[jifty-devel] Rendering cleanups for XHTML 1.0 Strict compliance

Jesse Vincent jesse at bestpractical.com
Thu Jun 22 18:38:40 EDT 2006

On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 04:44:50PM -0400, Sean E. Millichamp wrote:
> On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 15:13 -0400, Jesse Vincent wrote: 
> > Can you explain the added divs and the change from spans to divs? This
> > is going to affect the rendering of existing applications in a
> > potentially painful way.
> On Thu, 2006-06-22 at 15:33 -0400, Thomas Sibley wrote:
> > Fixing up the attributes was a good thing, but I'm really wary about the 
> > addition of all those divs.  The problem is that divs are block-level 
> > elements whereas most of the elements you surrounded/replaced them with 
> > are not.  Changing from inline to block-level elements will tend to 
> > screw up layouts.
> Every change I made was something that the W3C validator said wasn't
> good XHTML 1.0 Strict and something that I could find a way to fix up
> without causing any visible formatting changes on the pages I was
> testing in any of the browsers I was testing with.
> That said, I wasn't testing any highly layed out pages with lots of CSS.
> They were simple pages with relatively simple using basic "out of the
> box" Jifty elements.  
> If the consensus from those-that-know-more-about-HTML-than-I is that I
> should put the div's and span's back the way they were I am happy to go
> through the patch and back those out.

Sorry for everyone jumping on you like that.  I think I speak for
everybody in the jiftyverse when I say that the goal of XHTML compliance
is a good one and that I really appreciate your work on that front. I
think the core of the issue is the "added divs change rendering" thing
that tom mentioned.  Mostly, I just listen to Tom on this stuff. When I
started doing web layout, the hot, modern thing was to use tables to
place elements.  Tom's much more on the ball about modern web design
practices than I am ;)



More information about the jifty-devel mailing list