Subject:
|
Re: Which HTML to use?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.suggestions
|
Date:
|
Wed, 16 Apr 2003 15:56:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1329 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.suggestions, Constantine Hannaher writes:
> The administrators at LUGNET are making changes here and there and normally
> I like that but something about the enlarged "Subject:" line in the web view
> of each post has bugged me. Is it really necessary to do this by a font size
> of -1, two BIG tags and a B tag? My overall point is, why stick with HTML
> 3.2? Certainly a top-to-bottom redesign in XHTML 1.x and CSS may be a
> daunting prospect, but incremental changes which reinforce old coding
> practices are the wrong direction (er, in my opinion).
>
> Constantine
I'll agree. I will also add that with CSS in use, the server speed will
become much faster since the cgi program won't have to generate all the long
code in HTML, just a short tag defining the class. Let the CSS do all the rest.
Jeremy
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Which HTML to use?
|
| (...) If by "much faster" you mean a ten-millionth of a second quicker per page display, then you're correct. :-) (...) Actually, the server doesn't have to generate the HTML on a tag-by-tag basis...it's more efficient than that. The difference in (...) (21 years ago, 16-Apr-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Which HTML to use?
|
| The administrators at LUGNET are making changes here and there and normally I like that but something about the enlarged "Subject:" line in the web view of each post has bugged me. Is it really necessary to do this by a font size of -1, two BIG tags (...) (21 years ago, 16-Apr-03, to lugnet.admin.suggestions)
|
7 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
