xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Thomas B. Passin" <tpas...@mitretek.org>
Subject Re: [proposal] Better look and feel
Date Mon, 03 Jan 2000 18:58:37 GMT

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote"

>I personally love the xml.apache.org web site but there is still
>something we can do to improve it.
>
<snip/>


>2) the table used have fixed size. While this allows faster page
>rendering, it is very painful to adopt when source code fragments
(using
>HTML <pre>) are used. This screws up the pages in a very unpleasant
way.
>


It is important to minimize the need to scroll horizontally to see
unwrapped lines. Too bad it's confusing to word-wrap source code.  But
you can't really control what font sizes users will be using (even with
CSS you can't be sure), so a perfect solution is impossible.  One
approach - provide a button that opens a new window with the source code
nicely formatted.  Then the user has the choice to see a better
formatting if desired.  This can be better for printing, too.

>There are solutions:
>
>- adopt flexible tables: slower to render but better looking, also for
>distributed HTMl documentation.
>- adopt frames: much faster to render, they same bandwith, they
simplify
>the stylesheets. Problem is the use of javascript to allow updating of
>two frames with a single menu click. And browser "back" is also
screwed.
>


No problem having javascript update two frames at once - but they
shouldn't be the same frame that contains the javascript or the script
will get overwritten (probably before it's finished).  I have sometimes
used a very small (like 2-pixels high) frame to contain the javascript.
The browser back button is more of a problem, but you should be able to
tinker with the top-level history- using javascript- to get it right.
Or ignore it and provide good navigation features for people to use when
they find out the back-button acts weird.

>??? any suggestion?
>
>
>3) the DTD used to write and generate the documentation should be
>site-wide. I propose to start a "DTD project" that should take care of
>DTD definition. when a project has particular needs, it should propose
>them to the project rather than write their own style.
>
>This allows better DTDs to be developed and styles to be reused on a
>site-wide basis.
>
>Please, vote.


I would vote a +1 for (3) if I had a vote.
>
Tom Passin


Mime
View raw message