New Introversion Software site launches

The forum with all your Introversion News!
FinnG
level3
level3
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 10:07 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Postby FinnG » Sat Dec 24, 2005 11:45 am

oooo, looking good :)

cant wait for more on defcon
Finn
madman2k
level1
level1
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:34 pm

Postby madman2k » Sun Dec 25, 2005 9:05 pm

nice page - but it could be even nicer, If it would be a web-page i.e. written in HTML or something. ;)
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... n.co.uk%2F
Mudi
level1
level1
Posts: 60
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 8:50 pm

Postby Mudi » Mon Dec 26, 2005 5:56 pm

madman2k wrote:nice page - but it could be even nicer, If it would be a web-page i.e. written in HTML or something. ;)
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... n.co.uk%2F


Just because it doesn't validate doesn't mean it isn't written in HTML. There are a lot of "unofficial" tags that are understood by all modern browsers but are not adopted as an official standard.

My personal page does validate under XHTML, but it doesn't mean I insist that everyone make theirs validate :P
madman2k
level1
level1
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:34 pm

Postby madman2k » Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:27 pm

Mudi wrote:
madman2k wrote:nice page - but it could be even nicer, If it would be a web-page i.e. written in HTML or something. ;)
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http% ... n.co.uk%2F


Just because it doesn't validate doesn't mean it isn't written in HTML.

I think HTML markup which does not valideate should be treated just like C code which does not compile.

its bad enough that my shiny firefox cant use its fast XML parser; it should not be made worse by letting it parse the pages in Quirks Mode.

The latter is also responsible for the most compatibility problems we have today, since the IE has never been forced to render things correctly.
User avatar
The GoldFish
level5
level5
Posts: 3961
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 9:01 pm
Location: Bowl / South UK
Contact:

Postby The GoldFish » Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:32 pm

C code which does not compile depends on which compiler you're using...

Read the problems that come up, they're nothing major.
-- The GoldFish - member of former GIT and commander in chief of GALLAHAD. You could have done something, but it's been fixed. The end. Also, play bestgameever!
User avatar
Dave2
level4
level4
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2002 9:07 pm
Location: Reading, England

Postby Dave2 » Tue Dec 27, 2005 1:25 am

madman2k wrote:its bad enough that my shiny firefox cant use its fast XML parser; it should not be made worse by letting it parse the pages in Quirks Mode.

I thought that the XML parser was actually slower than the tag soup parser, as it has less work concentrated on it.

(I am a validation freak, though...)
Don't think about The Game.
mindule
level2
level2
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 5:14 am
Location: Baton Rouge

Postby mindule » Tue Dec 27, 2005 3:25 am

Heh, is that most of a caffine molecule in the background?
madman2k
level1
level1
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:34 pm

Postby madman2k » Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:00 pm

The GoldFish wrote:C code which does not compile depends on which compiler you're using...

thats what ANSI C is for... :wink:

The GoldFish wrote:Read the problems that come up, they're nothing major.

except the missing Doctype - they could at least put any compatible Browser in the standards compilance mode.
madman2k
level1
level1
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 4:34 pm

Postby madman2k » Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:07 pm

Dave2 wrote:
madman2k wrote:its bad enough that my shiny firefox cant use its fast XML parser; it should not be made worse by letting it parse the pages in Quirks Mode.

I thought that the XML parser was actually slower than the tag soup parser, as it has less work concentrated on it.

(I am a validation freak, though...)

the XML parser does more than you might think. The Firefox interface is written in XUL, which is an XML dialect.
Furthermore there are SVG, XSLT...

anyway - an XML parser should be generally faster than an SGML parser, since it does not have to "guess" so much.

But it is quite difficult to put firefox in the XML mode; it is not enough having a valid XHTML1.x document, you also have to deliver it as application/xhtml+xml, which means you have to ask the accept headers to be still compatible with the IE.
User avatar
Dave2
level4
level4
Posts: 550
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2002 9:07 pm
Location: Reading, England

Postby Dave2 » Wed Dec 28, 2005 2:46 pm

Sorry, meant XHTML rather than XML with XUL or other common components, and renderer rather than parser (though that may still be utter balls or outdated); as you said, XUL is the UI language, whilst XHTML can only be parsed as XHTML when it's app/xhtml+xml, which is basically hardly anywhere (I tend to use accept header detection to determine which to send).
Don't think about The Game.
User avatar
shinygerbil
level5
level5
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
Contact:

Postby shinygerbil » Wed Dec 28, 2005 2:56 pm

Whatever happened to:

Code: Select all

<html>
<head>Hello</head>
<body>
woo, text

<br/>

more text

<br/>

<img src="picturefile"/>

</body>
</html>
Here is my signature. Make of it what you will.
Image
User avatar
prophile
level5
level5
Posts: 1541
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 4:17 pm
Location: Southampton, UK
Contact:

Postby prophile » Wed Dec 28, 2005 6:54 pm

We censored it because it didn't have a doctype.
User avatar
shinygerbil
level5
level5
Posts: 4667
Joined: Wed Dec 22, 2004 10:14 pm
Location: Out, finding my own food. Also, doing the shinyBonsai Manoeuvre(tm)
Contact:

Postby shinygerbil » Wed Dec 28, 2005 11:56 pm

Disgusting.
Here is my signature. Make of it what you will.

Image
da_zeg
level2
level2
Posts: 227
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 8:59 pm
Location: West Lothian, Scotland
Contact:

Postby da_zeg » Thu Dec 29, 2005 1:26 pm

Hand Written "quickasfuck" HTML PWNS, the files are much smaller and load quicker. Generally nothing too complex is used so browsers dont have a problem with it.

I say generally: anyone go to http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/dazeg in IE then go to it in Firefox. You'll see what I mean.

Also Im lazy and standards are a baw.
FinnG
level3
level3
Posts: 301
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 10:07 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Postby FinnG » Thu Dec 29, 2005 3:42 pm

That site doesn't work in Firefox.

I see no images for the buttons.
Finn

Return to “Introversion News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests