I'm playing around trying to learn XSLT (client-side, for now). The following errors:
...with Opera 11 complaining that upper-case is not a function. I guess this means Opera 11 is running XSLT 1.0, which was before functions like upper-case were defined. How can I confirm this? Opera's spec doesn't mention XSLT, yet clearly it has a built-in processor.
Does any browser support XSLT 2.0?
Thanks in advance for any help
I found this in the Presto 2.8 (Opera 11's rendering engine) Web Standards XML documentation
XSLT, XPath and XSL-FO
Opera supports XSLT style sheets with the <?xml-stylesheet?> processing instruction; see Associating Style Sheets with XML documents Version 1.0. Opera supports XSLT 1.0 and XPath 1.0 with the following exceptions:
The namespace-alias element is not supported.
Opera does not support XSL-FO.
Regarding browser support for XSLT 2.0, to my knowledge no major browsers support it (although there is fairly wide support for XSLT 1.0)
Here's a page for the web standards documentation
Related
We want to migrate our project from IBM WebSphere 6.1 to Tomcat 6, but in our JSP-JSF UI pages we have extensively used below IBM JSF tags.
ScriptCollector
PanelRowCaregory
PagerWeb
OutPutSelections
InputRowSelect
InputHelperDatePicker
InputHelperAssist
ConvertMask
And to replace above tags, we are trying to find the equivalent tags from Sun JSF or any other open source libraries, but we didn't find any equivalent tags.
I wanted to know whether any body has already worked on this kind of migration project, if yes can you please share the equivalent tags?
or if you solved it differently even that info also will be useful.
Thanks in Advance.
There's no standard JSF equivalent for the <hx:scriptCollector> (although the JSF 2.0 <h:head> comes close). The <hx:scriptCollector> is only required by those IBM-specific <hx:xxx> components. It's designed to collect all JavaScript files required by those <hx:xxx> components and then render the desired <script> tag(s) without potential duplicates when multiple components require the same JS files. It's not required by any standard JSF component.
In other words, just get rid of it without replacement.
As to other tags, just check the available standard components in tag documentation or Java EE tutorial. If none is available, just pick a component library like PrimeFaces or RichFaces. If you still can't figure out, ask an individual question for the particular tag.
I am using lcov and genhtml for code coverage. The output generated by genhtml has CSS style. The HTML window in wxWidgets 2.8.12 does not support CSS style HTML page.
Is it possible to get a normal HTML page using genhtml.
Regards
Johnnie
I don't know the answer to your question but wxWebView in wxWidgets 2.9 does support CSS so maybe you should consider upgrading to 2.9 and starting to use it.
I've been doing some searching around and couldn't find this topic anywhere. My company wants to use an HTML doctype but wordpress outputs XHTML by default. I've seen plugins and I would use these but this site will probably outlive the development of said plugins. Plus it's something else to account for when updating or building new sites.
If I use an XHTML doctype how will HTML5 browsers render it? Will they be backwards-compatible with old doctypes?
Edit 1: It is actually recomended that in order to make the transition to HTML5 easier that you try to follow the XHTML structure when writing any HTML.
There will be additional options and types with XHTML in HTML5 but a lot of it is based on the structure in which you are writing your HTML. The X simply means that it is moving to more of an XML base.
To go along with Kayla's input, you will want to make sure that all tags are being closed:
<br/> Instead of: <br>
You will also want to make sure to put quotations around any parameters:
Instead of: <a href=value></a>
Browsers have been slowly adopting the XHTML structure. This might mean that HTML that is formatted without end tags/etc might look a little different in IE 6 than in newer brower versions. Hope that helps!
It is not recommended to use the XHTML 1.0 or 1.1 doctypes for your HTML5 pages, one because its unnecessary and two your markup won't validate when you use the newer tags. Here is a quick guide on using XML syntax in HTML5 a.k.a. XHTML5.
Update: As noted bellow checkout the W3C Specification.
I am not sure what you are asking. What do plugins have to do with DTD?
Yes, any browsers that supports HTML5 is backwards compatible with (X)HTML, you can mix and match all you want. And basically as long as you are writing tags like:
<div>Hi</div> or <p>There</p>
instead of
<DIV>Hi</DIV> or <P>There</P>
the rest is just semantics.
HTML5 began life specifically because browsers manufacturers wanted to make sure that changes they introduced were backward compatible with existing web pages, in contrast to the now defunct XHTML 2, which was shaping up to be non-backward compatible.
So yes, your XHTML doctype will work just fine in HTML5 browsers.
As far as I know all modern browsers that are adding HTML 5 support will continue to support HTML 4 and XHTML for the foreseeable future so you should be fine.
If you're using Wordpress though stick with XHTML. It'll be supported for a long time to come in all browsers and most Wordpress plugins are designed to output XHTML.
I am a designer whose main marketing strategy is multi browser compatibility. I assure my clients that the site will work even in IE6 (!).
Of late i have been pondering over the question of moving to HTML 5. The reason behind my apprehension is that IE6 is still a major player in terms of market share and i don't want to lose it.
Is there any way of moving to HTML 5 and still promise multi browser compatibility?
Thank you.
Yes, by taking baby steps.
To start with, you can switch to the HTML5 doctype: <!DOCTYPE html>. This switches just about every browser out there into "standards" mode, the same as an HTML 4 strict doctype.
Then there's the new elements. Internet Explorer can't natively style them, but a handy little bit of javascript fixes that up: http://code.google.com/p/html5shiv/
If you or your tools aren't ready for that (e.g. some CMSs strip out HTML tags they don't understand), then in the interim you could use classes, e.g. instead of <article>, use <div class="article">.
As for the new form controls, they're backwards compatible too. So <input type="email"> will work exactly the same way as <input type="text"> in browsers that don't support it. If necessary you can use javascript to fill in the gaps. See http://diveintohtml5.ep.io/forms.html for more on that.
As for <video> and <audio>, you can fall back to <object> for older browsers - e.g. http://camendesign.com/code/video_for_everybody. Meanwhile <canvas> can be emulated in javascript, e.g. http://code.google.com/p/explorercanvas/.
"To HTML5" is a fairly broad statement. Even if you have the new HTML5 doctype set (the simple <!DOCTYPE html>) you don't have to go all out and use every aspect of HTML5, only what is appropriate to your project.
If you are keen to get on board with HTML5, I recommend reading "How to use HTML5 in your client work right now" for examples of how you can use certain aspects of HTML5 with few (if any) drawbacks.
Disclaimer: I am one of the curators of HTML5 Doctor.
From there it boils down to whether or not your project will benefit from the features of HTML5 and if you can afford to implement these features. For example, if all of your IE users also have JavaScript enabled you can use html5shiv to get IE to recognise the new elements, enabling you to use them and style them.
As for the new JS APIs and CSS properties that people often group with the term "HTML5", unless your site absolutely requires that you use the technology (perhaps something like geolocation), then it could simply be a matter of progressive enhancement. If webkit/firefox users get rounded corners from CSS3 and IE users don't, is that really such a big deal?
As a rule of thumb I would not develop a site purely in HTML 5 but would consider using it for certain, richer, parts of the site. Remember that it is still not recommended by W3C and IE barely supports it at all.
This blog has a good discussion on it: http://blogs.forrester.com/ronald_rogowski/10-05-10-what_should_customer_experience_professionals_do_about_html5
yes there are several ways.
but if you DONT need html5 elements like video tags, or html5 api's like browser databases, stay at XHTML,because it is still not recommended by W3C. There you can use simple fallbacks for ie6.
do you need html5 elements and apis?
As a last resort you could use Chrome Frame: http://code.google.com/chrome/chromeframe/
As for "a major player in terms of market share", that really depends on your audience. Even Microsoft is marketing its new IE versions rather aggressively. And I don't think there's shame in charging your IE 6 users an extra plugin installation fee. After all, their browser is 10 years old, which is about 100 Internet years, isn't it?
With an XML prolog like
? xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"? >
and a Doctype like
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Frameset//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-frameset.dtd">
I can get my page to render as expected. However, in IE7 the same page does not render correctly. (a span inside a div does not align vertically) Articles on the web suggest that XML prolog + doctype will throw IE6 into quirks mode. However this article seems to suggest otherwise, although it does not mention the version (is it 6 or 7) it applies to, though the article is dated sep 2005 which makes me believe it applies to IE6
Does XML Prolog + doc type throw IE6 into quirks mode? What about IE7? Any recommendations on for or against using the prolog + doctype?
Adding an XML prolog before the doctype will throw IE6 into quirks rendering mode. (See here.) In fact, any space before the doctype will throw IE6 into quirks mode. This is not the case for IE7 and above. You can use document.compatMode (example) to have the browser tell you what mode it is using to do the rendering.
The IE blog entry on MSDN is referring to changes made to IE7 that allow IE7 to stay in standards mode when using the appropriate doctype even if it is preceded by an XML prolog.
I would generally recommend omitting the prolog and keeping the browser in standards mode; I think this will make your life easier moving forward.