Paul wrote:

I still can't think of any good reason to make a few words in the middle of a sentence bold or italic othrer than to give than to suggest they are somehow different from the surrounding text.

Yes, but then you do want to emphasize them, so EM (emphasis) or STRONG (stronger emphasis) elements are appropriate.

Paul wrote:

The only time  <b> or <i> would be appropriate is if you want bold or italic purely for random decoration which is somewhat pointless.

Why don't you write decorational-only styles via CSS?
It's better solution and doesn't require an extra element in HTML.

DavidONE wrote:

If you look at any 'heat map' for a website (e.g., the eyes follow an 'F' pattern - scanning starts at top left and moves right.

Given that 'Post new topic' and 'Post reply' are going to be the most commonly clicked (?) links, would it not make sense to have these positioned in the 'hot' area - left of screen?  I find the current position at far right a little difficult to pick out quickly - especially on wide-screen monitors - and it takes my eyes away from the content that I'm reading.

Heat maps are just heat maps.

Most forum softwares have action-buttons on the right side. This is sort of convention: they are clear, users are used to it, and they work. PunBB dev-team takes advantage of conventions.

DavidONE wrote:

Similarly, 'Quote' is going to be frequently clicked and it should be located closer to 'Post' because they share functionality.

For topics, I'd advocate that 'Post' + 'Quote' are located in the dark blue bar, directly above / below post body.  For forums, I'd recommend 'Post new topic' is located in dark blue bar, to right of 'Topics [ n ]'.

You must be forgetting that quote links are attached to every single posting. They all just can't be closer to "Post". Quoting makes sense after reading a posting, they should be located below each posting.

DavidONE wrote:

The only exception to that rule could be main menu, which has obvious purpose.

Breadcrumbs also. Its hover should have underline though.

And... please, make forum title link to home page.

intedinmamma wrote:

That feels a little awkward to me, as I expect anything that turns the pointer into a pointing hand to be a link.

Buttons are similar to links: they are clickable and do something and/or direct you somewhere.
Anything that's clickable should IMO have the hand cursor come up...

Smartys wrote:

And why does that matter?

That increases usability. It tells you which element is clickable. For a bonus, you don't have to carefully position mouse cursor on clickable elements, changed cursor tells you right away that element underneath it is now clickable -- extremely helpful for little checboxes and radios. … -usability … erability/ … le-forms/2 … 005/03/09/

Paul wrote:

I expect it to indicate something is clickable which certainly applies to labels.


Paul wrote:

However, I had already done it a diferent way so I won't be using this method.


It will work only in modern browsers, no extra markup.

input[type=checkbox] {
    cursor: pointer;


(5 replies, posted in Feature requests)

Smartys wrote:

It takes up space on the screen

It doesn't waste screen space between HTML comment tags.

elbekko wrote:

I've never come across anyone who doesn't know what the home key does. Even my one-finger-typing grandfather knows what it does.

Lucky you. :)

elbekko wrote:

Don't tell me you know someone who hasn't discovered the use of the Home key yet...

It's an average dumbuser and, yes, I know them.

Don't tell me you know only advanced users with home-key-knowledge...

Rich Pedley wrote:

there is a back to top functionality already available

Did you mean the Home button on keyboards?
Most people don't know there's a button called Home, not to mention knowing its behaviour.

Or did you mean mouse-wheel/scrollbars? Not the same.

I still hope, it find its way to the final version. :)


(2 replies, posted in PunBB 1.3 troubleshooting)

Yes, Cancel should behave like history.go(-1), but it shouldn't depend on JavaScript.


(29 replies, posted in PunBB 1.3 troubleshooting)

Rich Pedley wrote:

I touched on this when looking at the forum for accessibility. Yes there are a lot of <div>'s, and I may have talked Paul into replacing one. However some are necessary, because of the way things work. With user entered text going into some of these places, you can't surround it by anything other than a <div>.

Board title should not contain HTML, so a paragraph can be used.

Rich Pedley wrote:

<span> use is aplenty maybe too much so. But they have obviously thought way ahead. By inserting these now it makes developing themes/styles via CSS a lot easier with hooks available where needed. Making the basic output full of possibilities means that less people will be tempted to try and change core files.

Yes, future-proofing for themes sounds reasonable.


(29 replies, posted in PunBB 1.3 troubleshooting)

Paul wrote:

Since in the real world divs and spans have no real semantic meaning then you cannot say they are semantically incorrect, they actually don't alter the semantics one jot.

I didn't say that.

Paul wrote:

People confuse the use of divs and spans with semantics. If you think there are too many divs and spans thats an argument about markup style, nothing to do with semantics unless you think a div or span has been used in place of a semantic tag.

Exactly, DIV's in header are used in place of semantic tags, so it is a semantic issue.

Your logic is self-defeating since if you are using zero-semantic DIV's around the content, your HTML document is also zero-semantic. DIVs are just grouping elements, they shouldn't contain text alone. Semantics comes first, then you can add necessary DIV/SPAN tags for layout and styling.

Paul wrote:

What is or is not a paragph is also a matter of opinion. The board title could just be one word and one word is a text snippet not a paragraph. Anybody care to suggest what the semantically appropriate tag is for an isolated word of text thats not a heading?

Board title can be H1 title, but since it's smarter to use H1 tags for topic titles, a paragraph is OK.

Paul wrote:

As for a text breadcrumb divider being easier to style. The text would be in the markup or the language file but the arrow is merely a background image so the argument is nonensene.

You can use around that arrow a SPAN. :)

<p id="path"><a href="#">First level</a> <span>></span> <a href="#">Second level</a> <span>></span> Third level</p>

#path SPAN {
    margin: 0 .5em;
    color: #f00;


(29 replies, posted in PunBB 1.3 troubleshooting)

Starting from top:


They all should be paragraphs or contain paragraphs. I see only DIVs.

Many titles and links (also main navigation links) contain SPAN elements. Wonder why?

Jérémie wrote:

Pun is (or was not so long ago) the only forum around with strict HTML validation and semantically reasonable source, and that's it main strength.

Yeah, it is, and I'm glad. :) It could be better tho...


(29 replies, posted in PunBB 1.3 troubleshooting)

liquidat0r wrote:

I presume that the idea behind not using that character any longer is that it is not meant to be used as a divider or arrow.

Maybe, but PunBB has bigger semantic problems in his code, DIV/SPAN overuse in example.

Greater than (>) and rightwards arrow (?) should work fine. :)
It's text: lightweight and easy to design (themes/skins).

elbekko wrote:

If your hand is on the mouse, why not just go to the scrollbar? Or even better, get one with a scrollwheel.

Okay, please try to understand... I'd appreciate it, thanks.

It's all about giving users more choices. It's easier to click than scroll through long pages. Scrolling can be quite annoying, you know.

Paul wrote:

You couldn't possible put it there anyway since thats where the post reply/new topic link goes.

Sorry about that, I was watching site and I wasn't logged in.

The link could be placed into path-bar, right-aligned:
in page header the bottom-link, in footer the top-link.

XMB forum has those... for example.

orlandu63 wrote:

2. Redundant. See Home key.

Not really. My hand is on the mouse, it'll cost an extra move.

I've analyzed several statistics reports, and people use it, a lot.
The longer the page is, the more they will use it.

My vision of the "Back to top" link:


(29 replies, posted in PunBB 1.3 troubleshooting)

chuyskywalker wrote:

- install.php doesn't have the password fields set to type=password
- The arrow between pages doesn't graphically make sense -- probably because it's the only non-text item on the page and it's got shading. I'd reduce it so a very simple, flat arrow that looks like text, ie:

Agree, it doesn't match with the rest at all.

I preferred the "old" right angle quote ("»"): it simply worked and it wasn't obtrusive.

Or, if you don't want to use the old sign, why not turn the new arrow into text?
Rightwards arrow: ? | &#8594; | ?

Let's say the new path looks like: - Register

When I copy it, the pasted result is: - You are here:  Register

It just doesn't make sense! Users do not want that, they'd like to copy the path, without all the slickness.

Thank you. :)

Jérémie wrote:

Forum title: in <div id="pun-title">, isn't a link to the forum home. I think most people would expect it to be.

Yes, the title should definitely be a link to Index.

Semantically correct solution would be:

<div id="pun-title">
    <p><strong><a href="./">PunBB</a></strong></p>

... or better (should we use DIVs everywhere?):

<p id="pun-title"><strong><a href="./">Title</a></strong></p>