Scribd Logo
Unggah

Selamat datang di Scribd!

  • Developing Web Applications With XHTML:: Problems and Benefits

    Diunggah oleh

    Grigore Anton
    19 tayangan35 halaman
    Browsers and xhtml: technical and process issues. Data delivered to browsers as one of two MIME types text / html text/xml. Xml handled in very different ways: html channel support, XML Channel support. Some browsers supports internal DTD subsets and arbitrary entity declarations.

    Deskripsi Asli:

    Judul Asli

    Dev Con Talk

    Hak Cipta

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Format Tersedia

    PPT, PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd

    Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

    Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

    Laporkan Dokumen Ini
    Browsers and xhtml: technical and process issues. Data delivered to browsers as one of two MIME types text / html text/xml. Xml handled in very different ways: html channel support, XML Channel support. Some browsers supports internal DTD subsets and arbitrary entity declarations.

    Hak Cipta:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Unduh sebagai PPT, PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    19 tayangan35 halaman

    Developing Web Applications With XHTML:: Problems and Benefits

    Diunggah oleh

    Grigore Anton
    Browsers and xhtml: technical and process issues. Data delivered to browsers as one of two MIME types text / html text/xml. Xml handled in very different ways: html channel support, XML Channel support. Some browsers supports internal DTD subsets and arbitrary entity declarations.

    Hak Cipta:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Unduh sebagai PPT, PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
    Tandai sebagai konten tidak pantas
    dari 35

    Developing Web Applications With XHTML:

    Problems and Benefits

    Ian GRAHAM Senior Manager, eSolutions Group Emfisys, Bank of Montreal E: ian.graham@bmo.com or utoronto.ca} W: http://www.utoronto.ca/ian/talks/ T: 416.513.5656 / F: 416.513.5590

    Talk Outline

    Introduction

    Technical and process issues

    Browsers and XHTML Server-side data management Dynamic content generation Conclusions

    Browsers and XHTML

    Data delivered to browsers as one of two MIME types


    text/html text/xml

    (HTML data) (XML data)

    Two types handled in very different ways

    Browsers and XHTML

    HTML Channel Support

    XML Channel Support

    Navigator 1--6 Opera 3--6 Lynx IE 3--5.5 ... Basically every browser

    Navigator 6 IE 5/5.5 Opera 4 Fewer browsers, with caveats (rendering /


    processing problems)

    HTML vs. XML Channels


    HTML channel
    Large set of defined internal general entities for common non-ASCII characters and symbols Default formatting properties for all standard HTML elements CSS support for id- and class-based CSS selectors (e.g., div.special, pre#note) Hard-wired support for functional elements (links, replaced elements [img, object/applet], map etc.) No internal DTD subsets: some browsers supports DOCTYPE declarations with no internal subset (for rendering mode switching) No validation must omit CDATA sections N/A No namespace support

    XML channel
    Only 5 XML-standard predefined general entities (lt, gt, amp, apos, and quot) No default XHTML formatting properties (exception: Mozilla/Navigator 6) No support No support (some support in Mozilla)

    Supports internal DTD subsets and arbitrary entity declarations, both internal and (sometimes) external Supports DTD-based (and sometimes schema-based) validation Supports CDATA sections Supports an XML declaration Supports namespaces

    XHTML via XML Channel

    Mozilla/NN6

    IE 5/5.5

    namespace support for XHTML namespace


    default formatting properties

    Restricted CSS support No support (yet) for style, link elements


    <?xml-stylesheet .... ?>

    No special support for XHTML (use CSS+XML) No standardized support for functional markup Transform XML into HTML: XML+XSLT HTML

    Browser Conclusions:

    Deliver data as text/html Must avoid many XML features

    CDATA sections DTD internal subsets (and DTD functionality)

    Not supported by HTML processors

    XHTML as text/html

    Be aware of some XHTML features


    xml:lang vs. lang attributes (use both) XML declarations (avoid them) empty element tag notation (add space before trailing / character) non-minimized attribute assignments (some bugs with Opera 3.6) DTD declaration (rendering concerns)

    Safe XHTML example

    <?xml version= "1.0" encoding= "utf-8" ?>


    <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" "DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd" > <html xmlns= "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml1" xml:lang= "en-ca" lang= "en-ca" >

    <head> <title> ... </title> <meta http-equiv= "content-type" content= "text/html;charset=utf-8" /> </head> <body> ..... whitespace </body> before slash </html>

    DOCTYPE Switching

    New HTML processors render differently depending on DOCTYPE value:

    quirks mode -- (reproduces various CSS and other layout errors of older browsers) standards mode -- (correct behavior, no quirks [supposedly!] )

    DOCTYPE Switching

    All XHTML DTDs get standard mode. Thus the following rule:
    quirks mode: strict mode:

    omit DOCTYPE include an XHTML DOCTYPE declaration

    Summary

    Seems like a lot of problems.... Not so bad ...

    Have to deal with most anyway (e.g., quirky vs. strict) patching often easy to automate

    Benefits
    Reduced markup errors (well-formedness) Migration path to future delivery channels

    Markup Guidelines

    Use external scripts and CSS style sheets Avoid CDATA sections External script, style sheet files On output, auto-adjust syntax:

    insert space at end of empty-element tags duplicate lang-related attributes strip/insert appropriate DOCTYPE declaration strip XML declaration

    Talk Outline

    Introduction Browsers and XHTML Server-side data management Dynamic content generation Conclusions

    Server-Side Management

    XHTML reduces errors in composition and rendering phases


    Well-formedness ensures unambiguous processing by an HTML or XML processor Barring CSS errors, this means fewer browser formatting problems

    Problems

    support by content generation tools

    Issues:

    Limited pool of XHTML authoring tools


    Most popular page authoring tools designed for HTML (DreamWeaver, FrontPage etc.) XHTML conversion adds process steps to authoring

    Too complex for most Web authors/designers

    Not an issue for organizations with existing XML/SGML processes

    Processing Content

    Problem detected

    A)

    Author / edit

    View & verify


    Problem detected

    Publish content

    B)

    Author / edit

    Convert to XHTML

    View & verify

    Publish content

    Alternatives

    Use XML-aware authoring tools

    Issues: Cost, non-WYSIWYG nature

    Create tightly controlled page templates and limit authoring responsibilities

    Reduces likelihood of markup error Fragment authoring only -- with validation

    Dynamic content generation

    Talk Outline

    Introduction Browsers and XHTML Server-side data management Dynamic content generation Conclusions

    Dynamic Content

    Content from databases

    SQL, XML, files (plain text or XML fragments) Either via structured markup generating functions or true XML-based tools

    Can enforce well-formedness in software

    Server-Side Management
    text strings XHTML Fragment XHTML Fragment XHTML Fragment HTML / XHTML page template HTML / XHTML to browser

    Page generation engine

    Reduced number of markup/formatting errors

    XHTML Fragments

    XHTML helps reduce errors in composition of pages from fragments:

    Checking fragment well-formedness ensures well-formedness of composed content Even if template is not well-formed, wellformedness of fragments increases rendering reliability of composed product Easier to control fragment authoring

    Roles & Responsibilities

    Fragment creation

    Many individual writers; requires little markup knowledge; WYSIWYG often not as important Fewer, more technically skilled people; can enforce well-formedness

    Template creation / Management

    Fragment Creation

    Common use case in content creation e.g., Newspaper articles, weblogs

    Subset of XHTML (e.g., p, a, br, h3, b, i, img, em) few attributes Easy to write Easy to dynamically correct markup

    Example Web Interface

    Advantages
    Centralized code Single interface

    Disadvantages
    Crappy editor Need to know markup to write content

    Future Alternatives

    Editable Web content (IE 5.5, Mozilla)

    http://standardbrains.editthispage.com/

    Accessing DOM tree to build an editor

    DOM ensures validity / well-formedness of markup

    With Mozilla, will work with XML

    Content Assembly

    Many tools (JSP, php, ASP, zope ...)

    Not many that guarantee well-formed XML output

    Obvious choice: XSLT


    Guarantees well-formedness of output HTML output mode allows for most issues described earlier

    Server-Side Management
    XSLT processor
    XHTML Fragment text strings XSLT fragment template XHTML Fragment XHTML Fragment

    XHTML to browser XSLT page template

    Zero markup / formatting errors

    XSLT Advantages
    XSLT

    (2)

    Always well-formed! Abstraction layer between content and output

    Output (2)

    Easier adjustment for future delivery channels

    XSLT

    XSLT

    (1)

    Output (1)

    XSLT Caveats

    Non-trivial language

    (well, at least to page developers/designers)

    Unclean separation between designer and programmer Lack of easy integration to common editing tools

    Alternative Approach

    Procedural page template designs

    XHTML-compliant design tools

    Escape to XSLT for content components

    Prototype-based transformations

    Markup Model

    ...regular markup .... <xsl:prototype> <table> ... Example table content goes here ... </table> </xsl:prototype> ... More XHTML markup ....

    Talk Outline

    Introduction Browsers and XHTML Server-side data management Dynamic content generation Conclusions

    Conclusions

    XHTML provides pragmatic advantages

    Improved content reliability, at several layers; migration path to XML-centric world

    Several disadvantages in near-term

    Poor integration with authoring tools; no easy XSLT-design separation

    Developing Web Applications With XHTML:


    Problems and Benefits

    Ian GRAHAM Senior Manager, eSolutions Group Emfisys, Bank of Montreal E: ian.graham@{bmo.com or utoronto.ca} W: http://www.utoronto.ca/ian/talks/ T: 416.513.5656 / F: 416.513.5590

    Anda mungkin juga menyukai