Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [NH] txt2html

Expand Messages
  • Randy Parrish
    I hate CSS anyways. :-). ... From: To: Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:19 AM Subject: [NH] txt2html
    Message 1 of 7 , Sep 13, 2001
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      I hate CSS anyways. :-).

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <tenu@...>
      To: <ntb-html@yahoogroups.com>
      Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 3:19 AM
      Subject: [NH] txt2html


      >
      > >From clip list, posted here as suggested by Jody.
      >
      >
      > --- In ntb-clips@y..., Jody <av1611@e...> wrote:
      > > You can do a <font> tag for the whole document, although the HTML
      > > gurus will hang us if they see us using the depreciated tag. <bg>
      >
      > This would probably belong to HTML list, reply there if necessary.
      >
      > <font> tag is text level element, so it shouldn't contain any block
      > elements as <p/ul/ol/dlfor/table>. Encapsulating the document in
      > <font> works, but it's bad practise.
      >
      > Using <font> as safegurad is better than relying on CSS alone as you
      > can easily make a mistake of changing the background color without
      > specifying contrasting text color, making the text unreadable with
      > CSS-disabled browsers. With CSS-disabled I mean either no CSS
      > support, or CSS disabled by user.
      >
      >
      > Jorma
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >
      >
    • Jody
      Hi Randy and Jorm, ... I ve begun to like it, although I only use it for basic tags. That is all I used the older regular HTML for as well. I think all main
      Message 2 of 7 , Sep 13, 2001
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Randy and Jorm,

        >I hate CSS anyways. :-).

        I've begun to like it, although I only use it for basic tags.
        That is all I used the older regular HTML for as well. I think
        all main browser today support at least the basic CSS, but the
        user can turn it off or define the pages how they want in CSS.

        Happy HTML'n!
        Jody

        http://www.notetab.net

        The NoteTab and Html List...
        mailto:Ntb-html-Subscribe@yahoogroups.com
        mailto:Ntb-html-UnSubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      • Randy Parrish
        hmm... good point there, but what about browsers that do not support css? For example, the classic WebTV unit does, althrough the Plus (which my wife uses)
        Message 3 of 7 , Sep 13, 2001
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          hmm... good point there, but what about browsers that do not support css?
          For example, the classic WebTV unit does, althrough the Plus (which my wife
          uses) does in a limited fashion. Not everyone has the latest browsers. CSS
          would give those problems. Wouldn't XML be better?

          Randy

          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Jody" <av1611@...>
          To: <ntb-html@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:09 PM
          Subject: Re: [NH] txt2html


          > Hi Randy and Jorm,
          >
          > >I hate CSS anyways. :-).
          >
          > I've begun to like it, although I only use it for basic tags.
          > That is all I used the older regular HTML for as well. I think
          > all main browser today support at least the basic CSS, but the
          > user can turn it off or define the pages how they want in CSS.
          >
          > Happy HTML'n!
          > Jody
          >
          > http://www.notetab.net
          >
          > The NoteTab and Html List...
          > mailto:Ntb-html-Subscribe@yahoogroups.com
          > mailto:Ntb-html-UnSubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
        • Randy Parrish
          I m starting on Xml.. found a good link for it. Fits right into this group. ... http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/ There are others:
          Message 4 of 7 , Sep 13, 2001
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            I'm starting on Xml.. found a good link for it. Fits right into this group.
            :-).

            http://www.w3schools.com/xhtml/

            There are others:

            http://builder.cnet.com/webbuilding/0-3881-8-7080997-7.html?tag=st.bl.3881-8
            -7080997-6.txt.3881-8-7080997-7

            http://www.xhtml.org/

            Randy

            ----- Original Message -----
            From: "Jody" <av1611@...>
            To: <ntb-html@yahoogroups.com>
            Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:09 PM
            Subject: Re: [NH] txt2html


            > Hi Randy and Jorm,
            >
            > >I hate CSS anyways. :-).
            >
            > I've begun to like it, although I only use it for basic tags.
            > That is all I used the older regular HTML for as well. I think
            > all main browser today support at least the basic CSS, but the
            > user can turn it off or define the pages how they want in CSS.
            >
            > Happy HTML'n!
            > Jody
            >
            > http://www.notetab.net
            >
            > The NoteTab and Html List...
            > mailto:Ntb-html-Subscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > mailto:Ntb-html-UnSubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
            >
          • Jody
            Hi Randy, ... I m the wrong person to ask, because I am not concerned if some old worn out browsers (or minimal browsers) view my pages the way I intended
            Message 5 of 7 , Sep 13, 2001
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              Hi Randy,

              >hmm... good point there, but what about browsers that do not
              >support css? For example, the classic WebTV unit does, althrough
              >the Plus (which my wife uses) does in a limited fashion. Not
              >everyone has the latest browsers. CSS would give those problems.

              I'm the wrong person to ask, because I am not concerned if some
              old worn out browsers (or "minimal" browsers) view my pages the
              way I intended them to look. Those people will get a "plain"
              page and for the most of them that is probably what they want -
              speed. I use a lightweight browser at times with images turned
              off etc. for that very purpose.

              >Wouldn't XML be better?

              I wouldn't know about that at all accept that XHTML is suppose to
              be (along with CSS) the standard along with w3c's latest. Some
              have said, at least the way I took it that this will be the last
              standard. I surely do not agree with that though. What happens
              when a new and faster technology comes out that requires a
              different format for say something like holograms coming out of
              Power Ranger watches for the children at $5.95 each? :-) ...and
              Star Wars watches for us big kids. <g> Boys will have their toys
              and the code will have to be changed along with it. So, I am not
              concerned about using font, blockquote ("illegally"), CSS, XHTML
              the slightest bit. I can certainly understand people making a
              living from building web pages (or the ones that prefer it) need
              to use the latest and greatest code.

              FWIW, this is what I was playing with in my Internet Options
              (which is used for Document to HTML (and with the same Clip):

              <html>
              <head>
              <title></title>
              <meta name="generator" content="notetab pro 4.85a"> <-- I know ;)
              <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="http://www.notetab.net" title="funsheet">
              </head>
              <body>

              I just changed it to the following and perhaps will add some H1,
              H2, tags in it and maybe some more meta tags. I realize that the
              link to the .css may be easier, but for my purposes it is not - I
              think. <g>

              <html>
              <head>
              <title></title>
              <meta name="generator" content="NoteTab Pro 4.86">
              <style type="text/css">
              Body
              {
              font-family : "Times New Roman";
              font-style : normal;
              font-size : 13pt;
              font-weight: bold;
              }
              A:link
              {
              color: #990000;
              }
              A:visited
              {
              color: #0099CC;
              }
              A:hover
              {
              color: #0033FF
              }
              A:active
              {
              color: red;
              }
              P
              {
              text-align: justify;
              margin-left:5em;
              margin-right:5em;
              }
              </style>
              </head>
              <body>

              >----- Original Message -----
              >From: "Jody" <av1611@...>
              >To: <ntb-html@yahoogroups.com>
              >Sent: Thursday, September 13, 2001 12:09 PM
              >Subject: Re: [NH] txt2html
              >
              >
              >> Hi Randy and Jorm,
              >>
              >> >I hate CSS anyways. :-).
              >>
              >> I've begun to like it, although I only use it for basic tags.
              >> That is all I used the older regular HTML for as well. I think
              >> all main browser today support at least the basic CSS, but the
              >> user can turn it off or define the pages how they want in CSS.


              Happy HTML'n!
              Jody

              http://www.notetab.net

              The NoteTab and Html List...
              mailto:Ntb-html-Subscribe@yahoogroups.com
              mailto:Ntb-html-UnSubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            • Lotta
              Hello, ... I saw from you other post that you are really referring to XHTML not XML. You ll find that with XML you are bound to use CSS for text formatting and
              Message 6 of 7 , Sep 13, 2001
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                Hello,

                >Not everyone has the latest browsers. CSS
                >would give those problems. Wouldn't XML be better?

                I saw from you other post that you are really referring to XHTML not XML.
                You'll find that with XML you are bound to use CSS for text formatting and
                so on. All presentational HTML tags are cleaned out. Which is kind of the
                purpose. :)

                Lotta
              • Lotta
                Hi What an improvement. I actually receive some list posts now. Only 5 hours delay on this one. Hurray for Yahoo (not). Sorry, I made a typo. ... Should be
                Message 7 of 7 , Sep 13, 2001
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hi

                  What an improvement. I actually receive some list posts now. Only 5 hours
                  delay on this one. Hurray for Yahoo (not).

                  Sorry, I made a typo.

                  >You'll find that with XML you are bound to use CSS for text formatting and
                  Should be ...with XHTML you are....

                  Lotta
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.