White House has new site for new president that validates

Discussion in 'HTML' started by cwdjrxyz, Jan 20, 2009.

  1. cwdjrxyz

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    About noon EST, the site for the White House was changed to that for
    the new president. It is at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ . Just for fun,
    I validated it at the w3c. It validates completely as xhtml 1.0
    transitional. However it is served as text/html. If it were properly
    served as application/xhtml+xml it of course could not be viewed by IE
    browsers unless header exchange or something else were used to detect
    when xhtml is not supported by a browser and serve html 4.01 instead
    for IE and some older browsers.

    Css validation does not fare as well with 41 errors. These are mostly
    associated with Microsoftese opacity etc and likely will cause no harm
    in viewing the page other than making it look somewhat different on
    different browsers.

    The site is fairly decent as big sites go as you can soon tell by
    validating the Microsoft homepage, Google, etc.
    cwdjrxyz, Jan 20, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. cwdjrxyz

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    "cwdjrxyz" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > About noon EST, the site for the White House was changed to that for
    > the new president. It is at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ . Just for fun,
    > I validated it at the w3c. It validates completely as xhtml 1.0
    > transitional. However it is served as text/html. If it were properly
    > served as application/xhtml+xml it of course could not be viewed by IE
    > browsers unless header exchange or something else were used to detect
    > when xhtml is not supported by a browser and serve html 4.01 instead
    > for IE and some older browsers.
    >
    > Css validation does not fare as well with 41 errors. These are mostly
    > associated with Microsoftese opacity etc and likely will cause no harm
    > in viewing the page other than making it look somewhat different on
    > different browsers.
    >
    > The site is fairly decent as big sites go as you can soon tell by
    > validating the Microsoft homepage, Google, etc.


    But full of unnecessary images of text, and where text is actual text it is
    often too small, and the layout then breaks when I zoom to a comfortable
    reading size (I use zoom text, not zoom page mode). Which is a pity because
    this particular layout would have been pretty easy to do properly.
    Nik Coughlin, Jan 20, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed "Nik Coughlin"
    <> writing in news:gl5l9k$o5p$:

    > "cwdjrxyz" <> wrote in message
    > news:65f2e155-cd32-4176-9ea5-d3bcb1518364

    @w39g2000prb.googlegroups.com.
    > ..
    >> About noon EST, the site for the White House was changed to that for
    >> the new president. It is at http://www.whitehouse.gov/ . Just for
    >> fun, I validated it at the w3c. It validates completely as xhtml 1.0
    >> transitional. However it is served as text/html. If it were properly
    >> served as application/xhtml+xml it of course could not be viewed by
    >> IE browsers unless header exchange or something else were used to
    >> detect when xhtml is not supported by a browser and serve html 4.01
    >> instead for IE and some older browsers.
    >>
    >> Css validation does not fare as well with 41 errors. These are mostly
    >> associated with Microsoftese opacity etc and likely will cause no
    >> harm in viewing the page other than making it look somewhat different
    >> on different browsers.
    >>
    >> The site is fairly decent as big sites go as you can soon tell by
    >> validating the Microsoft homepage, Google, etc.

    >
    > But full of unnecessary images of text, and where text is actual text
    > it is often too small, and the layout then breaks when I zoom to a
    > comfortable reading size (I use zoom text, not zoom page mode). Which
    > is a pity because this particular layout would have been pretty easy
    > to do properly.
    >


    You know, there's a way to post your comments on the site:
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/opl/

    --
    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, Jan 21, 2009
    #3
  4. cwdjrxyz

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    On Jan 20, 4:52 pm, cwdjrxyz <> wrote:
    > About noon EST, the site for the White House was changed to that for
    > the new president. It is athttp://www.whitehouse.gov/. Just for fun,
    > I validated it at the w3c. It validates completely as xhtml 1.0
    > transitional. However it is served as text/html. If it were properly
    > served as application/xhtml+xml it of course could not be viewed by IE
    > browsers unless header exchange or something else were used to detect
    > when xhtml is not supported by a browser and serve html 4.01 instead
    > for IE and some older browsers.
    >
    > Css validation does not fare as well with 41 errors. These are mostly
    > associated with Microsoftese opacity etc and likely will cause no harm
    > in viewing the page other than making it look somewhat different on
    > different browsers.
    >
    > The site is fairly decent as big sites go as you can soon tell by
    > validating the Microsoft homepage, Google, etc.


    Today video has appeared. On the old site, a streaming .wmv Microsoft
    video format was being used the time or two that I checked in the
    past, but most other US federal sites switched to flv/swf quite a
    while back. This first video on the new site is a 21 minute one of the
    inaugural address. The streaming version is now in flv/swf format, not
    Microsoft. There is a text link below for a high quality download in
    mp4 format, and it is about 230 MB. I was able to download it at about
    5000 kbps, so the server does not seem to be overloaded. My maximum
    download rate is not much more than 6000 kbps when everything is
    ideal, which usually is not the case. The most recent versions of QT,
    Real, and WMP would open the mp4 video. However I may have added a
    codec for the WMP that allowed it to play mp4 video, I do not remember
    for sure.

    A Microsoft server is being used, and thus the site has not been
    completely purged of Microsoft because of this and because of some
    Microsoftese still in the CSS. Other video formats might or might not
    be used in future videos.
    cwdjrxyz, Jan 23, 2009
    #4
    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. Niels Dybdahl

    Color.white vs. Color.WHITE

    Niels Dybdahl, Oct 6, 2004, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    434
    Chris Smith
    Oct 6, 2004
  2. Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    649
    Titus A Ducksass - AKA broken-record
    Nov 15, 2004
  3. Ben C
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    2,153
    Leif K-Brooks
    Jan 28, 2007
  4. Jonathan Eric Miller
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    333
    Jonathan Eric Miller
    Jul 22, 2004
  5. Guest
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    115
    Guest
    Oct 17, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page