Re: Problem on whoisam.php page!
* Josip Rodin | On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 09:52:58AM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: | > | 3) Let me reiterate that nobody but spammers needs that list anyway. An NM | > |knows the address of their AM because they contacted him. | > | > No, he doesn't necessarily know that. My AM had a bug in one of his | > scripts where his initial contact email didn't ever reach me. Of | > course, this is not the usual course, but things happen. | | Oh. Wouldn't it be better to put the AM's email on the NM's web page, then? Maybe so, yes. But that is also linked to from the list of applicants page, isn't it? (So we won't buy anything when it comes to spambots :/ ) -- Tollef Fog Heen Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who its friends are.
Re: Problem on whoisam.php page!
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 10:20:02PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > | > | 3) Let me reiterate that nobody but spammers needs that list anyway. An > NM > | > |knows the address of their AM because they contacted him. > | > > | > No, he doesn't necessarily know that. My AM had a bug in one of his > | > scripts where his initial contact email didn't ever reach me. Of > | > course, this is not the usual course, but things happen. > | > | Oh. Wouldn't it be better to put the AM's email on the NM's web page, then? > > Maybe so, yes. But that is also linked to from the list of applicants > page, isn't it? (So we won't buy anything when it comes to spambots > :/ ) Ah, I thought those pages were behind some password prompt. Oh well, scrap the idea then, there's nowhere you can hide from spambots... :( -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
AM report for Andrew McMillan
Summary for Andrew McMillan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Identity pub 1024D/8F068012 2001-02-16 Andrew McMillan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sig! 73D446C2 2001-03-03 Carey Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Philosophy & Procedures --- Andrew understands Debian's philosophy and agrees with it. Tasks & Skills -- Andrew has packages whereami of which he is upstream. It's a package designed to reconfigure your laptop automatically for the network it finds itself on (or according to other criteria). The package is lintian clean. Recommendation -- I recommend that Andrew be accepted as a Debian maintainer. -- Martin Michlmayr [EMAIL PROTECTED] pgpEf2DUvvgKI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Well done on new devel pages
On Fri, Mar 02, 2001 at 06:37:43PM -0800, Joey Hess wrote: > I really don't see why we have to sacfifice usability for a minor and > overly flashy thing like vertical titles. They could just as easily be > made horizontal without affecting the look. I've done that now. IMO it doesn't have the same effect as the horizontal, but anyway... > see shy jo, disgusted once more with the web's trend toward > style over substance Funny you should mention substance, because the main point of my rewrite of that page is to add more substance, the explanations for all the important items. It's also worth mentioning that the new page is completely valid HTML, it doesn't use one bit of new web stuff (CSS, DHTML, whatever). Oh well, you can't please everyone. :p -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Bug#88350: Current Debian policy should be shown in www-page
Package: www.debian.org Version: N/A Priority: normal Current Debian www page contains the most recent version of the Debian policy. For developers, it is completely OK, but since debian policy contains various information(or guidance) for system administrator (especially in Operating system section), I think the policy applied to current stable distribution should be on www page. Hopefully, I think the policy for stable should be taken out from developer pages, and put into the distribution section. Happy hacking, Seiji Kaneko
Re: Well done on new devel pages
Josip Rodin: > It's also worth mentioning that the new page is completely valid HTML, it > doesn't use one bit of new web stuff (CSS, DHTML, whatever). That's part of the problem, instead of using HTML to what it was designed for, and put the fancy formatting into CSS, you try to simulate it by doing it in HTML with tables and stuff. Yes, tables are perfectly valid HTML, but what is on the devel page *isn't* a table logically, and because of that, IMHO it shouldn't really be a table in the HTML code. -- \\// peter - http://www.softwolves.pp.se/ Statement concerning unsolicited e-mail according to Swedish law: http://www.softwolves.pp.se/peter/reklampost.html
Re: Well done on new devel pages
>> Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > It's also worth mentioning that the new page is completely valid > HTML, it doesn't use one bit of new web stuff (CSS, DHTML, whatever). CSS is *good*. It lets you achieve your v i s u a l t r i c k s (looks awful, doesn't it?) without forcing HTML into a presentation language. The only problem with CSS is the sorry support Netscape has for it. And BTW, even if it's valid HTML it doesn't mean it's good HTML. The fact that a C compiler compiles your program without errors doesn't mean your program is doing its thing right. (This doesn't have anything to do with *your* HTML, I haven't even looked at it) -- Marcelo
Re: Well done on new devel pages
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 05:33:56PM +0100, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > It's also worth mentioning that the new page is completely valid > > HTML, it doesn't use one bit of new web stuff (CSS, DHTML, whatever). > > CSS is *good*. It lets you achieve your v i s u a l t r i c k s > (looks awful, doesn't it?) It doesn't. :) > without forcing HTML into a presentation language. The only problem with > CSS is the sorry support Netscape has for it. Errr, what about lynx, links or w3m? Last I checked they didn't support it, either. So you'd have to make it look good with and without CSS, which is twice the work and would probably make an impact on file sizes. And, verifying CSS stuff looks bearable in four[1] non-compliant browsers is harder than doing the same for tables in Lynx. [1] plus older versions of currently CSS-compliant browsers... -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Re: Well done on new devel pages
* Josip Rodin | On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 05:33:56PM +0100, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: | > without forcing HTML into a presentation language. The only problem with | > CSS is the sorry support Netscape has for it. Netscape 4.x doesn't support CSS, it supports JSS (Javascript stylesheets), but it has a parser which interprets the attributes matching 1:1 between CSS and JSS. | Errr, what about lynx, links or w3m? Last I checked they didn't support it, | either. So you'd have to make it look good with and without CSS, which is | twice the work and would probably make an impact on file sizes. (/me dreams about the text-mode Opera.. yes, it's non-free, but I like it) Both CSS and HTML is made to degrade gracefully, that is, if somebody uses a browser without CSS support, he'll still see the content, but it won't look the way the web page's author intended. Which can't be guaranteed anyhow (for instance, my browser allows me to specify a user stylesheets which I can use to override the author's). So you make it work without CSS and if you'd like it to look pretty, you CSS it. IMHO -- Tollef Fog Heen Unix _IS_ user friendly... It's just selective about who its friends are.
Re: Well done on new devel pages
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 05:07:21PM +0100, peter karlsson wrote: > That's part of the problem, instead of using HTML to what it was > designed for, and put the fancy formatting into CSS, you try to > simulate it by doing it in HTML with tables and stuff. Yes, tables are > perfectly valid HTML, but what is on the devel page *isn't* a table > logically, and because of that, IMHO it shouldn't really be a table in > the HTML code. On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 07:41:47PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > Both CSS and HTML is made to degrade gracefully, that is, if somebody > uses a browser without CSS support, he'll still see the content, but > it won't look the way the web page's author intended. Yeah, but it has to look at least decently. IME one spends less time adjusting nested tables to work across browsers than adjusting CSS and the CSS-less stuff to work across browsers. If someone can prove me wrong, please, feel free :) -- Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Re: Debian WWW CVS: spanish
Ok, I've sent two users in the passwd file and more will surely
follow. In any case I think that it might be useful to restrict access to
only the 'spanish' directory to some users, call me paranoid.
How can this be limited?
Javi
On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 12:38:45PM -0800, James A. Treacy wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2001 at 08:18:45PM +0100, Javier Fdz-Sanguino Pen~a wrote:
> >
> > Great! Then I would like some new accounts:
> >
> > - Javier Fern´andez-Sanguino Peña (main coordinator)
> > - Jesus Gonz´alez Barahona (second-in-command :)
> > - Hector Garcia (in charge of translating the Weekly News)
> > - David Martinez (volunteer and helper)
> > - Jaime Villate (volunteer and helper)
> >
> > Could you please send me the passwds in a PGP/GPG signed message
> > to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so I can re-distribute them?
> >
> Actually, since you are a developer, you can do it yourself.
> Update CVSROOT/passwd file and both commit it and copy the
> new version to klecker:/cvs/webwml/CVSROOT
>
> You may find the following useful:
> pwgen 16 (for generating random passwords. In package pwgen)
> and
> perl -e "print crypt('passwd', 'salt').\"\n\""
> the salt is two hex digits.
>
> --
> James (Jay) Treacy
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Re: Well done on new devel pages
> On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 07:41:47PM +0100, Tollef Fog Heen wrote: > > Both CSS and HTML is made to degrade gracefully, that is, if somebody > > uses a browser without CSS support, he'll still see the content, but > > it won't look the way the web page's author intended. You can _never_ expect it to look a certain way. You can only hope. On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 08:14:39PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > Yeah, but it has to look at least decently. IME one spends less time > adjusting nested tables to work across browsers than adjusting CSS and the > CSS-less stuff to work across browsers. If someone can prove me wrong, > please, feel free :) You're misusing tables. A good metric of when you're doing something you shouldn't is if you set "border=0" and don't use "". A wise web page writer should look into the "" and "" tags. HTML is for giving content in a structured manner; it's up to the browser to represent it as it thinks it should. CSS is a method of giving the browser engine additional hints for how to show it. I recently remade the web site for the FreeRADIUS project. Take a look at the source. It's not prefect, but it is correct and it's guaranteed to look as it _should_ in every browser. URL: http://www.freeradius.org/ - chad -- Chad Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | Policeman: You're playing God! unix bruhjo, shutterbug, bookworm| Dr. Hfuhruhurr: *Somebody* has to! URL: http://web.chad.org/home/ from ``The Man with Two Brains'' (1993)
Re: Well done on new devel pages
On Sat, Mar 03, 2001 at 07:16:25PM +0100, Josip Rodin wrote: > > without forcing HTML into a presentation language. The only problem with > > CSS is the sorry support Netscape has for it. > > Errr, what about lynx, links or w3m? Last I checked they didn't support it, > either. So you'd have to make it look good with and without CSS, which is > twice the work and would probably make an impact on file sizes. You are confused. The trick is that you don't need to support CSS to be able to look at pages using style sheets. If you do it correct, the document is structured as the document should be. Then I can view the page correctly with every html capable browser. Browsers which understand style sheets can additionally layout the page, making it "pretty". In fact file size is reduced because layout is done once, and imported into all html files with a link. The documents only contains the content. A simple but effective example is my own homepage. It looks great in lynx and mozilla. IE5 and Netscape probably fail because they think they need to make it pretty but don't support the full standard correctly (In Netscape, switch of style sheets entirely to make it work. In IE5 it is bearable). Here is an example page (abbreviated): http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/strict.dtd";> Marcus Brinkmann — Introduction Marcus Brinkmann Content Introduction That's the document. There are absolutely no layout directives, and lynx copes easily. The order makes sense: Page title, TOC and content come seperately. But if you look at the page with Mozilla (please do, http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de), you will notice a background image, lots of colors, and more importantly, a boxed title and two columns, the toc left and in a seperate box the content. That's CSS 2 Positioning feature exploited here and it is very great. You can move around the boxes on the page presented to the user without changing the html file at all. The trick is that you canapply style sheets to the different "div" tags. div and span (block vs inline) are tags that do not control anything in HTML, so they can be used freely to control the style of the document. I prefer to make div tags more abstract, though, and apply styles to these abstract entities (header, toc, content). But I can understand the need for tables if you want position elements and can't use CSS 2 Positioning because no browser but Mozilla supports it decently. In about a year though, Internet Explorer will support it to (it already does to some extent), and Netscape 4 will be uninteresting to most people. Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Marcus Brinkmann GNUhttp://www.gnu.org[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.marcus-brinkmann.de
Re: Well done on new devel pages
Josip Rodin wrote: > I've done that now. IMO it doesn't have the same effect as the horizontal, > but anyway... Thank you. Of course, most screen readers will probably read the titles one single character at a time now, since they are broken up at character boundries: "Double-you owe are kay I en pee are owe gee are e ess ess" :-) > Funny you should mention substance, because the main point of my rewrite of > that page is to add more substance, the explanations for all the important > items. I like the ogranization and the substance, don't get me wrong. -- see shy jo
Re: Well done on new devel pages
>> Josip Rodin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > CSS is *good*. It lets you achieve your v i s u a l t r i c k s > > (looks awful, doesn't it?) > > It doesn't. :) It does. Unless used with fonts that are designed for it, changing the default kerning often confuses the reader. It works fine if your words are given a generous ammount of surrounding whitespace (or if you are going for that dada effect, but then why am I even writing this?). > Errr, what about lynx, links or w3m? Last I checked they didn't > support it, either. Which is exactly the point. CSS deals mostly with visual appearence changes that only make sense if you have the luxury of scalable and variable width fonts. There is stuff in CSS which *could* be handled by text mode browsers (justification, some forms of leading, indentation, even margings perhaps) but most of it doesn't make sense for such a browser. > So you'd have to make it look good with and without CSS "look good without CSS". That's the mistake most web "designers" make. With HTML you express your document's structure, not your document's appearance. That's one of the reasons I hate so much. It's damn it! > And, verifying CSS stuff looks bearable in four[1] non-compliant > browsers is harder than doing the same for tables in Lynx. If your document looks plain wrong in Lynx, you probably took a wrong turn somewhere along the path. (modulo tables used in the intended way) -- M.
