Gimlé

Those who seriously doubt that the decision to use typographic distinctions for links was a bad idea should read this (a part of Tom Gilder’s Converting HTML to CSS series).

Tom quite rightly points out that, because links are traditionally underlined, this otherwise fine method of adding typographic emphasis is de facto removed from the web designer’s toolbox.

Underlining text is a no-no because readers will think that it is a link.

And the people responsible for that blunder are the same as the ones trying to push the “Semantic Web” on us.

How about trying to do hypertext properly before you start bumbling around with metadata?

Speaking of bumblers, as a part of my ongoing endeavour to make the number of browsers this site is compatible with match the number of regular readers (two to three), I’ve added CSS-only drop down menus to the navigation box to the right. After looking through a number of implementations I decided to adapt (nick, steal, pillage) Designmeme’s approach.

Now, as you roll over either “Weblog” or “Archive” on the left, you should see a menu pop up containing either this site’s categories or monthly archives, depending on what you rolled over and your browser flavour.

IE on Windows users probably don’t see anything. In fact, they probably can’t even see this site (I’ll have to get myself a Windows test computer at some point).

IE on the Mac should have a slightly better time, although without the popups.

The category list and the archive list are both autogenerated by blosxom plugins.

Strangely enough, right now hacking CSS and reding Code Complete is more fun than preparing for my tutorial tomorrow.

Other stuff I need to read is the Xlink spec now that I’ve finished leafing through the OEBPS 1.2 spec.

Speaking of which…

Who over at openebook.org had the daft idea to fork one of the few standards that the W3 has actually done properly?

Consider this: The APIs to munge XML are miles ahead of the APIs for CSS when it comes to maturity, design quality and implementation.

XML transformation even has a readymade standard for you.

The OEBPS publication structure working group states that it is “…aware that this definition of a media type goes against the recommendation of the CSS Working Group, but has chosen to do so due to practical considerations.”

Extend CSS with OEBPS specific stuff and make the more difficult ones optional, by all means. Just leave the media type alone.

Sheesh.