• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

XF 1.0 Semantic HTML

Kier

XenForo Developer
Staff member
#1

Attachments

#6
I like this a lot! I bet Google does, too. A question though. How will BBCodes be extracted? Will they still have their original format, or will they have raw HTML?
 

Enigma

Well-known member
#9
First I'll say excellent job! It's better than the competitors. One thing that I'd ask for is that all the "site chrome"/navigation stuff/boilerplate stuff come after the page's content. This is good for SEO (search engines like the content first) and accessibility purposes (screenreaders, for example). Using CSS, you move the navigation/boilerplate stuff up to the top for a regular page view, but if you remove styles, it would come at the bottom. A standard Wikipedia page (Cows, for instance) exemplifies this well. View it and the boiler plate stuff is at the top and left. View it without page styles and you get a "jump to navigation" link near the top, and the content immediately follows. At the end of the HTML are all the lists of navigation and action links.

EDIT: XenForo already does this. My bad.
 
F

Floris

Guest
#11
Having bad eye sight, simply having something that looks beautiful is one thing, but the ability to turn off js and css and still read the page clearly, is very nice. Just because html5 recommendation is respected.
 

Kier

XenForo Developer
Staff member
#14
First I'll say excellent job! It's better than the competitors. One thing that I'd ask for is that all the "site chrome"/navigation stuff/boilerplate stuff come after the page's content. This is good for SEO (search engines like the content first) and accessibility purposes (screenreaders, for example)
We already do that...

 

Attachments

Kier

XenForo Developer
Staff member
#16
Officially I have no concrete answer for you on that, but I can tell you that we test in Firefox 4.x and 3.6, Google Chrome (latest), Apple Safari (latest), Opera (latest) on both Windows and Mac, Internet Explorer versons 8, 7 and 6, and with Safari under iOS.

The rendering of all those is virtually identical, with the exception of Internet Explorer which loses shadows and rounded corners, and then gracefully degrades below IE8. IE6 still needs a little work, but I think you'll find the system perfectly useable when browsing with it, and it won't make your eyes bleed to look at it.
 
F

Floris

Guest
#17
The top 5 browsers, latest stable versions.
With legacy support for older versions, and some mobile versions.

Chrome 4 and 5, but previous should work
Firefox 3.6 and 3.7, but 3.0 should work too
Safari 4 and 5, but safari 3 should work too
Operate 10.5 and 10.6, but anything over 9 should work too
Internet Explorer 8, but 6 and 7 should work too.

Where should work = core functionality works, smexy stuff probably doesn't. such as shadows, rounded corners, wysiwyg editors or few other special effects.

If you have a modern browser, and newer version of it, it will work. If your browser supports xhtml 1.0 or higher, and css1 or higher, it will do just fine. If it supports html5 and css3, it will do even better.

I've run XF on most of them, on Mac/Windows, and I have not tested Ubuntu desktop yet. I haven't found a browser yet that showed 'major' issues or broken designs.
 

Kier

XenForo Developer
Staff member
#19
So you do. My apologies. :) I had looked at the page source a couple days ago and for some reason I had the idea that it wasn't quite like that. Good job and keep up the good work!
Cheers :)

Apologies unnecessary - actually you're right - it wasn't like that a few days ago, I was waiting for a few styling issues to get resolved before I made the step to move it.