Re: I have a problem with this:

[Jenn]

Yes, I guess there are complicated issues. Who makes the site as
well as for whom it is *mainly* for. I was thinking of the
simpler thing of a webpage or site for no one in particular
(about cheesemaking for example, or the history of music...) and
being able to detect if it was made by a man, woman or perhaps
even an extra terrestrial.

yes either scenario would show the same things, I think... don't you
think?

 

[Neredbojias]

Celtic? cool ... Are you Irish by chance?

Nah. And it isn't Celtic, either. I just said that because I was sort
of ashamed to tell the truth. But the time has come to bare all. It's
really Cro-Magnon and means "Man who takes dump on chicken".

I know, I know, -not a very glorious monicker to say the least. But at
least I stopped being chicken-shit about the whole thing.

 

[dorayme]

Perhaps it is because her rebuttal to coding comments was to tell me I
am an abusive male who beats women. That wouldn't cloud my thoughts,
would it?

Perhaps your thoughts were clouded before that? Perhaps you were
simply not seeing a normal human and especially female reaction
to a bunch of men coming on quite so strong? Perhaps you are
being a little too sensitive yourself to a few words said in
reaction?

Us: "Your code is so last millennium."
Jenn: "You're a bull in a china shop who beats women and I am a lady."

That is not quite how it went. There is no point making up
extraordinarily narrow descriptions of the reality of this
thread. It is a rich thread with all kind of things in it. In
fact, I seized an opportunity with it - hope you all don't mind -
and have sold shares in it. These shares will go up and down
according to how it develops but I think I might buy me a fancy
top of the line *film* scanner with the proceeds so far. And then
there is the money I will get from you guys attending my
finishing classes Tues and Thurs mornings... (thanks for showing
how much you need them). Oh... how selfish of me, I might send
Jenn some flowers and chocolates and a stuffed koala from
downunder.

 

[Neredbojias]

Look at the email. It is sheldonlg. L and G are my remaining
initials.


Rochelle, Michelle => Shelley
Sheldon => Shelly

Ever hear of Shelly Berman?

Gawd, you must be as old as Ed Mullen. I salute you, Sheldon! Just
don't ask me to call you Shelly...

 

[rf]

--
I got a question. If you guys know so much about women, how come you're
here at
like the Gas 'n' Sip on a Saturday night completely alone drinking beers
with
no women anywhere?

Because they know so much about women?

 

[rf]

Because you are seeing exactly what you want to see rather than
other ways to make this list.

dorayme, you just don't get it, do you.

It was not us who started the fight. It was her.

Lewis has it exactly right.

And, she failed *TOTALLY* in getting my campfire metaphor. Stright to the
keeper. Over her head like a cloud.

And WTF does being a "lady" or raising children have to do with being told
your HTML sucks? Bloody nothing.

 

[dorayme]

dorayme, you just don't get it, do you.

It was not us who started the fight. It was her.

Lewis has it exactly right.

Not at all. Whoever said much earlier "Please be kinder. A group
should have broad shoulders, a lone individual who wanders in
cannot be expected to take on such a round of boots." has got it
exactly right. Some of you guys seem unable "to get" onto this
idea.

Nor the related one by the same writer that while it may well be
okay for an individual to act with some vehemence and passion
straining as well as going over the limits of decency, it is not
right for a group to do this. This sort of social point is
something I suspect will be very hard for you "to get". It
involves ethics, game theory and social thinking, all things that
people in the heat of hunting in packs would find difficult "to
get".

Early mistakes were made by everyone including me. But some of
you simply did not know when to stop and correct your mistakes.
It will all be made clear at my Tues and Thurs finishing classes.
Don't be late. <g>

 

[rf]

It will all be made clear at my Tues and Thurs finishing classes.
Don't be late. <g>

I'll bring the popcorn.

 

[dorayme]

I'll bring the popcorn.

Yes, that is probably a good idea, there is no way you will be
reformed so you can sit at the back and observe how the others
get transformed into model metrosexuals under my forceful ...
well.. let's just say ... *teaching methods*. <g>

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Yes, that is probably a good idea, there is no way you will be
reformed so you can sit at the back and observe how the others
get transformed into model metrosexuals under my forceful ...
well.. let's just say ... *teaching methods*. <g>

http://images9.cafepress.com/product/391543699v1_480x480_Front.jpg ???

 

[Jenn]

Gawd, you must be as old as Ed Mullen. I salute you, Sheldon! Just
don't ask me to call you Shelly...

I've never heard of Shelly Berman.

 

[Jenn]

This is a very good question. And there is a lot on this matter,
it gets a bit complicated.

Think of it really simply for the moment just in terms of table
cells like TDs: it is often quite unwanted for there to be
*separate* borders around each cell as would happen if you *just*
had:

td {border: 1px solid black;}

with

<table>
<tr><td>content</td>td>content</td>td>content</td></tr>
<tr><td>content</td>td>content</td>td>content</td></tr>
<tr><td>content</td>td>content</td>td>content</td></tr>
</table>

This would get an effect of lots of little separate boxes close
enough together in a general grid. Nice sometimes! But generally,
for a table with information and borders to help read the rows
and columns, better is where the borders between the cells
*collapse* together to leave just the minimum, clean lines up and
down. margin: 0; is powerless on its own to do this. (unlike the
power of the HTML attribute of cellspacing="0" which is too
powerful and can give a double border between cells)

With 'border-collapse' there are three values, collapse, separate
and inherit. If we:

table {border-collapse: collapse;}
td {border: 1px solid; padding:.3em;}

with the above table, we will get a nice enough look for some
purposes with just single lines that mark out the rows and
columns (even though it is the cells doing the work, their
getting up all friendly and close and cooperative has a gestalt
effect bigger than themselves).

Separate cells with borders are very male! border-collapse:
collapse brings out their feminine side. They are much nicer to
each other too this way and particularly to anything that happens
to wander by. Boy o boy, could I tell you what I have seen and
what my HTML camera has picked up over the years on this matter.
But long story don't ask...)

I've read this part about border-collapse at least 3 ......, All that keeps
going through my mind is "it's going to take me forever to understand and
figure this out and I've got 30 minutes to create what management wants ...
just do a table and make it work so I can move on to the next task..."

..........but I'm not picturing what it does or even when it would be
practical to use it on a website.

 

[dorayme]

I've read this part about border-collapse at least 3 ......, All that keeps
going through my mind is "it's going to take me forever to understand and
figure this out and I've got 30 minutes to create what management wants ...
just do a table and make it work so I can move on to the next task..."

.........but I'm not picturing what it does or even when it would be
practical to use it on a website.

OK. Never mind this detail for the moment. The main thing I was
saying was you might find it neat - and a way to get the hang of
CSS - to make tables without anything much by way of style
instructions in the actual table markup. Take this html document:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>table</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style.css">
</head>
<body>
<table>
<tr>
<td>content</td><td>content</td><td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td>content</td><td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td>content</td><td>content</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

In the stylesheet (linked to in the HEAD) you can style the table
to a great extent, leaving the markup simple and clean.

For example instead of something like

<table bgcolor="ffffff" align="center" width="800" border="1"
bordercolor="red" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">

you can leave it as simply

<table>

and put the style for it in the stylesheet. For example:

table {color: #000; background-color: #fff; width:800px; margin:
auto; border: 1px solid red; border-spacing: 0;}

And if you want to style the table cells, then, you can simply
put

td {...;} whatever you want and it applies to all the cells.

If you want to have a special style for the second cell along in
the first and third rows you can class those cells in the HTML
with an appropriate name

<td>content</td><td class="name">content</td>td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td>content</td>td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td class="name">content</td>td>content</td>

and in your stylesheet put

..name (color: white; background-color: red; etc}

 

[dorayme]

and put the style for it in the stylesheet. For example:

table {color: #000; background-color: #fff; width:800px; margin:
auto; border: 1px solid red; border-spacing: 0;}

Best to add the border-collapse property but am just avoiding
this for moment to make a general point about making do by
separating style from content. The details are harder and do
require some study, I agree. It is not plain sailing. Especially
with tables, different browsers can react a bit different to some
css and one has to get up to speed on the main differences.

But you can steer a safe course. Things like font color and
background colour and background images are all pretty easy to
reliably hive off to stylesheets.

 

[Jenn]

OK. Never mind this detail for the moment. The main thing I was
saying was you might find it neat - and a way to get the hang of
CSS - to make tables without anything much by way of style
instructions in the actual table markup. Take this html document:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<html>
<head>
<title>table</title>
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="style.css">
</head>
<body>
<table>
<tr>
<td>content</td><td>content</td><td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td>content</td><td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td>content</td><td>content</td>
</tr>
</table>
</body>
</html>

In the stylesheet (linked to in the HEAD) you can style the table
to a great extent, leaving the markup simple and clean.

For example instead of something like

<table bgcolor="ffffff" align="center" width="800" border="1"
bordercolor="red" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">

you can leave it as simply

<table>

and put the style for it in the stylesheet. For example:

table {color: #000; background-color: #fff; width:800px; margin:
auto; border: 1px solid red; border-spacing: 0;}

And if you want to style the table cells, then, you can simply
put

td {...;} whatever you want and it applies to all the cells.

If you want to have a special style for the second cell along in
the first and third rows you can class those cells in the HTML
with an appropriate name

<td>content</td><td class="name">content</td>td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td>content</td>td>content</td>
<td>content</td><td class="name">content</td>td>content</td>

and in your stylesheet put

.name (color: white; background-color: red; etc}

How do you keep up with all the different style names?

Also.. I thought it would be this

table.name {....style} or
table.td {......style} ?

Today I was trying to fix something.. the site added a subnav.ascx and it
worked for the entire site, but one page in the site is a different doman
that re-directs to the parent domain. It has it's own individual design, but
inherits the subnav.ascx page. The code in that page worked on the entire
site, except this domain page ... it has it's own style sheet that overrides
the default style. This style sheet had so many different names and classes
and lines of code on it, it took me about 2 hours testing before I just
finally removed about half the code in the style sheet and then the separate
domain page worked.. but I had to code it's own subnav.ascx page and alter
the code for it to accommodate the various background color and other
differences. It was satifsying to finally fix it, but sheeesh.. if all the
code would have just been on the html page I could have figured it out in
half the time. That subnav.ascx page also have a picky script on it that
onMouseover had a popup box with a msg in it. It was a fun challenge, tho.
That's kind of what I do alot.. is figure out how to make things works in an
environment designed by a committee. LOL

 

[dorayme]

How do you keep up with all the different style names?

Also.. I thought it would be this

table.name {....style}

You are not wrong about this. It could be this OK and it would
even be a good idea to be this in some contexts. But this more
careful specific way is the start of a road that can lead to the
very problem you hate, complexity in stylesheets.

If all you have on the page are elements of a certain class
"name" that you want styled a certain way then

..name {...}

will get those elements to have the styles listed. This is quite
legal and correct. And it would save you having to nail each
element down by the CSS sheet with such as

table.name {...}
p.name {...}
div.name {...}

If you particularly wanted all the elements of this class to
share these styles, no need to nail down so specific.

..name {...}

will do fine. It roughly means 'any element of class "name"
should be this and that and the other thing stylewise'

On the other hand, if say, you *mostly* want all elements of
class "name" to have certain styles, let's say color: red, but
you did not want a particular element to have all these styles,
say you wanted the Ps of class "name" to have green text and
maybe other things different you can add:

p.name {color: green;...}

 

[Jenn]

On 5/7/2010 4:38 PM, Jenn wrote:

No, it is not _I_ who will have to make the adjustment. <snip>
This is a group to discuss CODE. If you want a chit-chat group, then
programming news groups are the wrong place. You get no _special_ wavers
because you are a woman. To do so would be sexist. Sorry, but such is
life.

All groups have chit-chat that goes on. This one is no different. It is
also not sexist to approach people based on who you know them to be. People
who have a long history are already familiar with who everyone is and their
history (what they like/don't like, how they communicate, family stuff,
male/female, etc.) Why treat a new comer any different and do the logical
thing and get to know that new comer first before you decide you have a
place in that persons life to criticize their work?

Also, no one is "forcing" anything on you. You are the one that needs an
attitude adjustment there.

That is your opinion, which you're entitled to. I'm also entitled to to say
"back off" if I'm being ganged slapped by a bunch of men who call themselves
professional coders. Thus far, I have not seen one professional website
produced by anyone as an example of their work. I've only seen hobby sites
that are said to pass validation.

They make PROFESSIONAL criticisms of your CODE and coding techniques --
not you.

On the contrary, I have to recognize they are first professionals before I
will consider their advice. They did not only go after my 5 to 10 yr old
sites they went after me personally. That is not professional at all.

Did very many of them lack HUMAN civility in doing so? Absolutely! And
that is very wrong. That caused you to take it personally.

Not only that, it WAS personal. I put alot of myself, my time, and my
effort into sites where I was paid to do so... I did the best I could at
the time with the skills I had at the time, to work in the browser(s) that
were popular at that time.... and all of that was sufficient to be paid as a
professional 5 to 10 yrs ago. All most of you did was tear it apart, make
fun of it, and then joke about how incapable I must be. Additionally, I
told you all that I have been alone in what I do from the beginning and that
this is the first time I've attempted to find a group of people who enjoy
coding websites like I do. I don't know anyone in real life who doesn't
look at me like I'm an alien from Mars when I tell them I'm a webmaster. My
own family doesn't really understand what I talk about when I tell them
about a difficult coding issue I figured out. My current job I have access
to other webmasters via email, but that still does not produce an
environment of discussion like this can, and I'm still pretty much on my own
to figure out how to give my employers what they want every day.

One other thing I've had to face in my local market is gender bias because
what I do is a mainly male dominated market. So, at least this is what my
husband tells me... I have to work twice as hard and accomplish twice as
much to be taken seriously and get a decent job. I've managed to get many
good clients, one 3 yr part-time position, and my current 4 yr full-time
position in that environment.

Now, I ask you .... what reaction did you really expect from me... that is
assuming you can even put yourself in my position for a moment or two? If
those of you who post here have NO understanding of who I am, you will also
have no understanding of what I may need from you, or even how to
communicate with me. I'm not a man, and I haven't had access to being
around other coders who are just bulls tromping their way through someones
work. I don't appreciate that sort of approach.

However, all you had to do is shut up and ignore it. IOW, get a little
thicker skin.

LOL gee... should I just also bow down to you so called professionals and
kiss your CSS god and validator god and thank you for tromping on my work
that I share with you?

No one is standing over your shoulder at the terminal when you are coding
and "forcing" you to take their advice. What they ARE saying, albeit it
none too nicely, is "If you won't take our advice, then don't bother us
again".

Hey, I'm good with that! I'd rather discuss it with a very few people who
are at least polite about it and interested in TALKING TO me as a human
being as opposed to squashing me in their attempt to make themselves look
smarter and more alpha male-ish. I don't need nasty people to give me
unsolicited advice. They can either addess me with respect and politeness,
or click their killfile, which will make me even happier. I don't consider
such people to have a pinky-full of professionalism, anyway.

Frankly, at the very least when it comes to validation, they are correct.

I'm not convinced ... sorry. I'm interested, but at this point, it's not
top on my TO DO list.

In real life -- ABSOLUTELY! On a technical forum discussing technical
matters, it is TOTALLY irrelevant.

THIS is real life for people who make their money on the internet. Do you
not understand that?

Tell me, if you want to buy tickets to something and there is a line of 20
men waiting, do you go to the end of the line or try to jump ahead of
everyone because of "ladies first"? I highly doubt that you would.

I don't follow the crowd. I look for a second line that is shorter, or even
scan about and look to see if a new line is going to open. Only sometimes,
am I actually having to get at the end of that long line.

 

[Jenn]

On 5/7/2010 5:01 PM, dorayme wrote:

Me too. That is the way it should be.

Why? If it were that way... you'd not be allowed to joke around with anyone.

 

[Jenn]

You miss the point here, Jenn. You are asking about CONTENT. That is a
totally separate issue from how that content is coded. The coding needs
to take into account many things:

The point was that many websites .. the finished product that people see
when they go to a webpage, can reflect the gender of the person who put it
together.

Question: What is the most complicated site you've designed and built? Got
a link?

 

[Jenn]

I don't know who Ed Mullen is. Actually, I am a very young 68. I live in
the greatest place on earth for people over 55 (www.thevillages.com). I
play golf three times a week and I also work about 40 hours a week from my
home. Most of my emphasis is on server-side coding using php. I do as
much as I have to with html, css and javascript (though with a LOT of
AJAX). When it comes to layout and design, I usually leave that part to
my daughter who works for me (and also does php). She was more like Jenn,
a web designer, until I taught her php and turned her into a web
developer.

You are so much *younger* than I am... and if this were a group that
only discussed technical stuff all the time, I'd never know this about you.
You're daughter is lucky she has had someone to teach her ... I've had no
help in that respect.