Warp wrote:
> Ok, I made a version of one of the pages with absolutely no layout:
> http://www.students.tut.fi/~warp/povQandT/languageQandT_nolayout.html

*grin*
you forgot a layout element: spaces, periods, and commas...

-- 
Tim Cook
http://empyrean.scifi-fantasy.com
mirror: http://personal.lig.bellsouth.net/lig/z/9/z993126

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.12
GFA dpu- s: a?-- C++(++++) U P? L E--- W++(+++)>$
N++ o? K- w(+) O? M-(--) V? PS+(+++) PE(--) Y(--)
PGP-(--) t* 5++>+++++ X+ R* tv+ b++(+++) DI
D++(---) G(++) e*>++ h+ !r--- !y--
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d73ce94@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  wrote:

>   Hierarchy, sections, subsections, index, site map, visually marking
> starting of different parts... All that is layout.

No, that is "structure".  See the various HTML specifications*.  So you
simply do not know the terminology and we were talking about completely
different things.  Oh well...

    Thorsten


* The HTML 4.0 recommendation for example (because I happen to have it at
hand, no other reason to mention it here) explains it in section 7.  It is
titled "The global structure of an HTML document".

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d73d046@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  wrote:

>   You do realize that tags like <H1>, <P>, <HR>, <I> etc are layout formatting
> tags?
>   No layout means that the whole page would be one contiguous line of text.

No, you are wrong.  See my other post.  They are not "layout", they are
"structure".  I had assumed you know at least the basic terminology, but
people not reading the manual seems to be a problem outside POV-Ray.  So I
would recommend to RTFM now, the continue arguing ;-)


    Thorsten


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

Sorry to blow your arguments about HTML = content over structure out of the
water, Thorsten, but :

"HTML has its roots in SGML which has always been a language for the
specification of structural markup." - W3C HTML 4.01 Specification, section
2.4.1.

*runs and hides*

--
Pandora/Scott Hill/[::O:M:C::]Scorpion
Software Engineer.
http://www.pandora-software.com

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d73d225@news.povray.org> , Xplo Eristotle <xpl### [at] infomagicnet>
wrote:

See, that is the problem in this discussion.  You claim you know what you
are arguing about but in fact it turns out you don't :-(  This causes a lot
of confusion simply because you never actually read the specification you
are defending.  If you had, you would not be making such mistakes.  let me
gives you a few quotes from the HTML 4.0 recommendation:

> If you have a table - even if it's filled with ordinary tabular data -
> it's still layout.

11.1 "To minimize these problems, authors should use style sheets to control
layout rather than tables."

> If you put an image on a web page, where does it go?

This is determined in one part by the structure of the document.  A
paragraph ends and a new one starts.  That is structure.  If the new
paragraph starts and the first this is an image the the image will be part
of that paragraph.  Where does that paragraph go?  Well, that depends on the
layout and it not relevant for the person creating the document.  The user
has selected how he wants his layout.  Now, before you jump to nonsensical
conclusions before reading on, you have to be careful what exactly I am
saying:  I am against layout provided by the page.  It would be absolute
nonsense to prevent users from selecting layout as I detailed before.  users
are allowed as much control over layout as they like, but with the broser
providing defaults.  this is exactly how HTML used to work.  Even nowadays
you can still specify some layout yourslef:  Most browsers allow you to set
defatult standard font sizes and fonts, for example.

> If so, how much room should there be between
> the image and the text? This is all layout.

Yes, how much space is distributed on a page is layout.  I never said it was
not, did I?  My point still is in what why should content depend on the
space between an image and text?  Not at all, the user simply uses whatever
preference he/she likes.  In case you did not notice, you get a very
readable page if you use neither stylesheets nor font tags.  The image will
just be paced reasonably.  So why do you tell me what is layout if you don't
know?

> When you put words on a page, they go in a certain order. That is
> layout. The sentences and paragraphs also go in a certain order. That is
> layout.

See, you do not know the terms.  i replied to Warp about this including a
refernce explaining it.  It is "structure".

> Lines must break somewhere (or not). That is layout. There must
> be space between paragraphs (or not); that is layout.

Yes, but should it matter for the content creator is the space between two
paragraphs is two or twenty pixels?  No, the layout is up the the user
preference (see above).  Browsers could very well have been extended to
allow users to control this easily.  Instead any kind of control was taken
from users and they are now at the mercy of the page designer.  So users
lost control.


    Thorsten


____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d73d2d3@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  wrote:

>   Ok, I made a version of one of the pages with absolutely no layout:

No, you made a page without "structure".  I really expected you to know such
an important difference!  Maybe you should attend a course about the topic
or get a few good books.  You have a really big hole in your knowledge here!

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <3D7### [at] scifi-fantasycom> , "Timothy R. Cook" 
<tim### [at] scifi-fantasycom> wrote:

>> Ok, I made a version of one of the pages with absolutely no layout:
>> http://www.students.tut.fi/~warp/povQandT/languageQandT_nolayout.html
>
> *grin*
> you forgot a layout element: spaces, periods, and commas...

Again someone who does not know the difference between layout and structure.
See my other posts explaining it.  Really, I assume people know at least the
basics if they argue about something.  How wrong I was :-(

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

"Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in message
news:3d73e999@news.povray.org...
> In article <3d73d2d3@news.povray.org> , Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg>  wrote:
>
> >   Ok, I made a version of one of the pages with absolutely no layout:
>
> No, you made a page without "structure".  I really expected you to know
such
> an important difference!  Maybe you should attend a course about the topic
> or get a few good books.  You have a really big hole in your knowledge
here!
>


    Enlighten us Thorston, what are *your* definitions of "layout",
"structure" and "content" ?

--
Pandora/Scott Hill/[::O:M:C::]Scorpion
Software Engineer.
http://www.pandora-software.com

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d73e88c@news.povray.org> , "Pandora" 
<pan### [at] pandora-softwarecom> wrote:

> Sorry to blow your arguments about HTML = content over structure out of the
> water, Thorsten, but :
>
> "HTML has its roots in SGML which has always been a language for the
> specification of structural markup." - W3C HTML 4.01 Specification, section
> 2.4.1.

But in what way does it "blow [my] arguments"?  That is exactly what I am
saying!  I never said  "content over structure", I say and said "content
over layout".  And "layout" != "structure" as I explained a million times by
now.  So thanks for the quote, it is much better than the one I found and
straight to the point!

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message

In article <3d73eadf@news.povray.org> , "Pandora" 
<pan### [at] pandora-softwarecom> wrote:

>     Enlighten us Thorston, what are *your* definitions of "layout",
> "structure" and "content" ?

Try the one you can find everywhere else?  I gave references already, and
you found another one.

But it seems you simply don't understand the definitions as you other post
clearly showed.  You supported my point and said it was supposed to show I
am wrong.  Really, the purpose of this argument was never to explain
terminology.  I assumed everybody knew the basic terminology.

If you still need more references that maybe explain it better, just search
google for the three terms.  I am sure it will illustrate the same basic
concepts found everywhere else (this of course assumes you pick credible
sources, as which I which I define peer-reviewed scientific explanations).

    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message