Page 3 - Site Check Pwease

It is not a case of whether I like your answer or not, as I clearly stated previously in this thread I am satisified with my objective which is to launch a web site which covers the majority of the browser market. Which this web site does and very well if I may blow my own trumpet for a while.

And please do not put words into my mouth, I did not at any time state that 'this is not possible' I stated that 'there is no simpler way to achieve what works' which was in response to your questioning my use of div tags when basic HTML will perform the same task.

Well I am afraid that you have absolutly no basis with which to build a foundation for an argument as you have no idea of what the coding is like behind this project.

But hey, your right, this was a post requesting feedback, so if you can throw together your basic HTML code which will perform SQL queries, display text results over an image, be SEO, work on all browser / platform combinations and fit into the template system which I have written then please by all means proove me wrong.

/me sits down with some popcorn and a drink to watch the show

Some people just have to talk without thinking...

btw, like the site Silky.

Obviously I don't have your PHP code to reproduce, but that's moot since this discussion is about HTML... and more specifically about if there is something "simpler" than Layers/DIV tags.

The reason to avoid layers in not an issue of standards compliance, but instead compatibility with non-compliant and browsers. Using tables is superior in this case because it is a much older standard and thus is much more widely adopted.

Here is yours completely unchanged except for doing a Save As to my server.

Here is mine. The changes I made include:

1. I removed the DIV tags around the categories dropdown menu because I could not see that doing anyting on any of my browsers.
2. I edited the header.gif image into three parts:

1. header_left.gif
2. header_pixel.gif (I'll explain that in a minute.)
3. header_right.gif

[list=1 start=3][*]The header table row I split into three cells. I put the left and right images in the outside cells, and added your "86 PHP Scripts Listed In 74 Categories" text into the center cell. (I could not figure out why you had nested DIV tags around this text, so I just took the inside one and changed it to a STYLE.) No I did not make this text "appear on top of an image". Instead I simply made the background of this cell the same color as your image. (Looks exatly the same and no layers or browser issues... I used both the BACKGROUND="header_pixel.gif" and BGCOLOR="#416F93" attributes to make this compatible with more browsers, but this also make is less w3c compliant.)[*]You had the header, body, and footer sections in three tables. I did feel like doing all of the work of converting this to one table, but I did make the header/footer as one table with the body as a nested table.

The reason to do this is because it ensures that your header and footer will strech in porportion to the body area. This will be very important if you ever get a veeeeeerrrrrryyyy looooonnnngggg category name. (Obviously i can't know if you've somehow take this into account in your database or PHP, but this will cover you if you haven't.)
[*]I also changed all of the HTML tags/attributes to lower case and indented using tabs... This is purely style since HTML is quite forgiving in this area. Probably the XML/xHTML rules are the best, but I'm old and set in my ways...[/list=1]

I ran this through the W3C HTML validator, and ithe results show only found a few things of interest... All of which I would argue are necessary to meet your requirment of working in as many browsers as possible. These include your BODY margin stuff and my table BACKGROUND thing.

So the funny part is that even with all of your talk of standards compliance, yours would not even run in this validator. Frankly I think standards are nice, but to live with them you'd need to forgoe neat thing like your IE/NN margin stuff.


Over the years I've hired a LOT of young HTML guys. Your code is very good, and you will go far in this field. But your willingness to stop when you are so close to the finish line would make me thing twice before hiring you.


BTW, it took me much longer to write this response than it did to make these HTML tweaks... which is to say much longer than you have spent telling us that there is no simple way.


Peace!

/me sits down next to andreas to watch...

hey tommy, what has you so peeved at silky's reply? im just wondering...

/me drops by with 3 12 packs of australian finest and sits next to andreas and ronin betting $5 on smooth winning by a knockout in round 6

Can I sit next to you Al?

//NoXcuz

c'mon over mate! it is getting a bit too crowdy here, but the more the merrier

Your just not getting this are you. This discussion is not just about HTML because the damn web site is not a static HTML web site.

Every line of code that you just edited doesnt even exist until it is created by the PHP Template Engine which I have been developing for the past 4 months and decided to test with this web site. Your few html changes then dont become a matter of a few minutes to modify but a few hours and possibly a few days before it can all move live. So I refer you back to my original posting in responce to your original posting....

"There is no simpler way to achieve what works in IE and Mozilla on PC, which to be honest with you were my main concern for the immediate launch.

As the project progresses I will be using another forum (No offence :-) and updating / performing more browser checks.

For the moment though I am satisfied with the web site."

I have never stated that what you have done could not be achieved what I have stated and still maintain is that this is NOT simple in terms of the big picture.

You have made simple basic HTML changes which pretty much anyone on this forum could have done including me, but you have no idea how those simple basic changes affect a complex web site such as PHP Script Search.



See there you go putting words into my mouth again, I haven`t once even mentioned standards compliance. All I have asked for is compatibility checks and grammer / spelling checks, once I was happy (which was a long time ago in this thread) I launched the web site. So I think perhaps you should read more carefully and you might not get so wound up and waste your time.

I personally couldnt care less about W3C standards, I ran my site through there (Stealing Al's other posting, he knows the one) for a laugh before I even posted the site up here at DevShed for testing. The reason I couldnt care less is because the standards are BS. You cannot in this world have a set of standards defined by one group which are then for the most part ignored by the browser developers which then ignore each others stanards and build there own competing products which then leave us the programmers with a hell of a time building products compliant with them.

My web site is compatible with IE and Mozilla on a PC which regardless of what you think is the bulk of the browser market, I will not waste my time making it even more compliant when there are much more important things that need taking care of with this project. So as I stated previously a number of times, further browser checks will be performed at a later date on another forum.

Now I'm sorry if this doesnt meet your standards but I have my own development process. I couldnt care less whether you would employ me or not, you have obviously read my profile and seen that I am young to make such a comment, but please dont let my age fool you, I am not just a script kiddie knocking up cheap web sites, I run 4 professional companies at this point in time which I set up off of my own back without any help from financial institutions, family or these dumb start up schemes. My portfolio of work and reputation not only in this community but in others speaks for itself, which is why I am currently developing the complete PHP Driven web site for an International Electrical Manufacturing Group.

Round 6

At the end of the day you dont have my engine and your not going to get my engine and without this engine you have no basis with which to tell me what is simple or not within the confinements of my own project.

Have a nice day

And Al, dont be tight with those 12 packs, share with the competitors to!!!

Thats about 1/3 of the way down...

Go Silky!

Keep up the good work with the site. :-)

Fine!

I have no idea what your "engine" is, but to me is sounds like a car that can only drive in reverse while the headlights are on.

I guess I don't understand why you'd expend so much effort building an engine that is not fleixible enough to make such a simple HTML change...

A true engine would have the UI and functionality seperated (imagine having to remove the sheet metal on your car to add oil), but clearly that is not the case with yours.

Good luck with your site!

Good luck finding another place where people will give you the answers you want!

By the way, I got a fourtune cookie years ago that said:I think that is apropos here...