[SGVLUG] Call for webmasters

[serross at ix.netcom.com]

Why not bring the site up to date - either XHTML T with CSS or XML. Our site is simple enough to do in a text editor, additional pages come through templates. We could even make the whole thing in PHP. I think what we want is a site that looks good and is informative. I really don't think the amount of bits & bites used should be a factor.
Tables can be made in CSS.

Stephen


-----Original Message-----
From: "Emerson, Tom" <Tom.Emerson at wbconsultant.com>
Sent: Oct 5, 2005 6:28 PM
To: "SGVLUG Discussion List." <sgvlug at sgvlug.net>
Subject: RE: [SGVLUG] Call for webmasters

> -----Original Message-----
> Behalf Of David Lawyer
> 
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 02:40:51AM -0700, Tom Emerson wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > David Lawyer
> > > 
> > > I'm in favor of a very simple site using say html 3.2 and not 
> > > using any complex tags like the table tag.
> > 
> > ???  Since when is the "table" tag complex?
> 
> It takes several minutes to learn it and when you use it it isn't
> WYSIWYG.

Other than dredging up a 3-month old topic, I've since found that "tables" are considered evil for a different reason -- the /preferred/ way to manage this now is to use css entirely -- talk about non-WYSIWYG!  You have to think in terms of class and ID names, absolute (!) screen positions, and so on.

>  Just making a table in plain text is simpler since it looks
> like a table.

Hmmm...  The "traditional" way [programmer] oriented webmasters write tables is thus:

  <table>
    <tr>
      <td>
        top-left cell
      </td>
      <td>
        top-mid cell
      </td>
      <td>
        top-right cell
      </td>
     </tr>
     <tr>
      <td>
       mid-left cell
      </td>
      <td>
       mid-mid cell
[etc...]

but if the cell-contents are short enough, you can do it this way:

<table>
<tr><td>top-left cell</td> <td>top-mid cell</td> <td>top-right cell</td></tr>
<tr><td>mid-left cell</td> <td>mid-mid cell</td> <td>mid-right cell</td></tr>
<tr><td>bot-left cell</td> <td>bot-mid cell</td> <td>bot-right cell</td></tr>
</table>

heck, that even looks like a table!  (well, it did when I wrote it -- it might word-wrap kinda crazy)

> Suppose I want to insert a new column into a text
> table.  I use the block mode in vim, type the new column at the left
> margin (one entry per line), define the new column  as a block and
> insert the block at the right place in the table.  One doesn't even
> need to use a mouse.

I'll argue that "learning how to use block-mode in vi(m) takes a few minutes at first" as well [actually, /learning/ that such a mode EXISTS in the first place has taken me years, so to speak...]

However, in both cases, once you've /learned/ how to accomplish it, doing the next time takes less and less time until you don't even "think" about it.  However, this is also a bit of a moot point because other than setting up the "template" [a task done approximately -ONCE- in the lifetime of a CMS based site], the software typically "does the tables" for you...

(oh, and I didn't use a mouse for the above table either :) )
 
> I suppose that if one needed to create a large number of tables, then
> it would be worthwhile to use the html table format and perhaps a html
> editor.  But if you already know vim and how to deal with blocks
> (rectangles with monospaced font inside them), then it's easier to do
> tables in plain text and use the html <pre> tag (Preserve) which is
> <verb> (verbatim) in LinuxDoc.

NOW, SINCE WE'VE ALL MOVED ON FROM THE DAYS OF TELETYPES THAT ONLY HAVE MONO-SPACED UPPERCASE TEXT, DATA CONSUMERS [THAT WOULD BE YOUR WEBSITE VIEWERS] TEND TO PREFER MIXED CASE PROPORTIONAL FONTS

</sarcasm>

though, in general, "numeric data", for which even css snobs admit is "ok to use tables for truly tabular data", tends to be a fixed-width set of characters, even in a proportional font, so <pre> tags would do in a pinch [until the client re-sized his browser frame]

> > 
> > > think that text browsers like lynx should work OK with it.  
> > 
> > Hnnn... Is there a "lynx" template/theme available for Mambo?
> > 

a bit of a p.s. -- I actually did take a moment to look at our "site" via lynx -- when using the "sgvlug classic" template, it actually rendered quite nicely -- since the "menu" stuff is on the RIGHT side of the layout, it renders AFTER the "main text" of the site.  For templates with a left- or top-menu, those menu items appear as a long list of links [on every page] that you have to tab past to get to the "content"...