IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 1 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

IWETHEY Home / IWETHEY Board / Theory and Practice of Programming Forum / Uhh, HTML *is* structured
Post #116,556
by drewk
Picture of drewk
9/4/03 10:04:59 AM
Reply
New Uhh, HTML *is* structured
The problem is that for five generations of browsers now (and working on the sixth) the browsers are forgiving of poorly written html. Look at the source for this page and tell me it's not structured.
===

Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #116,558
by deSitter
Picture of deSitter
9/4/03 10:15:29 AM
Reply
New HTML not a page definition language
And Scott could make a bag of hammers look smart.
-drl
     Question about programming with functions. - (static) - (47) - Sept. 4, 2003, 07:17:27 AM EDT
         Code that's called once... - (admin) - (21) - Sept. 4, 2003, 07:43:01 AM EDT
             What he said, with more detail - (drewk) - (20) - Sept. 4, 2003, 09:31:15 AM EDT
                 Re: What he said, with more detail - (deSitter) - (2) - Sept. 4, 2003, 09:53:20 AM EDT
                     Uhh, HTML *is* structured - (drewk) - (1) - Sept. 4, 2003, 10:04:59 AM EDT
                         HTML not a page definition language - (deSitter) - Sept. 4, 2003, 10:15:29 AM EDT
                 What he said, and what he before him said ... - (JimWeirich) - (15) - Sept. 4, 2003, 10:14:02 AM EDT
                     Someone confirm/deny what I was told - (drewk) - (13) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:07:16 AM EDT
                         Depends on the language - (admin) - (7) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:10:36 AM EDT
                             Re: Depends on the language - (deSitter) - (2) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:17:50 AM EDT
                                 Sounds more like FORTRAN - (tuberculosis) - (1) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:21:45 AM EDT
                                     Yes, very FORTRANish - (admin) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:29:09 AM EDT
                             Different reason for that, I believe - (drewk) - (3) - Sept. 4, 2003, 12:05:31 PM EDT
                                 We did testing... - (admin) - (2) - Sept. 4, 2003, 01:28:51 PM EDT
                                     D'oh! - (drewk) - (1) - Sept. 4, 2003, 02:42:49 PM EDT
                                         ROFL. -NT - (admin) - Sept. 4, 2003, 02:49:28 PM EDT
                         I have a 1GHz laptop - (tuberculosis) - (1) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:30:59 AM EDT
                             Or better yet - (Arkadiy) - Sept. 4, 2003, 03:49:58 PM EDT
                         Re: Someone confirm/deny what I was told - (JimWeirich) - (1) - Sept. 4, 2003, 12:41:13 PM EDT
                             Yeah that guy gets around! - (tuberculosis) - Sept. 4, 2003, 04:12:07 PM EDT
                         Puh-LEEEEZE! - (jb4) - Sept. 23, 2003, 02:36:42 PM EDT
                     How big a block? - (static) - Sept. 4, 2003, 09:56:40 PM EDT
                 Pascal has one up on PHP - (tablizer) - Sept. 13, 2003, 01:01:32 PM EDT
         Re: inline PHP code and HTML - (tuberculosis) - (18) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:19:45 AM EDT
             Copy and Paste vs Functions. - (static) - (17) - Sept. 4, 2003, 09:49:32 PM EDT
                 Nothing wrong with 12 4-5 line functions - (admin) - Sept. 4, 2003, 10:14:18 PM EDT
                 Typical size of a method in Smalltalk is probably 4-5 lines - (tuberculosis) - (15) - Sept. 4, 2003, 11:47:55 PM EDT
                     Um. Yabut. - (FuManChu) - (14) - Sept. 5, 2003, 02:46:46 AM EDT
                         I was wondering how to say that. :-) - (static) - (13) - Sept. 5, 2003, 10:57:35 PM EDT
                             I'm going for fairly strict layout/form/content separation - (FuManChu) - Sept. 6, 2003, 12:22:53 AM EDT
                             Do I smell another "OO is better abstraction" war brewing? - (tablizer) - (11) - Sept. 13, 2003, 01:14:42 PM EDT
                                 That is a fault of history OF the current language. - (FuManChu) - (4) - Sept. 13, 2003, 02:17:15 PM EDT
                                     So you reject a language because - (tablizer) - (3) - Sept. 14, 2003, 01:49:36 AM EDT
                                         Not at all. - (FuManChu) - (2) - Sept. 14, 2003, 04:37:02 PM EDT
                                             not very nice wording, if you ask me - (tablizer) - (1) - Sept. 19, 2003, 02:04:09 AM EDT
                                                 Then you might have guessed I wasn't trying to be diplomatic -NT - (FuManChu) - Sept. 19, 2003, 02:42:37 AM EDT
                                 Not unless you're spoiling for a fight. -NT - (static) - (1) - Sept. 15, 2003, 07:49:09 AM EDT
                                     No, fighting the spOOilings -NT - (tablizer) - Sept. 19, 2003, 02:07:43 AM EDT
                                 Hey Bryce... - (ChrisR) - (3) - Sept. 15, 2003, 02:52:16 PM EDT
                                     Perhaps - (tablizer) - (2) - Sept. 19, 2003, 01:42:59 AM EDT
                                         I've read way too many Oracle books lately - (ChrisR) - (1) - Sept. 19, 2003, 10:44:14 AM EDT
                                             thanks for the quote -NT - (tablizer) - Sept. 20, 2003, 12:38:50 AM EDT
         Re: Question about programming with functions. - (JayMehaffey) - Sept. 4, 2003, 02:24:13 PM EDT
         Code as a Communications Tool - (gdaustin) - Sept. 4, 2003, 02:33:16 PM EDT
         Code for readability - (broomberg) - (3) - Sept. 5, 2003, 10:24:10 PM EDT
             Profiling and optimizing. - (static) - (2) - Sept. 5, 2003, 10:51:02 PM EDT
                 Difficult to optimize the algorithm after the fact - (broomberg) - (1) - Sept. 6, 2003, 11:42:37 AM EDT
                     Yes, I know. - (static) - Sept. 7, 2003, 02:46:59 AM EDT

I see... dead people.
70 ms