Subject: Re: status matrices and XSL
From: Karl Ove Hufthammer (huftis@bigfoot.com)
Date: Sat Mar 10 2001 - 08:03:40 CST
----- Original Message -----
From: "Paul Rohr" <paul@abisource.com>
To: "Karl Ove Hufthammer" <huftis@bigfoot.com>; <abiword-dev@abisource.com>
Sent: Friday, March 09, 2001 11:22 PM
Subject: Re: status matrices and XSL
> At 01:45 AM 3/9/01 +0100, Karl Ove Hufthammer wrote:
> >Here's some preliminary work. It contains the few first rows of the UI
> matrix.
> >Does it look OK, or does it need radical changing?
>
> Sweet. Thanks for the sneak peek.
And here's the finished product. Or almost finished, since the matrix looks very
outdated. Most of the cells marked 'no' in the last table should be 'yes'. I can
fix this for win32, but someone else must update it for other platforms.
> I'd probably move that huge "column
> explanation" down to the bottom, but that's just me. I want to get right to
> the colors. :-)
I think it's better to have it at the top. It's a bit late to present that
column explanations to the reader *after* he/she has read alle the
tables/matrices.
> >(The HTML file *does* work in
> >Netscape 4.x, atleast somewhat,
>
> I *am* noticing some fairly annoying glitches in the rendering on 4.0
> browsers, but presumably they can be fixed with some more tweaking:
>
> Netscape 4.04 -- over an inch of vertical whitespace above each matrix
This should be fixed, or at least improved, in this version.
> MSIE 4.0 -- narrow cells with no padding. perhaps a minimum width?
I've added HTML-based padding.
> For grins, I also loaded it into:
>
> DJ Delorie's Lynx Viewer, and
> the WebTV viewer (a desktop simulator, actually),
>
> and it looked pretty good there, too. Figure out how to widen up those
> cells and we'd really be in business! ;-)
The latest version of Lynx now has experimental support for real data tables,
and it seems to work correctly, except for the last table, which is to wide.
> >but please do yourself a favour and use Mozilla
> >0.8!) I'll add the legend and support for other colours later.
>
> I personally have a soft spot in my heart for good CSS implementations -- if
> you really scour the Web, you can see why -- but since we're going to be
> posting this on the website for the world to see, we probably can't insist
> that everyone upgrade their browsers to make it legible.
It should be legible on all browsers which support HTML and/or CSS now.
> If satisfying the least common denominator means writing out static HTML
> tables with *no* CSS, then we might want to consider doing so. I just hope
> we don't have to.
I don't think we have to.
> >The format of the XML file goes like this (see ui_matrix.xml):
>
> Wow. That's more verbose than I would have bothered with
> -- big hunks of
> included HTML would probably be more my style -- but I tend to do the
> minimum possible I can get away with.
We can do more interesting things with pure XML (transposing the matrices,
creating summaries &c.)
> So long as it's easy to update cells and add new rows or columns as needed,
> that's all I care about.
It's easy to add columns at the *end* (to the right) -- creating one in the
middle will be a bit harder (an advanced search and replace script should take
care of it).
--#
Karl Ove Hufthammer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sat Mar 10 2001 - 08:05:58 CST