for the menu elements, they should all have the same color (unlike page content, where it's useful IMO)
2005-09-11 25401, 2005
g0llum
but we do override the link colors anyway, an you can't make out that big a difference -> so it looks more like an error to users if you don't stick to the colour scheme
2005-09-11 25432, 2005
g0llum
finally something where exon is right, most times i'm a bit annoyed by his comments
2005-09-11 25432, 2005
djce
True, I've just never found it necessary to add those rules.
2005-09-11 25446, 2005
djce
:-) but in a way, he's right.
2005-09-11 25404, 2005
g0llum
always. but he'd like a homepage like google after all :)
2005-09-11 25405, 2005
djce
There is a balance to strike between accessibility and looking nice.
2005-09-11 25417, 2005
djce
It's hard, I think we'd all agree that.
2005-09-11 25432, 2005
g0llum
i forgot to add the sixth patch before sending you the whole stuff
2005-09-11 25428, 2005
nikki_
I often turn off css just so I can see which links I've been to because mb makes everything the same :/
2005-09-11 25454, 2005
nikki_
hmm
2005-09-11 25416, 2005
nikki_
I wish opera had an option to use a stylesheet just for one site...
2005-09-11 25446, 2005
nikki_
then I could change anything I wanted without worrying about destroying the rest of the web
2005-09-11 25408, 2005
djce
g0llum: are you hacking on your server at the moment?
2005-09-11 25421, 2005
nikki_
I managed to change the pending edit colour without killing other websites, but that's a class and stuff
2005-09-11 25428, 2005
djce
I hope so, 'cos it looks rather broken.
2005-09-11 25424, 2005
g0llum
just applied the 6th patch again
2005-09-11 25428, 2005
g0llum
what was broken?
2005-09-11 25454, 2005
djce
want a snapshot? quite a bit.
2005-09-11 25457, 2005
g0llum
nikki_: i've promised you we'll try to come up with a minimal stylesheet you'll like ok?
2005-09-11 25402, 2005
nikki_
yay!!
2005-09-11 25405, 2005
nikki_ hugs g0llum
2005-09-11 25408, 2005
g0llum
djce: yes
2005-09-11 25415, 2005
djce
ok, 1 min/
2005-09-11 25435, 2005
Russss
XSL is evil
2005-09-11 25443, 2005
dseomn
Russss: why?
2005-09-11 25458, 2005
Russss
mainly because I don't know it :P
2005-09-11 25402, 2005
djce
oh wait, either you just fixed it or my cache wasn't cleaned :-) it's ok now.
2005-09-11 25406, 2005
Russss
but it's better than DSSSL :P
2005-09-11 25416, 2005
dseomn
yeah, much better
2005-09-11 25459, 2005
Shepard
XSL-T is funny
2005-09-11 25423, 2005
g0llum
the only thing that still breaks the opera-stuff, is
2005-09-11 25431, 2005
g0llum
* Home (sidebar open)
2005-09-11 25434, 2005
Shepard
but crap because it's a programming language in XML which is not what anyone wants ;)
2005-09-11 25436, 2005
g0llum
* close sidebar
2005-09-11 25440, 2005
g0llum
* go contribute
2005-09-11 25442, 2005
g0llum
* back home
2005-09-11 25445, 2005
g0llum
* open sidebar
2005-09-11 25453, 2005
dseomn
Shepard: it's not really a prog language
2005-09-11 25453, 2005
Russss
XSL isn't really a programming language though
2005-09-11 25455, 2005
Russss
heh
2005-09-11 25402, 2005
Russss
wheras DSSSL is. Kind of.
2005-09-11 25404, 2005
Shepard
it is supposed to be
2005-09-11 25419, 2005
Shepard
for a certain task only but it is
2005-09-11 25432, 2005
dseomn
no, it's meant for transformations
2005-09-11 25432, 2005
g0llum is getting too old for this :)
2005-09-11 25420, 2005
dseomn
programming languages are more complex (e.g. C) or convoluted (e.g. asm or bf)
2005-09-11 25433, 2005
luks
well, it has foreach, if, else, ... :P
2005-09-11 25449, 2005
Russss
it's a template language
2005-09-11 25454, 2005
dseomn
it's halfway b/t markup and macro
2005-09-11 25441, 2005
luks
it is markup!
2005-09-11 25444, 2005
luks
XML :D
2005-09-11 25416, 2005
dseomn
that's like saying C is text/plain
2005-09-11 25428, 2005
Shepard
right
2005-09-11 25434, 2005
Shepard
so it's a programming language :P
2005-09-11 25448, 2005
Shepard
but only with a certain focus
2005-09-11 25456, 2005
Russss
who cares, it's annoying
2005-09-11 25405, 2005
Shepard
so it's limited
2005-09-11 25409, 2005
Russss
I'm beginning to doubt if it is actually better than DSSSL
2005-09-11 25414, 2005
luks likes XSL-FO
2005-09-11 25437, 2005
dseomn
Russss: it's much better than DSSSL if you're working w/ XML
2005-09-11 25436, 2005
dseomn
what are you (thinking of) using it for anyway?
2005-09-11 25444, 2005
Russss
docbook
2005-09-11 25454, 2005
Russss
I want to make HTML from docbook which doesn't look shite
2005-09-11 25413, 2005
dseomn
ooh, that's going to take some effort
2005-09-11 25422, 2005
Russss
hah
2005-09-11 25430, 2005
dseomn
XSLT is definitely easier than DSSSL for that
2005-09-11 25456, 2005
djce has quit
2005-09-11 25459, 2005
dseomn
I was thinking of doing something like that for my website, but I found parsewiki which worked much better for me
it's a DJ-mix, but i think the same style should apply
2005-09-11 25433, 2005
Shepard
and dseomn, as i said yesterday: it's very complex at the moment and noone will remember the rules. perhaps you could simplify them so that still everyone knows what to do in every case. or you could add a FAQ below like on PartNumberStyle instead
2005-09-11 25437, 2005
fuchs
dseomn: and add some formating as on the other style guides, it's very hard to get the point ;)
2005-09-11 25402, 2005
dseomn
ok, /me looks at other style guides
2005-09-11 25420, 2005
fuchs
things like "If the ?TrackTitle ends in "medley" it should be changed to "(medley)" unless the ?TrackTitle is "medley" in which case it shouldn't be changed. Also, if the word medley is obviously part of the ?TrackTitle it should not be converted to (medley)." are very hard to understand, f.e.
2005-09-11 25415, 2005
dseomn is not very good at simple and precise wording
