On Fri, 2010-02-12 at 16:03 -0500, Andrew Ballard wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Ashley Sheridan
> wrote:
> > There's a good reason for OpenOffice having some difficulties with MS
> > Office documents. Back when MS rushed through getting their document
> > standard ratified by ISO (whi
On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Ashley Sheridan
wrote:
> There's a good reason for OpenOffice having some difficulties with MS
> Office documents. Back when MS rushed through getting their document
> standard ratified by ISO (which itself is a whole other story) they
> didn't explain all the deta
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 22:38 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 12:13:11PM +1100, clanc...@cybec.com.au wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:18:18 +, a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk (Ashley
>>> Sheridan) wrote:
>>>
On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 10:16 +1100,
On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 22:38 -0500, Paul M Foster wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 12:13:11PM +1100, clanc...@cybec.com.au wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:18:18 +, a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk (Ashley
> > Sheridan) wrote:
> >
> > >On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 10:16 +1100, Ross McKay wrote:
> > >
>
On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 12:13:11PM +1100, clanc...@cybec.com.au wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:18:18 +, a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk (Ashley
> Sheridan) wrote:
>
> >On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 10:16 +1100, Ross McKay wrote:
> >
> ...
> >
> >There's a good reason for OpenOffice having some dif
On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:18:18 +, a...@ashleysheridan.co.uk (Ashley Sheridan)
wrote:
>On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 10:16 +1100, Ross McKay wrote:
>
...
>
>There's a good reason for OpenOffice having some difficulties with MS
>Office documents. Back when MS rushed through getting their document
On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 10:16 +1100, Ross McKay wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:12:01 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
>
> >I'm doing quite a bit more work in public sector these days. Recently ne
> >department finally did away with IE6 and moved to IE7. Here's what I had
> >to do to accomodate this
On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 10:12:01 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
>I'm doing quite a bit more work in public sector these days. Recently ne
>department finally did away with IE6 and moved to IE7. Here's what I had
>to do to accomodate this gotcha:
>
> Nothing
>
>See, that was tough. Why was it so h
tedd wrote:
> At 1:38 PM -0500 2/10/10, Robert Cummings wrote:
>> Agreed. Those make sense to demarcate the structure layout of the
>> document... but still, for styling the class makes more sense since it
>> keeps the specificity low and easy to override (especially true for
>> skinnable apps). In
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 19:09 +, Lester Caine wrote:
> Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> > Lester Caine wrote:
> >> Since a large section of our USER base is still tied to W2k and does not
> >> have access to install other software, the call for IE6 to die is STILL
> >> somewhat premature!
> >> What is ne
At 1:38 PM -0500 2/10/10, Robert Cummings wrote:
Agreed. Those make sense to demarcate the structure layout of the
document... but still, for styling the class makes more sense since
it keeps the specificity low and easy to override (especially true
for skinnable apps). In my experience I've se
Andrew Ballard wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Robert Cummings wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
"The most common misconception of how this element should be used is for
the standard sidebar." - see: http://html5doctor.com/understanding-aside/
Unfortunatley I examined that side quite thorou
Robert Cummings wrote:
> Nathan Rixham wrote:
>> Robert Cummings wrote:
>>> Michael A. Peters wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
> Michael A. Peters wrote:
>> It took very little work since I was essentially doing that already.
>> aside is the most logical html 5 layout tag for describing
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 3:48 PM, Robert Cummings wrote:
> Nathan Rixham wrote:
>> "The most common misconception of how this element should be used is for
>> the standard sidebar." - see: http://html5doctor.com/understanding-aside/
>
> Unfortunatley I examined that side quite thoroughly and got sm
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
through the document and contextually near to the information to which
the aside relat
Robert Cummings wrote:
> Michael A. Peters wrote:
>> Nathan Rixham wrote:
>>> Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
> Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
> through the document and contextually near to the information to which
> the asi
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
through the document and contextually near to the information to which
the aside relates. The entire sidebar seems a bit gratuitous
Michael A. Peters wrote:
> Nathan Rixham wrote:
>> Michael A. Peters wrote:
>>> Robert Cummings wrote:
>>>
Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
through the document and contextually near to the information to which
the aside relates. The entire sidebar s
Nathan Rixham wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
through the document and contextually near to the information to which
the aside relates. The entire sidebar seems a bit gratuitous as an
"aside". Sure it's a
Michael A. Peters wrote:
> Robert Cummings wrote:
>
>>
>> Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
>> through the document and contextually near to the information to which
>> the aside relates. The entire sidebar seems a bit gratuitous as an
>> "aside". Sure it's aside,
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
through the document and contextually near to the information to which
the aside relates. The entire sidebar seems a bit gratuitous as an
"aside". Sure it's aside, but it's not e
Robert Cummings wrote:
Many government documents have the concept of "aside" as appearing
through the document and contextually near to the information to which
the aside relates. The entire sidebar seems a bit gratuitous as an
"aside". Sure it's aside, but it's not exactly the semantic mean
Shawn McKenzie wrote:
Lester Caine wrote:
Since a large section of our USER base is still tied to W2k and does not
have access to install other software, the call for IE6 to die is STILL
somewhat premature!
What is needed is someone to kick M$ to sort the mess out by at least
allowing IE8 to ins
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Just a word of thought... if you're doing styling... use classes and
not IDs. Use of IDs for styling is very often indicative of
inexperience, inability, or lack of understanding with respect to CSS.
I use ID when ther
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Just a word of thought... if you're doing styling... use classes and not
IDs. Use of IDs for styling is very often indicative of inexperience,
inability, or lack of understanding with respect to CSS.
I use ID when there will only be one element
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Robert Cummings wrote:
Just a word of thought... if you're doing styling... use classes and
not IDs. Use of IDs for styling is very often indicative of
inexperience, inability, or lack of understanding with respect to CSS.
I use ID when there will only be one eleme
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 02:56:36PM +1100, clanc...@cybec.com.au wrote:
>
> The interesting things in my websites go on behind-the-scenes, in the PHP,
> and produce
> relatively straightforward HTML. I have avoided the well-known bugs in IE6,
> and think my
> webpages display correctly on any of
Robert Cummings wrote:
Just a word of thought... if you're doing styling... use classes and not
IDs. Use of IDs for styling is very often indicative of inexperience,
inability, or lack of understanding with respect to CSS.
I use ID when there will only be one element that needs to be styled
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
What about search engines? Will there be any impact on these,
particularly with regards to semantic content?
I expect semantic markup to (eventually) improve how pages are indexed.
Also, are there any browsers that would fall over with unknown tags? I
know IE use
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 13:25 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
> Bob McConnell wrote:
>
>> Our SOP is to generate standards compliant pages, validate them with
>> Firefox and the HTML Validator add-on, then deal with the deviant
>> browsers. It's a l
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 13:25 -0500, Robert Cummings wrote:
>
> Michael A. Peters wrote:
> > Bob McConnell wrote:
> >
> >> Our SOP is to generate standards compliant pages, validate them with
> >> Firefox and the HTML Validator add-on, then deal with the deviant
> >> browsers. It's a lot less work
Michael A. Peters wrote:
Bob McConnell wrote:
Our SOP is to generate standards compliant pages, validate them with
Firefox and the HTML Validator add-on, then deal with the deviant
browsers. It's a lot less work than trying to do it the other way
around. There are a few minor issues, such as
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 10:20 -0800, Michael A. Peters wrote:
> Bob McConnell wrote:
>
> >
> > Our SOP is to generate standards compliant pages, validate them with
> > Firefox and the HTML Validator add-on, then deal with the deviant
> > browsers. It's a lot less work than trying to do it the othe
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
The W3C validator rejects that autocomplete attribute because it still
isn't in any valid standard. Some browsers have introduced it, and PCI
requires it to be there for browsers that recognise it, but it's not a
good security feature, as browsers don't have to honor it
Bob McConnell wrote:
Our SOP is to generate standards compliant pages, validate them with
Firefox and the HTML Validator add-on, then deal with the deviant
browsers. It's a lot less work than trying to do it the other way
around. There are a few minor issues, such as W3C still refusing to
allow
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 11:20 -0500, Bob McConnell wrote:
> From: Ashley Sheridan
> > On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 10:17 -0500, Bob McConnell wrote:
> >> From: Robert Cummings
> >>> Lester Caine wrote:
> James McLean wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
> >> On Thu, 04 Feb 201
From: Ashley Sheridan
> On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 10:17 -0500, Bob McConnell wrote:
>> From: Robert Cummings
>>> Lester Caine wrote:
James McLean wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
>> On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem
>> Maas) wrote:
>>>
Bob McConnell wrote:
From: Robert Cummings
Lester Caine wrote:
James McLean wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem
Maas) wrote:
as for using IE6 ... WTF ... you do realise this is essentially a
web
developers maili
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 10:17 -0500, Bob McConnell wrote:
> From: Robert Cummings
> > Lester Caine wrote:
> >> James McLean wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem
> Maas) wrote:
> > as for using IE6 ... WTF .
From: Robert Cummings
> Lester Caine wrote:
>> James McLean wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem
Maas) wrote:
> as for using IE6 ... WTF ... you do realise this is essentially a
web
> developers mailing list r
Richard Quadling wrote:
On 10 February 2010 13:02, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
I've not had any personal experience with the public sector, but I have
heard stories from those who have. By all accounts, it seems that most
of the public sector is still stuck in the dark ages with regards to
technolog
Ashley Sheridan wrote:
I've not had any personal experience with the public sector, but I have
heard stories from those who have. By all accounts, it seems that most
of the public sector is still stuck in the dark ages with regards to
technology, which could go some way to explaining the abysmal
Lester Caine wrote:
James McLean wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem Maas) wrote:
as for using IE6 ... WTF ... you do realise this is essentially a web
developers mailing list right?
The interesting things in my we
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 09:41 -0500, tedd wrote:
> At 7:02 AM -0600 2/10/10, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> >Lester Caine wrote:
> >> Since a large section of our USER base is still tied to W2k and does not
> >> have access to install other software, the call for IE6 to die is STILL
> >> somewhat premat
At 7:02 AM -0600 2/10/10, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
Lester Caine wrote:
Since a large section of our USER base is still tied to W2k and does not
have access to install other software, the call for IE6 to die is STILL
somewhat premature!
What is needed is someone to kick M$ to sort the mess out b
On 10 February 2010 13:02, Ashley Sheridan wrote:
> I've not had any personal experience with the public sector, but I have
> heard stories from those who have. By all accounts, it seems that most
> of the public sector is still stuck in the dark ages with regards to
> technology, which could go s
On Wed, 2010-02-10 at 07:02 -0600, Shawn McKenzie wrote:
> Lester Caine wrote:
> > Since a large section of our USER base is still tied to W2k and does not
> > have access to install other software, the call for IE6 to die is STILL
> > somewhat premature!
> > What is needed is someone to kick M$ t
Lester Caine wrote:
> Since a large section of our USER base is still tied to W2k and does not
> have access to install other software, the call for IE6 to die is STILL
> somewhat premature!
> What is needed is someone to kick M$ to sort the mess out by at least
> allowing IE8 to install on W2k mac
James McLean wrote:
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem Maas) wrote:
as for using IE6 ... WTF ... you do realise this is essentially a web
developers mailing list right?
The interesting things in my websites go on behind-t
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 2:26 PM, wrote:
> On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem Maas) wrote:
>>as for using IE6 ... WTF ... you do realise this is essentially a web
>>developers mailing list right?
>
> The interesting things in my websites go on behind-the-scenes, in t
On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 02:39:03 +0100, joc...@iamjochem.com (Jochem Maas) wrote:
>Op 2/4/10 1:32 AM, clanc...@cybec.com.au schreef:
>> Recently I have frequently found, especially in the morning (GMT 2200 -
>> 0200), that I can
>> open a bookmark in the manual, for example
>> http://www.php.net/man
Op 2/4/10 1:32 AM, clanc...@cybec.com.au schreef:
> Recently I have frequently found, especially in the morning (GMT 2200 -
> 0200), that I can
> open a bookmark in the manual, for example
> http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.image.php.
> But if I then do a search of any type I get 'The page cannot
On Thu, 2010-02-04 at 11:32 +1100, clanc...@cybec.com.au wrote:
> Recently I have frequently found, especially in the morning (GMT 2200 -
> 0200), that I can
> open a bookmark in the manual, for example
> http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.image.php.
> But if I then do a search of any type I get '
Recently I have frequently found, especially in the morning (GMT 2200 - 0200),
that I can
open a bookmark in the manual, for example
http://www.php.net/manual/en/ref.image.php.
But if I then do a search of any type I get 'The page cannot be displayed'. I
then cannot
reach any page, including th
Richard Quadling wrote:
> $ pecl install haru
> [...]
> $ phd -f pdf -t phppdf -d .manual.xml
I installed haru, yet when I try the phd command, I get a "class
'HaruDoc' not found" error :( Has this happened to anyone else?
James
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe
2009/7/7 Angus Mann :
> Hi all. I realize this question has been asked before and I've found
> responses in the archive, but none of the links work now, or the files they
> point to are old or unsuitable.
>
> I'd like to print the most recent PHP manual to paper, so I need it in a
> format that'
Hi all. I realize this question has been asked before and I've found responses
in the archive, but none of the links work now, or the files they point to are
old or unsuitable.
I'd like to print the most recent PHP manual to paper, so I need it in a format
that's suitable. I've downloaded it fr
ÃmìtVërmå wrote:
Please turn off your mail client's request for read receipts when
sending to a mailing list.
--
John C. Nichel IV
Programmer/System Admin (ÜberGeek)
Dot Com Holdings of Buffalo
716.856.9675
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, v
Good.. you went straight into their vault to those PDF :)
tedd wrote:
Hi ALL
I am looking out for PHP Manual in PDF Format
Thanks in Advance
Regards
Kaushal
Try Google:
http://iwing.cpe.ku.ac.th/tutorial/PHP/PHPmanual.pdf
I'm sure there are others.
tedd
--
PHP General Mailing Lis
Hi ALL
I am looking out for PHP Manual in PDF Format
Thanks in Advance
Regards
Kaushal
Try Google:
http://iwing.cpe.ku.ac.th/tutorial/PHP/PHPmanual.pdf
I'm sure there are others.
tedd
--
http://sperling.com
Hi ALL
I am looking out for PHP Manual in PDF Format
Thanks in Advance
Regards
Kaushal
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> > Does anyone still have the tarfile for the manual. On the website they
> > announce that these manuals will be redeployed shortly but this message
> > is already three weeks there and I need this (as always ) urgently.
> > Thanx in advance for sending it .
> Best I have is a copy that was las
wim wrote:
Does anyone still have the tarfile for the manual. On the website they
announce that these manuals will be redeployed shortly but this message
is already three weeks there and I need this (as always ) urgently.
Thanx in advance for sending it .
Wim
Best I have is a copy that was last
Does anyone still have the tarfile for the manual. On the website they
announce that these manuals will be redeployed shortly but this message
is already three weeks there and I need this (as always ) urgently.
Thanx in advance for sending it .
Wim
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.ne
Hello,
John Nichel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Wasn't the php manual with user comments available for download
> at one time? Is it still there and I'm just not seeing it? If
> it was never there, can I suggest that as an option for the
> manual download from you good people at PHP? Damn,
I would say the dynamic nature of this guide requires it to be online, unless
you want to make some sort of "update" feature. Otherwise you would only be
downloading a snapshot. And then comes into play creating and maintaing all
the various "snapshots" of this ever changing document. IMHO, I
Wasn't the php manual with user comments available for download at one
time? Is it still there and I'm just not seeing it? If it was never
there, can I suggest that as an option for the manual download from you
good people at PHP? Damn, I'm just full of questions.
--
PHP General Mailing List
On Sunday 27 October 2002 02:45, Stephen wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was just wondering if the entire PHP manual at php.net was published into
> a book or not. I was going to print it out once but it turned out to be
> about 1000+ pages...
It would be out of date as soon as it's published and before it
Hello,
I was just wondering if the entire PHP manual at php.net was published into a book or
not. I was going to print it out once but it turned out to be about 1000+ pages...
Thanks,
Stephen Craton
http://www.melchior.us
http://php.melchior.us
Where can I download the php manual with the user notes (in html format)
Thank You
___
http://www.SaudiABM.com
___
About Islam :
http://home2.swipnet.se/~w-20479/Audio.htm
http://sultan.org
___
--
PHP General Mailing List (htt
You can get here:
http://monica.inf.ufsc.br/Docs/MySQL.pdf
see you.
Augusto
On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Andreas D. Landmark wrote:
> At 03.08.2001 10:36, Pere Vineta wrote:
> >Dear friends,
> >
> >Any one of you know when PHP Manual in PDF Format will be available?
> >
> >Thanks
>
> Probably when Ad
> Probably when Adobe stops picking on innocent cryptographers pointing out
> weaknesses in their software and stops hiding the source for what they
forced
> through as the defacto standard for document distribution...
Last I heard, Adobe had dropped charges, and it was the US Government that
won
01 3:51 PM
Subject: Re: [PHP] PHP Manual in PDF Format
> You can get here:
>
> http://monica.inf.ufsc.br/Docs/MySQL.pdf
>
> see you.
>
> Augusto
>
> On Fri, 3 Aug 2001, Andreas D. Landmark wrote:
>
> > At 03.08.2001 10:36, Pere Vineta wrote:
> > >Dear frie
At 03.08.2001 10:36, Pere Vineta wrote:
>Dear friends,
>
>Any one of you know when PHP Manual in PDF Format will be available?
>
>Thanks
Probably when Adobe stops picking on innocent cryptographers pointing out
weaknesses in their software and stops hiding the source for what they forced
through
Dear friends,
Any one of you know when PHP Manual in PDF Format will be available?
Thanks
Pere
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PR
Hi,
Anyone knows if there is a XML version of the PHP manual ?
Ovidiu
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To contact the list administrators, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks for that, and sorry.
I had looked everywhere else except there.
That should have been my first option to check out.
YoBro
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
: On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:50:49PM +1300, YoBro wrote:
:
: > Does anybody know of,
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 12:50:49PM +1300, YoBro wrote:
> Does anybody know of, or have the ability to convert the PHP html manual
> into an EBook for the likes of a palm pilot or Franklin reader?
Try http://php.net/docs.php and look under Other Versions.
-Egon
--
http://www.linuxtag.de/
http:
Does anybody know of, or have the ability to convert the PHP html manual
into an EBook for the likes of a palm pilot or Franklin reader?
This could really help for around the office and meetings.
--
Regards,
YoBro
-
DO NOT REPLY TO TH
79 matches
Mail list logo
