web-standards

As some of you would of heard the hgroup element is being removed from the HTML5 Specification . (For more info, see the W3C HTML Working Group's decision on request to drop hgroup from HTML5 on the W3C's Public Mailing List archives.) Now I'm currently working on the redesign of a site using this tag that creates a way of adding a sub heading. My current thoughts are to just add another hX tag under the main header, but I'm not sure if this would be semantic enough to do so. <h1>Darren Reay</h1> <h2>A developing web developer</h2> <p>Hello World</p> Could anyone either come up with a

I've been wracking my brain over this one, google searches don't really have much in the way of help or even documentation of this problem but it's greatly affecting my current conversion to a mobile-friendly design. Everywhere I go, everyone's touting using rem -based layouts as the new gold standard, and on the surface the virtues of this approach seem ideal (full accesibility support for both reference pixel based scaling and font-size scaling to support many DPIs and many screen sizes / settings). However I've run into a rather large snag, I'm finding that Chrome (and possibly all webkit

As someone who has tried to find a way to help content authors develop and maintain big web sites by creating (HTML) components for years, I'm really excited to see web components gaining tracction at w3c, google and mozilla. But it seems to me that, there is no measure against javascript library bloat in the specifications. Say that I develop component A which has a dependency for underscore.js and want to use components B and C which have dependencies on lodash.js version 1.*, etc. I don't see any way to flag dependencies and library versions. This could lead to huge library bloat when we

Are there any naming conventions or standards for Url parameters to be followed. I generally use camel casing like userId or itemNumber . As I am about to start off a new project, I was searching whether there is anything for this, and could not find anything. I am not looking at this from a perspective of language or framework but more as a general web standard. I recommend reading Cool URI's Don't Change by Tim Berners-Lee for an insight into this question. If you're using parameters in your URI, it might be better to rewrite them to reflect what the data actually means. So instead of having

Imagine somebody today, March 1 2011, has never written a webpage and would like to know what they should read to start building web pages today. They don't care about backwards compatibility, but want to build with web standards so that they will be portable amongst as many browsers as possible (Yes I'm saying I do not care if my web pages don't work with IE 4-8, Opera, Netscape, Mozilla, etc, I really don't care, because I've never used them, and that's likely true about those who will use the tools I'm building). This person has zero biases or bad habits because they've never done it before

I have a reacurring problem. I code nice standards compliant code only to have it fail due to ampersands within some of the hyperlink urls. Does anyone know of a work around or hack for this. Thanks You should URL Encode the hyperlinks, so all characters are turned into a valid ASCII format and don't contain any (X)HTML entities. For C# use HttpUtility.UrlEncode , for PHP urlencode , for JavaScript encodeURI , etc... Finding the right method for the language you're using shouldn't be that hard. I code nice standards compliant code only to have it fail due to ampersands within some of the