 | | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
(...) but that will only work if the client supports java - if java is unavailable (for whatever reason), the button will act as a normal link. Why not put the target tag as a backup for the java? Dan (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
(...) JavaScript, not Java. A completely separate and unrelated language. Note that target="_top" is for frames, to load the page in the outermost frame (i.e. the whole window). For a new window, the correct value is target="_blank". If you are not (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
(...) defenitly, my slip, sorry :) (...) hmmm... at least in mozilla, it doesn't create a new window. so it's only used to break out of frames, which is a very good thing for a button to do. (...) :) Dan (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
The target= attribute is deprecated in HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0. If I, for whatever reason of vanity and the like, choose to write an XML document that validates against the strict DTDs, then I cannot use the target= attribute. You are correct that (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
You would be right about using the target= attribute as a backup if I was writing to the Transitional DTDs or against the loose URIs. Deprecated means I can't use the target= attribute in an XML document that validates against the DTDs for HTML 4.01 (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
(...) <rant> My only thought on this whole thing is why is the world seeming to force everyone to use scripted web pages? What on earth is wrong with just plain HTML? I often prefer to run with scripting disabled either because it is so buggy on (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag [and A tag] used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
Er, I'll take as a valid point from between your non-standards-based rant tags that a web page should not need a user agent with scripting active to be usable. If I have understood the W3C's recommendations on this point, and all I'm trying to do (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
(...) Well, I believe deprecated does not mean prohibited; it means that it is going to be prohibited in a future version, so you'll have to change it someday. Am I wrong about that? Does CSS offer an equivalent to this? It seems possible to me. I (...) (23 years ago, 18-Dec-01, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the IMG tag used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
Deprecated does mean "not allowed" when one is validating a page against the strict DTD. It means "not prohibited" only against the Transitional DTDs. Thanks for the tips. (...) (23 years ago, 19-Dec-01, to lugnet.publish.html)
|
| |
| | Re: Attributes of the [A and] IMG tag[s] used in displaying the LUGNET logo
|
|
Thanks to your tip, here is my candidate for an XHTML-compliant LUGNET banner anchor (hide the style declaration from Netscape 4 by including it in an imported style sheet, margin values optional): <style type="text/css"> img.bannerlugnet { (...) (23 years ago, 3-Jan-02, to lugnet.publish.html)
|
