 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneralPHPASPPerlColdFusionFlashHTML, CSS, ScriptsBrowsers |
Webmaster Forum / HTML, CSS, Scripts / HTML / August 2008Anchor with TYPE attribute
Is there any *practical* use of writing, say, <a href="book.pdf" type="application/pdf"> with a TYPE attribute?  SignatureTop-posting. What's the most irritating thing on Usenet? > Is there any *practical* use of writing, say, > > <a href="book.pdf" type="application/pdf"> > > with a TYPE attribute? If you do, you can use CSS to mark up pdf links differently from other links. a[type=application/pdf] { before: url("pdf-image.png"); } For instance. SignatureJoost Diepenmaat | blog: http://joost.zeekat.nl/ | work: http://zeekat.nl/ > Is there any *practical* use of writing, say, > > <a href="book.pdf" type="application/pdf"> > > with a TYPE attribute? Not much, but in addition to potential use in styling (with attribute selectors, not supported by IE 6), they might be used for site management e.g. to find all links to PDF files. Of course this requires software that pays attention to such attributes. Moreover, on Firefox and relatives, if the user right-clicks on a link and selects "Properties", he will see information about the media type. So not much, really. Yucca In article <Pine.GSO.4.63.0808251633210.2568@s5b004.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>, > Is there any *practical* use of writing, say, > > <a href="book.pdf" type="application/pdf"> > > with a TYPE attribute? Yes: <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/WWW/userfriendlierhyperlinks/>. SignatureSander Tekelenburg, <http://www.euronet.nl/%7Etekelenb/> > In article > <Pine.GSO.4.63.0808251633210.2568@s5b004.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Yes: <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/WWW/userfriendlierhyperlinks/>. Interesting page, Sander. I realize the page is a bit old and so you may not want to change it, but since it *is* on the WWW (and you're pointing to it in 2008), maybe you'd like to consider a few of my remarks, respectfully submitted: 1. It seems like a cool idea to me for you to point to a list of MIME types. I guess this would be the place: <http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/>. Or maybe there's a better list somewhere. (Assuming "MIME types" is really the appropriate term. I see e.g. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_media_type>.) 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861603806/dependant.html . 3. The word "known" is missing an "n". Search for "kown". I'm still poking around the site and, while I see it's a bit old, it looks interesting. (BTW, I wish more Web authors would so conscientiously date their publishings.) HAND. SignatureJohn Possessive "its" has no apostrophe. Even on the Internet. Pedants could rule the world and make it a better place, if the rest of you would just *understand*. [...] > 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See > http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861603806/dependant.html . No, dependant is acceptable, as probably a UK variant since it is more like French. It's a bit like "advertize" which was being quibbled over the other day-- in UK English "advertise" is also acceptable. Many of those optional variant UK spellings are basically French. "dependent" and "advertize" are closer to the original Latin and Greek respectively. >probably a UK variant >variant UK spellings I tend to think of the UK spelling as being the standard, and the US as being the variant -- and I was born and raised in the USA. SignatureGuy Macon <http://www.GuyMacon.com/> >>probably a UK variant > >>variant UK spellings > > I tend to think of the UK spelling as being the standard, and the > US as being the variant -- and I was born and raised in the USA. I say "variant" UK spellings because dependent and advertize are both also correct in UK English and in my opinion preferred. > I tend to think of the UK spelling as being the standard, and the > US as being the variant -- and I was born and raised in the USA. There are (largely) two sorts of divergent spellings: * 17th century spellings that the US has preserved and the UK has shifted. * Webster's fiddling 8-( > I tend to think of the UK spelling as being the standard, and the > US as being the variant -- and I was born and raised in the USA. In most cases where US and UK usage of English differs, the US version is often (perhaps usually) closer to the original. I suspect this is because the US was more isolated than the UK for much of its history. British English has always been strongly influenced by our European neighbours, and in the past, colonies. SignatureSteve Swift http://www.swiftys.org.uk/swifty.html http://www.ringers.org.uk Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:46:44 +0100 from Steve Swift <Steve.J.Swift@gmail.com>: > In most cases where US and UK usage of English differs, the US version > is often (perhaps usually) closer to the original. Correct. All or most of those -ize, -ise verbs verbs come from Greek verbs in -izo, so the -ise spelling is further from the original. hat doesn't mean they're wrong in the UK, of course. SignatureStan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com/ HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/ validator: http://validator.w3.org/ CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ Why We Won't Help You: http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/05/05/why_we_wont_help_you > Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:46:44 +0100 from Steve Swift > <Steve.J.Swift@gmail.com>: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > verbs in -izo, so the -ise spelling is further from the original. hat > doesn't mean they're wrong in the UK, of course. I heartily agree, but try telling that to M$'s spell checker! > [...] >> 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See >> http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861603806/dependant.html . > > No, dependant is acceptable, as probably a UK variant since it is more > like French. The OED distinguishes between the noun, "dependant, dependent" and the adjective, "dependent". > It's a bit like "advertize" which was being quibbled over the other > day-- in UK English "advertise" is also acceptable. In UK English and in US English only "advertise" is standard. OED only shows "advertize" as an "also-found-as" in the "advertise" article, in the same manner as "aduertyse" is given as one. Merriam-Webster unabridged says "advertize" is a variant spelling. > Many of those optional variant UK spellings are basically French. > "dependent" and "advertize" are closer to the original Latin and Greek > respectively. The "-ise" in "advertise" came from the French infix "-iss-" [is] found in some -ir verbs (likewise, "choisir", "finir"), unlike most English "-ize/-ise" suffixes, at least a few of which came from the French verb ending "-iser" [ize], and have the Greek origin of which you wrote. >> [...] >>> 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > The OED distinguishes between the noun, "dependant, dependent" and the > adjective, "dependent". I don't have an OED (spent the money on a new car instead), but checked the Collins dictionary. It allows either spelling for the adjective, but only "dependant" for the noun. cf. pendant (not pendent) for something you hang around your neck. Also a noun. Not to be confused with pedant. >> It's a bit like "advertize" which was being quibbled over the other >> day-- in UK English "advertise" is also acceptable. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > the same manner as "aduertyse" is given as one. Merriam-Webster > unabridged says "advertize" is a variant spelling. The Collins dictionary also says advertize is "U.S. sometimes". >> Many of those optional variant UK spellings are basically French. >> "dependent" and "advertize" are closer to the original Latin and Greek [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > "-ize/-ise" suffixes, at least a few of which came from the French verb > ending "-iser" [ize], and have the Greek origin of which you wrote. In that case it sounds like it should be "advertise", even for someone who writes "burglarize" or "bowdlerize". > [...] >> 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See >> http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861603806/dependant.html . > > No, dependant is acceptable, as probably a UK variant since it is more > like French. I'm used to the variations exemplified by "color"/"colour" and "advertise"/"advertize", but I'm not used to "-ent"/"-ant" variations. Can you provide some other examples of that? SignatureBlinky Killing all posts from Google Groups The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org Need a new news feed? http://blinkynet.net/comp/newfeed.html >> [...] >>> 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "advertise"/"advertize", but I'm not used to "-ent"/"-ant" variations. > Can you provide some other examples of that? Pendant, repellent, propellant, ascendent, descendent. Those are the spellings I would use (for no particular reason-- using "repellent" but "propellant" is inconsistent). But pendent, repellant, propellent, ascendant and descendant are all allowed and mean the same I believe. I don't know if there's any US/UK bias to these though. > I'm used to the variations exemplified by "color"/"colour" and > "advertise"/"advertize", but I'm not used to "-ent"/"-ant" variations. > Can you provide some other examples of that? Then there's grey (UK) vs. gray (US). Now we're really into a gr{e,a}y area. SignatureSteve Swift http://www.swiftys.org.uk/swifty.html http://www.ringers.org.uk >> I'm used to the variations exemplified by "color"/"colour" and >> "advertise"/"advertize", but I'm not used to "-ent"/"-ant" variations. >> Can you provide some other examples of that? > > Then there's grey (UK) vs. gray (US). Now we're really into a gr{e,a}y > area. Well since they call them greyhounds and not grayhounds I have always been partial to grey. But since none of this mattered in English until recently with the likes of Webster, folks just spelled words anyway way they wished. If it got the point across, then it was good! A friendlier time for dyslexics. SignatureTake care, Jonathan ------------------- LITTLE WORKS STUDIO http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:45:32 -0500 from Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs>: > It's a bit like "advertize" which was being quibbled over the other > day-- in UK English "advertise" is also acceptable. In US English, "advertize" is plain wrong and "advertise" is the only acceptable spelling. SignatureStan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA http://OakRoadSystems.com/ HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/ validator: http://validator.w3.org/ CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ Why We Won't Help You: http://diveintomark.org/archives/2003/05/05/why_we_wont_help_you > Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:45:32 -0500 from Ben C <spamspam@spam.eggs>: >> It's a bit like "advertize" which was being quibbled over the other >> day-- in UK English "advertise" is also acceptable. > > In US English, "advertize" is plain wrong and "advertise" is the only > acceptable spelling. I think after Harlan's post that advertize is pretty much wrong in UK English too. > [...] > > 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > It's a bit like "advertize" which was being quibbled over the other > day-- in UK English "advertise" is also acceptable. You might care to "Improve Answer" at <http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_correct_spelling_of_advertize> with some references etc. If you type into Google: is "centre" correct? You get a list of links. If you type into Google is "advertize" correct? you get at the top of a list of links, Did you mean: is "advertise" correct? So the variant here is causing more than usual eyebrow raisings. Signaturedorayme > [...] >> 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > "dependent" and "advertize" are closer to the original Latin and Greek > respectively. I am SO glad to hear that, as for years I've been accused of mispellings. >> [...] >>> 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > I am SO glad to hear that, as for years I've been accused of mispellings. Yes although I was wrong about "advertize", which is not really acceptable in UK or US English (although some dictionaries do list it). I don't think the root is the same. The "-ise" in advertise, as it should be spelt, is not the Greek -ize that's in all those other words like "proselytize". [...] > > <http://www.euronet.nl/~tekelenb/WWW/userfriendlierhyperlinks/>. > > [...] It seems like a cool idea to me for you to point to a list of MIME > types. After giving it some thought, I think it would be better not to. Authors should ensure that the value of the type attribute is the same as the MIME type the server sends for the file in question. In other words, authors should already ensure anyway that files they serve are accompanied with an appropriate MIME type. (For *that* they'll need a list of appropriate MIME types, of course, but server configuration is beyond the scope of this article.) Assuming they do bother to configure their server appropriately, they will already know which value to use for the type attribute of each specific link. Assuming they do *not* bother to ensure the server sends the 'right' MIME type, handing them a list of MIME types with this article will probably result in (some) authors entering a different value in the type attribute than the server actually sends... (No doubt authors, or authoring tools, already make that mistake today. But I see no reason why I should encourage that ;)) [...] > 2. I believe "dependant" should be spelled "dependent". See > http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861603806/dependant.html . Heh :) > 3. The word "known" is missing an "n". Search for "kown". Thanks. Fixed. SignatureSander Tekelenburg The Web Repair Initiative: <http://webrepair.org/> |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.