Status-Q

I'm quite pleased with a photo I took of my wife Rose today:

You might very reasonably ask, "How did a guy like you get a girl like her?"

I got lucky.

A bit more hacking, and the comments are now handled on my server by a PHP script and stored in a MySQL database. Congrats to Userland for coming up with such a simple scheme.

Mmm. So much for pushing the envelope. Two late nights of hacking and I'm still fiddling with my experimental CSS layout. Not only have I failed to get it exactly how I want it, but I've also failed to get it even close enough to this to replace what I've got at present. Getting a reliable sidebar on the right margin is most of the problem.

Now, I could certainly change my formatting to make it easier to do in CSS, but that seems to defeat the object. CSS is supposed to give you more flexibility, not less. And it does so, but I can't make it do so reliably across more than one browser.

So I'll keep playing, but for now, the basic formatting here is CSS but the layout stays as tables. There's lots of tasteful CSS layout here to divert your attention...

Here's how to do the CSS thing whole-heartedly:"This is the official accessibility statement for diveintomark.org". Well done, Mark - that takes some dedication.

There's a new Comments feature for Radio Userland. This is basic, but very cute and very easy to use. I've enabled it as an experiment. Now, if you should so desire, you can leave comments on Status-Q!

I don't think, in this incarnation, that it's obvious when people have done so. That's not quite so easy to implement especially when, as on this site, the main pages live on one server (mine) and the comments on another (Userland's). Fixing that could be a real test of Web Services!

testing2

testing 3

and four

and five

Henry Jenkins: Blog This. Just in case you thought this site was mere trivia.

OK, in the great CSS debate that's going on in the blogging world at the moment, I'm definitely on the pro-CSS side. I've used it in a half-hearted way for some time, but as Mark Pilgrim says,

I agree. After all, it's nearly 4 years now since CSS2 became a W3 recommendation. 4 years! And that's the second version. When CSS1 was approved the web was only half its current age.

I converted this site to be largely CSS-based a few days back, but it's still heavily reliant on tables. The finer points of CSS layout are something I haven't played with much yet, but I'm about to try, so if the site looks a little weird for the next couple of days, please be patient. I'm just drawing a line in the sand (from 0,0 to 10px, 100px), pushing the envelope (to the right margin) and moving the web forward by a pixel or two..