the "new standard"... in print

[khaki]

okay...
I've had my rants against the W3 and their ridiculous website (and poor dear Charles probably has brain-fits every time he sees them)...
but I'm not looking to be the problem...
I want to be part of the solution.

So...
who can recommend a book (not a site... although if you know of any good ones I'll take that too, I guess) that covers XHTML with complete accuracy (W3 accurate)?

I know that all of the information that I'll ever need about XHTML can be found for free at W3....
but I am willing to pay anywhere from $30-$75 for a good book with an actual INDEX (and sensible table of contents.... although the INDEX is the key)

Anyone?
The #1 priority is accuracy though.
So if someone like Charles - or any of the other "guardians of standards" can recommend something... that would be really great (and you'll finally get me to shut-up about the W3 website. :eek: That alone might even make it worth paying for the book for me... right? :) lol).

thanks a bunch...
;) k

[Charles]

The current versions of XHTML are just XML versions of HTML 4.01 (XHTML 1.0 Transitional is HTML 4.01 Transitional, XHTML 1.0 Strict and XHTML 1.1 are HTML 4.01 Strict) and so no real spec was released. You're supposed to just read the HTML 4.01 spec - which has an index at http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/index/list.html. But the index isn't key, you'll only make yourself more confused unless you take the systematic approach. You need to start at the beginning, continue along until the end and then stop.

[Robert Wellock]

Actually I'd have to agree with Charles there, reading the HTML 4.01 Recommendations from beginning to end is extremely boring reading and takes considerable time...

I chose to do that last Christmas although it does mean there will be few questions that you'll need to ask about HTML 4.01 markup if it does not go above your head, or you fall asleep during reading.

Out of the reading I found five pages most useful, the rest I had basically picked up through practical experience, but it was worth the effort and it is essential reading if you want to understand XHTML 1.0 properly.

I cannot recommend a book on XHTML since I haven't found one that is really good however; Beginning XHTML by the former publisher Wrox, although it had a lot of CSS errata and typographical errors was a reasonable XHTML Reference book and easy to read.

[khaki]

bummer.... :(

I was hoping that I would hear about a "Charles-approved" book.
shucks!

but okay... can we discuss something...

there was thread today which spawned this thread (which is often the case with me :rolleyes: )

I'm almost afraid to tell you which thread it is....
but... i'll be a big girl and just tell ya:

http://forums.webdeveloper.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=9994

anyway... the thing is, that if I had just read the HTML 4.01 spec (as it relates to <select>) as you suggest....
I would not be coding to the new standard of XHTML (until after I read that section next... which would then force me to unlearn stuff from what I had just read previously).

Do y'see what I mean?

The way that W3 sets up the site, I HAVE to read every word (even the deprecated stuff) just to even get to the later information.

That's just crazy :eek:

I am self taught (and haven't we all heard that enough.... to the point of wanting to throw-up! lol) and I do very well by reading (mostly books). So I was hoping that there would be a book that has the accuracy of W3.... but without the way that they essentially force you to digest the information.
I just find that the way the W3 site is set up is not condusive to the manner in which I tend to learn.

Can you see my point Charles?
(or understand what I am saying?)

I do much better with books. That's just me.... I can't really change that.
And I'd be really much better off with a good accurate book (with an extensive index, samples, etc).
I just don't think that you can sell me on the W3 site.
I tried (honestly) and it doesn't do it for me.

see?

;) k

[khalidali63]

Try this link K.
I think they try to keep up with all the w3c recomendations ( I doubt if they take proposals into consideration at all).

They have a bit readable element +attributes descriptions..
For th ebooks,my recomendation will be try to read the specs,cus I doubt there is any seriously good book on HTML that strictly preaches the w3c standards( i could be wrong.

Here is the link

http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_doctype.asp

on this site you cn find XHTML tags,attribs and events,
In my opinion trying to dhere as much as to the strict standard will pay of in long term,because when there won't be html4.1 n e more,you won't have to worry about comming back and re-writing your code.

Hope this'll help you..

[khaki]

yeah... that definitely helps Khalid, thanks...

as a matter of fact, Jona :) referenced a link from that same site in the "other" thread.

I didn't take much time to look at it then (until I looked at the one which you provided just now)...
and it will definitley help (and it's free!!!)

Just for kicks... I checked the <select> tag and oddly enough it says that there is no difference between HTML and XHTML.
ughh... nothing is perfect I guess.

but this site is almost exactly what I am looking for (and I love the examples! :) )

yeah... this will work for me.
it's great how it tells about the differences between HTML and XHTML (when it gets it right :eek: ) and especially what has been deprecated and what has replaced it (so cool!!!).

yup... i'll be referring this site to other people too, that's for sure!
thanks so much!!! :)

oh... and Charles and Robert...
thanks guys... I appreciate the time that you took to respond.
The W3 is great for some (I understand that)... but there are probably lots of knuckleheads just like me who need a different approach :rolleyes:

but... at least the goal is achieved (even if the path that is taken is a bit different)

thank you !!!!!! :) !!!!!!
;) k

[jeffmott]

for a good book with an actual INDEXWell, Charles has already provided you with the link to the index in the HTML 4.01 spec if you didn't know about that already. But I don't think that's what you need right now. If you always use the index instead of reading the spec front to back then you'll end up in a situation where you don't know what you don't know. The index will bring you to what you know you're looking for, but what about the things you don't know is relevant to your situation? Then one day someone here will post a reply saying you need to change the way you've done something and you'll go on your rant for having done it wrong for 3+ years. :)

Just think, if you had started reading it from when you first said it'd take too long, you would've been done by now. Yes, it is somewhat long. You're not expected to read it in a single sitting. Make a point of reading X amoung each day. And yes, it is dry reading. But, remember that you're not reading for entertainment. Also, specifications for any other technology are also "dry". They're meant to tell you what you need to know and nothing more (this includes small jokes). And very few of these technologies are as forgiving as HTML. If you don't get used to reading specs then you're going to have major problems in other areas of computing.if I had just read the HTML 4.01 spec (as it relates to <select> ) as you suggest....
I would not be coding to the new standard of XHTML (until after I read that section next... which would then force me to unlearn stuff from what I had just read previously).
Do y'see what I mean?This seems worse than it really is. XHTML still builds very largly off HTML. There are no changes dealing directly with the SELECT element. All you really need is the differences between HTML and XHTML (http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/#diffs). But don't stop with that. Read the rest of that document (it's not nearly as long as the HTML spec).

If you still don't follow the suggestions of reading these specifications then you'll spend the rest of your life asking questions and being confused instead of knowing the answers for yourself and being confident that you know most everything there is to know about the subject.The way that W3 sets up the site, I HAVE to read every word (even the deprecated stuff) just to even get to the later informationThere isn't very much in the HTML4.01 spec that is deprecated. Section 15 is almost entirely deprecated elements, attributes, and example and could probably be skipped completely, though I'd at least skim through it.and I do very well by reading (mostly books)Not meaning to be offensive here, but how often do you end up raving after realizing you've been doing something wrong? Maybe those books don't do you as much good as you think.I just don't think that you can sell me on the W3 site.
I tried (honestly) and it doesn't do it for me.This is where the forum and a little Q&A comes in. Where'd you get stuck?

I would even recommend printing out the spec. First, it seems a lot easier to skim over words or even sections when it's on the screen, and that can get you real confused real fast. Also, you'd be surprised how even just a change of environment can help (sitting in a recliner outside instead of in front of the computer).

Sunbathing on a beautiful day, you pick up a copy of a good... specification. lol, it's like we go out of our way to look like computer geeks. :p

[Charles]

Let's compare the man to his shadow, the W3C's HTML 4.01 Specification to the W3Schools' thingy. Consider the IFRAME element. (http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/present/frames.html#edef-IFRAME &amp; http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_iframe.asp)

From the Standard:

<IFRAME src="foo.html" width="400" height="500" scrolling="auto" frameborder="1">
[Your user agent does not support frames or is currently configured
not to display frames. However, you may visit
<A href="foo.html">the related document.</A>]
</IFRAME>

(Yes, the W3C specification employs copious examples.)

From the thingy:

<iframe
src ="../default.asp">
</iframe>

Not even a mention that not all browsers support the IFRAME element. The whole point of the 4.01 Spec is the creation of pages that work on all browsers. Sadly, the W3 Schools are uninterested in accessibility. And consider the TABLE element. (http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html &amp; http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_table.asp) The W3 Schools forget to mention that tables are not supposed to be used for layout, and they forget to mention the 'abbr', 'axis', 'headers' and 'scope' attributes that you will need to employ to make multidimensional tables accessible to non-graphical browsers. But that's because the W3 Schools are not interested in non-graphical browsers. And that's why you should eschew them in favor of the real thing. But if you insists just be clear, you are not learning HTML. You are learning how to use the parts of HTML to manipulate certain graphical browsers.


Personally, I found the sections of the 4.01 Spec to be too short to get boring. I suggest printing it out one URL at a time and taking each in turn with you into the necessary. And if it's comedy you want, then just be patient. Here's a peek at the XHTML 2.0 Spec.:

<dl>
&nbsp;&nbsp;<dt>Dweeb</dt>
&nbsp;&nbsp;<dd>young excitable person who may mature into a <em>Nerd</em> or <em>Geek</em></dd>

&nbsp;&nbsp;<dt>Hacker</dt>
&nbsp;&nbsp;<dd>a clever programmer</dd>

&nbsp;&nbsp;<dt>Nerd</dt>
&nbsp;&nbsp;<dd>technically bright but socially inept person</dd>
</dl>