By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
455,244 Members | 1,339 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 455,244 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

XHTML Basic: style or media?

P: n/a
Hi all,

I am currently fooling around trying to produce a very basic webpage
that can be shown on both computer screens and Nokia series 60 GSM cell
phones featuring an XHTML browser. (XHTML-MP | XHTML Mobile Profile)
I found XHTML-MP to be the W3C XHTML-Basic + WML extensions, that is why
I have chosen to base a web page on XHTML Basic 1.0

Doing that I am running into the following problem: Nokia phones do not
support the media attribute in the link element and XHTML Basic does not
support the style element.

My clues to having separate stylesheets were to either have link
elements pointing to different stylesheets for different media, or to
use a style element in combination with an imported stylesheet for
computer screens and a link element for linking a handheld targeted
stylesheet to handheld media showing.

The latter works on IE, Netscape 7 and Opera 7 allthough not valid
according to the dtd the doctype declaration is pointing to. (as an
effect the W3C browser/editor Amaya 8.3 will not show the page
[http://meeuw.zeepost.nl/meeuw_homepage_xhtml_basic.htm] correctly)
Should I care? And if so, does anybody have a suggestion to do this some
other way and have the page show correctly on both Nokia series 60 cell
phones and computer screens?

Thanks,

Jaap

Jul 20 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
8 Replies


P: n/a
"JotM" <ja*****@12move.netherlands_nl> a écrit dans le message de
news:c5**********@reader08.wxs.nl
does anybody have a suggestion to do this
some other way and have the page show correctly on both Nokia series
60 cell phones and computer screens?


I think thi is just stupid to try it. Computer and cells phones are just to
different from their use to their caracteristics, so you should make a web
site for gsm, another for the web, etc.
It's ok, you can technically make web pages that can display on both but you
don't have to think technics, but end user.

Jul 20 '05 #2

P: n/a
"JotM" <ja*****@12move.netherlands_nl> a écrit dans le message de
news:c5**********@reader08.wxs.nl
does anybody have a suggestion to do this
some other way and have the page show correctly on both Nokia series
60 cell phones and computer screens?


I think thi is just stupid to try it. Computer and cells phones are just to
different from their use to their caracteristics, so you should make a web
site for gsm, another for the web, etc.
It's ok, you can technically make web pages that can display on both but you
don't have to think technics, but end user.

Jul 20 '05 #3

P: n/a
Pierre Goiffon wrote:
"JotM" <ja*****@12move.netherlands_nl> a écrit dans le message de
news:c5**********@reader08.wxs.nl
does anybody have a suggestion to do this
some other way and have the page show correctly on both Nokia series
60 cell phones and computer screens? [link snapped]

I think thi is just stupid to try it. Computer and cells phones are just to
different from their use to their caracteristics, so you should make a web
site for gsm, another for the web, etc.


Dear Pierre, did you care following the link? Is your knowledge of Dutch
and CSS sufficient to notice that allmost all div's and/or paragraphs
are either member of a class or have an id? And so can be turned on or
off with the "display: none"-statement to achieve specific cummunication
aimed at specific media.
For me this puzzle is part of the fun. In what _functional_ chunks to
devide the contents into, so a CSS aimed at either "screen", "handheld"
or "print" media will result in something comprehensive yet _pretty_ .
Sure, this can be done by defining all the content in XML and have XSLT
produce a specific (X)HTML page for a specific medium, but I am fooling
around trying to do this within a single XHTML page calling specific
CSS's. That is where I ran into trouble as I encountered partial
implementations of the W3C recommendation. As creating website is not my
job but merely a hobby, no sweat. But I am curious if someone else sees
an opening here I do not.
And as for your opening remark: having worked in R&D for over a decade,
I do not agree that trying something new where long known solutions are
available is "just stupid" even if it looks futile. You never know what
might come from it.
It's ok, you can technically make web pages that can display on both ...[rest snapped].


Please do enlighten me. Because this is just my problem.

Jul 20 '05 #4

P: n/a
Pierre Goiffon wrote:
"JotM" <ja*****@12move.netherlands_nl> a écrit dans le message de
news:c5**********@reader08.wxs.nl
does anybody have a suggestion to do this
some other way and have the page show correctly on both Nokia series
60 cell phones and computer screens? [link snapped]

I think thi is just stupid to try it. Computer and cells phones are just to
different from their use to their caracteristics, so you should make a web
site for gsm, another for the web, etc.


Dear Pierre, did you care following the link? Is your knowledge of Dutch
and CSS sufficient to notice that allmost all div's and/or paragraphs
are either member of a class or have an id? And so can be turned on or
off with the "display: none"-statement to achieve specific cummunication
aimed at specific media.
For me this puzzle is part of the fun. In what _functional_ chunks to
devide the contents into, so a CSS aimed at either "screen", "handheld"
or "print" media will result in something comprehensive yet _pretty_ .
Sure, this can be done by defining all the content in XML and have XSLT
produce a specific (X)HTML page for a specific medium, but I am fooling
around trying to do this within a single XHTML page calling specific
CSS's. That is where I ran into trouble as I encountered partial
implementations of the W3C recommendation. As creating website is not my
job but merely a hobby, no sweat. But I am curious if someone else sees
an opening here I do not.
And as for your opening remark: having worked in R&D for over a decade,
I do not agree that trying something new where long known solutions are
available is "just stupid" even if it looks futile. You never know what
might come from it.
It's ok, you can technically make web pages that can display on both ...[rest snapped].


Please do enlighten me. Because this is just my problem.

Jul 20 '05 #5

P: n/a
"JotM" <ja*****@12move.netherlands_nl> a écrit dans le message de
news:c5**********@reader10.wxs.nl
And as for your opening remark: having worked in R&D for over a
decade, I do not agree that trying something new where long known
solutions are available is "just stupid" even if it looks futile. You
never know what might come from it.


Web content is available for cell phones since more than 5 years now, so
some people like... me have try it before and I think you will get the same
conclusion as me really soon. For a lot of reasons, maintening 2 different
sites are the good choice - you see, there are now a lot of templates
engine, and it's always better to do all the presentation stuff server side.
So you've got a layer for extracting data from your database, another one to
transform and adapt datas, another to make the markup & css - that's just
that last that could be impacted by inserting new templates.

I just wanted to prevent you for this, though I don't have any solution for
your particular problem.
At last, I wish you good luck and you're true, it's courageous and good to
try something new. But if I can give you an advice : just see how it is done
on big websites since years.

Jul 20 '05 #6

P: n/a
"JotM" <ja*****@12move.netherlands_nl> a écrit dans le message de
news:c5**********@reader10.wxs.nl
And as for your opening remark: having worked in R&D for over a
decade, I do not agree that trying something new where long known
solutions are available is "just stupid" even if it looks futile. You
never know what might come from it.


Web content is available for cell phones since more than 5 years now, so
some people like... me have try it before and I think you will get the same
conclusion as me really soon. For a lot of reasons, maintening 2 different
sites are the good choice - you see, there are now a lot of templates
engine, and it's always better to do all the presentation stuff server side.
So you've got a layer for extracting data from your database, another one to
transform and adapt datas, another to make the markup & css - that's just
that last that could be impacted by inserting new templates.

I just wanted to prevent you for this, though I don't have any solution for
your particular problem.
At last, I wish you good luck and you're true, it's courageous and good to
try something new. But if I can give you an advice : just see how it is done
on big websites since years.

Jul 20 '05 #7

P: n/a
Pierre Goiffon wrote:
[snap]... and it's always better to do all the presentation stuff server side. So you've got a layer for extracting data from your database, another one to
transform and adapt datas, another to make the markup & css - that's just
that last that could be impacted by inserting new templates.

I just wanted to prevent you for this, though I don't have any solution for
your particular problem.


Thx for the protection. You're probably right. Which means I will now
have to endulge myself in server-side coding. Mmm. That should keep me
busy for many long nights to come. ;-)

/************************************************** **************************
JotM aka Jaap van der Heide
Remove ".XXXnospamXXX" for a valid return address
Please reply to a news message in the group where the message was posted
************************************************** **************************/

Jul 20 '05 #8

P: n/a
Pierre Goiffon wrote:
[snap]... and it's always better to do all the presentation stuff server side. So you've got a layer for extracting data from your database, another one to
transform and adapt datas, another to make the markup & css - that's just
that last that could be impacted by inserting new templates.

I just wanted to prevent you for this, though I don't have any solution for
your particular problem.


Thx for the protection. You're probably right. Which means I will now
have to endulge myself in server-side coding. Mmm. That should keep me
busy for many long nights to come. ;-)

/************************************************** **************************
JotM aka Jaap van der Heide
Remove ".XXXnospamXXX" for a valid return address
Please reply to a news message in the group where the message was posted
************************************************** **************************/

Jul 20 '05 #9

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.