Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'specification'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • W3Schools
    • General
    • Suggestions
    • Critiques
  • HTML Forums
    • HTML/XHTML
    • CSS
  • Browser Scripting
    • JavaScript
    • VBScript
  • Server Scripting
    • Web Servers
    • Version Control
    • SQL
    • ASP
    • PHP
    • .NET
    • ColdFusion
    • Java/JSP/J2EE
    • CGI
  • XML Forums
    • XML
    • XSLT/XSL-FO
    • Schema
    • Web Services
  • Multimedia
    • Multimedia
    • FLASH

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Location


Interests


Languages

Found 2 results

  1. Hi guys! I just went through difficult maintenance for a website project involving iframes with the necessity of short, not embedded initial content. I was using @srcdoc and it already was difficult enough as syntax rules. Then I changed mime type for the pages, converting them into proper XHTML, and the result was confusing and terrible: Syntax adjustments for the "markup model" inside the attribute's value made me double the length of the value. It is not checked by validator, so predicting errors is difficult. It relies on the support of @seamless in order to match the design of the page, or otherwise it needs style declaration/stylesheet embedding which make it longer and impact on page loading while using several iframes in the page. Anyway using both could lead to conflicts during the (future, eventual) transition phase when @seamless is implemented on some UAs but not all and/or we'll have to face both support and backward compatibility. inserting semantic markup is too long because it ends up being treated as external document, so there must me a link reference to the main argument which is pointless (IMO), as the content is actually part of the page containing the main argument itself. XML serialization is wrong also in those browsers which currently support @srcdoc: Firefox always parses it as HTML, while the other ones complete the srcdoc document with tags missing (following the spec rules about tag omission in text/html) also where this is not requested. @srcdoc syntax is difficult to find, read, parse and serialize for any client different from browsers, i.e. search engines, data mining tools, scripts which fetch documents, and even for the authors themselves which have to write proper scripts for retrieving data (perhaps from databases) and insert them in a so particular position (with a special syntax inside an attribute) it is theoretically confusing because it mixes elements and attributes. It forces authors to write unmaintainable document fragments, also denying them the use of common editing aids like indentation and markup highlighting. These reasons and many more make iframe@srcdoc practically unusable now and in the near future. It is not a case that in webpages fetched by webdevdata as of october 2013 no use of @srcdoc has ever been made. And I suppose neither is a case that iframe@srcdoc is the very only feature making use of a "markup model" inside an attribute value. Now, iframe is not a void element: the restrictions on content, different between HTML (content model: text) and XHTML (content model: empty) documents, have been introduced with HTML5. Has anyone ever thought that the very same results of @srcdoc, with better, richer and more practical result using the native <iframe>'s content?
  2. birbal

    new pc spec

    what would you suggest specification of custom built computer? Major purpose: for programing (all kind of),Minor purpose: 3d software like blend or 3d studio max (not as extensively but more as hobby) and modern gaming (not in high details but with playable detailing and screen rate and resolution) My budget is around 600$ . i would not like to compromise with performance and future compatibility (upgradable in fututre) and in that case could be flexible with my budget if necessary. But cheaper are better. Best would be where performance and budget meets each other. I think i made my point. Require Components (Listed by priority):(The first 4 is high priority of mine) Processor: At first i was leaned toward AMD FX-8150 8 core. but after viewing the reviews of it i am little bit confused. I expected it will be comparable with i7 but some benchmarks left AMD FX-8150 behind even i5-2500k series. i5-2500k,i7-2600k,AMD-FX8150 i am confused what will be best among them. now I am more leaned toward i5-2500k as it cheaper than AMD and benchmarks are better than AMD. I would even go for i7-2600k if it has significant performance beinifits. Motherboard: have not decided Monitor: 21" samsungCabinet: cooler master elite HDD: segate barracuda 1TBRAM: G-skills DDR3 2x 4GBGPU: have not decided (I don't need optical drive,mouse ,key board,speakers,FDD if i am missing anything other than that please point it out) That's roughly what i came up. any feedbacks are welcome
×
×
  • Create New...