thescientist

Browser Wars 2.0?http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/28/g...9_n_841320.html

that's exactly what I was saying to one of my co-workers during a study group conference call this week. I told him how much the new FF tabs looked like Opera tabs, but he said I just used Opera too much. I said I only use it for testing, but one distinctive UI aspect of Opera was how it's tabs looked. Now FF's look like it almost exactly.

ok, but just to set the record straight...mailto != submitting a form! two completely different things.edit: you would be better off taking mailto completely off the table and just learning how to use PHP's mail function in conjunction with a form submission.

No, I don't think you're listening to what I'm saying. mailto has absolutely nothing to do with forms. Like I said, it requires a mail client to be installed by the user and requires that they also have outgoing mail configured on their computer. When they click on a mailto link, the browsers will attempt to open up a mail client on their computer for them to compose an email with. All you get is an email pop-up window that you can potentially pre-populate with some information.Forms can be written to interact with a server side scripting language so that information can be sent from the client to the server for processing. In PHP, you have a native mail function that can send email using the servers outgoing mail. You can make a form to get whatever information you want from the user, and have it send an email, or input information into a database, whatever.Perhaps you should just read about them?http://www.w3schools.com/HTML/html_links.asp - mailto example at the bottomhttp://www.w3schools.com/php/php_forms.asp - Forms & PHP http://www.w3schools.com/php/php_forms.asp - PHP mail()

mailto is based on the HTTP protocol and works without forms, but requires that a user have a personal mail client installed on their computer and that it is configured properly. Kind of cheap and dirty, but not really appropriate for "professionals". Forms allow the sending of data to a server side script, like PHP, which has native support for sending mail, through the use of the mail() function, which accesses the web servers outgoing mail server (SMTP - if setup) and will send the email for you. It takes a couple of extra steps but is much more flexible and reliable, and honestly, "less hacky". It's arguably the first thing beginners learn to do with PHP, and makes for a decent enough crash course in learning the language, and gives the basic insight towards interaction between client side and server side.

doesn't mean it's the right way. Just because someone wrote it, doesn't mean it's necessarily good, or worth following. Table were used frequently back for the turn of the century, but the point of CSS was to provide a far better and more flexible way to layout a page. Semantically tables are meant to render data in a tabular format. CSS solely exists to style HTML markup, thus eliminating the need to layout pages in tables.Some other things "wrong" (i.e. not considered best practices) in that template would be inline javacript <a onMouseOver="if (document.images) document.home.src= 'images/m1_hover.jpg';" onMouseOut="if (document.images) document.home.src= 'images/m1.jpg';" href="index.htm"> that could easily be done with CSS.not to mention the copious of inline style declarations, the seemingly unnecessary uses of and of course the fact that is was all generated from a WYSIWYG editor. Not exactly what anyone on this board would probably consider "professional" grade. Although it would be a good lesson for those wanting to learn how not to do things.

um... just keep trying and practicing? All three of them are basic elements with pretty straightforward implementations. I guess without any specifics, I'm not really what to say, other than the most basic of basic advice:1) only use tables for tabular data, not laying out your webpages2) lists are often used for navigation3) forms are typically used with server side scripts to send data to a database or to send emails (i.e. contact forms). Like I said, if there is some sort of specific problem you are having then let us know, other than that, I'm not really sure what you're difficulties are or what advice you're looking for.

what is it exactly you are having a problem with?

monkey see, monkey do. I put mine in a thread a few months ago asking for some help/feedback, but it's been up and running for a while, so might as well post it.Site Name: Analog StudiosSite Description: Music and Recordings Site Owner/Developer: MeSite Address: http://www.analogstudios.netExtra Comments: A redesign of the site, with focus on being database driven and more dynamic and interactive

yeah, that was probably one of the only good things about using it, aside from the text editor. But free FTP clients and free text editors outweigh the price by about 400 to 1

If you don't select update fonts, you should be able to open the PSD as normal, with yellow exclamation/warning signs next to any text layers with the unsupported font. Selecting this layer should give you the font you need to find online before it prompts you to replace it. Sometimes the replacement font is not exactly a good match, so it also depends on how dependent you are on needing to use the supplied font.

it depends. you could create a main graphical image to line up with main content on your site, say centered in the middle of the page. On the left and right hand side, you could have the main image slowly degrade into something repeatable, so that you could have fluid left and right columns and just repeat a gradient like pattern that will repeat as needed to fill out the extra screen space. For the height, you could just have the images and the flared out left/right columns slowly fade down to a certain color and then set that color to the background of the <body> tag, so where the images end, the background color will compensate/fill out the rest of the page.

agreed! I think the forums here provide an integral companion to the material taught on the w3schools site.

the article, while overly critical and at sometimes petty, does bring up some legitimate points. The idea going forward to is to consolidate all the best practices and references in one good spot and maintain it from there; which is what the thread is attempting to do in light of our reaction to w3fools. The web is big enough for everyone, it's just a matter of what you do and how you present yourself on it. (much like in real life).

I definitely think it has some potential, as long as there as a degree of consistency to it, that focuses on best practices and standards (naturally) and has a core group of (as DD emphasized) vetted contributors and "editors". ShadowMage brought up a good suggestion of having a comments section like on php.net.

but how do you keep people from contributing erroneous information? What is the screening process of wiki sites in general? And how do you keep something like declaring an object using new vs. {} from devolving to pettiness?

Exactly. If someone that represented W3Schools showed up here everyone once in a while, I bet a lot of these kinds of little details would have long since been cleared up by now.

do you have a source for that?

all the authors with links to their Twitter accounts are listed below the intro paragraph at the top of the page

what good does this kind of site do, when I can find an example where they are mis-representing the example they're criticizing? For example http://www.w3schools.com/js/js_loop_for.aspthese guy's need to layoff the caffeine and pizza. This sites make it seem like this all being done out of malice on W3Schools' end. I for one can't find any examples of W3Schools claiming to be associated with the W3C on their site, but then again, I'm not trying to spend all my free time trying to find errors in their references. Mistakes happen, and programmers often have different stylistic and syntactical preferences, which can be debated endlessly. Any programmer/developer/newbie, like anyone looking for information, should consider more than source for their information

Well I'm back to change my vote. I've only just downloaded it today because I didn't find out about till today. Finding a good and comparable text editor for Mac was hard enough as it is and I was grateful just to find TextWrangler, but I was never super "excited" about, to put it one way. Anyway, this editor I just found is called Smultron and so far just from the look and setup of it I like it a lot. I use Eclipse for all my work projects and this closely resembles that, allowing you to save a bunch of documents as a project, which you can open and close, as well as filtering out filetypes. Although it doesn't have a file system browser window on the side, you can have save options for opening the last project on startup, or documents. It has file tabber at the top so you can have multiple documents open at once and switch back and forth between them simultaneously (easily the one feature that I didn't get with TextWrangler that is already winning me over with this app). Give it a shot Mac users!http://www.opensourcemac.org/(its towards the bottom of the page. also worth noting there are a lot of other good apps for mac users)

usually using a Strict DTD and using the universal selector to reset all margins and paddings effectively reduces a large portion of encountered inconsistencies.

howdy newcomers, welcome to the forum!

For the Mac fans, I'll put another plug out there for TextWrangler. It's the closest thing to ConText I have found for OSX and even though I use a VM for work, I still don't find it worth the trouble using VM and/or boot camp just for a text editor, so as dismayed as I am to not have Context, TextWrangler works just fine. We are just talking about text editors after all, although I will concede syntax highlighting is a pretty nice feature, other than that, I'm not too bothered by what they do or don't have.