Is the website ok?

**Neal** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:17:48 -0400, Leif K-Brooks <eurleif@ecritt ers.biz>
wrote:
[color=blue]
> Neal wrote:[color=green]
>> So, if you don't plan to use PHP, there's no way I know of to serve it
>> as application/xml+xhtml to some browsers and as text/html to others.[/color]
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/content-negotiation.html[/color]

I'm basically familiar with browsers telling the server what MIMEs they
accept. What I'm not clear on from this document is how I configure Apache
to send either text/html or application/xml+xhtml to a browser for the
same file based on its accept request.

**Leif K-Brooks** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

Neal wrote:[color=blue]
> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:17:48 -0400, Leif K-Brooks
> <eurleif@ecritt ers.biz> wrote:[color=green]
>> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/content-negotiation.html[/color]
>
> I'm basically familiar with browsers telling the server what MIMEs they
> accept. What I'm not clear on from this document is how I configure
> Apache to send either text/html or application/xml+xhtml to a browser
> for the same file based on its accept request.[/color]

That would involve lying to the browser, which isn't a very good idea. A
better option would be to have one HTML 4 file and one XHTML file and
choose which the browser gets based on its Accept header.

If you have your heart set on lying to the browser, you can use some
mod_rewrite trickery. See
<http://www.greytower.n et/en/archive/articles/xhtmlcontent.ht ml>.

**Neal** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 00:37:00 -0400, Leif K-Brooks <eurleif@ecritt ers.biz>
wrote:
[color=blue]
> Neal wrote:[color=green]
>> On Sun, 20 Jun 2004 22:17:48 -0400, Leif K-Brooks
>> <eurleif@ecritt ers.biz> wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/content-negotiation.html[/color]
>>
>> I'm basically familiar with browsers telling the server what MIMEs they
>> accept. What I'm not clear on from this document is how I configure
>> Apache to send either text/html or application/xml+xhtml to a browser
>> for the same file based on its accept request.[/color]
>
> That would involve lying to the browser, which isn't a very good idea. A
> better option would be to have one HTML 4 file and one XHTML file and
> choose which the browser gets based on its Accept header.
>
> If you have your heart set on lying to the browser, you can use some
> mod_rewrite trickery. See
> <http://www.greytower.n et/en/archive/articles/xhtmlcontent.ht ml>.[/color]

Well, lying to an inanimate object keeps my conscience clear, but writing
two separate documents/websites makes me a little reluctant...

I use this precise snippet in my experimentation s. I have yet to implement
this in an actual live site.

<?
if(stristr($HTT P_SERVER_VARS["HTTP_ACCEP T"],"applicatio n/xhtml+xml")){
header("Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=UTF-8");
echo('<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">') ;
} else {
header("Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8");
echo ('<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">');
}
?>

(My server uses an old PHP, as you can tell. $_SERVER would be preferred
here, obviously.)

It works like a charm. No problems detected. I'd appreciate a heads up on
what problems this could create.

**Leif K-Brooks** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

Neal wrote:[color=blue]
> [Calling XHTML text/html] works like a charm. No problems detected.
> I'd appreciate a heads up on what problems this could create.[/color]

A browser which doesn't support XHTML or guzzle tag soup won't be able
to use your site. IIRC, w3m falls in to this category, but don't quote
me on that.

**Neal** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 01:29:03 -0400, Leif K-Brooks <eurleif@ecritt ers.biz>
wrote:
[color=blue]
>
> Neal wrote:[color=green]
>> [Calling XHTML text/html] works like a charm. No problems detected.
>> I'd appreciate a heads up on what problems this could create.[/color]
>
> A browser which doesn't support XHTML or guzzle tag soup won't be able
> to use your site. IIRC, w3m falls in to this category, but don't quote
> me on that.[/color]

Not familiar with w3m, where is it from? I've tested this on NN4.01
successfully.

**Chris Morris** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

Leif K-Brooks <eurleif@ecritt ers.biz> writes:[color=blue]
> Neal wrote:[color=green]
> > [Calling XHTML text/html] works like a charm. No problems detected.
> > I'd appreciate a heads up on what problems this could create.[/color]
>
> A browser which doesn't support XHTML or guzzle tag soup won't be able
> to use your site. IIRC, w3m falls in to this category, but don't quote
> me on that.[/color]

No, w3m (Neal: http://w3m.sourceforge.net/ - unlike NN4 it's still
being developed) would cope fine with that.

--
Chris

**Chris Morris** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

Neal <neal413@yahoo. com> writes:[color=blue]
> I use this precise snippet in my experimentation s. I have yet to
> implement this in an actual live site.
>
> <?
> if(stristr($HTT P_SERVER_VARS["HTTP_ACCEP T"],"applicatio n/xhtml+xml")){
> header("Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=UTF-8");
> echo('<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN"
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">') ;
> } else {
> header("Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8");
> echo ('<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">');
> }
> ?>
>
> It works like a charm. No problems detected. I'd appreciate a heads up
> on what problems this could create.[/color]

Accept: text/html, application/xhtml+xml;q=0.1
Would be sent application/xhtml+xml rather than the preferred text/html

Accept: text/html, application/xhtml+xml;q=0
Would be sent application/xhtml+xml despite saying 'never send it'.

Accept: application/*
Unusual but possible. Would be incorrectly sent text/html.

Accept: */*
Would be sent text/html - not necessarily incorrect.

--
Chris

**Dr John Stockton** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

JRS: In article <t6Cdnbm2aY3SME jdRVn-jg@texas.net>, seen in news:comp.i
nfosystems.www.authoring.html, Mad Bad Rabbit <madbadrabbit@y ahoo.com>
posted at Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:29:19 :[color=blue]
>Dr John Stockton <spam@merlyn.de mon.co.uk> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> Take a satellite mass m, planet mass M, density
>> D, planet radius R, orbit radius R (no
>> atmosphere...), period t, angular velocity
>> w , gravitational constant G.[/color]
>
>Why not use the entity ω ?[/color]

Does not work on my system, which has MSIE4. That is an absolute
requirement, since otherwise a wrong but plausible character might be
shown elsewhere (I press an incorrect key quite frequently).

I cannot recall whether I've viewed such a page on a later browser, but
I'm pretty sure I've not seen any such page failing to give the desired
characters; not do I recall any report of a problem. If some systems do
not handle it as I'd wish, then there is a section of the potential
audience that I cannot currently satisfy - just as much as a page
written by you containing ω would not entirely satisfy me.

Actually, IIRC, I don't have any list showing such a form for Greeks;
but given that example the rest should be easy to guess.
[color=blue]
>(also, instead of , why not use <var> to emphasise variables ?)[/color]

Mark-up is expected to produce italic. Those are not really
variables in the programmer's sense, but algebraic symbols, for which
italic is proper. Mark-up <var> happens to give me italic at present,
but for programmers' variables I would want what <tt> gives me.

[color=blue]
>Otherwise, you'll have to look at:
>
> http://www.unicode.org/charts/
> ...[/color]

Thanks.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/> - FAQqish topics, acronyms & links;
some Astro stuff via astro.htm, gravity0.htm; quotes.htm; pascal.htm; &c, &c.
No Encoding. Quotes before replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Don't Mail News.

**Dr John Stockton** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

JRS: In article <96bbd0h8bqef4b 3c692iciok5tglb gjifa@4ax.com>, seen in
news:comp.infos ystems.www.authoring.html, Steve Pugh <steve@pugh.net >
posted at Sun, 20 Jun 2004 16:34:56 :[color=blue]
>Dr John Stockton <spam@merlyn.de mon.co.uk> wrote:[/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>>I use it frequently as in the last line of[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> w , gravitational constant G.[/color][/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>>in order to get Greeks (absence of simple Greeks seems an omission in
>>HTML).[/color]
>
>Can you explain what you mean by this?[/color]

I should possibly have put "original HTML", and stressed "simple".

TB-L originated the Web in a technical institution, where Greeks should
be greatly needed for names of particles, the SI micro prefix, and
general maths. ISTM that it would have been easy enough, for example,
to use some keyboard character, possibly \, as an escape for the next
character indicating that it meant a corresponding Greek or Maths
symbol. That would be simple to use. It could be extended for the
better-known Continental languages by saying that if the character after
\ is a punctuation character, the meaning is that a corresponding accent
is to be intelligently applied to the following letter; e.g. \"a =
ä and even \-h = Planck's symbol. It would not preclude adding any
of the existing wider-range extensions.

( I've used a word processor in which ! was an escape character
for italic; perfectly convenient (Greeks were probably
impractical in those days))

The form that I use for omega is undesirably long; in &#number; the
number is not obviously related to the character.

[color=blue][color=green]
>>The method has the advantage that the selecting character, here
>>'w', is generally related in an evident manner to the desired one, here
>>'omega'.[/color]
>
>Do you mean that if the display is totally incapable of showing a
>lowercase omega then showing a 'w' is the next best thing?
>I'm not sure I agree.[/color]

In the context in which I tend to use it, that would be acceptable. But
it is not what I meant. I meant that the author can easily relate the
double-you of the page source within a Symbol context to the intended
Greek meaning omega.

[color=blue][color=green]
>>How should they be done?[/color]
>
>ω or ω or ω[/color]

I see in MSIE4 ? or ? or ω where ? represents a near-
square.

[color=blue][color=green]
>>With Unicode references such as € (which
>>I know is not Greek, and appears unrelated to its meaning)?[/color]
>
>Um, yes the Euro sign is not Greek, but how is it unrelated to its
>meaning?[/color]

There is no obvious connection between either the concept Euro or the
epsilon-like shape and the number 8364. There would be an obvious
connection with a notation such as \=C or \$, or E.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ???@merlyn.demo n.co.uk Turnpike v4.00 MIME. ©
Web <URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
Dates - miscdate.htm Year 2000 - date2000.htm Critical Dates - critdate.htm
Euro computing - eurocash.htm UK Y2k mini-FAQ: y2k_mfaq.txt Don't Mail News

**Alan J. Flavell** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Dr John Stockton wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
> >Why not use the entity ω ?[/color]
>
> Does not work on my system, which has MSIE4.[/color]

&#number; references for Greek have been working since at least
MSIE3.03, maybe earlier. They were certainly working for me back in
the days of Win95, once I'd got some decent fonts. (Well, they were
working fine in Alis Tango browser on Win/3.1, but that's a bit of a
special case).

If you aren't seeing it, then something else is wrong. (You've got
castrated fonts installed, probably).
[color=blue]
> That is an absolute requirement,[/color]

Illogical. Browsers of that vintage in general did not guarantee to
support a character repertoire greater than iso-8859-1. Anything else
would be either icing on the cake (if in conformance with published
specifications) , or "relying on a bug" - which is what it seems you're
determined to do.

You really can be stubbornly determined to make a sow's ear out of a
silk purse, sometimes.

**Uncle Pirate** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

Ganesh J. Acharya wrote:[color=blue]
> I now think that I am also a newbie for HTML too. I am thinking of
> using XHTML as it is the current standard. But is that a good decision
> because I have to soon build a team here rather working the things on
> my own. So, I have to keep many things in mind. I am learning to walk
> forward keep a enterprise in mind.[/color]

I asked on alt.html about HTML vs. XHTML. The gist of the responses
seemed to be stick with HTML unless XHTML is needed for content
management or other XML related issues. I think I'm going to stick with
HTML 4.01 strict on the school's new site.

--
Stan McCann "Uncle Pirate"
Webmaster/Computer Center Manager, NMSU at Alamogordo
Cooordinator, Tularosa Basin Chapter, ABATE of NM AMA#758681
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) :( http://surecann.com/Dcp_2068c.jpg
A zest for living must include a willingness to die. - R.A. Heinlein

**Dr John Stockton** · Jul 20 '05, 07:08 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

JRS: In article <t6Cdnbm2aY3SME jdRVn-jg@texas.net>, seen in news:comp.i
nfosystems.www.authoring.html, Mad Bad Rabbit <madbadrabbit@y ahoo.com>
posted at Sun, 20 Jun 2004 10:29:19 :[color=blue]
>
>Here's a list of entities for Greek letters and a few math symbols:
>
> http://www.htmlhelp.com/reference/ht...s/symbols.html[/color]

Exactly the sort of answer I was after. HTML, not PDF, which is quite
unnecessary for the purpose.

Only four of them work for me; three are of no real use to me, and one
was already known (fnof hellip trade; bull).

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Turnpike v4.00 IE 4 ©
<URL:http://jibbering.com/faq/> JL / RC : FAQ for news:comp.lang. javascript
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/js-index.htm> jscr maths, dates, sources.
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/jscr/&c, FAQ items, links.

**Dr John Stockton** · Jul 20 '05, 07:09 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

JRS: In article <Pine.LNX.4.53. 0406212059560.2 8548@ppepc56.ph .gla.ac.uk[color=blue]
>, seen in news:comp.infos ystems.www.authoring.html, Alan J. Flavell[/color]
<flavell@ph.gla .ac.uk> posted at Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:06:59 :[color=blue]
>On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Dr John Stockton wrote:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>> >Why not use the entity ω ?[/color]
>>
>> Does not work on my system, which has MSIE4.[/color]
>
>&#number; references for Greek have been working since at least
>MSIE3.03, maybe earlier.[/color]

(1) But ω is not of the form &#number;.
(2) Some numbers, yes. All assigned numbers, not for me.
[color=blue]
>If you aren't seeing it, then something else is wrong. (You've got
>castrated fonts installed, probably).[/color]

The installation is as was supplied on behalf of Microsoft.
[color=blue][color=green]
>> That is an absolute requirement,[/color][/color]

Please do not quote without sufficient context.

A sufficient quote would have been :
Does not work on my system, which has MSIE4. That is an
absolute requirement, since otherwise a wrong but plausible
character might be shown elsewhere ...
[color=blue]
>Illogical. Browsers of that vintage in general did not guarantee to
>support a character repertoire greater than iso-8859-1. Anything else
>would be either icing on the cake (if in conformance with published
>specifications ), or "relying on a bug" - which is what it seems you're
>determined to do.[/color]

Irrelevant. As an author, I insist on being able to read what I am
authoring. It is then reasonably certain that the great majority of
others see either what I would wish, or the glyph of indeterminacy; that
they will not see a plausible, but incorrect, character.

--
© John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon. co.uk Delphi 3 Turnpike 4 ©
<URL:http://www.merlyn.demo n.co.uk/> TP/BP/Delphi/&c., FAQqy topics & links;
<URL:http://www.bancoems.co m/CompLangPascalD elphiMisc-MiniFAQ.htm> clpdmFAQ;
<URL:http://www.borland.com/newsgroups/guide.html> news:borland.* Guidelines

**Alan J. Flavell** · Jul 20 '05, 07:09 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

On Tue, 22 Jun 2004, Dr John Stockton wrote:
[color=blue]
> JRS: In article <Pine.LNX.4.53. 0406212059560.2 8548@ppepc56.ph .gla.ac.uk[color=green]
> >, seen in news:comp.infos ystems.www.authoring.html, Alan J. Flavell[/color]
> <flavell@ph.gla .ac.uk> posted at Mon, 21 Jun 2004 21:06:59 :[color=green]
> >On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Dr John Stockton wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> >> >Why not use the entity ω ?
> >>
> >> Does not work on my system, which has MSIE4.[/color]
> >
> >&#number; references for Greek have been working since at least
> >MSIE3.03, maybe earlier.[/color]
>
> (1) But ω is not of the form &#number;.[/color]

Congratulations , you noticed. That's why I tried to recommend (unless
you're composing utf-8 in the first place) to use &#number; in
preference to &name; , if such &name; entities were defined in HTML4.
More details on my web pages, if you finally get around to looking.
But you're too busy finding excuses for not following the specs.
[color=blue]
> (2) Some numbers, yes. All assigned numbers, not for me.
>[color=green]
> >If you aren't seeing it, then something else is wrong. (You've got
> >castrated fonts installed, probably).[/color]
>
> The installation is as was supplied on behalf of Microsoft.[/color]

Microsoft subsequently recommended a free font upgrade, if you're
talking about the OS that I think you are.
[color=blue]
> As an author, I insist on being able to read what I am authoring.[/color]

You insist, it seems, on stumbling along with an obsolete system and
refusing all pointers to available upgrades. I should have given up
sooner, shouldn't I?
[color=blue]
> that they will not see a plausible, but incorrect, character.[/color]

If you persist with your Symbol font bogosity, then users of
HTML4-conforming browsers certainly -will- see what you consider to be
the incorrect character (e.g they will see "q" where you -intended-
theta). With all your consideration for users of obsolete and
defective software, don't you care in the least about the users of
specification-conforming browsers?

EOT for me.

--
I'm afraid you have fallen into a well-known trap of understanding
what is going on here. -Phil Hazel on exim-users

**Brian** · Jul 20 '05, 07:09 PM

Re: Is the website ok?

Leif K-Brooks wrote:[color=blue]
> Neal wrote:
>[color=green]
>> if you don't plan to use PHP, there's no way I know of to serve it
>> as application/xml+xhtml to some browsers and as text/html to others.[/color]
>
> http://httpd.apache.org/docs/content-negotiation.html[/color]

That's great in principle, but how do you contend with MSIE/Win's
accept headers?

--
Brian (remove ".invalid" to email me)

Home - TS McHughs Irish Pub & Restaurant

http://www.tsmchughs.com/

Is the website ok?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment