By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
438,394 Members | 1,912 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 438,394 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

My xhtml, your opinion

P: n/a
Hi everybody!

Can the honoured readers of this newsgroup maybe help me with my
xhtml-skills. The only thing I would like to have, is some feedback on
my coding style on my website, which you can find at:

http://michaelsremarks.com

Because I want it to have good xhtml and css, I also posted a similar
message (concerning css) into the authoring.stylesheets-group.
Thanks a lot for feedback, hints, tipps or criticism,

Michael

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


P: n/a
Michael Kalina wrote:

http://michaelsremarks.com


| <body style="background-
| image:url(http://michaelsremarks.com/images/hintergrund.gif)">

Why inline CSS? That is bad habit you will be sorry for later.

You could use CSS-signature to allow people to customize your site

<body id="michaelsremarks-com">

The I could easily remove unnessary margins of your site, and wouldn't
need to do it again each time I visit yout site.

| <p>
| <a href="/" class="noline">Home</a> /
| <a href="/?rss=1" title="XML feed">RSS</a> /
| <a href="/?atom=1" title="XML feed">Atom</a>
| </p>

This is not a paragraph. Don't use P markup. More cases like this there
too.

| <div class="abschnitt">Kategorien</div>

This is obviously heading. Use suitable heading element (h2? h3?).

| <p style="text-align: center">*</p>

Rather use hr and style it nicely. Unfortunately it is impossible to
style hr to look * in IE. If you can't think anything else, wrap it to
div instead of p. And use some class, insted of inline CSS. Maybe you
want to change size or color of that * someday. Or if I was regular on
your site, I would remove it.

| <h3>

You skipped h2, dont do that. WAI guidelines has link to explanation.

Quite good.

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
I'm looking for work | Etsin työtä
Jul 20 '05 #2

P: n/a
Lauri Raittila wrote:
Michael Kalina wrote:
http://michaelsremarks.com

http://michaelsremarks.com/index.php?id=134

| <textarea name="message" cols="1" rows="1" ...>

Really bad. Use some row and cols values that work whe CSS is disabled.

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
I'm looking for work | Etsin työtä
Jul 20 '05 #3

P: n/a
Lauri Raittila <la***@raittila.cjb.net> wrote:
You skipped h2, dont do that. WAI guidelines has link to explanation.


Is there an explanation in the WAI guidelines that is more convincing than
the one at <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#document-headers>?

I agree that it is important to use them to convey document structure, but
there are times when document structure would lead an author to skip a
level. My pet example is content that naturally falls into "chunks", each
of which has a heading and some content (paragraphs, lists, etc.). These
"chunks" are organized into sections (H2), some of which are large enough
to be divided into subsections (H3).

To me, it seems more structural to use H4 for all the "chunk" headings,
even though that means skipping H3 in the smaller sections that don't have
subsections. Using H3 for some "chunk" headings and H4 for other "chunk"
headings seems less structural. Adding an extraneous (perhaps even empty)
H3 to the smaller subsections seems like a non-structural hack.

IMHO, YMMV, and all that.
--
Darin McGrew, mc****@stanfordalumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, da***@htmlhelp.com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

aquapella /"a-kw&-'pe-l&/ adj. sung in the shower
Jul 20 '05 #4

P: n/a
Darin McGrew wrote:
Lauri Raittila <la***@raittila.cjb.net> wrote:
You skipped h2, dont do that. WAI guidelines has link to explanation.
Is there an explanation in the WAI guidelines that is more convincing than
the one at <http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#document-headers>?


Hm. I didn't remember it like that - maybe it was some automatic too that
tried to check for WAI, and offered links?...
I agree that it is important to use them to convey document structure, but
there are times when document structure would lead an author to skip a
level. [example snipped]


I have heard that ther is some browser, which you can use to go trough
headers in order (h1, h2s, h3s...).

Anyway, personlally I don't like skipping of headings, even in case you
state, but I have no strong opinion against what you say...

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
I'm looking for work | Etsin työtä
Jul 20 '05 #5

P: n/a
Darin McGrew wrote:
My pet example is content that naturally falls into "chunks", each
of which has a heading and some content (paragraphs, lists, etc.). These
"chunks" are organized into sections (H2), some of which are large enough
to be divided into subsections (H3).

To me, it seems more structural to use H4 for all the "chunk" headings


You've lost me here. You want to use H3 for all the "chunk" headings,
but in your first paragraph (that is, the first one quoted above), you
describe your example as using H2. Perhaps a quick demo of code you'd
use in a reply?

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Jul 20 '05 #6

P: n/a
Michael Kalina wrote:
Can the honoured readers of this newsgroup maybe help me with my
xhtml-skills.


You should mark up your huge blocks of links as lists, styled to remove
the bullets if that's what you want. A bunch of <a>s separated with
<br/>s is presentational markup. Suppose one day you decided you want to
present your links horizontally instead?

http://www.alistapart.com/articles/taminglists/

Looks great, though.

--
Mark.
Jul 20 '05 #7

P: n/a
Michael Kalina wrote:
Hi everybody!

Can the honoured readers of this newsgroup maybe help me with my
xhtml-skills. The only thing I would like to have, is some feedback on
my coding style on my website, which you can find at:

http://michaelsremarks.com

Because I want it to have good xhtml and css, I also posted a similar
message (concerning css) into the authoring.stylesheets-group.
Thanks a lot for feedback, hints, tipps or criticism,


Others have commented on your structure, so I'll just mention that I think
the links in the paragraph "Was gibt es sonst noch?" are just as bad as
"click here": er, Der, die, ihm, sie, dem, and denen don't give your
visitors any clue as to what to expect. You also actually have link to
"hier" which should preferrably be replaced with something meaningful...
Same goes for "hierauf" and "damit".
I know that this wasn't what you asked for, but I think it is important to
keep in mind! ;-)
Aside from that, I think the page looks beautiful.
--
Inger Helene Falch-Jacobsen
http://home.online.no/~ingerfaj/

Jul 20 '05 #8

P: n/a
Brian wrote:
Darin McGrew wrote:
My pet example ...

To me, it seems more structural to use H4 for all the "chunk" headings
You've lost me here.


Well, I just assumed he means the same that everybody else, when they
justify jumping over headings...

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
I'm looking for work | Etsin työtä
Jul 20 '05 #9

P: n/a
I wrote:
My pet example is content that naturally falls into "chunks", each
of which has a heading and some content (paragraphs, lists, etc.). These
"chunks" are organized into sections (H2), some of which are large enough
to be divided into subsections (H3).

To me, it seems more structural to use H4 for all the "chunk" headings

Brian <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote: You've lost me here. You want to use H3 for all the "chunk" headings,
No, I want to use H4 for all the "chunk" headings.
but in your first paragraph (that is, the first one quoted above), you
describe your example as using H2. Perhaps a quick demo of code you'd
use in a reply?


Here you go. I think it's more structural to use H3 and H4 consistently,
than to obsess over maintaining a strict H1-H2-H3-H4-H5-H6 hierarchy.

<h2>Section 1</h2>...
<h4>Chunk 1.1</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 1.2</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 1.3</h4>...

<h2>Section 2</h2>...

<h3>Subsection 2.1</h3>...
<h4>Chunk 2.1.1</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.1.2</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.1.3</h4>...

<h3>Subsection 2.2</h3>...
<h4>Chunk 2.2.1</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.2.2</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.2.3</h4>...

<h3>Subsection 2.3</h3>...
<h4>Chunk 2.3.1</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.3.2</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.3.3</h4>...

<h2>Section 3</h2>...
<h4>Chunk 3.1</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 3.2</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 3.3</h4>...
--
Darin McGrew, mc****@stanfordalumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, da***@htmlhelp.com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

"The handwriting on the wall may mean you need a notepad by the phone."
Jul 20 '05 #10

P: n/a
Darin McGrew wrote:
Brian wrote:
You've lost me here. You want to use H3 for all the "chunk"
headings
No, I want to use H4 for all the "chunk" headings.


I mistyped that. Sorry.
Here you go. I think it's more structural to use H3 and H4
consistently, than to obsess over maintaining a strict
H1-H2-H3-H4-H5-H6 hierarchy.

<h2>Section 1</h2>...
<h4>Chunk 1.1</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 1.2</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 1.3</h4>...

<h2>Section 2</h2>...

<h3>Subsection 2.1</h3>...
<h4>Chunk 2.1.1</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.1.2</h4>...
<h4>Chunk 2.1.3</h4>...


Ah! I understand what you mean now.

--
Brian (remove "invalid" from my address to email me)
http://www.tsmchughs.com/
Jul 20 '05 #11

P: n/a
Mark Tranchant <ma**@tranchant.plus.com> wrote:
You should mark up your huge blocks of links as lists, styled to remove
the bullets if that's what you want. A bunch of <a>s separated with
<br/>s is presentational markup. Suppose one day you decided you want to
present your links horizontally instead?


br {display: none}
Jul 20 '05 #12

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.