Css/xhtml

[PieMaster]

I saw on another post someone offering a fully validated CSS/XHTML page so I thought i'd share my knowledge on such matters.

CSS/XHTML = Web accessibility.

Although the sites they showed were XHTML/CSS... they werent actually fully compliented web accessible.

Things to remember

• Web accessibility is for people with disabilities.
• Blind people cannot 'enjoy' pictures [and neither can the reader describe them, thus theyre skipped]: Thus rendering web accessibility for this completely useless [unless offering stories].
• CONTRARY to what was said it doesn't mean they both appear the same on each web browser, it actually changes depending on how good of a quality the coder is.
• Older web browsers cannot understand it fully.
• Unfortunatly CSS/XHTML designs end up making the page slower.

So... CSS/XHTML isn't very usefull here however I dont know the full law situations, i'd doubt that it really would make any difference. I prefer Web Accessibility myeslf but makes not much difference to the front end user.

Grab a bookmarklet and test it:
http://visitjesper.homeip.net/bookmarklets.html
Try a CSS/XHTML accessibile site such as
http://www.xaraya.com/

Read up more about it here.

[vivency-AdamQ]

Begin edit:
If you bothered to read his illegitimate post, please read my rebuttle, because you deserve to know the truth. This guy is an assclown and should be banned from ever touching another computer. Read on, please.
End edit.

I saw on another post someone offering a fully validated CSS/XHTML page so I thought i'd share my knowledge on such matters.

Right, when one wants to share "knowledge", one should be sure that one knows what one is talking about. Following me completely destroying any credibility you might have held in unknowing users, please keep this in mind next time you feel inclined to share your "wisdom".

Web accessibility is for people with disabilities.

Oh how WRONG you are, sir. Yes, web accessibility is for blind people, and deaf people, but also for many other users, including, but not limited to:

1. Javascript Disabled people (10% of users have absolutely no javascript functionality...)
2. Mobile devices such as Blackberries, Palms, Cybeeko, whatever...
3. People who's primary language is not that of the website.

Blind people cannot 'enjoy' picture...

Are you blind? How do you know? How do you know blind people's friends/spouses don't describe the porn to the blind person? Not all blind people were always blind, oral descriptions can help them remember what a wet pussy looks like. Blind people jack off too.

Thus rendering web accessibility for this completely useless [unless offering stories].

And what about porn blogs? Web-reader software can read blogs. Again, blind people enjoy sex as much, if not MORE, than people who can see.

CONTRARY to what was said it doesn't mean they both appear the same on each web browser, it actually changes depending on how good of a quality the coder is.

Wrong again. Two properly coded sites will look identical in all browsers.

Older web browsers cannot understand it fully.

Yes, like Internet Explorer 3 and 4, which, combined, do not even amount to 0.1% of users today. The latter of the two browsers was released in 1997-- 8 years is a long time.

Unfortunatly CSS/XHTML designs end up making the page slower.

ACTUALLY.... you're wrong again. Again. Where do you get this shit? Are you making it up as you go along? CSS was designed and developed from the ground up specifically to speed up rendering, and to make everything simpler. Tables are for tabular data: spreadsheets. CSS is for presentational things: design/layout. CSS renders many times faster than tables do.

CSS/XHTML isn't very usefull here however I dont know the full law situations...

Wow you're right: you dont know the whole story. So next time, don't call me a liar.

I prefer Web Accessibility myeslf but makes not much difference to the front end user.

How can you "prefer Web Accessibility" when you don't even know what it is... Really, though.


I fear what design is coming to, because people who don't know different will believe you when you LIE to them.

[PieMaster]

Who said this has anything to do with you?

Right, when one wants to share "knowledge", one should be sure that one knows what one is talking about. Following me completely destroying any credibility you might have held in unknowing users, please keep this in mind next time you feel inclined to share your "wisdom".

I've been a web designer 7+ years and taught CSS to students.

Javascript Disabled people (10% of users have absolutely no javascript functionality...)

Having CSS wont change the fact there is javascript on a page... And thus it doesn't really matter if they do or dont. CSS doesnt affect it.. its wether there is Javascript on the page or not.

Are you blind? How do you know? How do you know blind people's friends/spouses don't describe the porn to the blind person? Not all blind people were always blind, oral descriptions can help them remember what a wet pussy looks like. Blind people jack off too.

I think you ruined your argument right around here.

And what about porn blogs? Web-reader software can read blogs. Again, blind people enjoy sex as much, if not MORE, than people who can see.

.......Digging yourself a grave because thats total bollocks.

Wrong again. Two properly coded sites will look identical in all browsers

True, but thats the same with HTML aswell. It just depends how its coded.

Yes, like Internet Explorer 3 and 4, which, combined, do not even amount to 0.1% of users today. The latter of the two browsers was released in 1997-- 8 years is a long time.

you'd be suprised what I've seen in all my years in the web soloution scene.

ACTUALLY.... you're wrong again. Again. Where do you get this shit? Are you making it up as you go along? CSS was designed and developed from the ground up specifically to speed up rendering, and to make everything simpler. Tables are for tabular data: spreadsheets. CSS is for presentational things: design/layout. CSS renders many times faster than tables do.

Actually, it was specifically set for WEB STANDARDS.
HTML are flat files unlike CSS which has to organise them. Its been documented that the filesizes are larger and thus load slower.

Wow you're right: you dont know the whole story. So next time, don't call me a liar.

Once again, I didnt point my finger at you. Just because I dont know the full law situation doesn't mean I know jack shit about this.

Oh and by the way, next time when your creating navigation try a handy thing called 'Bullet points'.

[xsivforce]

good html, xhtml, css and 508 info at worstwebpage.com

[clubahhh]

Im not even going to buy into this argument.. Why? well cause Arguing on the Internet is like winning Gold at the special olympics.. Even if you win you are still a retard..

Think of using the media type declaration "AURAL" in the CSS call. With an audiable stylesheet, wouldn't that make those porn blogs even more enjoyable... Just a thought... ;)

[vivency-AdamQ]

Who said this has anything to do with you?

You made it obvious.

I've been a web designer 7+ years and taught CSS to students.

Doesn't mean you know anything; you even admitted you didn't know.

Having CSS wont change the fact there is javascript on a page... And thus it doesn't really matter if they do or dont. CSS doesnt affect it.. its wether there is Javascript on the page or not.

Switch mouseovers to hovers, and so on, and so forth. It minimizes what javascript-disabled users can't use.

HTML are flat files unlike CSS which has to organise them. Its been documented that the filesizes are larger and thus load slower.

Styled <div>s render faster than tables. Also, CSS code takes up less space than an xhtml table most of the time. FURTHERMORE, CSS IS a flat file: it's text. OR, it could be in the xhtml "style" attribute.

Just because I dont know the full law situation doesn't mean I know jack shit about this.

Oh of course not, you've been teaching students blah blah blah.

Oh and by the way, next time when your creating navigation try a handy thing called 'Bullet points'.

Bullet points? You mean an UN-NUMBERED LIST... you DOLT?

You know, for a teacher, you sure are stupid.

[vivency-AdamQ]

Heh.. watching School of Rock today and the guy said, "you know what they say: those who can't do, teach. Thos who can't teach teach gym"

made me think of this post...

[Ghost Webmaster]

best way to settle this for the two of you to post your best standards compliant work and let the people decide