Print

Print


That's a really, really old site.  Those stylesheets are probably from the
late 1990's, long before I started working at UVA.  We've got an updated XTF
application, but it isn't in production yet.  Soon though!

The <dsc> in the soon-to-be-finished XTF framework for displaying Virginia
Heritage Project EAD documents will render very similarly to the <dsc> in
the Northwest Digital Archives finding aids collection, if you are familiar
with that, having written those stylesheets.

Ethan

On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Joyce Chapman <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Ethan, from doing a search here http://ead.lib.virginia.edu/vivaead/, it
> looks like you (actually all of Virginia Heritage) are not using tables at
> all and are using <ul> instead. Are you all using <ul> specifically for the
> reason you mentioned in your post, or did other factors contribute to that
> decision as well?
>
> Thank you,
> Joyce
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Ethan Gruber <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> The largest flaw in the older nested table approach that we see in EAD
>> cookbook, I think, is the fact that that the HTML version of the finding aid
>> is inflated to 400-500% of the filesize of the source XML file.  This is
>> especially evident in larger, complex finding aids that have six or more
>> component levels.  A manageable 2MB XML file transformed into a completely
>> unusable 8MB HTML file.
>>
>> Ethan Gruber
>> University of Virginia Library
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Joyce Chapman <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>>
>>> Probably many of us have been told by Web folk that a <dsc> output using
>>> empty table cells as a mechanism to control display (forcing indentation) is
>>> bad. Not only does it fail to use tables the way they are meant to be used
>>> (only as a mechanism to code tabular data, not for design/layout) but I've
>>> been told that all these empty padding cells are unfriendly to screen
>>> readers for the blind. In fact,  I've been told that if you are funded with
>>> state money, you are required to be accessible to screen readers and
>>> definitely shouldn't be displaying the <dsc> info this way. I deal with this
>>> by outputting the tabular data of the <dsc> in a table with only two columns
>>> (and since it IS tabular data, 1-2 container columns and 1 content column
>>> are supposedly ok), and controlling indentation of embedded components in
>>> the content column with CSS. Which is easier for my brain to deal with than
>>> the many-columned approach anyway! So my questions:
>>>
>>> 1. How many of you are outputting the <dsc> without using a <table> at
>>> all?
>>> 2. How many of you are using a 2- or 3-column table with CSS to control
>>> embedded components?
>>> 3. How many of you have been told by your Web peeps that the
>>> many-columned approach should not be used?
>>>
>>> Joyce
>>>
>>> --
>>> Joyce Chapman
>>> NCSU Libraries Fellow
>>> Metadata and Cataloging/
>>> Digital Library Initiatives
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Joyce Chapman
> NCSU Libraries Fellow
> Metadata and Cataloging/
> Digital Library Initiatives
> [log in to unmask]
>