spf-discuss
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OT] HTML rant

2004-11-05 09:48:22
jpinkerton wrote:

 [why.html]
I'll see what I can do about this - what format do you want
the result in?

Three options:

1 - just plain text (maybe optional)
2 - the old spf.pobox layout (= <pre>....</pre> within a
    single working table)
3 - the new layout replacing all absolute width= dimensions
    in the nested tables containing <pre>....</pre> by some
    equivalent CSS constructs.

At the moment the problem is that legacy browsers don't grok
CSS (okay, that's a feature and no bug), but they do respect
the width= stuff.  And a table with width=1000 within a table
with width=500 simply doesn't work well.  The actual widths
are different.  I tested to delete all width= in the output
and got a very wide (horizontal scrollbar) but visible result.

Try the form before you slate it completely

I did, and I sent a copy of the PHP error message to you and
Koen by mail, check your old inbound ;-)  But ignore it, you
fixed all PHP errors already.

it goes to Koen's nice little help group who will respond
via their wiki.

Okay, then it's not what I wanted, because it was no problem
for the SPF experts, but a simple "webmaster" PHP issue.

I *much* prefer to not have an e-mail link - not even an
obfuscated one - the spammers are not far from cracking them
too......

As I said elsewhere, at the moment spam sent to my "webmaster"
address obfuscated on <http://purl.net/xyzzy/privacy.htm> is
minimal.  The <link ref="made" href="redirected" /> on all of
my pages is still one twist too much for the harvesters.

                      Bye, Frank