CSS specs - reformatted

You most likely tested with browser not supporting, or you not being
avare of, navigation based on <link> elements?

That was what I mean with "the next section isn't there yet"... that is,
those "next, previous, contents" which the real specs have in the bottom of
the screen.

However, you can go from one page to another by clicking Ctrl-Up/Down.
Except that Opera has defined Ctrl-Down/Up to a new meaning and it's a bit
confusing with Opera. And also, Opera doesn't seem to support
window.focus(), and you will have to manually move the focus to a "content"
frame.

(and for some odd reason force scrollbar.)

For a good reason, which doesn't belong into this thread. Some browsers are
clever enough not to show it though unless necessary.

By magic, I mean that when I pressed maximize button. Before that, it was
not right size at all, it was bigger than my parent window, so I was
unable to see it fully. I see that my explenation can be misunderstood by
people not using MDI browser.

Ok, I see that this is a problem and I'll probable get rid of the new
window.

Search feature of your site was not really very advanced. I almost same
in my browser GUI. If it had somethings that vere crafted specifically
for W3 specs, it would be much more usable than any generic tool.

I'm not planning to do a software to view only one manual, but the search
works for me very well.

Well, much to do still.

I see some minor corrections but of course I want to thank you for bringing
them on.

Of course, person more used to lynx would have known that - but does
someone really surf using lynx nowadays, exept when they can't get X
working?

Lynx is the least common denominator in a way. Above that we have the mobile
phones for example. Getting this work with Lynx is a good starting point to
think about the mobile phones.


--
Ilkka Huotari
Netdoc - http://www.visiomode.com/

Ilkka Huotari wrote:

You most likely tested with browser not supporting, or you not being
avare of, navigation based on <link> elements?

That was what I mean with "the next section isn't there yet"... that is,
those "next, previous, contents" which the real specs have in the bottom of
the screen.

Yes, and also <meta rel="next"> etc. things. OTOH, I have no idea if they
work with frames. You need advanced browser, such as OPera, Mozilla or
lynx to use them trought.

However, you can go from one page to another by clicking Ctrl-Up/Down.

No I can't. And, how on earth could I know that? I mean, if I have
section 11.1, there is no link to section 11.2 in the frame you have the
content. If you have the search on the right, you don't have any link to
next section. (I don't know if there is such sections)

What ctrl + uo/down does in your browser? In IE they seem to be exactly
same as up/down. Or have you done something to get ctrl + arrow act
differntly?

Except that Opera has defined Ctrl-Down/Up to a new meaning and it's a bit
confusing with Opera.

No, Opera is not confusing at all.

And also, Opera doesn't seem to support
window.focus(), and you will have to manually move the focus to a "content"
frame.

No, but I have disabled window.focus(), as is usually used something
annoying.

For a good reason, which doesn't belong into this thread. Some browsers are
clever enough not to show it though unless necessary.

<frame scrolling=yes marginwidth...">
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You are explicitly asking scrollbar. Replace "yes" with "auto". Then
correctly working browsers can do the same as your "clever" browsers.

By magic, I mean that when I pressed maximize button. Before that, it was
not right size at all, it was bigger than my parent window, so I was
unable to see it fully. I see that my explenation can be misunderstood by
people not using MDI browser.

Ok, I see that this is a problem and I'll probable get rid of the new
window.

Good idea. I found a setting in Opera which I can use to force your
window right size, so I can cure half of the problem here, and many other
sites too.

Well, much to do still.

I see some minor corrections but of course I want to thank you for bringing
them on.

I certainly did not mention all problems I saw on your site.

Of course, person more used to lynx would have known that - but does
someone really surf using lynx nowadays, exept when they can't get X
working?

Lynx is the least common denominator in a way. Above that we have the mobile
phones for example. Getting this work with Lynx is a good starting point to
think about the mobile phones.

Irrelevant for my point, which was not to use value="search", but instead
<label>Search<input value="" ...></label>

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
I'm looking for work | Etsin työtä

And, how on earth could I know that?

Well, I will add a help window from the "?" button from that.

No, but I have disabled window.focus(), as is usually used something
annoying.

I didn't explicitly disable it but it seems to be disabled.

You are explicitly asking scrollbar. Replace "yes" with "auto". Then
correctly working browsers can do the same as your "clever" browsers.

Yes I am and I already said it is for a good reason which doesn't belong
into this thread.

Lynx is the least common denominator in a way. Above that we have the
mobile
phones for example. Getting this work with Lynx is a good starting point
to
think about the mobile phones.

Irrelevant for my point, which was not to use value="search", but instead
label>Search<input value="" ...></label

I already said that it is confusing in Lynx, remember? That probably means
that I will change it in Lynx, don't you think so?

A free hint for you: think outside of the box before you blurt something
out.


--
Ilkka Huotari
Netdoc - http://www.visiomode.com/

think outside of the box ...

And what I mean by that, is, that when you know enough, you know, that you
don't actually know enough...

You can appreciate the fact that there may be some circumstances and reasons
where certain knowledge from source X isn't enough. That the The Truth [tm]
maybe isn't that simple Sometimes it is, it sometimes the first thought
isn't enough.

Ilkka

Ilkka Huotari wrote:

think outside of the box ...

And what I mean by that, is, that when you know enough, you know, that you
don't actually know enough...

I know that I don't know enaugh. But I also know that I should not belive
someone that I have never seen/read before from face value, just because
he says to belive him.

You can appreciate the fact that there may be some circumstances and reasons
where certain knowledge from source X isn't enough. That the The Truth [tm]
maybe isn't that simple Sometimes it is, it sometimes the first thought
isn't enough.

I know quite lot about HTML+CSS, and browsers. I do not know much about
server side thingies etc, but I know that it is irrelevant when
evaluating the product, that is HTML+CSS +possibly JS. You can do
everything server side just fine. It may take lots of time, but it is
possible...

--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
I'm looking for work | Etsin työtä

Ilkka Huotari wrote:

And, how on earth could I know that?

Well, I will add a help window from the "?" button from that.

I still don't know what you mean by ctrl+up/down. As ctrl+up/down is not
action, it is shortcut key to an action. It is quite big change, that if
it is browser function, it is in Opera, and I was able to use it just
fine. And, why make ? button, when you can make "help" link?

No, but I have disabled window.focus(), as is usually used something
annoying.

I didn't explicitly disable it but it seems to be disabled.

Or maybe you did something wrong. Like used non-standard JS? I don't know
about JS, but that is most common error, I think.

You are explicitly asking scrollbar. Replace "yes" with "auto". Then
correctly working browsers can do the same as your "clever" browsers.

Yes I am and I already said it is for a good reason which doesn't belong
into this thread.

Why do you think it does not belong to this thread? If there is good
reason to expicitly ask scrollbar, it would be very useful to know the
reason - after all, we might not be able to figure it out ourselves, and
make mistake about not doing as you do. But if you don't say why, I
assume you don't have any reason. BTW, you can change subject line if you
think it does not describe thread well enaugh.

Lynx is the least common denominator in a way. Above that we have the

Irrelevant for my point, which was not to use value="search", but instead
label>Search<input value="" ...></label

I already said that it is confusing in Lynx, remember? That probably means
that I will change it in Lynx, don't you think so?

So, your comment was irrelevant to my point. If you had not quoted that
part of my text, I wouldn't have thought it was related to my point. And
since I noticed that I had failed to mention use of label element before,
I stated my idea again.

A free hint for you: think outside of the box before you blurt something
out.

Free hint: making comments of other peoples boxed views is not good idea,
when you seem to be thinking at least as much inside your own box. And,
especially, as you as author of page, should consider other peoples views
useful, even if they wouldn't see outside their box - after all, they
most likely know their box better than you do.

Think about that comment of yours about not having text for that book
icon. That was pretty much thinking just your box, ie comparing your tool
to another similar tools, but not to web, where your product obviously is
supposed to work.
I had never seen such icon before. It was far from ovvious. As vere those
left and right arrows, I thought I could use them to move to next and
previus section of spec, but thay just dublicate my browser build in back
and forward functions¹. Of course, you purposefully tried to hide them,
whitout any reason, I assume.

[1] If you can find browser that dont have back and forward function,
tell us, so we can laugh at it together.


--
Lauri Raittila <http://www.iki.fi/lr> <http://www.iki.fi/zwak/fonts>
I'm looking for work | Etsin työtä

Free hint: making comments of other peoples boxed views is not good idea,
when you seem to be thinking at least as much inside your own box. And,
especially, as you as author of page, should consider other peoples views
useful, even if they wouldn't see outside their box - after all, they
most likely know their box better than you do.

Yes you are absolutely right. Coming out of the box is difficult :-)

Ilkka