[Announce] p-gal: photo gallery generator with templating support

[Paolo Pantaleo]

Hi,
I'm writing a software in python to generate html photo gallery. It is
called p-gal and is GPL licensed. It is written in python [With the
invaluable help of this list ] and it has a templating system based
on Cheetah. Currently it works under Linux (and maybe other UNIX-like
OSs)

The main idea of p-gal is to provide a framework to allow image
gallery generation, but letting the user as free as possible about the
style of the gallery. P-gal features for now only one template (or
theme), but adding new ones is very simple.

I would anyone to take a look at my piece of code, and give me his
feedback about what is good and what should be improved.

Thnx
PAolo Pantaleo

 

[Paul Rubin]

I would anyone to take a look at my piece of code, and give me his
feedback about what is good and what should be improved.

url?

 

[Paolo Pantaleo]

url?

Sorry...

www.sf.net/projects/ppgal

 

[ajaksu]

www.sf.net/projects/ppgal

Ciao Paolo!

The homepage (http://paolopan.freehostia.com/p-gal/ ) looks weird in my
SeaMonkey 1.0.4, contents appear below GoogleAds instead of at the
right.

Some feedback and a couple of questions at http://tinyurl.com/qgbth
(points to
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1540122&group_id=169372&atid=850133
)

Best regards,
Daniel

 

[Paolo Pantaleo]

Ciao Paolo!

The homepage (http://paolopan.freehostia.com/p-gal/ ) looks weird in my
SeaMonkey 1.0.4, contents appear below GoogleAds instead of at the
right.

Well... I designed the site for Firefox... anyway I used CSS float
directives and no tables. I don't know if I made something wrong, or
if it is a [not so unlikely] standard compliance problem. Well Firefox
too has some problems with floats.

I copied the layout from http://www.topolinux.org/ - can you see this properly?

 

[ajaksu]

Sorry for the OT post...

Well... I designed the site for Firefox...

Don't
Even Firefox developers will tell you to avoid this. Develop for
standards compliant browsers (including Firefox) by testing against the
standards. Neither your HTML or CSS pass validation, both due to minor,
easy-to-fix issues.

anyway I used CSS float directives and no tables.

Good choice on CSS, but you do use (four) tables at that page, and one

... I don't know if I made something wrong, or
if it is a [not so unlikely] standard compliance problem. Well Firefox
too has some problems with floats.

Before you can blame it on (some browser's) poor standards compliance,
your (X)HTML+CSS must be standards compliant. Then, you have to figure
out whether the browser showing what you intended is following
standards on that case

I copied the layout from http://www.topolinux.org/ - can you see this properly?

Yes, I can see topolinux.org properly. If you look at topolinux.org's
source, they have the big GAds IFrame at the bottom. But what I found
really interesting is that they also have small IFrames at the right
bottom (Visitatore), and that those have this property:

google_ad_format = "110x32_as_rimg";

So I imagine that the format you used for your left IFrame can be part
of the problem. BTW, it looks exactly the same (i.e., broken) with IE6.

From http://tinyurl.com/qnpru :

<p class="googlesquareleft"><script type="text/javascript"><!--
[snip]
google_ad_format = "250x250_as";
google_ad_type = "text";
[snip]
//--></script>

Where...
..googlesquareleft
{
[snip]
margin: 15px 10px 5px 10px;
float: left; /*allows main content to wrap around google ad */
/* note: after this we need to use the clear class to clear the
float at
end of the container */
}

Distinti saluti,
Daniel

 

[John Bokma]

Don't
Even Firefox developers will tell you to avoid this. Develop for
standards compliant browsers (including Firefox) by testing against
the standards. Neither your HTML or CSS pass validation, both due to
minor, easy-to-fix issues.

If you actually read those "standards" you will know that the documents
itself are called Recommendations or Working drafts. Why someone
recommends to follow documentation but isn't even able to name them as
they are named in the documentation itself is beyond me.

 

[Gabriel Genellina]

If you actually read those "standards" you will know that the documents
itself are called Recommendations or Working drafts. Why someone
recommends to follow documentation but isn't even able to name them as
they are named in the documentation itself is beyond me.

Uh?????
They are "true" and "real" international standards. Do you know what
ISO is? HTML 4.01 is ISO/IEC 15445; see https://www.cs.tcd.ie/15445/15445.html



Gabriel Genellina
Softlab SRL





__________________________________________________
Preguntá. Respondé. Descubrí.
Todo lo que querías saber, y lo que ni imaginabas,
está en Yahoo! Respuestas (Beta).
¡Probalo ya!
http://www.yahoo.com.ar/respuestas

 

[John Bokma]

Uh?????
They are "true" and "real" international standards. Do you know what
ISO is? HTML 4.01 is ISO/IEC 15445; see
https://www.cs.tcd.ie/15445/15445.html

From which I quote:
"The scope of this International Standard is a conforming application of
ISO 8879, SGML. This International Standard describes the way in which the
HTML language specified by the following clauses in the W3C
*Recommendation for HTML 4.01* shall be used, and does so by identifying
all the differences between the HTML language specified by the W3C
Recommendation for HTML 4.01 and the HTML language defined by this
International Standard:"

I do, you clearly don't. In short "HTML 4.01 is ISO/IEC 15445" is false
(read the link you just posted).

Moreover, most people talking about the "HTML standard" clearly are not
talking about ISO/IEC 15445. They talk about documents published by w3c.

 

[ajaksu]

If you actually read those "standards" you will know that the documents
itself are called Recommendations or Working drafts. Why someone
recommends to follow documentation but isn't even able to name them as
they are named in the documentation itself is beyond me.

Hi John, sorry about the delay (been offline for a couple of days).

First I'd like to point out that I didn't mean to be rude or attack
Paolo, I invested some time trying to diagnose the problems with his
site and in fact I'm kinda working for him this morning

Then, I'd ask you to read his post, as it was the first use of
standard: "standard compliance problem".

And to answer your question, I recommend to follow standards because
that's how I call the mixed bag of Recommendations, some of which are
also Specifications, allowing for the inclusion of both significant
Standards and standards. I guess I must've been bitten by the buzzword
bug, sorry it that offends you. But I'm not the only one (TM).

This is the W3C Markup Validation Service, a free service that checks Web
documents in formats like HTML and XHTML for conformance to W3C
Recommendations and other standards.
http://validator.w3.org/

This seems to imply that W3C considers Recommendations to be standards
(sorry if I'm mistaken, my English is not that good).

Support for open Web standards in Firefox ensures you can get the most
out of this emerging class of Web-based tools.
http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/

I guess this is why we were using that word, given the Firefox context.

So I might be "able to name them as they are named in the
documentation(sic) itself", but I'd rather try to help than offer
qwerty sacrifices to the Holy Dictionary and His trolly followers

Daniel

The Web Standards Project is a grassroots coalition fighting for standards
which ensure simple, affordable access to web technologies for all.
http://www.webstandards.org/

While Opera is well capable of showing standards-compliant pages correctly,
not all web pages are compliant.
http://www.opera.com/docs/specs/doctype/

(A)uthors are forced to choose between writing valid, standards-compliant
documents and providing content that renders properly on the browsers of
most visitors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XHTML

 

[John Bokma]

And to answer your question, I recommend to follow standards because
that's how I call the mixed bag of Recommendations, some of which are
also Specifications, allowing for the inclusion of both significant
Standards and standards. I guess I must've been bitten by the buzzword
bug, sorry it that offends you. But I'm not the only one (TM).

True, but if one follows a document, shouldn't one name it according to
how it's named in the document itself? To me, the answer is yes.
Especially if people start to claim that "ISO HTML" and HTML 4.01 are
identical standards.

A lot of people call Python, Perl, etc. *just* scripting languages, not
real programming languages (whatever that may be). Should we join their
ranks or educate?