Re: I need help

W.R wrote:

I am using MS-Word to develop the html code
for my resume.

Stop. MS Word produces exceptionally poor HTML code.

Get a decent editor: <http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?HTML_editors>

I have the following which doesn't create anything but
a listing of the code...

Possibly you are telling MS Word to save your document as HTML, but typing
the code in manually - in which case it creates an HTML document to display
the code, not using the code.

Please send your assistance emails
to me personally - crystlenwayne (AT) peoplepc (DOT) com

No, this is Usenet.

h2>Wayne A. Rowe</h2

You are _starting_ with a level 2 heading? That doesn't make much sense.

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is

In article <cfntk1$ckj$1$8300dec7 (AT) news (DOT) demon.co.uk>, David Dorward
<dorward (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

W.R wrote:

[snip]

h2>Wayne A. Rowe</h2

You are _starting_ with a level 2 heading? That doesn't make much sense.

I've seen this mentioned a few times and am intrigued. If an H1 heading is
much larger than you need, and if you're not using CSS and it's widely
recommended that developer's use fonts at 100% size, then doesn't it make
sense to use a heading size that is more likely to meet your requirements
for a given line of text?

Or have I really missed the point somewhere along the line? Is it okay,
for example, to set an H1 with a font size="-2" in order to control it?

Pointers to tutorials/advice on the proper use of headlines appreciated.

Andy D.
--
Andy D.
http://members.westnet.com.au/andydolphin
Fine art gallery - online, Western Australia
Landscapes, seascapes and still life paintings in oils.

Andrew D wrote:

You are _starting_ with a level 2 heading? That doesn't make much sense.

I've seen this mentioned a few times and am intrigued. If an H1 heading is
much larger than you need

<h1> doesn't mean "A heading of this size", it means "A level 1 heading". If
that happens to have a large _default_ size that you don't like it - change
it.

and if you're not using CSS

This is 2004. Browsers which support different sizes of fonts but do not
support the very basic CSS 1 needed to resize fonts hold as close to zero
marketshare as makes no difference.

and it's widely recommended that developer's use fonts at 100% size

No - that's body text, not headings.

Pointers to tutorials/advice on the proper use of headlines appreciated.

<h1> - heading
<h2> - subheading
<h3> - subsubheading
<h4> - etc etc etc

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:23:25 +0800, Andrew D <andyd (AT) elsewhere (DOT) com> wrote:

In article <cfntk1$ckj$1$8300dec7 (AT) news (DOT) demon.co.uk>, David Dorward
dorward (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

W.R wrote:

[snip]

h2>Wayne A. Rowe</h2

You are _starting_ with a level 2 heading? That doesn't make much sense.

I've seen this mentioned a few times and am intrigued. If an H1 heading
is
much larger than you need, and if you're not using CSS and it's widely
recommended that developer's use fonts at 100% size, then doesn't it make
sense to use a heading size that is more likely to meet your requirements
for a given line of text?

Or have I really missed the point somewhere along the line? Is it okay,
for example, to set an H1 with a font size="-2" in order to control it?

Yes yes yes yes yes. A thousand times yes.

Pointers to tutorials/advice on the proper use of headlines appreciated.

h1 is the heading for this page. h2's are headings for sections of the
page. h3's are subheadings for sections of the h2 sections. Think of it as
an outline of the document.

h1 My web page
h2 Navigation of my site
h2 My favorite Links
h3 Web Design
h3 My Little Pony Links
h3 Other Links
h2 Info about me
h3 My bio
h3 My upcoming appearances

If it fits this format, you'll get arguments from no one, I imagine. This
is a strict interpretation admittedly, but it's the one I go by.

David Dorward <dorward (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

h1> - heading
h2> - subheading
h3> - subsubheading
h4> - etc etc etc

That's a proprietary definition. It for example suggests that multiple
h1's are inappropriate, or any heading level sequentially repeated,
although quite a few people would agree with that, it's a particular
point of view not supported by the specs.

From the spec: "There are six levels of headings in HTML with H1 as the
most important and H6 as the least. "

No more, no less.

--
Spartanicus

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 22:44:32 +0100, Toby Inkster
<usenet200408 (AT) tobyinkster (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Andrew D wrote:

If an H1 heading is much larger than you need,

Larger?! In *my* browser, an <h1> heading is the same size text as an
h2
heading, which is the same size as an <h3> heading.

The "if" above seems to cover the fact that in some cases the heading size
is not different. Clearly in *your* browser an author's CSS cannot change
the font-size of headings, so that's IMO a moot point to this argument.

Visitors for whom visual CSS is of any consequence normally do see h1 as
larger than h2, h3, etc. The CSS adjustment for these renderings does not
bear at all on the rendering for other users for whom the headings are not
larger than normal text.

Perhaps what you actually were arguing is the wording of the phrase. h1
certainly does not "mean" bold text at twice the size, though in most
graphic browsers it turns out to be the case. h1 merely means "primary
heading" and imposes no rendering strictures asude from the mention that
most browsers make the h1 more prominent on the page than surrounding text.

An h1 heading is not large or small in size, but its rendering in most
browsers can be, and that fact is the point of discussion.

Spartanicus wrote:

That's a proprietary definition.

It is, at least, implied by the semantics extractor. ISO-HTML, IIRC,
enforces it.

--
David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Home is where the ~/.bashrc is

On Mon, 16 Aug 2004 23:14:37 +0100, Spartanicus <me (AT) privacy (DOT) net> wrote:

David Dorward <dorward (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

h1> - heading
h2> - subheading
h3> - subsubheading
h4> - etc etc etc

That's a proprietary definition.

It's also a pragmatic approach.

It for example suggests that multiple
h1's are inappropriate, or any heading level sequentially repeated,
although quite a few people would agree with that, it's a particular
point of view not supported by the specs.

It's wise to use well-formed HTML, even though it is not required. If an
author had closed every non-empty element in the HTML document but left a
sole <p> unpaired with a </p>, I think we'd agree that this would not be
an error in the code, but it would be an error in execution.

Just as not all elements need to be closed, just as not all values need to
be quoted, headings are not required to be strictly hierarchical but
there's certainly nothing lost in this endeavor - in fact, as it allows a
meaningful document summary tree to be extracted, I'd suggest the benefit
of being stricter than the specs is wise here.

From the spec: "There are six levels of headings in HTML with H1 as the
most important and H6 as the least. "

No more, no less.

Very true. That's the comment within the definition. It's also 19 words
longer than the comment on the table element. Yet, we likely agree that
table markup should be reserved for tables, and not misused for page
layout of non-tabular information.

Why would we wish to use h1 followed by h5 followed by h3? Is there
another standard means of doing document headings I am not aware of which
sensibly organizes information? Headings are a tool to stratify the levels
of proportion of data in a document. If I have one heading in my page, may
I use h3? Or would it be more sensible to use h1?

There's really no sound argument I'm aware of to skip h1. Why then would
there be one to skip h2 and go right to h3? This extends to suggest that
for most sensible authoring we should use h1, h2, h3 etc. in order, each
referring to a subsequently smaller portion of the content.

The presence of the above commented text should not be seen as a
free-for-all allowance of crazy mixed-up headings, anymore than the lack
of commented text in the table definition should allow a free-for-all
misuse of tables for any visual arrangement of information into contrived
rows and columns.