[J-core] J-Core: Style Sheet Donation

[Rob Landley]

On 07/29/2016 02:39 PM, Santiago Gil wrote:
> Hi Rob.
> 
>> +    <h1 id="06-02-2016"><a href="#06-02-2016">April 2, 2016</a></h1>
>> -<h1><a name="06-02-2016" /><a href="#06-02-2016">April 2, 2016</a></h1>
>>
>> Huh. I didn't know putting id= on an h1 tag was an option that #anchor
>> navigation would work with. (I have an old python script that expects
>> the older format to make an rss feed from header lines formatted that
>> way, but it should be easy enough to fix up.)
>>
> Yep, sorry about that. I changed that because in html5 the 'name'
> attribute is deprecated.

I assume that <b> becoming <strong> is a similar deprecation?

>> You added <code> tags. I personally avoid "semantic" tags that don't
>> have a clear descriptive meaning (bad experiences with docbook), but
>> I'll bow to your judgement here. :)
>>
> Why do you say it doesn't have a clear descriptive meaning? It's being
> used in the proper context: for displaying code. (An alternative to
> that would be to define a css class and wrap the code in 'div' tags,
> but generates more typing than opening and closing 'code' tags, and
> seems more of an ad-hoc solution).

Sorry, I wasn't clear. (I meant I try to use tags that indicate how to
display, like bold/underline/size, rather than more abstract tags that
indicate <sarcasm> or <sponsored> where it's not clear to me how that
should be indicated visually. I think <code> means <monospaced> (which
used to be <tt> but is now <kbd> apparently?)

But it's moot because you have a stylesheet, so you can define a new
<fruitbasket> tag and have it display exactly how you want to. :)

I've checked in the <code> tags and typo fixes in index.html, working on
the next batch now. (I'm peeling off some smaller commits before
changing the headers and introducing the stylesheets.)

>> +    the <a
>> href="http%3A%2F%2Flandley.net%2Fqemu%2F2008-01-15.html%23Jan_17%2C_2008_-_%5BPATCH_0_5%5D_Enable_building_of_op.o_on_gcc4">problems
>> with that approach</a>
>>
>> Possibly slightly overzealous escaping? :)
> Yeah, I over-escaped it (no character ran away :P). I think the only
> problematic characters were a pair of square brackets, though.
> .

I can fix it up, just making sure there wasn't a reason I didn't
understand. :)

Thanks,

Rob