Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
The Internet News Slashdot.org

Retooling Slashdot with Web Standards 764

Joe Clark writes "Nearly a year after an interview with this correspondent highlighted a few problems with Slashdot's HTML, Daniel M. Frommelt and his posse have recoded a prototype of Slashdot that uses valid, semantic HTML and stylesheets. Frommelt projects four-figure bandwidth savings in the candidate redesign, were it adopted, not to mention better appearance in a wide range of browsers and improved accessibility. Next he needs volunteers to retool the Slashdot engine. And yes, he did it all with CmdrTaco's blessing." Slashdot has kept its HTML 3.2 design for a long time ("because it works"), but perhaps this effort will be a catalyst for change...
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Retooling Slashdot with Web Standards

Comments Filter:
  • CTRL-R (Score:5, Funny)

    by mrpuffypants ( 444598 ) * <.moc.liamg. .ta. .stnapyffuprm.> on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:06AM (#7534655)
    I'm all for it. If it makes /. load faster when I hit CTRL-R 10 times per half hour then I'd be very happy!

    On second thought, that could mean more time working. Scratch the idea.
  • by Xerithane ( 13482 ) <xerithane.nerdfarm@org> on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:07AM (#7534664) Homepage Journal
    Hell just froze over.

    Brr.
    • Slashdot on IIS. [alistapart.com]

      HTTP/1.1 200 OK
      Server: Microsoft-IIS/5.0
      X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
      Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:09:02 GMT
      Content-Type: text/html
      Accept-Ranges: bytes
      Last-Modified: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:38:43 GMT
      ETag: "8036d049a6afc31:9a2"
      Content-Length: 33923

      Well, I never!
    • *looks down*

      Hell just froze over.

      Brr.


      Please, this isn't the proper thread to mention when you've got an erection. :-) But I'm glad it has finally happened for you too. I think the next step will be to go out to meet a girl. ;-)
  • by CSharpMinor ( 610476 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:08AM (#7534665)
    They're actually proud of this? That they went so many years without complying to HTML standards? It is obvious that Slashdot was just planning to break the HTML standard to force everyone to use Slashdot's "integrated" browser, Mozilla.

    This isn't the first time this has happened. Remember when BBS's became popular, and Slashdot "integrated" one into their site to kill any competition? Or all the times that Slashdot has brought down "competing" sites by linking to them, thereby safeguarding their website monopoly?

    It's a shame that the DoJ let them off for this....
  • While you're at it (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GoldMace ( 315606 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:08AM (#7534668)
    Could you please make page 2 of comments actually be page 2 of the comments. I might be incredibly naive, but it seems something more like page 1.5. I don't know about the rest of you, but I always just read the odd numbered pages of comments, because like way too much stuff if repeated from the previous page on the even numbered ones.
    • by spektr ( 466069 )
      Could you please make page 2 of comments actually be page 2 of the comments. I might be incredibly naive, but it seems something more like page 1.5.

      I can confirm this. There was a case were I tried to view an 8 pages thread, and all the 8 pages came up as the same first page. Only as I changed from the threaded view to the flat view I was able to see some of the later postings. There are definitely bugs in the paging code.
      • Yes. For readibility, it displays the whole thread at once. However, if a thread has more posts than your posts-per-page setting, every single page will ONLY be this one thread.
      • The primary problem, as I can see it, is that pages begin on a base response, and will go back as far as necessary to display that base response, rather than the nested replies to it.

        It can be annoying, so I will agree on that argument; at least include an option to do pages beginning in a response nest.

        My own method of cutting down on nesting-thread page repetititition is to set the display to 100 posts/page. (Which also cuts down on my need to click on the page numbers! Nifty!)
      • by devphil ( 51341 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @02:58AM (#7535258) Homepage


        is that the default comment view (i.e., when you don't have an account) is non-threaded, oldest first. Which is just stupid. People visiting are treated to pages of whatever the current first-post troll is these days.

        Switch the default to threaded, highest scores first, and then if a visitor wants a more chaotic view, they can deliberately ask for it.

    • by Dr. Sp0ng ( 24354 )
      Could you please make page 2 of comments actually be page 2 of the comments. I might be incredibly naive, but it seems something more like page 1.5.

      It shows the last thread of the previous page. No idea why it does this, but that's what it's doing.
    • by DF5JT ( 589002 )
      " Could you please make page 2 of comments actually be page 2 of the comments."

      Easy: Leave the main page as it is and pipe the comments to NNTP.

      Is it really just the advertisements that prevent this? Why not create alt.fan.slashdot and have the discussions a lot easier to read with your favorite newsreader?
    • Having the WAP site back would be nice as well. No one seemed to know about it but it was there, you went to slashdot.org on your phone and got the text of the articles. When they upgraded to slashcode 2.0 it disappeared without a trace. It's nice to be able to get slashdot on the move!

      • by Anonymous Coward
        I've already moderated on this story, so this is AC to keep my moderations intact. I hope somebody gets to see it :)

        Basically when the site is redisgned with valid XHTML and CSS your WAP device will just dump the CSS file and you'll have your bare, structural (X)HTML which your WAP device will love. It's just one of the reasons why web stanards are so great.
  • well (Score:5, Insightful)

    by revmoo ( 652952 ) <[slashdot] [at] [meep.ws]> on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:09AM (#7534674) Homepage Journal
    but perhaps this effort will be a catalyst for change...

    How about a new look altogether?

    I had a look at the new site, and while it does fix many problems and should certainly be used to replace the existing setup, why not go a little farther and retool the look of the site as well?

    The look of slashdot has barely changed since the late 90's, and while the look certainly brings part of it's character, it's beginning to look dated. Perhaps it can be redesigned with a more effecient and cohesive interface while still retaining some of it's previous character?

    Or is it just a pipe-dream...
  • by kurosawdust ( 654754 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:10AM (#7534676)
    will this work for browsers for those with disabilities? I think its only fair, considering I clicked on slashdot Games article and am now freakin' blind.
  • by Amiga Lover ( 708890 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:10AM (#7534685)
    The prototype is slowing already. You bastards! you slashdotted slashdot!
  • Hallelujah! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by EchoMirage ( 29419 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:12AM (#7534695)
    This is long long long long long overdue. Just because HTML 3.2 "worked" didn't make it good, or right. A proper application of [X]HTML and CSS can be a huge bandwidth saver. It looks like Google [google.com] also updated their design yesterday or today - no doubt to subtly cut down on the huge amounts of bandwidth they serve out. More importantly for Slashdot, however, is that writing their code in an open and updated fashion really opens up the market for the kinds of people that can access the site, and that's never a bad thing. So congratulations on starting this project, and I hope it gets underway soon!

    Now maybe I'll finally be able to change my .sig!
    • Re:Hallelujah! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Zoop ( 59907 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:18AM (#7535025)
      I like bandwidth savings but I am really curious: are any blind people (let's face it; we're not talking about "accessible" for paraplegics or the deaf) read Slashdot?

      And do you do it with a reader that doesn't interface directly with IE's rendering engine rather than reading the HTML directly?

      Despite running some very information-centric sites, I have yet to see a confirmed assistive technology surfing my site in the logs--yes, I know all about spoofing, which is why I ask...you'd think that some of them, given the Biblical proclamations about standards liberating the handicapped that come from ALA, would just be a HTML-slurpers that give a unique identifier to logs and simply break on IE-only sites.

      So, any of you out there? Is the site unusable on JAWS or some such? I want real blind people who use it every day rather than somebody who once listened to JAWS read it in a lab or academic setting.
      • Re:Hallelujah! (Score:5, Informative)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22, 2003 @11:09AM (#7536357)
        I'm a blind /. user and I use either JAWS interfacing with IE (yes, I know, windows sucks but Gnopernicus is not there yet) or command-line browsers such as lynx and links. For the most slashdot works alright, and I'd say CSS and XHTML only affect people using more semantic tools, like those who use Emacs to browse.
    • Tidying posts (Score:5, Insightful)

      by KjetilK ( 186133 ) <kjetil AT kjernsmo DOT net> on Saturday November 22, 2003 @05:02AM (#7535452) Homepage Journal
      Amen!

      I hope they implement ASAP.

      But there is another challenge, and that's the posts people write. Anybody care about their code? For example, quoting, to do it properly, one should write: <blockquote><p>blah, blah</p></blockquote>. That's an awful lot of typing.

      A page is not going to validate unless the posts are correct.

      The way I have planned to do this on one of my sites, is to make sure that every time somebody clicks "Preview" or "Submit", the post is handled to Tidy [sourceforge.net] for sanity checks and conversion. By using preview, you can correct you're code, but you can never submit something that isn't well-formed.

      I'm using Perl too, not Slashcode, but AxKit [axkit.org]. Nevertheless, a good Perl implementation of Tidy is still lacking. There is a HTML::Tidy [sourceforge.net] project page on Sourceforge, but it hasn't really gotten off the ground.

      Does anybody else want to work on this, or do you have other ideas for cleaning up posts?

      • Re:Tidying posts (Score:3, Informative)

        by Spy Hunter ( 317220 )
        Slashcode already does quite a bit of munging on the html you give it. It disallows some (most) tags and tag attributes, implements the special <ECODE> tag that isn't a real HTML tag, and closes all of your open tags. It probably wouldn't be too hard to fix it up to correct nesting issues. If Slashdot was serious about moving to XHTML, this would probably be the least of their worries.
      • Re:Tidying posts (Score:3, Insightful)

        by scrytch ( 9198 )
        But there is another challenge, and that's the posts people write. Anybody care about their code? For example, quoting, to do it properly, one should write:

        blah, blah

        . That's an awful lot of typing.

        A page is not going to validate unless the posts are correct.

        The balance problem is trivally corrected by actually parsing the HTML in the post, then inserting the proper closing tags at the end. No, the page will still not validate -- but no one is asking for slash pages+posts to validate, merely asking t

        • Re:Tidying posts (Score:3, Insightful)

          by KjetilK ( 186133 )

          The balance problem is trivally corrected by actually parsing the HTML in the post, then inserting the proper closing tags at the end.

          Yes, that's true! But it is not simply the balance problem I'm addressing. People may for example use the BLOCKQUOTE element, but don't realize that it should be a P element within it. There are quite a lot of small things like that.

          but no one is asking for slash pages+posts to validate,

          I do... :-)

          The point is, tidy should be able to do that job easily, unless I'v

  • Agent sensing (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Trillan ( 597339 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:13AM (#7534698) Homepage Journal

    When the time comes, please add some code to switch to a light design when browsing with a PDA. I know right now you can select light mode, but it affects all browsers used from an account which isn't at all what I want...

    • Re:Agent sensing (Score:3, Informative)

      by ubernostrum ( 219442 )

      Selecting based on user-agent is a Bad Thing. The preferred method to provide "light" style to a PDA is the @media rule [w3.org] in CSS, which would allow PDAs to get their style via an "@media handheld" rule in the stylesheet, or from a simple link like this:

      <link rel="stylesheet" href="pda.css" media="handheld">

      The author of the ALA article used the same technique to provide "printer-friendly" layout via CSS, and it can work for a variety of other media as well.

  • by anthony_dipierro ( 543308 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:15AM (#7534710) Journal
    So I looked at final example [alistapart.com] and I was just about to complain about how messed up it was. The words in the boxes on the right were all scrunched against the left edge. There were these stupid little dots in front of the links. It was just plain ugly. Then I went to the real site and realized it had always been that way, I just haven't paid attention to it.
  • by Lank ( 19922 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:16AM (#7534718)
    Daniel M. Frommelt is the University World Wide Web Coordinator at the University of Wisconsin - Platteville, an executive committee member of the Campus Web Council of Wisconsin, and a web standards advocate. Daniel spends his free time brewing beer.

    I like the guy already.
  • Teeny Bug (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Audity ( 600754 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:17AM (#7534721)
    That's all well and good, but you don't want to break the old page. I read slashdot often with my "text zoom" on mozilla 1.0.1 at 120 or 150%.

    Right now slashdot looks normal at any text zoom setting, but the version proposed in the article hides parts of words when I turn up my zoom to 200%. I don't often read with text that large, but I've done it before, and I'm sure there's users out there who do it regularily.
    • Re:Teeny Bug (Score:5, Informative)

      by alphaseven ( 540122 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:56AM (#7534939)
      Looking at the css file, it looks like the centre column is set at 96 pixels from the left, no matter how big the text in the left hand column is. So if the text in the left column is wider than 96 pixels it will bleed over the middle column.

      I'm not really up on my css, but I would guess a solution would be to have the centre column floating next to the left column, or to define the distance from the left hand side in em units instead of pixels.
      • Re:Teeny Bug (Score:5, Insightful)

        by ubernostrum ( 219442 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @03:57AM (#7535357) Homepage

        I'm not really up on my css, but I would guess a solution would be to have the centre column floating next to the left column, or to define the distance from the left hand side in em units instead of pixels.

        Or the CSS property overflow [w3.org], which could be used in a variety of ways to make the text visible when it gets too large for the column.

  • by ericdano ( 113424 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:18AM (#7534731) Homepage
    One of the problems is the constant twiddling that happens on the CVS of slash. If you run a slash site, which I do, and keep up to date, you need to usually update every template on the site. Little things change, etc, etc. It's a pain in the ass. And look at when the Slashcode [slashcode.com] site was updated. Like months ago.

    It would be GREAT to see them finally, 3 or 4 years later, dump the old theme and streamline it with CSS and stuff. Is it going to happen anytime soon. Probably not.....

  • by drpentode ( 586437 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:20AM (#7534741)

    Now that you've made slashdot standards compliant, why not make it look good? CSS has powerful leading, word spacing and font tools (all of them with relative measurements to look good across most browsers). If a browser doesn't like a text attribute, it won't display it, so you won't have to worry about the same unpredictability as you would with layers and div boxes. The one thing that sucks the most on slashdot is its typesetting. Type is the one thing web designers forget about, but doing it right drastically improves the appearance and readability of a site.

  • by PotatoHead ( 12771 ) <doug.opengeek@org> on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:26AM (#7534774) Homepage Journal
    is a bad idea. Personally, I like it. Reducing the necessary bandwidth to use the site is a good thing though for everyone involved. Why spend money you don't have to in a down economy.

    Things do look a bit dated, but maybe that is a good thing. The popularity of /. is not an issue so what's to prove by changing the look? Gain new users? Have more impact?

    Anyone that matters knows the site already. The content is the reason they return, not the pretty icons. Getting more impact through a more compelling rendering might matter to a few folks, but will the expense be worth it?

    Maybe this is the wrong comparison... Take an established publication like the Times or WSJ. Do they make big changes often? No. The formula works and is a big part of their identity.

    I think they keep things the way they are because they know change works against the needs of their readers; namely, access to relevant content easily.

    Unless I am missing something, major changes to /. would prove to be a mistake.

    • Fast page loads would be one thing. Do a view page sometime and see all the CRAP that is in there. If you could reduce it then you could be speeding up your web viewing (slashdot reading) experience, and unclogging/freeing up Slashdot's bandwidth. Sounds like a win/win to me.
  • by cioxx ( 456323 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:26AM (#7534775) Homepage
    There is a project called CSSZenGarden [csszengarden.com]. It's a collection of different stylesheets which modify the same content according to contributor's tastes and design abilities. There are few dozens of examples, and amongst them there is the Slashdot [csszengarden.com] interface, albeit not a perfect copy as shows in the article.

    You can view all the available CSS designs here [mezzoblue.com]. Same content, different stylesheet. Just shows off all the wonderful things that's possible with CSS standards-based page creation.

    "HTML is dead." - Friedrich Nietzsche
  • What does it pay? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DAldredge ( 2353 ) <SlashdotEmail@GMail.Com> on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:27AM (#7534778) Journal
    /. makes money off ads and subscriptions. Why should we work for free? After all, the editors will not even edit their site nor will the check for dups. And some of the bandwidth cost savings could go to those that do the work.
  • by Speare ( 84249 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:37AM (#7534837) Homepage Journal

    Not a flame.

    If you're thinking of retooling the slash engine itself, I hope you consider some of the oft-complained areas for the most improvement. Things get mixed up in any random-access submission "queue" engine, but slash seems to suffer from these things often. Even editors have grumbled about not seeing other editors' status on various stories.

    • detect multiple/overlapping story submissions by their URLs, and make it easier for editors to find the earliest and to find the best (longest, most links, no broken links) examples of a breaking story
    • automatically give submitters a reason for their rejections: "rejected; another poster broke the story earlier and/or better."
    • capitalize stories according to title rules (not just every word)
    • fix or highlight the top fifty most common grammatical mistakes in submissions automatically (s/\bmore then\b/more than/g)
    • automatically mirror (and provide as separate link) a front-page snapshot of featured stories for the first hour of a story going public
    • searcher should be aware of common three-letter acronyms, and index them better
    • allow meta-moderation of "overrated" and "underrated"
    • Good points.

      > allow meta-moderation of "overrated" and "underrated"

      *rrated is abused far too often in my opinion.
      Here [slashdot.org]'s an explanation from another /.er on why *rrated is not M2ed. I guess this would be easy to fix if the metamoderators could see the score of the comment at the time it was moderated (e.g. "Overrated at +3 Insightful" or something like that).

      Also, it should not be possible to moderate *rrated on a post with no previous moderation. This would prevent troll moderators from immediately
  • by scoobysnack ( 144572 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:43AM (#7534869) Homepage

    Good article, just a couple of suggestions...

    In general, it's usually better to avoid giving layout-suggestive names to your div tags. In the example, the author calls the Login/Sections/Help div leftcolumn. It would probably be better to name it something that is more suggestive of it's content rather than it's location - this way, if in the future a new skin was added that moved the content to the right-side, or even bottom of the page, the div name wouldn't contradict it's location.

    Another suggestion would be to disable all images in the print.css file. The author already went ahead and disabled the advertisement, the left and right columns, but he left those pesky story icons. I know that when I print an article, usually all I care about is the text. It's a simple way to make a page a little more printer friendly.

    My last suggestion would be to move the content div tag, up near the top of the page. This way, as your browser downloads the information from the server, it will download the story information (important) before downloading the left/righthand content panes (unimportant). If someone stops loading their browser before the page download has been completed, at least the browser can attempt to render the story data. And with css, the layout will be preserved.

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:52AM (#7534919)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re:What about PNGs? (Score:3, Informative)

      by ericdano ( 113424 )
      Ouch. VERY true.
    • seconded! (Score:4, Informative)

      by eddy ( 18759 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @05:17AM (#7535473) Homepage Journal

      Actually, you'll have to go back to stuff like Internet Explorer 1.5 and the like to find a browser that doesn't support the basics.

      And for the record, PNGs are always smaller, except in a few very special cases which doesn't matter because the absolute size difference is next to nothing in those.

      And yes, the PNG-writer in Adobe products is fucking broken last time I checked, and to top it off, many "webdesigners" doesn't understand that PNG supports truecolor, so they'll happily compare their paletted GIF and their GIF saved RGBA and explain the size difference not with "I'm an idiot" but "PNG sucks".

      And as for animation.. that's a feature! Personally, I have animated GIFs disabled -- always -- but if you really want to animate pictures you'll use MNG which is animations made out of PNG-images

  • by brrrrrrt ( 628665 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:57AM (#7534943)
    If Slashdot is going to be recoded, I would like to ask for four features that are easy to implement, and that would be very nice to have.

    1. When you click on your username, you see all of your comments, and next to your comments, you see the number of replies to your comments.
    It would be really nice if this number would be clickable, so you could immediately read the replies to your comments. (It's quite complicated to get to the replies now, especially when you've put a high comment threshold in place)

    2. Can story submissions be placed (more logically & more conveniently) on people's slashdot-homepages, instead of on the page that you get when you click on "submit story"?

    3. It would be nice if you could see your own story submissions (not just the subject, but also the body & other details) when you click on them. Just to see them back.

    4. Could the default comment-submission mode be changed to "plain old text" instead of "html-formatted"?
    It is confusing that you have to write your own html in a text area on slashdot to get something as basic as newlines, where there is no other site that I can think of - not even a geeky one - that requires you to manually enter the BRs.
    It's just not useful, not intuitive and not nice this way.
  • by mikeswi ( 658619 ) * on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:00AM (#7534956) Homepage Journal
    14 gigs PER DAY savings ????

    I do ~90-100 gigs per MONTH and freak out at that.

    I will never bitch about my bandwidth use again.
    I will never bitch about my bandwidth use again.
    I will never bitch about my bandwidth use again.
    I will never bitch about my bandwidth use again.
    I will never bitch about my bandwidth use again.
    I will never bitch about my bandwidth use again.
  • Search Function (Score:4, Interesting)

    by General Sherman ( 614373 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:00AM (#7534957) Journal
    While you're updating the (X)HTML to be compliant, why don't you make the search engine actually search? As it is now it's almost completely random as to what you get when you click "search", no matter what you put in the box. I've gotten completely different results just by hitting reload.
  • by metalhed77 ( 250273 ) <andrewvcNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:02AM (#7534968) Homepage
    Ok, I like ALA, I'm a bit of standards guy even, my whole website is XHTML 1.0 strict. Unfortuanately slashdot has a table based layout, which, to put it simply, CSS cannot handle. I've spent days researching correct CSS tables in the past and it is an impossibility. The problem? Font overlapping. Try a text zoom to as little as 200% (yes, doubling the text size is not that extreme) and most CSS table based designs instantly break. Much like this one. My site works fine with it as everything is position ed such that font size only breaks at absurdly high magnification, but if it were any more complex I'd HAVE to use tables. I don't know if this si a browser issue, or a problem with the CSS spec, but text overflow is a serious issue, one which breaks nearly every CSS page with complex layout in existance. There needs to be a way to style tables in CSS without having to use a table tag. In short, CSS boxes are just that, boxes, they don't link together to correctly handle font sizes. The new slashdot is more broken than the current slashdot in a functional sense.
    • by Slur ( 61510 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @04:10AM (#7535380) Homepage Journal

      Following your identical post on ALA the following reply from Marshall Roch [exclupen.com]

      Everything mentioned in these comments are fixable, including Andrew's "CSS tables."

      Have a look at http://projects.exclupen.com/slashdot/ [exclupen.com] (does not work well in IE, but that is fixable if there is interest)

      • Italics are back (using cite) so you can tell what is contributed and what is editorial remarks.
      • I have "jump to" links to the content, navigation, and right-side boxes.
      • Labels are used on the forms.
      • The content column comes first
      • Padding is fixed so some text isn't touching the edges of the boxes (maybe it's just a personal pet peeve, but that really bugs me)
      • I'm sure there's more stuff I did, but this was a month ago and I forgot already. :)

      I'm also willing to help get /. up to speed. Where's the best place for interested parties to discuss this further? Please post replies on the ALA forum.

    • by ubernostrum ( 219442 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @04:11AM (#7535382) Homepage

      I don't know if this si a browser issue, or a problem with the CSS spec, but text overflow is a serious issue, one which breaks nearly every CSS page with complex layout in existance.

      Yeah, you'd think somebody would come up with an " overflow [w3.org]" property and put it in the CSS spec to fix that, wouldn't you?

      Snarky comments aside, most problems with layouts being broken by text magnification can be fixed with careful design. Yeah, it takes some work, but generally no more than what you'd put in nesting 800 tables...

    • Having read some of the other posts in this thread, there is a solution--DON'T use TABLES!!! I personally think that tables are a bad idea, and should be avoided at all possible.

      In most cases, one can replace tables with division tags, which work much better in general. The only caveat is that IE tends to break CSS based DIV tags if you use the wrong type of positioning. To be specific, if you use position: fixed; IE will NOT position this correctly, and really has trouble with multiple elements being f
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:22AM (#7535037)
    The example page does look pretty much exactly like the existing Slashdot layout, to which I say job well done. The only problem I see with it is that, at least in IE6, when the window isn't maximized, the category images all crowd up in the visible window and overlap things they aren't supposed to instead of trailing off the visible screen to the right. I don't know anything about advanced HTML, so I don't know whether that's a bug or a limitation of the technique, but it's definitely a big issue, I'd think.
  • some shortcomings (Score:3, Interesting)

    by locus_standi ( 631116 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:27AM (#7535048)
    the italic words on slashdot are rendered in bold on konqueror 3.1.4 no matter what font i use. also, the font for comments seem to depend on the general font of X and konqueror. i would prefer if slashdot specified a standard typeface for comments and other aspects of the website. while slashdot loads pretty quick here, i would welcome a fresh look to the website. a better way to view comments would be nice too. the threaded system is cumbersome when there are too many comments. just my $0.02
  • by kuzb ( 724081 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:28AM (#7535051)

    If XHTML, there are some things to consider:

    It's important to note that using XHTML 1.1 requires you to send your documents as XML [w3.org]. This means the document should have an XML declaration above the doctype, and needs to be sent with an XML mime-type [w3.org], ideally application/xhtml+xml. This has a significant drawback; IE can't see it [w3.org].

    A fairly well established workaround is to use mod_rewrite and munge the mime-type of a document [w3.org] based on what a user agent sends in its Accept header (To date, Mozilla is the only browser to include application/xhtml+xml in its Accept header). However, some would argue that this too has drawbacks. Since only Mozilla understands application/xhtml+xml, your documents will be sent as text/html, and XHTML does not validate as HTML.

    The arguments around this issue have been summarized in the widely linked "Sending XHTML as text/html Considered Harmful [hixie.ch]"

    • Konqueror, Opera (Score:3, Informative)

      by Phantasmo ( 586700 )
      I believe that Konqueror DOES include application/xhtml+xml in its Accept header, but it processes the document using the HTML parser rather than a proper XML parser.

      Also, I seem to remember reading application/xhtml+xml pages just fine in Opera.

      I used to serve all pages on my site as pure XHTML 1.1, with the correct MIME type and everything, until I realized that I'm one of three people I know who uses a non-IE browser. :(

      You can't really hate Microsoft until you've gotten serious about standards. Then
  • Works much better... (Score:3, Informative)

    by Polo ( 30659 ) * on Saturday November 22, 2003 @02:20AM (#7535184) Homepage
    I tried it on my phone, and the display is lots more readable.

    The original version had lots of italics and the text flow wasn't great.

    The updated version looked much better (except that the header of the first story was separated from the body by the section nav and poll and stuff)

    Handspring Treo 600, blazer browser.

    Now there's no reason to fix http://slashdot.org/palm [slashdot.org] (which doesn't seem to work) to be as good as http://www.wired.com/news_drop/palm [wired.com] looks on a handheld.

    Maybe even make it automatic.

  • by legLess ( 127550 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @02:54AM (#7535248) Journal
    This is an elegantly-designed page, and a nice recode of the original.

    For the last several months I've been working on the same project from a slightly different perspective. We have a working Slash-based site, currently in live beta, at http://www.news4neighbors.net [news4neighbors.net].

    The site doesn't validate, but it's all structural XHTML with CSS for layout and style. This is much rougher than the beautiful markup presented here, but the difference is that nearly our entire site is running this template system. My work is based on the Openflows strict theme, released early this year at http://strict.openflows.org [openflows.org]. But not much of that theme is left, as their project and mine had very different goals. I've changed all of the 120-something templates, and much of the code that sends them data.

    The site needs a lot of work, no doubt. But we're developing it rapidly, and have made much progress.

    The biggest challenge is that Slash itself doesn't separate content from presentation from business logic. To change one set of tags you may have to rewrite a template, change a database variable, write some Perl, or a combination. This isn't a knock on Slash -- it's very powerful and I enjoy using it -- it's just that the presentation layer hasn't been their focus.

    The end-goal for this project, Slash-wise, is to have a fully XHTML/CSS compliant theme that people can easily use on their sites.

    If you want more information about it, send me email at randall -at- sonofhans.net

    [ FYI, I also posted this in the ALA discussion ].
  • Handheld-friendly (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ralphclark ( 11346 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @08:38AM (#7535841) Journal
    The article suggests as a consequence of the CSS-based implementation that printer-friendly and handheld-friendly views would be available. Now that's surely going to be the killer argument for many of us. How much time would I save if I could read slashdot comfortably on the way to and from work? I'd get my life back finally after five years of being glued to my desk every evening...
  • by theolein ( 316044 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @08:52AM (#7535873) Journal
    Slashdot has never been a pretty site (pun not intended), but a site that has been about content, the whole content and nothing but the content. While huge numbers of tables have a way of eating bandwdth, the html 3.2 works on everything on the planet with the possible exception of Mr. Ozimba's Netscape 1. 419 browser in Nigeria, and it renders damn fast as well, and seems to be pretty much indestructible.

    There are bound to be issues with the multitude of browsers available, each rendering even CSS 1.0 in their own inimitable style (pun intended), because what Mac IE5 considers as a box, and what Windows IE5 consider as decent box or text attribute sometimes tend to be entirely different things.

    If it works don't break it, I think. Rather fix the search engine.
  • YES (Score:3, Informative)

    by Apreche ( 239272 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @12:03PM (#7536675) Homepage Journal
    YES, Slashdot should definitely be perfectly XHTML compliant. This has the following benefits

    1) looks better
    2) allows people to easily make custom ./ css
    3) slashdot can have multiple css to choose from, especially for those of us blinded by games.slashdot.org. Also in Firebird users can switch between the different stylesheets with east
    4) people can easily write XSLT stuffs to take slashdot and mix it up.
    5) Maybe we can make an RSS that's a little bit better and more customizeable. Doesn't exactly have to do with it, but it's related somewhat.

    Yes ./ become compliant.
  • by cygnus ( 17101 ) on Saturday November 22, 2003 @01:57PM (#7537342) Homepage
    Daniel M. Frommelt and his posse have recoded a prototype of Slashdot that uses valid, semantic HTML and stylesheets.

    HTML is not a semantic web technology! here's the W3C Semantic Web page [w3.org]. Notice how (X)HTML isn't mentioned?

    i don't know who to blame for the propagation of this usage of the word 'semantic,' but i think it might be Jeffrey Zeldman [zeldman.com]. i like the dude, but this has to stop...

There is very little future in being right when your boss is wrong.

Working...