New Dojo Site--Most incompetent ever?
in [JavaScript]
|
Prev: Javascript Toolbox - Table Sort utility - Column Width cannot be set.
Next: FireFoc support forums (Re: FF3.6 Stack output from Too MuchRecursion)
From: SteveYoungGoogle on 10 Mar 2010 05:12 On Mar 10, 5:42 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > S.T. wrote: > > On 3/8/2010 1:04 AM, David Mark wrote: > >> What experienced developers? What Web? Where? And scales?! I've yet > >> to see a site out of this bunch (even a basic page) that doesn't > >> download ten times what it should. A quick glance shows that the front > >> (well only) page of the aforementioned Foundation site weighs in at:- > > >> Total HTTP Requests: 45 > >> Total Size: 454259 bytes > > > On dojotoolkit.com? > > No. Where then? Steve. <snip>
From: David Mark on 10 Mar 2010 05:46 S.T. wrote: > On 3/9/2010 3:15 PM, Garrett Smith wrote: >> It is important to validate the HTML. When the browser's HTML parser >> encounters H1 while it is in an inline element (SPAN, here), it has to >> error correct and make a nonstandard decision on how to handle the >> situation. > > Validating is a debugging tool - that's it. It's not important if a page > "passes" or not. You clearly do not have the knowledge or experience to filter validation reports. Best to just abide by them (at least for now). > > No doubt there are lengthy arguments about how critical validating is to > the future of humanity, but the real world uses validation for it's > useful purposes and stops there. ALT'ing every single IMG whether useful > or not is a fool's errand. But do you understand when it is useful and when it is not? Clearly the Dojo developers do not (ask any blind person who has the misfortune to come across their new site). I'm still wondering why they bothered with aural style sheets. Perhaps they were just copying without thinking. :) > Escaping every ampersand in a URL is wasted > time. I don't think so (and you definitely shouldn't think so). > > Nice way to find tags that weren't closed and duplicate IDs though. Unless the errors happen to be lost in a sea of missing attributes (or invalid values). > >>> "When an object is absolute/fixed positioned, it becomes block-level. >>> Even if the CSS display type is set to inline (or inline-block/table), >>> the effective display type becomes block-level once an object is >>> positioned. " >>> >> It is better to instead refer to the CSS 2.1 specification. >> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/visuren.html#dis-pos-flo > > That page says an inline element with position: absolute is computed as > a block level element, which was my original point. Which demonstrates that you have no idea what you are talking about. > >> >>> Check computed display styles of absolute positioned spans in various >>> browsers. They aren't inline. >> >> Do not confuse HTML flow types with CSS display values. > > Yes, I already conceded that point. It wasn't so much confusing the two, > rather realizing his context was with HTML validation whereas I was > looking from the browser's perspective, as I care about what the browser > does with the markup -- not what the W3C thinks of it. > No point there. Invalid markup definitely affects browsers. The validation tools on the W3C site (and elsewhere) simply alert you to mistakes (many of which will manifest themselves in your "real world").
From: David Mark on 10 Mar 2010 06:08 SteveYoungGoogle wrote: > On Mar 10, 5:42 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> S.T. wrote: >>> On 3/8/2010 1:04 AM, David Mark wrote: >>>> What experienced developers? What Web? Where? And scales?! I've yet >>>> to see a site out of this bunch (even a basic page) that doesn't >>>> download ten times what it should. A quick glance shows that the front >>>> (well only) page of the aforementioned Foundation site weighs in at:- >>>> Total HTTP Requests: 45 >>>> Total Size: 454259 bytes >>> On dojotoolkit.com? >> No. > > Where then? > Groan. You again?
From: David Mark on 10 Mar 2010 06:11 David Mark wrote: > SteveYoungGoogle wrote: >> On Mar 10, 5:42 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> S.T. wrote: >>>> On 3/8/2010 1:04 AM, David Mark wrote: >>>>> What experienced developers? What Web? Where? And scales?! I've yet >>>>> to see a site out of this bunch (even a basic page) that doesn't >>>>> download ten times what it should. A quick glance shows that the front >>>>> (well only) page of the aforementioned Foundation site weighs in at:- >>>>> Total HTTP Requests: 45 >>>>> Total Size: 454259 bytes >>>> On dojotoolkit.com? >>> No. >> Where then? >> > > Groan. You again? Here you go:- JavaScript - http://www.dojofoundation.org/ Timeout thread: delay 0 ms Unhandled exception: [Object DOMException] name: Error message: SYNTAX_ERR stacktrace: n/a; see opera:config#UserPrefs|Exceptions Have Stacktrace In Opera 10 no less. And check out the "layout" in anything less than a maximized browser at a very high resolution. You can bet the developers never did. ;)
From: SteveYoungGoogle on 10 Mar 2010 07:53
On Mar 10, 12:11 pm, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > David Mark wrote: > > SteveYoungGoogle wrote: > >> On Mar 10, 5:42 am, David Mark <dmark.cins...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>> S.T. wrote: > >>>> On 3/8/2010 1:04 AM, David Mark wrote: > >>>>> What experienced developers? What Web? Where? And scales?! I've yet > >>>>> to see a site out of this bunch (even a basic page) that doesn't > >>>>> download ten times what it should. A quick glance shows that the front > >>>>> (well only) page of the aforementioned Foundation site weighs in at:- > >>>>> Total HTTP Requests: 45 > >>>>> Total Size: 454259 bytes > >>>> On dojotoolkit.com? > >>> No. > >> Where then? > > > Groan. You again? > > Here you go:- > > JavaScript -http://www.dojofoundation.org/ > Timeout thread: delay 0 ms > Unhandled exception: [Object DOMException] > name: Error > message: SYNTAX_ERR > stacktrace: n/a; see opera:config#UserPrefs|Exceptions Have Stacktrace > > In Opera 10 no less. And check out the "layout" in anything less than a > maximized browser at a very high resolution. You can bet the developers > never did. ;) So your thread and OP is entitled "New Dojo Site--Most incompetent ever?". The OP opens with the question "Have you seen the shiny new Dojo Toolkit site?". But your figures for a bad site come from http://www.dojofoundation.org/ |