hinkle (10/29) Aug 22 2005 Work that presumably you don't have to do all yourself. I guess it depen...
- bobef (7/9) Aug 22 2005 No. The frames was MUCH better in my opinion. Now you have to hit back e...
- pragma (4/6) Aug 22 2005 Walter, this is a huge improvment. The site feels much less clustrophob...
- Hasan Aljudy (4/9) Aug 22 2005 Definitely, this is tons better.
- Jarrett Billingsley (4/5) Aug 22 2005 Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site, ...
-
Walter
(11/13)
Aug 22 2005
No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder
. - Jarrett Billingsley (15/25) Aug 22 2005 Yeah, I really shouldn't be one to talk either ;) But if you're going t...
- zwang (4/28) Aug 22 2005 Sun's JDK online documentation uses frames;
- AJG (15/48) Aug 22 2005 I can't speak for the Sun site, but the MSDN navigation menu is a
- J C Calvarese (4/36) Aug 23 2005 I absolutely agree. MSDN's navigation and slow and cumbersome. MSDN's co...
- Ameer Armaly (3/54) Aug 23 2005 I agree entirely-it's way overdone.
- Lars Ivar Igesund (3/6) Aug 22 2005 I like it.
- Carlos Smith (16/17) Aug 22 2005 Yes, Yes.
- Walter (4/16) Aug 22 2005 http://azenomei.knuffel.net/~rhialto/banned_from_www.polderland.nl/frame...
- Regan Heath (13/33) Aug 22 2005 Yes.. except.. the original problem that 'frames' solve, if badly,
- Derek Parnell (12/17) Aug 22 2005 On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:30:56 +1200, Regan Heath wrote:
- zwang (2/25) Aug 22 2005 Here comes another problem: visitors have to click more links than neces...
- James Dunne (6/40) Aug 22 2005 The solution is to redesign this bobawful pile of crap we call the web. ...
- AJG (14/28) Aug 22 2005 Personally, given the new design, I don't think the navigation menu is
- Walter (3/11) Aug 22 2005 That looks pretty good.
- Walter (4/19) Aug 22 2005 Oh darn, there is a problem with it - if the left-sidebar is taller than...
- Ilya Zaitseff (3/26) Aug 22 2005 Such behaviour is completely controlled by overflow:hidden CSS option.
- Jarrett Billingsley (3/5) Aug 22 2005 That looks _very_ good. I'd really like that.
- Jarrett Billingsley (8/14) Aug 23 2005 I've been implementing this layout in my site, and it's working wonderfu...
- AJG (23/38) Aug 23 2005 What you need, my man, is a little dynamic magic. What kind of server se...
- Jarrett Billingsley (7/32) Aug 24 2005 That sounds like a good idea. I'll have to check out if my server suppo...
- Chris Sauls (42/45) Aug 24 2005 While I am a big advocate of PHP, if all you want is to include snippets...
- pragma (12/15) Aug 24 2005 Here's your 30-second crash-course in how to aggregate files in PHP:
-
Jarrett Billingsley
(4/4)
Aug 25 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley"
wrote in message - pragma (10/14) Aug 25 2005 They're basically the same, with one exception. The 'require' function ...
- James Dunne (8/47) Aug 26 2005 It should... Apache 2.0.54 is your server, and I think by default SSI is
- Hasan Aljudy (9/30) Aug 23 2005 yea, you're missing something:
- Jarrett Billingsley (12/20) Aug 24 2005 Oh yeah, that's what I'm doing already; it's just that it's a bit of a p...
- Walter (4/8) Aug 23 2005 the
- Hasan Aljudy (3/18) Aug 22 2005 That's brilliant!!
- ElfQT (6/6) Aug 23 2005 In case if any of you interested in html/css,
- Andrew Fedoniouk (8/8) Aug 22 2005 Umm...
- Walter (4/11) Aug 22 2005 eeeeeek!
- AJG (40/43) Aug 22 2005 As I mentioned before with the phobos docs, the frameless navigation is
- Walter (3/4) Aug 22 2005 The problem is it will break existing links to those pages.
- J C Calvarese (5/7) Aug 23 2005 By the way, I think you forgot to add the sidebar to the glossary:
- Walter (3/5) Aug 23 2005 Fixed.
- clayasaurus (3/13) Aug 23 2005 I think techtips has the same problem:
- Walter (3/5) Aug 23 2005 True, I just haven't done that directory yet.
- David L. Davis (22/24) Aug 23 2005 Walter, the no frames does look cleaner, but I must admit that it does s...
- Unknown W. Brackets (20/25) Aug 23 2005 Walter,
- AJG (5/8) Aug 23 2005 What is this "transitional" you speak of?
- Unknown W. Brackets (3/20) Aug 24 2005 Also known as "supporting browsers other than Deer Park and Internet
- Walter (5/29) Aug 24 2005 Ok, but why does it need to be XHTML rather than HTML?
- AJG (13/50) Aug 24 2005 Truthfully, it doesn't have to be. HTML 4.01 is a perfectly fine, comple...
- Unknown W. Brackets (8/9) Aug 24 2005 Philosophy aside, because it *says* it's XHTML:
- Walter (6/14) Aug 24 2005 That's what I get for cutting and pasting the line from an example. What
- Chris Sauls (5/7) Aug 24 2005 This is what you want:
- Walter (1/1) Aug 25 2005 Got it, thanks!
- Dejan Lekic (6/6) Aug 24 2005 It is certainly better than previous. :)
Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
Aug 21 2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:23:22 -0700, Walter <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlI'm still seeing frames (meaning I have 2 menus). The downside to not having the menu in a frame is that when you scroll the page you scroll the menu. Thus was born that abomination "the floating menu". Regan
Aug 21 2005
Regan Heath wrote:On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:23:22 -0700, Walter <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:Regan, It's only index.html that is still a frame. try http://www.digitalmars.com/d/lex.html Actually, the thing I really dislike about frames is when you link to an external site, eg the 'D links' page. Huge improvement, IMHO. I like it.www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlI'm still seeing frames (meaning I have 2 menus). The downside to not having the menu in a frame is that when you scroll the page you scroll the menu. Thus was born that abomination "the floating menu". Regan
Aug 21 2005
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:23:22 -0700, Walter wrote:Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlYes an improvement, though I didn't have a problem with frames. It looks cleaner, neater and pleasant. The thing I still miss is a decent index for each of the sections "Language" and "Phobos". Especially for Phobos as often I want to look up the details of a something and all I know is its name (or near enough) but not sure which module its in. I suppose someone can write a quick program to read all the phobos files and generate some HTML as an index. -- Derek (skype: derek.j.parnell) Melbourne, Australia 22/08/2005 4:38:50 PM
Aug 21 2005
Derek Parnell wrote:On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:23:22 -0700, Walter wrote:I often run into the same situation. Without an index, I have to grep.Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlYes an improvement, though I didn't have a problem with frames. It looks cleaner, neater and pleasant. The thing I still miss is a decent index for each of the sections "Language" and "Phobos". Especially for Phobos as often I want to look up the details of a something and all I know is its name (or near enough) but not sure which module its in. I suppose someone can write a quick program to read all the phobos files and generate some HTML as an index.
Aug 21 2005
"Derek Parnell" <derek psych.ward> wrote in message news:w8hyxgsmjwsw.1ppqyva5z35bq$.dlg 40tude.net...I suppose someone can write a quick program to read all the phobos files and generate some HTML as an index.Want to take a whack at it? It could be done as a melding of wc and the html preprocessor.
Aug 22 2005
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 01:04:48 -0700, Walter wrote:"Derek Parnell" <derek psych.ward> wrote in message news:w8hyxgsmjwsw.1ppqyva5z35bq$.dlg 40tude.net...Actually I've already started on something. It's a little more generic in that it will read a set of HTML files and produce a 'significant' word index for the whole set. -- Derek (skype: derek.j.parnell) Melbourne, Australia 22/08/2005 6:35:45 PMI suppose someone can write a quick program to read all the phobos files and generate some HTML as an index.Want to take a whack at it? It could be done as a melding of wc and the html preprocessor.
Aug 22 2005
I suppose someone can write a quick program to read all the phobos files and generate some HTML as an index.Why not D/phobos/any other libs use something similar to "XML Comment" (Try (Means a standardized and unambiguous way to comment on class, methods, parameters and more.) Help generation is much simpler then (and also, it would be really a big thing, to use a (future) editor, where phobos (or other) calasses and function information just pops up...) Pretty pretty please... ElfQT
Aug 22 2005
Derek Parnell wrote:On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:23:22 -0700, Walter wrote:<snip> But still laden with the flaws I pointed out before from here on: http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?digitalmars.D/23990 Not to mention inconsistent fonts, an empty std_base64.html and still more pages that have been left out of the conversion: - the techtips pages (which are in www.digitalmars.com/techtips not www.digitalmars.com/d but are clearly D-oriented - so what's supposed to happen here?) - dnews.html - builtin.html - newsgroup archives That reminds me Derek - you were going have a go at tidying up the pages. How far have you got with it? Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlYes an improvement, though I didn't have a problem with frames. It looks cleaner, neater and pleasant.
Aug 23 2005
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:09:17 +0100, Stewart Gordon wrote:That reminds me Derek - you were going have a go at tidying up the pages. How far have you got with it?I had a go at it but it's a lot of work patching things up like that. I must of got rid of my efforts because I can't locate them now. It needed a good revamp with CSS usage. It would be best (read: economically) done with some form of generator that holds the content and is applied over some template system. I've just about finished the automatic indexing tool, just some tidying up to do now. -- Derek Parnell Melbourne, Australia 24/08/2005 12:54:30 AM
Aug 23 2005
Derek Parnell wrote:On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:09:17 +0100, Stewart Gordon wrote:Do you mean a tool to compile HTML files from some source documentation format? I'm not sure this is necessary. HTML isn't that complicated. But maybe if we feel the need, something like this could be done at a later stage. If you don't want to do it anymore, I'll give it a go. Here's an idea: I'll take one of the pages home to work on, write a stylesheet and then post the result here. When this is done, if it's OK with everyone then we can work on getting the others converted.That reminds me Derek - you were going have a go at tidying up the pages. How far have you got with it?I had a go at it but it's a lot of work patching things up like that. I must of got rid of my efforts because I can't locate them now. It needed a good revamp with CSS usage. It would be best (read: economically) done with some form of generator that holds the content and is applied over some template system.I've just about finished the automatic indexing tool, just some tidying up to do now.Excellent! Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Aug 23 2005
Stewart Gordon wrote: <snip>If you don't want to do it anymore, I'll give it a go. Here's an idea: I'll take one of the pages home to work on, write a stylesheet and then post the result here. When this is done, if it's OK with everyone then we can work on getting the others converted.<snip> Attached is what I've ended up with. Changes implemented: - Cleaned up markup in the navigation header and sidebar a bit. This should be replicated on all pages, with only the content of the sidebar below the <hr> varying from section to section. Used <ul> rather than bullet shape/size in CSS, but I'm not sure what it is. - Enclosed all paragraphs in <p> tags, and got rid of the misplaced ones. - Replaced tables used to delimit code with simple <pre>, using CSS to format. - Removed indentation of whole portions of code (and added a bit of indentation in the stylesheet), and replaced tab characters used to lay out code with spaces. - Tried to tweak code comments so that line lengths are within the 800x600 settings of my Windows box. Almost succeeded but not quite. - Run through spellchecker. Not that there was much to fix on this particular page, but there's certainly plenty on others. Open issues: - What maximum line length should we adhere to for the code examples on the site? - I haven't as yet got rid of all the presentational HTML markup, but at least what remains is more run of the mill. Like using a table to lay out the page, and the frequency of <b> and <i> tags - we could replace some of them with something more logical, but others are harder to deal with short of wordier <span> elements. Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Aug 24 2005
Stewart Gordon wrote: <snip>Attached is what I've ended up with.Oops, I meant to run it through the validator before posting it! The only errors were three instances of <h3> improperly nested inside <a>. But it's simple to fix <h3><a name="typedef">Type Defining</a></h3> and now the page is valid HTML. Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB P+ L E W++ N+++ o K- w++ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Aug 24 2005
charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable D Programming Language - DeclarationsThanks, I've incorporated many of = although the font winds up the same size as in the old scheme, it takes = up much more vertical space. Perhaps this is correctible with the style = sheet, but I don't know how.
Aug 24 2005
Walter wrote:Thanks, I've incorporated many of your fixes. I balked at the the same size as in the old scheme, it takes up much more vertical space. Perhaps this is correctible with the style sheet, but I don't know how.http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_list.asp
Aug 26 2005
"Derek Parnell" <derek psych.ward> wrote in message news:qwaaf2ne46kc.1az2ivuqb6rt0$.dlg 40tude.net...It needed a good revamp with CSS usage. It would be best (read: economically) done with some form of generator that holds the content and is applied over some template system.Currently, the pages *are* generated using a simple text macro preprocessor I wrote. It sure makes it a heck of a lot easier to manage hundreds of pages.
Aug 23 2005
Improvement. Keep it. On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:23:22 -0700, Walter wrote:Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
Aug 22 2005
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 07:23:22 +0200, Walter <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:Improvement? Keep it?Yes, very good! Ciao uwe
Aug 22 2005
Mr. Bright, IMHO You should redesign DM website according to design provided by Trevor Parscal (he submitted it few months ago). - It was really superior design I think. He also said he would volunteer to help You with it, but looks like nothing happened. I know Mr. Parscall and all I can say is that he's very skillfull guy (artist, musician, developer...). I think no-frames version would be nice for search engines - so the best would be to have both of them, and let visitor chose which one (s)he would use. Kind regards Dejan -- ........... Dejan Lekic http://dejan.lekic.org
Aug 22 2005
Mr. Bright, IMHO You should redesign DM website according to design provided by Trevor Parscal (he submitted it few months ago). - It was really superior design I think. He also said he would volunteer to help You with it, but looks like nothing happened. I know Mr. Parscall and all I can say is that he's very skillfull guy (artist, musician, developer...). I think no-frames version would be nice for search engines - so the best would be to have both of them, and let visitor chose which one (s)he would use.I think it is not so much the design that needs to be changed, but the *content*. As far as i remember, some people said that they want a more detailed/complete Phobos documentation, some inconsistencies in the specs fixed etc. Discussing the style over and over again is a waste of time in my opinion. The design is ok now, that's it. And 2 versions == more work. Ciao uwe
Aug 22 2005
Sure, but if someone as skillfull as Trevor offers to do the job all by himself - why not? I think he could easily adopt all current content to new design. And someone else could do maybe this what you asid above - better documentation etc. Parscal made good template - web-application should simply use it, that is all. -- ........... Dejan Lekic http://dejan.lekic.org
Aug 22 2005
"Dejan Lekic" <leka entropy.tmok.com> wrote in message news:dec3e1$2kbk$1 digitaldaemon.com...Mr. Bright, IMHO You should redesign DM website according to design provided by Trevor Parscal (he submitted it few months ago). - It was really superior designIthink. He also said he would volunteer to help You with it, but looks like nothing happened. I know Mr. Parscall and all I can say is that he's very skillfull guy (artist, musician, developer...). I think no-frames version would be nice for search engines - so the best would be to have both of them, and let visitor chose which one (s)he would use.Trevor's web site design is really nice. The problem is, well, it's a lot of work to redo the web site.
Aug 22 2005
"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:ded4n0$idd$1 digitaldaemon.com..."Dejan Lekic" <leka entropy.tmok.com> wrote in message news:dec3e1$2kbk$1 digitaldaemon.com...Work that presumably you don't have to do all yourself. I guess it depends on who would end up owning things like copyrights and if anyone would volunteer to make a website and give the copyright over to digitalmars (or to whomever or whatever would end up owning the copyrights). Maybe someone should pump some life back into www.opend.org. That web page is copyrighted by "The OpenD Team" - not that I know who that is. There's plenty of people in the community who I bet could make some pretty spiffy content.Mr. Bright, IMHO You should redesign DM website according to design provided by Trevor Parscal (he submitted it few months ago). - It was really superior designIthink. He also said he would volunteer to help You with it, but looks like nothing happened. I know Mr. Parscall and all I can say is that he's very skillfull guy (artist, musician, developer...). I think no-frames version would be nice for search engines - so the best would be to have both of them, and let visitor chose which one (s)he would use.Trevor's web site design is really nice. The problem is, well, it's a lot of work to redo the web site.
Aug 22 2005
No. The frames was MUCH better in my opinion. Now you have to hit back everytime you go to a page. The cool thing is that it is more organized. But maybe something like msdn? Frames + folding menu? If you keep it note this - http://www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html and [...]/lex.html/phobos.html/comparison.html are different. The top line is different and the padding is different. In article <debngi$29kg$2 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
Aug 22 2005
In article <debngi$29kg$2 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlWalter, this is a huge improvment. The site feels much less clustrophobic and more usable now. - EricAnderton at yahoo
Aug 22 2005
Walter wrote:Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlDefinitely, this is tons better. Keep it (as opposed to return to frames), but I personally still prefer Trevor Pascal's design.
Aug 22 2005
"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:debngi$29kg$2 digitaldaemon.com...Improvement? Keep it?Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site, it's also a pain to navigate. I miss the frames.
Aug 22 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ded3u7$hkf$1 digitaldaemon.com...Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site,No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder <g>.it's also a pain to navigate. I miss the frames.The problem with frames is that no other web sites use them for navigation, and too many people think it makes the website look clumsy and old-fashioned. One blind user wrote me that frames made it very difficult for him to navigate. The last problem with frames is if you wind up at the page directly from, say, a search engine, one loses all the navigation. Are the navigation problems you're experiencing with it something that is fixable without using frames?
Aug 22 2005
"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:ded7rb$lc4$1 digitaldaemon.com...No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder <g>.Yeah, I really shouldn't be one to talk either ;) But if you're going to make a good impression for D, I'd really recommend getting a better design for the site.The problem with frames is that no other web sites use them for navigation, and too many people think it makes the website look clumsy and old-fashioned. One blind user wrote me that frames made it very difficult for him to navigate. The last problem with frames is if you wind up at the page directly from, say, a search engine, one loses all the navigation.I've always liked frames; they're great for separating the index from the page content. Though the problems you've mentioned are all very real ones.Are the navigation problems you're experiencing with it something that is fixable without using frames?I'm not sure. My biggest beef with it is when you go to a long page, and scroll to the bottom, but if you want to get to another page, you have to scroll all the way back up to the top. That, and the contents don't really stand out; they've got the same boring white background and are separated from the content by a thin black line. Also - I noticed you put the _moduleDtor() call in the D for Win32 section, but the DLLs section is missing the _moduleDtor() in the DllMain() example. :)
Aug 22 2005
Walter wrote:"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ded3u7$hkf$1 digitaldaemon.com...Sun's JDK online documentation uses frames; Microsoft's MSDN documentation uses frames; ...and many more.Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site,No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder <g>.it's also a pain to navigate. I miss the frames.The problem with frames is that no other web sites use them for navigation,and too many people think it makes the website look clumsy and old-fashioned. One blind user wrote me that frames made it very difficult for him to navigate. The last problem with frames is if you wind up at the page directly from, say, a search engine, one loses all the navigation. Are the navigation problems you're experiencing with it something that is fixable without using frames?
Aug 22 2005
Hi, zwang wrote:Walter wrote:I can't speak for the Sun site, but the MSDN navigation menu is a god-forsaken creature best banished to the pits of hell. It's slow, clumsy, overly complex, convoluted, deeply-nested, and is known to crash IE. Worst of all, it uses frames, which are downright sinful by themselves. Avoid such design at _all_ costs. That's not to say the _content_ of MSDN is bad. In fact, not at all. It's navigation menu that is its Achille's Heel. Anyway, if you want an example of a superbly useful nav menu, take a look at the ubiquituous IMDB: http://imdb.com/title/tt0060666/combined The PHP sites are also very nice in terms of navigation and search."Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ded3u7$hkf$1 digitaldaemon.com...Sun's JDK online documentation uses frames; Microsoft's MSDN documentation uses frames; ...and many more.Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site,No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder <g>.it's also a pain to navigate. I miss the frames.The problem with frames is that no other web sites use them for navigation,Cheers, --AJG.and too many people think it makes the website look clumsy and old-fashioned. One blind user wrote me that frames made it very difficult for him to navigate. The last problem with frames is if you wind up at the page directly from, say, a search engine, one loses all the navigation. Are the navigation problems you're experiencing with it something that is fixable without using frames?
Aug 22 2005
In article <dee448$1sh0$1 digitaldaemon.com>, AJG says...Hi, zwang wrote:I absolutely agree. MSDN's navigation and slow and cumbersome. MSDN's content is good. jcc7Walter wrote:I can't speak for the Sun site, but the MSDN navigation menu is a god-forsaken creature best banished to the pits of hell. It's slow, clumsy, overly complex, convoluted, deeply-nested, and is known to crash IE. Worst of all, it uses frames, which are downright sinful by themselves. Avoid such design at _all_ costs. That's not to say the _content_ of MSDN is bad. In fact, not at all. It's navigation menu that is its Achille's Heel."Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ded3u7$hkf$1 digitaldaemon.com...Sun's JDK online documentation uses frames; Microsoft's MSDN documentation uses frames; ...and many more.Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site,No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder <g>.it's also a pain to navigate. I miss the frames.The problem with frames is that no other web sites use them for navigation,
Aug 23 2005
"AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:dee448$1sh0$1 digitaldaemon.com...Hi, zwang wrote:I agree entirely-it's way overdone.Walter wrote:I can't speak for the Sun site, but the MSDN navigation menu is a god-forsaken creature best banished to the pits of hell. It's slow, clumsy, overly complex, convoluted, deeply-nested, and is known to crash IE. Worst of all, it uses frames, which are downright sinful by themselves. Avoid such design at _all_ costs."Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ded3u7$hkf$1 digitaldaemon.com...Sun's JDK online documentation uses frames; Microsoft's MSDN documentation uses frames; ...and many more.Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site,No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder <g>.it's also a pain to navigate. I miss the frames.The problem with frames is that no other web sites use them for navigation,That's not to say the _content_ of MSDN is bad. In fact, not at all. It's navigation menu that is its Achille's Heel. Anyway, if you want an example of a superbly useful nav menu, take a look at the ubiquituous IMDB: http://imdb.com/title/tt0060666/combined The PHP sites are also very nice in terms of navigation and search.Cheers, --AJG.and too many people think it makes the website look clumsy and old-fashioned. One blind user wrote me that frames made it very difficult for him to navigate. The last problem with frames is if you wind up at the page directly from, say, a search engine, one loses all the navigation. Are the navigation problems you're experiencing with it something that is fixable without using frames?
Aug 23 2005
Walter wrote:Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlI like it. Lars Ivar Igesund
Aug 22 2005
"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:debngi$29kg$2 digitaldaemon.com...Improvement? Keep it?Yes, Yes. Some reasons why: http://www.search-marketing.info/traps/frames.htm http://karlcore.com/articles/article.php?id=2 http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil http://www.htmlite.com/SD002.php http://www.discountdomainsuk.com/articles_archived/9/688/1 http://azenomei.knuffel.net/~rhialto/banned_from_www.polderland.nl/frames-ar e-bad.html http://www.netlawblog.com/archives/000167.html http://www.iso.port.ac.uk/~mike/whynoframes.html http://www.weballey.net/frames/badthings.html http://www.ecr.mu.oz.au/help/web/tips.html etc...
Aug 22 2005
"Carlos Smith" <c_____.s____ sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:ded8jg$lvk$1 digitaldaemon.com...Some reasons why: http://www.search-marketing.info/traps/frames.htm http://karlcore.com/articles/article.php?id=2 http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil http://www.htmlite.com/SD002.php http://www.discountdomainsuk.com/articles_archived/9/688/1http://azenomei.knuffel.net/~rhialto/banned_from_www.polderland.nl/frames-are-bad.html http://www.netlawblog.com/archives/000167.html http://www.iso.port.ac.uk/~mike/whynoframes.html http://www.weballey.net/frames/badthings.html http://www.ecr.mu.oz.au/help/web/tips.html etc...I think the point is made <g>.
Aug 22 2005
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:36:59 -0700, Walter <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:"Carlos Smith" <c_____.s____ sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:ded8jg$lvk$1 digitaldaemon.com...Yes.. except.. the original problem that 'frames' solve, if badly, remains. It is mentioned in the 2nd link, I quote... "Introduced by Netscape in 1996, frames were introduced as a (seemingly) creative solution to a common concern. When a user scrolls a page to view more content, the navigational items are taken out of view as well. The solution? Separate the content from the navigation so that the navigation is always visible and usable for the visitor." So, while I agree: "frames are not the solution" where does that leave you? Do you simply ensure your users never need to scroll your pages? do you add a floating menu? (hell no, IMO) what is the solution? ReganSome reasons why: http://www.search-marketing.info/traps/frames.htm http://karlcore.com/articles/article.php?id=2 http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil http://www.htmlite.com/SD002.php http://www.discountdomainsuk.com/articles_archived/9/688/1http://azenomei.knuffel.net/~rhialto/banned_from_www.polderland.nl/frames-are-bad.html http://www.netlawblog.com/archives/000167.html http://www.iso.port.ac.uk/~mike/whynoframes.html http://www.weballey.net/frames/badthings.html http://www.ecr.mu.oz.au/help/web/tips.html etc...I think the point is made <g>.
Aug 22 2005
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:30:56 +1200, Regan Heath wrote: [snip]Yes.. except.. the original problem that 'frames' solve, if badly, remains.[snip]So, while I agree: "frames are not the solution" where does that leave you? Do you simply ensure your users never need to scroll your pages? do you add a floating menu? (hell no, IMO) what is the solution?How about having smaller pages. Just limit a page to some context info at the top and one topic/aspect in the main body with the frame-less navigation info at the side. In other words, if scrolling is an issue, lessen the need to scroll. -- Derek Parnell Melbourne, Australia 23/08/2005 7:52:14 AM
Aug 22 2005
Derek Parnell wrote:On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 08:30:56 +1200, Regan Heath wrote: [snip]Here comes another problem: visitors have to click more links than necessary.Yes.. except.. the original problem that 'frames' solve, if badly, remains.[snip]So, while I agree: "frames are not the solution" where does that leave you? Do you simply ensure your users never need to scroll your pages? do you add a floating menu? (hell no, IMO) what is the solution?How about having smaller pages. Just limit a page to some context info at the top and one topic/aspect in the main body with the frame-less navigation info at the side. In other words, if scrolling is an issue, lessen the need to scroll.
Aug 22 2005
In article <opsvxe9ue123k2f5 nrage.netwin.co.nz>, Regan Heath says...On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 12:36:59 -0700, Walter <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:"Carlos Smith" <c_____.s____ sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:ded8jg$lvk$1 digitaldaemon.com...Yes.. except.. the original problem that 'frames' solve, if badly, remains. It is mentioned in the 2nd link, I quote... "Introduced by Netscape in 1996, frames were introduced as a (seemingly) creative solution to a common concern. When a user scrolls a page to view more content, the navigational items are taken out of view as well. The solution? Separate the content from the navigation so that the navigation is always visible and usable for the visitor."Some reasons why: http://www.search-marketing.info/traps/frames.htm http://karlcore.com/articles/article.php?id=2 http://www.html-faq.com/htmlframes/?framesareevil http://www.htmlite.com/SD002.php http://www.discountdomainsuk.com/articles_archived/9/688/1http://azenomei.knuffel.net/~rhialto/banned_from_www.polderland.nl/frames-are-bad.html http://www.netlawblog.com/archives/000167.html http://www.iso.port.ac.uk/~mike/whynoframes.html http://www.weballey.net/frames/badthings.html http://www.ecr.mu.oz.au/help/web/tips.html etc...I think the point is made <g>.So, while I agree: "frames are not the solution" where does that leave you? Do you simply ensure your users never need to scroll your pages? do you add a floating menu? (hell no, IMO) what is the solution? ReganThe solution is to redesign this bobawful pile of crap we call the web. HTML and HTTP have ruined the world and have stunted progress. No, I won't tell you what I *really* think ;) Regards, James Dunne
Aug 22 2005
Hi,Yes.. except.. the original problem that 'frames' solve, if badly, remains. It is mentioned in the 2nd link, I quote... "Introduced by Netscape in 1996, frames were introduced as a (seemingly) creative solution to a common concern. When a user scrolls a page to view more content, the navigational items are taken out of view as well. The solution? Separate the content from the navigation so that the navigation is always visible and usable for the visitor." So, while I agree: "frames are not the solution" where does that leave you? Do you simply ensure your users never need to scroll your pages? do you add a floating menu? (hell no, IMO) what is the solution? ReganPersonally, given the new design, I don't think the navigation menu is an issue. IMHO, the "scrolling problem" is overrated. Maybe it's because I have a really fast, adaptive acceleration scroll wheel ;). Having said that, before some ungodly javascript floating hack is introduced to create the effect of a fixed menu, please consider using the official solution, which is CSS. Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebar Variations, including headers/footers, left and right, etc. can be found here: http://annevankesteren.nl/2004/07/fixed-positioning Enjoy, --AJG.
Aug 22 2005
"AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deduje$1mca$1 digitaldaemon.com...Having said that, before some ungodly javascript floating hack is introduced to create the effect of a fixed menu, please consider using the official solution, which is CSS. Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebar Variations, including headers/footers, left and right, etc. can be found here: http://annevankesteren.nl/2004/07/fixed-positioningThat looks pretty good.
Aug 22 2005
"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:dee1ij$1pi2$1 digitaldaemon.com..."AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deduje$1mca$1 digitaldaemon.com...Oh darn, there is a problem with it - if the left-sidebar is taller than the screen. It can't be scrolled!Having said that, before some ungodly javascript floating hack is introduced to create the effect of a fixed menu, please consider using the official solution, which is CSS. Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebar Variations, including headers/footers, left and right, etc. can be found here: http://annevankesteren.nl/2004/07/fixed-positioningThat looks pretty good.
Aug 22 2005
On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:15:54 +1100, Walter <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote:"Walter" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:dee1ij$1pi2$1 digitaldaemon.com...Such behaviour is completely controlled by overflow:hidden CSS option."AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deduje$1mca$1 digitaldaemon.com...Oh darn, there is a problem with it - if the left-sidebar is taller than the screen. It can't be scrolled!Having said that, before some ungodly javascript floating hack is introduced to create the effect of a fixed menu, please consider using the official solution, which is CSS. Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebar Variations, including headers/footers, left and right, etc. can befoundhere: http://annevankesteren.nl/2004/07/fixed-positioningThat looks pretty good.
Aug 22 2005
"AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deduje$1mca$1 digitaldaemon.com...Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebarThat looks _very_ good. I'd really like that.
Aug 22 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dee2dn$1qgc$1 digitaldaemon.com..."AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deduje$1mca$1 digitaldaemon.com...I've been implementing this layout in my site, and it's working wonderfully! I makes for very clean-looking HTML, and it's great that all the pages are consistent. Only problem I have with it is that I have to copy the code for the header and nav bar to each page, so if I want to change something in the nav bar, I have to go through each page and change it; but I'm sure I'm doing something wrong there.Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebarThat looks _very_ good. I'd really like that.
Aug 23 2005
Hi, Jarrett Billingsley says..."Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dee2dn$1qgc$1 digitaldaemon.com...What you need, my man, is a little dynamic magic. What kind of server setup are you running? The simplest solution to your dilemma is SSI (server-side includes). This is a very straightforward way of including content from one file into many other files. So you would have: ~/nav.inc.html = contains navigation code. ~/index.shtml = contains index page. ~/page1.shtml = some other page. Then, in index.shtml and page1.shtml (and every other page you want the nav menu to appear in), you would INCLUDE nav.inc.html. The canonical way to do this is with the following: <!--#include file="nav.inc.html" --> For that to work, your server must support SSI, and the _container_ page must be named with a .shtml extension. The _included_ page can have any extension, unless it, too, has SSI in it, in which case it must also be .shtml. ---------- More elaborate solutions exist using Perl or PHP or even Apache magic, but I think the simplest, quickest one is SSI. Let me know if it works out for you. Cheers, --AJG."AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deduje$1mca$1 digitaldaemon.com...I've been implementing this layout in my site, and it's working wonderfully! I makes for very clean-looking HTML, and it's great that all the pages are consistent. Only problem I have with it is that I have to copy the code for the header and nav bar to each page, so if I want to change something in the nav bar, I have to go through each page and change it; but I'm sure I'm doing something wrong there.Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebarThat looks _very_ good. I'd really like that.
Aug 23 2005
"AJG" <AJG_member pathlink.com> wrote in message news:defm1k$1hfo$1 digitaldaemon.com...What you need, my man, is a little dynamic magic. What kind of server setup are you running? The simplest solution to your dilemma is SSI (server-side includes). This is a very straightforward way of including content from one file into many other files. So you would have: ~/nav.inc.html = contains navigation code. ~/index.shtml = contains index page. ~/page1.shtml = some other page. Then, in index.shtml and page1.shtml (and every other page you want the nav menu to appear in), you would INCLUDE nav.inc.html. The canonical way to do this is with the following: <!--#include file="nav.inc.html" --> For that to work, your server must support SSI, and the _container_ page must be named with a .shtml extension. The _included_ page can have any extension, unless it, too, has SSI in it, in which case it must also be .shtml.That sounds like a good idea. I'll have to check out if my server supports SSI. Thanks for the suggestion!More elaborate solutions exist using Perl or PHP or even Apache magic, but I think the simplest, quickest one is SSI. Let me know if it works out for you.Yeah, I really don't know anything about either, but I'm pretty sure my server supports PHP. Maybe I'll look into that once I start with my web design class :)
Aug 24 2005
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:Yeah, I really don't know anything about either, but I'm pretty sure my server supports PHP. Maybe I'll look into that once I start with my web design class :)While I am a big advocate of PHP, if all you want is to include snippets then your best bet would probably be SSI if its available. Generally speaking the following SSI snip: Is equivelant to the following PHP snip: -- Chris S PS - For complex dynamic pages, PHP is a god. ;)
Aug 24 2005
In article <deiers$ijj$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Jarrett Billingsley says...Yeah, I really don't know anything about either, but I'm pretty sure my server supports PHP. Maybe I'll look into that once I start with my web design class :)Here's your 30-second crash-course in how to aggregate files in PHP: index.php: <html><body> <? include("hello.php"); ?> </body></html> hello.php: <p>Hello world!</p> In a nutshell: anything in between the <? and ?> tokens is PHP code. The include() function is just one of many in the PHP runtime/platform, and does what you'd expect. - EricAnderton at yahoo
Aug 24 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:deiers$ijj$1 digitaldaemon.com... Thanks to both Chris Sauls and pragma! I'll try those out and see which one I like better.
Aug 25 2005
In article <dekfea$1i4t$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Jarrett Billingsley says..."Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:deiers$ijj$1 digitaldaemon.com... Thanks to both Chris Sauls and pragma! I'll try those out and see which one I like better.They're basically the same, with one exception. The 'require' function will barf if the targeted file isn't present, while 'include' will be a little more forgiving. Just experiment a little and I'm sure you'll get it. Also, keep in mind that you can use relative paths for both functions (eg. "../index.php" or "./scripts/foobar.php"). PHP Documentation: http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.include.php http://us2.php.net/manual/en/function.require.php - EricAnderton at yahoo
Aug 25 2005
In article <deiers$ijj$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Jarrett Billingsley says..."AJG" <AJG_member pathlink.com> wrote in message news:defm1k$1hfo$1 digitaldaemon.com...It should... Apache 2.0.54 is your server, and I think by default SSI is enabled. I haven't tested it. If you wish to use it, try it out and let me know if it works. If it doesn't, I'll dig deeper and fix it.What you need, my man, is a little dynamic magic. What kind of server setup are you running? The simplest solution to your dilemma is SSI (server-side includes). This is a very straightforward way of including content from one file into many other files. So you would have: ~/nav.inc.html = contains navigation code. ~/index.shtml = contains index page. ~/page1.shtml = some other page. Then, in index.shtml and page1.shtml (and every other page you want the nav menu to appear in), you would INCLUDE nav.inc.html. The canonical way to do this is with the following: <!--#include file="nav.inc.html" --> For that to work, your server must support SSI, and the _container_ page must be named with a .shtml extension. The _included_ page can have any extension, unless it, too, has SSI in it, in which case it must also be .shtml.That sounds like a good idea. I'll have to check out if my server supports SSI. Thanks for the suggestion!Yes, you have PHP 5.0.4 installed. Any extra PHP modules you need can be easily installed. Regards, James DunneMore elaborate solutions exist using Perl or PHP or even Apache magic, but I think the simplest, quickest one is SSI. Let me know if it works out for you.Yeah, I really don't know anything about either, but I'm pretty sure my server supports PHP. Maybe I'll look into that once I start with my web design class :)
Aug 26 2005
Jarrett Billingsley wrote:"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dee2dn$1qgc$1 digitaldaemon.com...yea, you're missing something: pull out all the "style" definitions to a .css file, then include it in your html. I'm not sure about the details, but I think: <head> <!-- what ever you want to put ... --> <link href="style.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"> </head>"AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deduje$1mca$1 digitaldaemon.com...I've been implementing this layout in my site, and it's working wonderfully! I makes for very clean-looking HTML, and it's great that all the pages are consistent. Only problem I have with it is that I have to copy the code for the header and nav bar to each page, so if I want to change something in the nav bar, I have to go through each page and change it; but I'm sure I'm doing something wrong there.Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebarThat looks _very_ good. I'd really like that.
Aug 23 2005
"Hasan Aljudy" <hasan.aljudy gmail.com> wrote in message news:defrh3$1uf6$1 digitaldaemon.com...yea, you're missing something: pull out all the "style" definitions to a .css file, then include it in your html. I'm not sure about the details, but I think: <head> <!-- what ever you want to put ... --> <link href="style.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"> </head>Oh yeah, that's what I'm doing already; it's just that it's a bit of a pain to have to copy the: <div id="header> blah blah blah </div> <div id="sidebar"> links to stuff </div> Into every page, if it's going to be exactly the same on every page. What AJG suggested with SSI sounds like what I'm aiming for.
Aug 24 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:deffus$17g8$1 digitaldaemon.com...Only problem I have with it is that I have to copy the code for the header and nav bar to each page, so if I want to change something inthenav bar, I have to go through each page and change it; but I'm sure I'm doing something wrong there.I use a simple macro text preprocessor.
Aug 23 2005
AJG wrote:Hi,[snip]please consider using the official solution, which is CSS. Here's a simple example: http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebar Variations, including headers/footers, left and right, etc. can be found here: http://annevankesteren.nl/2004/07/fixed-positioning Enjoy, --AJG.That's brilliant!!
Aug 22 2005
In case if any of you interested in html/css, and in case didn't know that site before: http://www.csszengarden.com/ "A demonstration of what can be accomplished visually through CSS-based design." ElfQT
Aug 23 2005
Umm... <td valign="top" bgcolor="eeeeee" nowrap> I guess you were going to say "#eeeeee"? And about frames: Frames were designed to minimize traffic. They really makes sense when you have complex index part and dynamic content part. Just to minimize entropy and air pollution for such cases. Andrew.
Aug 22 2005
"Andrew Fedoniouk" <news terrainformatica.com> wrote in message news:ded95j$mfh$1 digitaldaemon.com...Umm... <td valign="top" bgcolor="eeeeee" nowrap> I guess you were going to say "#eeeeee"?eeeeeek!And about frames: Frames were designed to minimize traffic. They really makes sense when you have complex index part and dynamic content part. Just to minimize entropy and air pollution for such cases.I know. But they're dead.
Aug 22 2005
Hi, Walter wrote:Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlAs I mentioned before with the phobos docs, the frameless navigation is a huge improvement. Great job! The site feels more modern now, and is much more usable. This is particularly true for search engines and bookmarks. I have an idea for searching which is quite simple and doesn't involve any heavy lifting. See, the problem right now is that searching, which is done through Google, lumps together docs and messages. With that setup, it's very hard to find the official information. Hence my suggestion: What about moving either the docs or the newsgroup to another root at the domain level? For instance: www.digitalmars.com/d/docs/... and www.digitalmars.com/d/newsgroup/... and www.digitalmars.com/d/archive/... That way, when searching with google, you can use KEYWORDS ... site:digitalmars.com to locate pages within: 1) Just the docs (/d/docs/). 2) Just the messages (/d/archive/). 3) Everything related to D (/d/). 4) All of DigitalMars (/). Moreover, this could be extended to work with sub-categories. For example, you could separate the spec proper: www.digitalmars.com/d/docs/spec/... (arrays, functions, etc...) from phobos: www.digitalmars.com/d/docs/phobos/std/... www.digitalmars.com/d/docs/phobos/etc/... Which would allow even further specificity when searching. The best part of this is that it is all done through google. No need to implement anything server-side, and no need to index pages. Just move the pages to the correct location. In fact, a custom search page could be used that prettifies the whole ordeal for non-googlers. I could put together this page if people support the idea. What do you think? Cheers, --AJG.
Aug 22 2005
"AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:dedsd4$1jig$1 digitaldaemon.com...What do you think?The problem is it will break existing links to those pages.
Aug 22 2005
Hi, Walter says..."AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:dedsd4$1jig$1 digitaldaemon.com...Ah. But is this really a big concern? Specially given that _with_ the frames, bookmarks didn't work properly. If this is really a problem, there is still a fairly simple solution: First, copy pages to their new, canonical locations. Second, in the old pages, nuke the content and simply leave a stub which should contain 2 things: 1) A tag to make the search engines forget it. <meta name="robots" content="noindex,nofollow,noarchive"> This way searching the way I previously described would still work. 2) A redirect to the actual page. This way there's no need for duplicate content and it avoids staleness. Eventually, these stubs can be removed as people update their links. Thoughts? I think harnessing google is the best option. They specialize in searching and indexing web pages, and they know what they're doing. Why not put that to good use? Cheers, --AJG.What do you think?The problem is it will break existing links to those pages.
Aug 22 2005
Walter wrote:I agree totally. I'll work on it.Awesome. --AJG.
Aug 22 2005
"AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deeb3g$27o1$2 digitaldaemon.com...Walter wrote:The phobos stuff is done. It only awaits google to reindex it before the search works.I agree totally. I'll work on it.Awesome. --AJG.
Aug 22 2005
In article <deeevd$2bgr$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says..."AJG" <AJG nospam.com> wrote in message news:deeb3g$27o1$2 digitaldaemon.com...Great work! What about moving the spec itself into a /d/spec/ or a /d/lang/ directory? That would finally untie it from the archives. Cheers, --AJG.Walter wrote:The phobos stuff is done. It only awaits google to reindex it before the search works.I agree totally. I'll work on it.Awesome. --AJG.
Aug 23 2005
"AJG" <AJG_member pathlink.com> wrote in message news:defm8j$1if5$1 digitaldaemon.com...Great work! What about moving the spec itself into a /d/spec/ or a/d/lang/directory? That would finally untie it from the archives.Yes, I should do that too.
Aug 23 2005
In article <debngi$29kg$2 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...Improvement? Keep it?Yes. And yes. I think it's a great improvement.www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlBy the way, I think you forgot to add the sidebar to the glossary: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/glossary.html jcc7
Aug 23 2005
"J C Calvarese" <technocrat7 gmail.com> wrote in message news:deenko$2oaq$1 digitaldaemon.com...By the way, I think you forgot to add the sidebar to the glossary: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/glossary.htmlFixed.
Aug 23 2005
Walter wrote:"J C Calvarese" <technocrat7 gmail.com> wrote in message news:deenko$2oaq$1 digitaldaemon.com...I think techtips has the same problem: http://www.digitalmars.com/techtips/index.htmlBy the way, I think you forgot to add the sidebar to the glossary: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/glossary.htmlFixed.
Aug 23 2005
"clayasaurus" <clayasaurus gmail.com> wrote in message news:defb5q$u4v$1 digitaldaemon.com...I think techtips has the same problem: http://www.digitalmars.com/techtips/index.htmlTrue, I just haven't done that directory yet.
Aug 23 2005
In article <debngi$29kg$2 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlWalter, the no frames does look cleaner, but I must admit that it does seem a little bit harder now to navigate around in...which I'm sure I'll adjust to it. But it feels strange to post a message in the web interface, and to be left with no link back to forum. Currently, I think this may lead to some mistaken double posting...from yours truly, and others. After posting, all you're left with is: --------------------------------------- Posting - Please wait... Article Posted Copyright Newsguy News Service --------------------------------------- Please place a link that'll put one back into the forum, or better yet, back to the list of forums. <g> Thanks, David L. P.S. Feeling a little like E.T. right now, and all I need is a link to the forum homepage. :) ------------------------------------------------------------------- "Dare to reach for the Stars...Dare to Dream, Build, and Achieve!" ------------------------------------------------------------------- MKoD: http://spottedtiger.tripod.com/D_Language/D_Main_XP.html
Aug 23 2005
Walter, You'll have to forgive me, I'm a crazy XHTML freak. http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html In short: border=1 cellpadding=8 cellspacing=0 -> border="1" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" nowrap> -> nowrap="nowrap"> onFocus -> onfocus {this.value="";}'> -> {this.value="";}' /> value="www.digitalmars.com"> -> value="www.digitalmars.com" /> value="www.digitalmars.com/d"> -> value="www.digitalmars.com/d" /> value="google-search"> -> value="google-search" /> value="Go"> -> value="Go" /> <hr><br> -> <hr /><br /> <br> -> <br /> (lots of times) </td></table> -> </td></tr></table> I wish I had time to put into this myself - suggestions, comments other than validation, javascript code to highlight code snippets (assuming any of it would be worthwhile), but I don't just now... -[Unknown]Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
Aug 23 2005
In article <deh146$13ar$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Unknown W. Brackets says...Walter, You'll have to forgive me, I'm a crazy XHTML freak. http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlWhat is this "transitional" you speak of? ;) --AJG. /1.1 Freak.
Aug 23 2005
Also known as "supporting browsers other than Deer Park and Internet Explorer 7". -[Unknown]In article <deh146$13ar$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Unknown W. Brackets says...Walter, You'll have to forgive me, I'm a crazy XHTML freak. http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.digitalmars.com/d/index.htmlWhat is this "transitional" you speak of? ;) --AJG. /1.1 Freak.
Aug 24 2005
Ok, but why does it need to be XHTML rather than HTML? "Unknown W. Brackets" <unknown simplemachines.org> wrote in message news:deh146$13ar$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter, You'll have to forgive me, I'm a crazy XHTML freak.http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.digitalmars.com/d/i ndex.htmlIn short: border=1 cellpadding=8 cellspacing=0 -> border="1" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" nowrap> -> nowrap="nowrap"> onFocus -> onfocus {this.value="";}'> -> {this.value="";}' /> value="www.digitalmars.com"> -> value="www.digitalmars.com" /> value="www.digitalmars.com/d"> -> value="www.digitalmars.com/d" /> value="google-search"> -> value="google-search" /> value="Go"> -> value="Go" /> <hr><br> -> <hr /><br /> <br> -> <br /> (lots of times) </td></table> -> </td></tr></table> I wish I had time to put into this myself - suggestions, comments other than validation, javascript code to highlight code snippets (assuming any of it would be worthwhile), but I don't just now... -[Unknown]Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
Aug 24 2005
Hi, In article <deim31$uon$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...Ok, but why does it need to be XHTML rather than HTML?Truthfully, it doesn't have to be. HTML 4.01 is a perfectly fine, complete specification that is widely-supported. However, I think XHTML is by and large "the future," and it _might_ be a good idea to move in that direction. In addition, XHTML tends to have greater semantic value for the web, because it more cleanly separates visual/audial data ("presentation") from the actual information ("content"). Of course, a pragmatist seldom cares about these ideals; if this conversion would require a large effort, I don't know if it'd be worth it. At the same time, I do think the pages should at least validate properly. My 2 cents, tax-deductible. --AJG."Unknown W. Brackets" <unknown simplemachines.org> wrote in message news:deh146$13ar$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter, You'll have to forgive me, I'm a crazy XHTML freak.http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.digitalmars.com/d/i ndex.htmlIn short: border=1 cellpadding=8 cellspacing=0 -> border="1" cellpadding="8" cellspacing="0" nowrap> -> nowrap="nowrap"> onFocus -> onfocus {this.value="";}'> -> {this.value="";}' /> value="www.digitalmars.com"> -> value="www.digitalmars.com" /> value="www.digitalmars.com/d"> -> value="www.digitalmars.com/d" /> value="google-search"> -> value="google-search" /> value="Go"> -> value="Go" /> <hr><br> -> <hr /><br /> <br> -> <br /> (lots of times) </td></table> -> </td></tr></table> I wish I had time to put into this myself - suggestions, comments other than validation, javascript code to highlight code snippets (assuming any of it would be worthwhile), but I don't just now... -[Unknown]Improvement? Keep it? www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html
Aug 24 2005
Philosophy aside, because it *says* it's XHTML: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> Validating against HTML 4: http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html&doctype=HTML%204.01%20Transitional Which is basically just the /> and the xmlns. -[Unknown]Ok, but why does it need to be XHTML rather than HTML?
Aug 24 2005
That's what I get for cutting and pasting the line from an example. What should it say to be HTML 4? "Unknown W. Brackets" <unknown simplemachines.org> wrote in message news:dejbff$1sf3$1 digitaldaemon.com...Philosophy aside, because it *says* it's XHTML: <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> Validating against HTML 4:http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.digitalmars.com/d/i ndex.html&doctype=HTML%204.01%20TransitionalWhich is basically just the /> and the xmlns. -[Unknown]Ok, but why does it need to be XHTML rather than HTML?
Aug 24 2005
Walter wrote:That's what I get for cutting and pasting the line from an example. What should it say to be HTML 4?This is what you want: <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd"> <html> -- Chris Sauls
Aug 24 2005
It is certainly better than previous. :) -- ........... Dejan Lekic http://dejan.lekic.org
Aug 24 2005