Re: Web Design and Web Development

Discussion in 'HTML' started by roseliza, Mar 11, 2007.

  1. roseliza

    roseliza Guest

    To all readers...


    What are HTML, CSS, WYSIWYG?
    roseliza, Mar 11, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Bernhard Sturm, Mar 11, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. roseliza wrote:

    > To all readers...
    >
    >
    > What are HTML, CSS, WYSIWYG?


    To simplify:

    HTML:
    HyperText Markup Language; the code you see when you select "View
    source" in your browser. It's a standard used for structuring and
    formatting a web page.

    CSS:
    Cascading Style Sheets; a standard used together with HTML for
    presentation and layout. This is usually placed in a seperate file, and
    linked to in the HTML header to apply a common presentation to multiple
    web pages (ie. you'll only have to change the .css file to update a
    color/font/background to the layout).

    WYSIWYG:
    What You See Is What You Get; a method of visually designing a web
    page. Most commonly used by web design beginners who don't want to
    think much of the underlying HTML code. Even more commonly used when
    *learning* the basics of HTML (if viewing the source code
    side-by-side). Common WYSIWYG web designing tools include NVU (open
    source), Adobe/Macromedia Dreamweaver and Microsoft
    FrontPage/Expression.

    --
    Kim André Akerø
    -
    (remove NOSPAM to contact me directly)
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kim_Andr=E9_Aker=F8?=, Mar 11, 2007
    #3
  4. roseliza

    Neredbojias Guest

    On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 14:45:51 GMT roseliza scribed:

    > To all readers...
    >
    >
    > What are HTML, CSS, WYSIWYG?
    >


    Oh, that's easy.

    HTML is a traditional friendly toast meaning "Here's To My Liver".

    CSS refers to the ol' proverbial tenet: "Can't Stand Success".

    WYSIWYG is a rather archaic and puritannical query asking "Were You
    Sleeping Indiscretely With Your Girlfriend?"

    --
    Neredbojias
    He who laughs last sounds like an idiot.
    Neredbojias, Mar 11, 2007
    #4
  5. While the city slept, Kim André Akerø ()
    feverishly typed...
    > CSS:
    > Cascading Style Sheets; a standard used together with HTML for
    > presentation and layout. This is usually placed in a seperate file,


    Usually (is good) but not necessarily. It can be in the head of a document,
    or you can -- of course -- style individual elements. Although this does
    kind of lead away from the road of "why css is a 'Good Idea'

    > WYSIWYG:
    > What You See Is What You Get; a method of visually designing a web
    > page.


    NO!

    WYSIWYG is a software design concept that predates the web. It refers to
    *any* software tool that presents the information entered in the form that
    it will be output. In many respects, the other areas of WYSIWYG are far more
    correct usages, as (for example) a WYSIWYG word processor will present the
    information supplied exactly as it will be printed out, whereas a "WYSIWYG"
    web editor is probably better described as "WYSIWYMGIYAVVL" (What You See Is
    What You Might Get If You Are Very Very Lucky)

    Cheers,
    Nige

    --
    Nigel Moss http://www.nigenet.org.uk
    Mail address will bounce. | Take the DOG. out!
    "Your mother ate my dog!", "Not all of him!"
    nice.guy.nige, Mar 12, 2007
    #5
  6. nice.guy.nige wrote:
    > While the city slept, Kim André Akerø ()
    > feverishly typed...
    >> CSS:
    >> Cascading Style Sheets; a standard used together with HTML for
    >> presentation and layout. This is usually placed in a seperate file,

    >
    > Usually (is good) but not necessarily. It can be in the head of a document,
    > or you can -- of course -- style individual elements. Although this does
    > kind of lead away from the road of "why css is a 'Good Idea'
    >


    I would say that putting the style in the head or inline within the body
    really defeats the best advantage of CSS, separation the presentation
    from the markup making management most efficient.

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Mar 12, 2007
    #6
  7. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed "Jonathan N. Little"
    <> writing in
    news:e40eb$45f4c025$40cba7a7$:

    > nice.guy.nige wrote:
    >> While the city slept, Kim André Akerø ()
    >> feverishly typed...
    >>> CSS:
    >>> Cascading Style Sheets; a standard used together with HTML for
    >>> presentation and layout. This is usually placed in a seperate file,

    >>
    >> Usually (is good) but not necessarily. It can be in the head of a
    >> document, or you can -- of course -- style individual elements.
    >> Although this does kind of lead away from the road of "why css is a
    >> 'Good Idea'
    >>

    >
    > I would say that putting the style in the head or inline within the
    > body
    > really defeats the best advantage of CSS, separation the
    > presentation
    > from the markup making management most efficient.
    >


    It depends on the circumstance. For example, say I have DT styled as
    bold in the external sheet, but on one page on the site, I want it
    italics instead - in that case, I would use put the style in the head on
    that page only.

    --
    Adrienne Boswell at Home
    Arbpen Web Site Design Services
    http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
    Please respond to the group so others can share
    Adrienne Boswell, Mar 12, 2007
    #7
  8. On Mar 11, 8:46 pm, "nice.guy.nige" <> wrote:
    > web editor is probably better described as "WYSIWYMGIYAVVL" (What You See Is
    > What You Might Get If You Are Very Very Lucky)


    I completely disagree. The exception is when it does not appear the
    way you wanted it to. If what you say is true, and it only works if
    you are "very lucky", then no one would use them. I would agree with
    the statement,
    WYSIWYGBIPWV (What You See Is What You Get But It Probably Won't
    Validate)
    Travis Newbury, Mar 12, 2007
    #8
  9. Adrienne Boswell wrote:

    > It depends on the circumstance. For example, say I have DT styled as
    > bold in the external sheet, but on one page on the site, I want it
    > italics instead - in that case, I would use put the style in the head on
    > that page only.


    Some might argue that a better approach would be to add a class to your
    BODY element such as:

    <BODY CLASS="special_definition_lists">
    ...
    </BODY>

    and then add your styling to the main style sheet. One page with special
    definition lists tends to lead to two such pages, or three, or...

    Personally, I'd consider both methods on a case-by-case method. Each has
    advantages and disadvantages.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Geek of ~ HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python*/Apache/Linux

    * = I'm getting there!
    Toby A Inkster, Mar 12, 2007
    #9
  10. Travis Newbury wrote
    > On Mar 11, 8:46 pm, "nice.guy.nige" <> wrote:
    >> web editor is probably better described as "WYSIWYMGIYAVVL" (What You See
    >> Is
    >> What You Might Get If You Are Very Very Lucky)

    >
    > I completely disagree.


    I completely disagree ;-)

    > The exception is when it does not appear the
    > way you wanted it to.


    Which will happen just about all the time.

    Each browser has (sort of) and each "WYSIWYG" editor has a different
    rendering engine, with the exemplatory example being the combination of
    Frontpage and IE, which have many differently behaving engines with many and
    varied different bugs over their different incarnations.

    You should never expect version x of editor y to look the same in version i
    of browser j. Won't happen.

    > If what you say is true, and it only works if
    > you are "very lucky", then no one would use them.


    Sheep?

    > I would agree with
    > the statement,
    > WYSIWYGBIPWV (What You See Is What You Get But It Probably Won't
    > Validate)


    I don't think validation comes into it, except that "WYSIWYG" editors are
    notorious for producing invalid code, HTML, CSS and Javascript. Clean it up
    and it will still be different.

    WYSIWYG applies to things like word , or even wordpad. A single program that
    *can* display stuff *exactly* as *it* is going to print it. The term does
    not apply to application A passing some significantly complex data to
    application Z, or X, or Y, and expecting the latter to display it the same.

    I prefer the much shorter term for these editors: WYSIC[rap].

    --
    Richard.
    Richard Formby, Mar 12, 2007
    #10
  11. Toby A Inkster

    [for & against inline styles]

    > Adrienne Boswell wrote:
    >
    >> It depends on the circumstance. For example, say I have DT styled as
    >> bold in the external sheet, but on one page on the site, I want it
    >> italics instead - in that case, I would use put the style in the head on
    >> that page only.

    >
    > Some might argue that a better approach would be to add a class to your
    > BODY element such as:
    >
    > <BODY CLASS="special_definition_lists">
    > ...
    > </BODY>
    >
    > and then add your styling to the main style sheet. One page with special
    > definition lists tends to lead to two such pages, or three, or...
    >
    > Personally, I'd consider both methods on a case-by-case method. Each has
    > advantages and disadvantages.


    Further...

    I have a single, say, contact form in my entire web site. I want to apply a
    certain style to that single form.

    <form style="whatever"> works for me.

    "Whatever" is never ever used anywhere else.

    "Whatever" is in the form elements opening tag. If I want to change it I go
    directly to the page containing the form and change it right there. I don't
    have to scroll up to the top of the HTML document. I don't have to find it
    in my 'global' style sheet. It's right there. In the only form in my entire
    site that it applies to.

    But, as you say, case by case.

    I tend to think in C++ or C# terms. Is this variable [style property/value]
    global to the entire application, local to this particular [C#] class, local
    to a member function within that [C#] class or is it indeed local to a
    specific block of code within that function.

    Hint: the i in for (int i = ...) or in Javascript for (var i = ...)
    should always be local.

    --
    Richard.
    Richard Formby, Mar 12, 2007
    #11
  12. On Mar 12, 7:05 am, "Richard Formby" <>
    wrote:
    > > I completely disagree.

    > I completely disagree ;-)
    > > The exception is when it does not appear the
    > > way you wanted it to.


    I use FF and IE right out of the box, default settings for both, just
    like the vast majority of the world. I virtually never have a
    problem with any website. Things line up, text seems to be where it
    should be, as do borders, and images, and everything else.

    People from this group seem to have problems because they go out of
    their way to create the problems. Things like "Your design falls apart
    when I increase my font size" may be true, but most people (anecdotal
    evidence) never touch that setting anyway, so they don't see it fall
    apart.

    Anyway, if you go out of your way and try to breaks it, I agree, you
    can break it. But most of the people on the web don't seem to be
    trying to break a website, they just enjoy the web and bitch about how
    hard it it so just find a price for a condo in Destin... (The wife was
    bitching about that last night)

    So to most, websites appear just the way the designer wants it to
    almost all the time.

    > You should never expect version x of editor y to look the same in version i
    > of browser j. Won't happen.


    Oh well, we disagree.
    Travis Newbury, Mar 12, 2007
    #12
  13. nice.guy.nige wrote:

    > While the city slept, Kim André Akerø ()
    > feverishly typed...
    > > CSS:
    > > Cascading Style Sheets; a standard used together with HTML for
    > > presentation and layout. This is usually placed in a seperate file,

    >
    > Usually (is good) but not necessarily. It can be in the head of a
    > document, or you can -- of course -- style individual elements.
    > Although this does kind of lead away from the road of "why css is a
    > 'Good Idea'


    It's usually placed in a separate CSS file, and it is preferred to do
    so if you have a style that will be used more than once, but it's not
    at all necessary. It'd be pretty useless if you were going to style
    each individual element, but it's certainly possible. That's what the
    "style" attribute is there for.

    > > WYSIWYG:
    > > What You See Is What You Get; a method of visually designing a web
    > > page.

    >
    > NO!
    >
    > WYSIWYG is a software design concept that predates the web. It refers
    > to *any* software tool that presents the information entered in the
    > form that it will be output. In many respects, the other areas of
    > WYSIWYG are far more correct usages, as (for example) a WYSIWYG word
    > processor will present the information supplied exactly as it will be
    > printed out, whereas a "WYSIWYG" web editor is probably better
    > described as "WYSIWYMGIYAVVL" (What You See Is What You Might Get If
    > You Are Very Very Lucky)


    Yes, I agree it's a concept that predates the web. But in the context
    of the topic ("Web Design and Web Development"), it describes a method
    of visually designing a web page. I didn't say it was good, but people
    who don't know or don't want to know what they're doing uses this
    method, much to the pain of other professionals who take over the job
    of maintaining a website created in, say, FrontPage or (*shudder*)
    Microsoft Word.

    Of the available WYSIWYMG (What You See Is What You Might Get) tools,
    NVU is one of the better ones. Personally, I prefer organizing the
    structure correctly using only EditPad Pro and Opera (as a visual aid,
    moving on to IE, Firefox and Safari once I have a design in Opera that
    also validates).

    Please note that I only wrote a short description of the concepts the
    OP was curious about, as I feel the OP is an absolute beginner at this.
    If you'd like, you could write a more elaborate description of each to
    the OP.

    --
    Kim André Akerø
    -
    (remove NOSPAM to contact me directly)
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kim_Andr=E9_Aker=F8?=, Mar 12, 2007
    #13
  14. Travis Newbury wrote:

    > People from this group seem to have problems because they go out of
    > their way to create the problems. Things like "Your design falls apart
    > when I increase my font size"


    Travis, I have crook eyesight. So do many people of my vintage. I simply
    cannot see the text on a very large number of sites out there because the
    dresigner has chosen to *suggest* a stupidly small font size. One I simply
    cannot see.

    I will *naturally* mouse-wheel the font to something larger than the
    dresigners stupidly chose.

    If said site then falls apart then so be it. I either cannot read it because
    of the stupidly small font size or I cannot read it because it has fallen
    apart. In either case it it not my problem, it is the dresigners. At the
    cost to the dresigners client for I have gone elsewhere to shop.

    > may be true, but most people (anecdotal
    > evidence) never touch that setting anyway, so they don't see it fall
    > apart.


    Please cite some references to support this. We have disagreed on this
    before but I suggest to you that the people who need to use these settings
    *will* know where they are and *will* use them. That is why they are there.
    Richard Formby, Mar 12, 2007
    #14
  15. On Mar 12, 8:12 am, "Richard Formby" <>
    wrote:
    > Travis, I have crook eyesight. So do many people of my vintage. I simply
    > cannot see the text on a very large number of sites out there because the
    > dresigner has chosen to *suggest* a stupidly small font size. One I simply
    > cannot see.


    > I will *naturally* mouse-wheel the font to something larger than the
    > dresigners stupidly chose.
    >
    > If said site then falls apart then so be it. I either cannot read it because
    > of the stupidly small font size or I cannot read it because it has fallen
    > apart. In either case it it not my problem, it is the dresigners. At the
    > cost to the dresigners client for I have gone elsewhere to shop.
    >
    > > may be true, but most people (anecdotal
    > > evidence) never touch that setting anyway, so they don't see it fall
    > > apart.

    >
    > Please cite some references to support this. We have disagreed on this
    > before but I suggest to you that the people who need to use these settings
    > *will* know where they are and *will* use them. That is why they are there.


    I do not disagree that people who need these setting will know where
    they are, I disagree with the number of people that use them. As for
    my evidence, it is anecdotal (http://www.answers.com/topic/anecdotal-
    evidence). Evidence I have gathered from my own experience via direct
    contact with users. It is not scientific, but I tend to believe my
    personal observations.

    My observations show that people in general use the default settings
    for a browser like I do. And with my default settings in both IE and
    FF I have no problem with virtually any website. Therefore, I can
    only assume that sites made with a wysiwyg editor are displaying the
    site exactly like the designer wanted it to. And if I am seeing it
    correctly with the default settings, so is everyone else that uses the
    default settings.

    Scientific? Nope not by a long shot, but you would be hard pressed to
    change my mind. Do you have scientific evidence showing the majority
    of users don't use the default settings?
    Travis Newbury, Mar 12, 2007
    #15
  16. Adrienne Boswell wrote:
    > Gazing into my crystal ball I observed "Jonathan N. Little"
    > <> writing in
    > news:e40eb$45f4c025$40cba7a7$:
    >
    >> nice.guy.nige wrote:
    >>> While the city slept, Kim André Akerø ()
    >>> feverishly typed...
    >>>> CSS:
    >>>> Cascading Style Sheets; a standard used together with HTML for
    >>>> presentation and layout. This is usually placed in a seperate file,
    >>> Usually (is good) but not necessarily. It can be in the head of a
    >>> document, or you can -- of course -- style individual elements.
    >>> Although this does kind of lead away from the road of "why css is a
    >>> 'Good Idea'
    >>>

    >> I would say that putting the style in the head or inline within the
    >> body
    >> really defeats the best advantage of CSS, separation the
    >> presentation
    >> from the markup making management most efficient.
    >>

    >
    > It depends on the circumstance. For example, say I have DT styled as
    > bold in the external sheet, but on one page on the site, I want it
    > italics instead - in that case, I would use put the style in the head on
    > that page only.
    >

    For "one-pagers" sure, but for a multi-page site...

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Mar 12, 2007
    #16
  17. Richard Formby wrote:
    > Toby A Inkster
    >
    > [for & against inline styles]
    >
    >> Adrienne Boswell wrote:
    >>
    >>> It depends on the circumstance. For example, say I have DT styled as
    >>> bold in the external sheet, but on one page on the site, I want it
    >>> italics instead - in that case, I would use put the style in the head on
    >>> that page only.

    >> Some might argue that a better approach would be to add a class to your
    >> BODY element such as:
    >>
    >> <BODY CLASS="special_definition_lists">
    >> ...
    >> </BODY>
    >>
    >> and then add your styling to the main style sheet. One page with special
    >> definition lists tends to lead to two such pages, or three, or...
    >>
    >> Personally, I'd consider both methods on a case-by-case method. Each has
    >> advantages and disadvantages.

    >
    > Further...
    >
    > I have a single, say, contact form in my entire web site. I want to apply a
    > certain style to that single form.
    >
    > <form style="whatever"> works for me.
    >
    > "Whatever" is never ever used anywhere else.
    >
    > "Whatever" is in the form elements opening tag. If I want to change it I go
    > directly to the page containing the form and change it right there. I don't
    > have to scroll up to the top of the HTML document. I don't have to find it
    > in my 'global' style sheet. It's right there. In the only form in my entire
    > site that it applies to.
    >
    > But, as you say, case by case.
    >
    > I tend to think in C++ or C# terms. Is this variable [style property/value]
    > global to the entire application, local to this particular [C#] class, local
    > to a member function within that [C#] class or is it indeed local to a
    > specific block of code within that function.
    >
    > Hint: the i in for (int i = ...) or in Javascript for (var i = ...)
    > should always be local.
    >


    I have a tendency to do the same, in HEAD put page specific styles. One
    note though is when your make a dramatic site-wide style change these
    little on-page exceptions may bite you in the end!

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Mar 12, 2007
    #17
  18. On Mar 12, 8:12 am, "Richard Formby" <>
    wrote:
    > Travis, I have crook eyesight. So do many people of my vintage. I simply
    > cannot see the text on a very large number of sites out there because the
    > dresigner has chosen to *suggest* a stupidly small font size. One I simply
    > cannot see.


    > I will *naturally* mouse-wheel the font to something larger than the
    > dresigners stupidly chose.
    >
    > If said site then falls apart then so be it. I either cannot read it because
    > of the stupidly small font size or I cannot read it because it has fallen
    > apart. In either case it it not my problem, it is the dresigners. At the
    > cost to the dresigners client for I have gone elsewhere to shop.
    >
    > > may be true, but most people (anecdotal
    > > evidence) never touch that setting anyway, so they don't see it fall
    > > apart.

    >
    > Please cite some references to support this. We have disagreed on this
    > before but I suggest to you that the people who need to use these settings
    > *will* know where they are and *will* use them. That is why they are there.


    I do not disagree that people who need these setting will know where
    they are, I disagree with the number of people that use them. As for
    my evidence, it is anecdotal (http://www.answers.com/topic/anecdotal-
    evidence). Evidence I have gathered from my own experience via direct
    contact with users. It is not scientific, but I tend to believe my
    personal observations.

    My observations show that people in general use the default settings
    for a browser like I do. And with my default settings in both IE and
    FF I have no problem with virtually any website. Therefore, I can
    only assume that sites made with a wysiwyg editor are displaying the
    site exactly like the designer wanted it to. And if I am seeing it
    correctly with the default settings, so is everyone else that uses the
    default settings.

    Scientific? Nope not by a long shot, but you would be hard pressed to
    change my mind. Do you have scientific evidence showing the majority
    of users don't use the default settings?
    Travis Newbury, Mar 12, 2007
    #18
  19. Jonathan N. Little wrote:

    > I have a tendency to do the same, in HEAD put page specific styles. One
    > note though is when your make a dramatic site-wide style change these
    > little on-page exceptions may bite you in the end!


    Exactly.

    Say your site's entire colour scheme is green. As you publish mostly prose
    and only have one page that contains any tabular data, you simply add the
    following styling information to the HEAD of that one page:

    TH { background: #060; color: white; }

    A few months later, you decide to change the site's colour scheme to
    purple. You've long forgotten about the page with the green table, which
    now looks strangely at odds with the rest of the site's design.

    If you'd put it in the main style sheet, then you would have noticed it
    and updated it with the rest of the stylesheet changes.

    Generally speaking, I think all colour scheme and font family stuff should
    probably be kept centrally for this reason, even if you only plan on using
    it on one page.

    Certain things like making particular page-specific classes bold or
    italics *may* be better in the document HEAD. An inline style attribute is
    almost never a good option, but often must be resorted to in the case of
    crummy CMSes.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Geek of ~ HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python*/Apache/Linux

    * = I'm getting there!
    Toby A Inkster, Mar 12, 2007
    #19
  20. Toby A Inkster wrote:
    > Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    >
    >> I have a tendency to do the same, in HEAD put page specific styles. One
    >> note though is when your make a dramatic site-wide style change these
    >> little on-page exceptions may bite you in the end!

    >
    > Exactly.
    >
    > Say your site's entire colour scheme is green. As you publish mostly prose
    > and only have one page that contains any tabular data, you simply add the
    > following styling information to the HEAD of that one page:


    Yep, I've learned the hard way! Worse is when is something subtle like
    margin, padding or line-height and your waste time debugging a
    nonexistent bug to find a buried inline style!

    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
    Jonathan N. Little, Mar 12, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Kevin Spencer
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    439
    John Saunders
    Aug 6, 2003
  2. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    473
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    349
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    337
  5. CNA Programming Group

    Custom web design and web site development

    CNA Programming Group, Aug 31, 2004, in forum: Perl Misc
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    109
Loading...

Share This Page