Re: [WSG] Random Quote/Picture
on my website (www.germworks.net) i have _javascript_ which randomly loads image and text every time its reloads or loadsOn 5/24/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Moyle wrote: Trying to find out how to make a scriptServer-side or client-side script?If server-side, that's off topic forthis list. load a random text line/lines and orpicture (as a 2nd option) each time the page is loaded.Like this?http://www.alistapart.com/articles/betterrotator/You should be able to modify it to output any content you like. --Lachlan Hunthttp://lachy.id.au/**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help** -- GermWorkshttp://www.germworks.nethttp://germworks.blogspot.com/ http://www.germworks.net/Phantom
RE: [WSG] Random Quote/Picture
Sorry, I fail to see that JS and any randomating pictures/text Thanks, David Moyle e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Germ Sent: Thursday, 25 May 2006 4:56 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Random Quote/Picture on my website (www.germworks.net) i have _javascript_ which randomly loads image and text every time its reloads or loads On 5/24/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Moyle wrote: Trying to find out how to make a script Server-side or client-side script?If server-side, that's off topic for this list. load a random text line/lines and orpicture (as a 2nd option) each time the page is loaded. Like this? http://www.alistapart.com/articles/betterrotator/ You should be able to modify it to output any content you like. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ ** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- GermWorks http://www.germworks.net http://germworks.blogspot.com/ http://www.germworks.net/Phantom
Re: [WSG] Random Quote/Picture
Look on this page http://www.germworks.net/Web.htmland the js code is http://www.germworks.net/random_site.js and the code for the webpage is:script src= random_site.js type=text/_javascript_/script On 5/25/06, David Moyle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, I fail to see that JS and any randomating pictures/text Thanks, David Moyle e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org] On Behalf Of Germ Sent: Thursday, 25 May 2006 4:56 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Random Quote/Picture on my website ( www.germworks.net) i have _javascript_ which randomly loads image and text every time its reloads or loads On 5/24/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Moyle wrote: Trying to find out how to make a script Server-side or client-side script?If server-side, that's off topic for this list. load a random text line/lines and orpicture (as a 2nd option) each time the page is loaded. Like this? http://www.alistapart.com/articles/betterrotator/ You should be able to modify it to output any content you like. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ ** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- GermWorks http://www.germworks.net http://germworks.blogspot.com/ http://www.germworks.net/Phantom -- GermWorkshttp://www.germworks.nethttp://germworks.blogspot.com/ http://www.germworks.net/Phantom
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
Yes Mark, i know the problem... its just that for 10 years there is nothing that moves regading screen sizes and accesability have to follow the smallest standard size in order to not be refused by visitors. I dont think it work like that any longer, and HEY people need to buy screens and upgrade for god sake!!! Do you all think im wrong... should we all drive around in a VW beetle 1963 because the roads in some countries on this planet arent good enough to drive with a LADA??? some roads will never even be used but they are still on the map!! refffer that to people that will never use their cars as computers never will be boughtNow you might got my point... Have a nice day Michael Mark Harris wrote: Michael Persson wrote: This is exactly what im telling my clients, i wanted to have a discussion about it also. I dont know why we, web designers developers have to sit here and look at technical fun and enjoy without proceed to any fun and difference in sizes Why do sofware developers pushing the limits of users computers but web developers have to follow the clients settings and screen size... I just dont think its fair... FAIR? What part of welcome to the real world are you having difficulty with? You're in business - you deal with your customer needs, not your desires. regards Mark Harris ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- Michael Persson [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Miaouli 19, 10554 Athens, Greece Tel: +30/210/3227400 Fax : +30/210/3227410 www.mozaik.com http://www.mozaik.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
if resizing text breaks the design, why the hell allow it? There are tons of sites out there that use EMs and dont even take into consideration how atrocious their site looks if people increase the text size. different websites have different audiences.Case in point is all these cool flash sites out there that even I can't read, they are so tiny. If you are trying to do a cutting-edge design that focuses on a specific audience that ain't blind - I don't see why you cannot force a variety of text-sizes. Typography is an art too - print designers can use type to add to the design - we can't?? I love using EMs for certain kinds of sites - but it has it's place like anything else. It's a tool, not a rule. On 5/25/06, Patrick Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael Persson its just that for 10 years there is nothing that moves regading screen sizes and accesability have to follow the smallest standard size in order to not be refused by visitors.Ever thought that maybe it's because people's eyes didn't evolveover the last 10 years, so if somebody needs a lower resolution and large text size, they'll still need it regardless of technology? I dont think it work like that any longer, and HEY people need to buy screens and upgrade for god sake!!!See above. It's not a case of people not upgrading. If somebody needs and prefers their resolution low, they'll set their machine to thateven on a large new 21 monitor. It's not an issue of people notbuying/upgrading. Now you might got my point...Yes...real users stand in the way of your creativity, we get it. PPatrick H. LaukeWeb Editor / University of Salfordhttp://www.salford.ac.ukWeb Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help** -- Warren Cardinallucid crew512.853.9693 | 901.458.5236
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
On Thu, 25 May 2006 10:17 pm, Patrick Lauke wrote: Michael Persson its just that for 10 years there is nothing that moves regading screen sizes and accesability have to follow the smallest standard size in order to not be refused by visitors. Screen sizes have changed drastically in the last 10 years - from 14 = 15 = 17 = 19 +. The real problem is the teachings at schools, TAFE, uni, community college, mate down the road, etc haven't evolved with the advances in screen design. How many people say that they have trouble seeing small text sizes but haven't a clue how to change the font size of screen elements without changing the resolution? Ever thought that maybe it's because people's eyes didn't evolve over the last 10 years, so if somebody needs a lower resolution and large text size, they'll still need it regardless of technology? If you are worried about your eyes change the font size of elements or use the accessibility features built into every OS but keep the screen resolution high - it makes screen elements smooth! I dont think it work like that any longer, and HEY people need to buy screens and upgrade for god sake!!! See above. It's not a case of people not upgrading. If somebody needs and prefers their resolution low, they'll set their machine to that even on a large new 21 monitor. It's not an issue of people not buying/upgrading. As I said learn above ... to get the best out of your new 24 wide-screen LCD learn how to configure your system at the highest resolution and then adjust the font to a suitable size. Now you might got my point... /* Removed - I was being facetious */ Yes...real users stand in the way of your creativity, we get it. NO ... those with no vision stand in the way of creativity. P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- Regards, Steve Bathurst Computer Solutions URL: www.bathurstcomputers.com.au e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0407 224 251 _ ... (0) ... / / \ .. / / . ) .. V_/_ Linux Powered! -- Regards, Steve Bathurst Computer Solutions URL: www.bathurstcomputers.com.au e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0407 224 251 _ ... (0) ... / / \ .. / / . ) .. V_/_ Linux Powered! ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
Title: Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely On 5/25/06 8:31 AM, Warren Cardinal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: if resizing text breaks the design, why the hell allow it? There are tons of sites out there that use EMs and dont even take into consideration how atrocious their site looks if people increase the text size. different websites have different audiences. Case in point is all these cool flash sites out there that even I can't read, they are so tiny. If you are trying to do a cutting-edge design that focuses on a specific audience that ain't blind - I don't see why you cannot force a variety of text-sizes. Typography is an art too - print designers can use type to add to the design - we can't?? I love using EMs for certain kinds of sites - but it has it's place like anything else. It's a tool, not a rule. Which goes to show how many site are poorly made... And I made one of those Flash site. I think its legible, though. We are replacing it soon. ;-) -- Tom Livingston Senior Multimedia Artist Media Logic www.mlinc.com
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
Patrick H. Lauke wrote... [...] See above. It's not a case of people not upgrading. If somebody needs and prefers their resolution low, they'll set their machine to that even on a large new 21 monitor. It's not an issue of people not buying/upgrading. [...] --- I heartily agree. My wife got a new machine a while back. Running XP Pro (so it's new and not something in need of an upgrade). Out of the box the OS software was set to send video to her new flat screen monitor at a resolution of 1024x768. My wife didn't like it. Too small. I made it 800x600 for her. Now she loves it. She doesn't have great eyesight -- which may be to my advantage as I grow older myself ;-) -- and setting the monitor to 800x600 blows everything up, evenly and perfectly. For her is it an awesome solution (better than the magnifying glass). The only downside, of course, is when she wants to go to a web site that rudely doesn't support that resolution. This is not 640x480 we're talking about. It's 800x600 and it's still widely used and should be supported. It's my only beef with the ALA site. The makers made assumptions that web developers don't use anything smaller than 1024x768. That's a pretty dangerous [making assumptions] and I seriously doubt it is true. Instead of assumptions, it's better to make allowances in my opinion. Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
it's very interesting on this group that the technical people just want to complain about website designers not doing this and that with no regard to the intricacies and beauty of design. another point - isbestbuy.com losing customers because their text size is small and you cannot resize it? I think NOT. If customers complain - and we all know they do - they would do something about it. If you want large text, decrease your resolution. On 5/25/06, Steve Olive [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 25 May 2006 10:17 pm, Patrick Lauke wrote: Michael Persson its just that for 10 years there is nothing that moves regading screen sizes and accesability have to follow the smallest standard size in order to not be refused by visitors.Screen sizes have changed drastically in the last 10 years - from 14 = 15 = 17 = 19 +. The real problem is the teachings at schools, TAFE, uni,community college, mate down the road, etc haven't evolved with the advancesin screen design. How many people say that they have trouble seeing small text sizes but haven't a clue how to change the font size of screen elementswithout changing the resolution? Ever thought that maybe it's because people's eyes didn't evolve over the last 10 years, so if somebody needs a lower resolution and large text size, they'll still need it regardless of technology?If you are worried about your eyes change the font size of elements or use theaccessibility features built into every OS but keep the screen resolution high - it makes screen elements smooth! I dont think it work like that any longer, and HEY people need to buy screens and upgrade for god sake!!! See above. It's not a case of people not upgrading. If somebody needs and prefers their resolution low, they'll set their machine to that even on a large new 21 monitor. It's not an issue of people not buying/upgrading.As I said learn above ... to get the best out of your new 24 wide-screen LCD learnhow to configure your system at the highest resolution and then adjustthe font to a suitable size. Now you might got my point.../* Removed - I was being facetious */ Yes...real users stand in the way of your creativity, we get it. NO ... those with no vision stand in the way of creativity. P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help **--Regards,SteveBathurst Computer Solutions URL: www.bathurstcomputers.com.aue-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Mobile: 0407 224 251 _... (0) ... / / \.. / / . ).. V_/_Linux Powered!--Regards,SteveBathurst Computer SolutionsURL: www.bathurstcomputers.com.aue-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Mobile: 0407 224 251 _... (0)... / / \.. / / . ).. V_/_Linux Powered!** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**-- Warren Cardinallucid crew512.853.9693 | 901.458.5236
[WSG] HELP: Disappearing text and other problems in IE
I have been given the task of updating a web site to a more accessible, standards-compliant version. Right off, I'm having problems with the absolutely positioned navigation (main navigation and smaller help navigation near top) in both IE and Firefox. Depending on the resolution and Firefox version the navs move around slightly with the help nav partially disappearing in some versions. In IE, the navs don't show up at all! Is all this caused by the fact they are absolutely positioned? The client will not budge from the navs being positioned where they are. Also, I'm having a problem with the header in IE leaving a space between the header and bottom border. Help! What am I doing, or not doing?The template page is at: http://www.scrivenerspen.org/immport/template.html.The main style sheet is at: http://www.scrivenerspen.org/immport/styles/immport.cssThe ie style sheet is at: http://www.scrivenerspen.org/immport/styles/ie.cssThanks.Carolyn
Re: [WSG] HELP: Disappearing text and other problems in IE
carolyn - just quickly - I can see that you have position:absolute - but u dont specifiy a position WHERE. also - u have it floated right. try doing position: relative and put your nav ul INSIDE the header div, allow room for it in your div height and then positon it so it is in the bottom of the header div. On 5/25/06, Carolyn Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been given the task of updating a web site to a more accessible, standards-compliant version. Right off, I'm having problems with the absolutely positioned navigation (main navigation and smaller help navigation near top) in both IE and Firefox. Depending on the resolution and Firefox version the navs move around slightly with the help nav partially disappearing in some versions. In IE, the navs don't show up at all! Is all this caused by the fact they are absolutely positioned? The client will not budge from the navs being positioned where they are. Also, I'm having a problem with the header in IE leaving a space between the header and bottom border. Help! What am I doing, or not doing?The template page is at: http://www.scrivenerspen.org/immport/template.html.The main style sheet is at: http://www.scrivenerspen.org/immport/styles/immport.cssThe ie style sheet is at: http://www.scrivenerspen.org/immport/styles/ie.cssThanks. Carolyn-- Warren Cardinallucid crew512.853.9693 | 901.458.5236
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
its just that for 10 years there is nothing that moves regading screen sizes and accesability have to follow the smallest standard size in order to not be refused by visitors. I can't see why, since we can make our designs adapt to available space. We just have to design them that way. I dont think it work like that any longer, and HEY people need to buy screens and upgrade for god sake!!! My 3840 wide screen-view/resolution is wide enough for most sites to fit in, but I design the base for the more average 640 - 1280 window-width. Then I go back and evaluate those same designs for 170 - 600 window-width, so I can keep up with the progress in 'small screen rendering'. There are so many people who buy those small screen devices these days, and I don't want to be left behind :-) Do you all think im wrong... should we all drive around in a VW beetle 1963 because the roads in some countries on this planet arent good enough to drive with a LADA??? some roads will never even be used but they are still on the map!! refffer that to people that will never use their cars as computers never will be boughtNow you might got my point... Yeah, but I prefer an off-road convertible so I can drive where I want whenever I want. And, of course, there are a few more vehicles around - just in case. The same with web designs and screens and window-width... as a convertible site can get get further. Some solutions are of course created for special purposes - just in case. As a former software/hardware developer: I also had to develop for users/clients wants and needs back then - or else it wouldn't sell. There are not all that many more restrictions in web design - it just has to sell. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
Gang, There will always be opinions about text size and resolutions. I myself have been back and forth over the years. There is a greater truth to be considered though. As an analogy, consider a tree. The tree that bends in a storm will last much longer than a stiff tree. The winds will eventually break it. Websites are like trees, in order to survive through the various visitors/storms to our sites encounter, they need to bend to be able to ride our the storm. Considering the greater good of humanity, as designers we are obligated to create functional beauty. This includes being flexible as we are creating things for the most flexible media ever conceived. That is why we strive to do things like make flexible text, print stylesheets etc... Its simply the right thing to do, regardless of varying opinions. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com (609)335-3076 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Warren Cardinal wrote: it's very interesting on this group that the technical people just want to complain about website designers not doing this and that with no regard to the intricacies and beauty of design. another point - is bestbuy.com http://bestbuy.com losing customers because their text size is small and you cannot resize it? I think NOT. If customers complain - and we all know they do - they would do something about it. If you want large text, decrease your resolution. On 5/25/06, *Steve Olive* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 25 May 2006 10:17 pm, Patrick Lauke wrote: Michael Persson its just that for 10 years there is nothing that moves regading screen sizes and accesability have to follow the smallest standard size in order to not be refused by visitors. Screen sizes have changed drastically in the last 10 years - from 14 = 15 = 17 = 19 +. The real problem is the teachings at schools, TAFE, uni, community college, mate down the road, etc haven't evolved with the advances in screen design. How many people say that they have trouble seeing small text sizes but haven't a clue how to change the font size of screen elements without changing the resolution? Ever thought that maybe it's because people's eyes didn't evolve over the last 10 years, so if somebody needs a lower resolution and large text size, they'll still need it regardless of technology? If you are worried about your eyes change the font size of elements or use the accessibility features built into every OS but keep the screen resolution high - it makes screen elements smooth! I dont think it work like that any longer, and HEY people need to buy screens and upgrade for god sake!!! See above. It's not a case of people not upgrading. If somebody needs and prefers their resolution low, they'll set their machine to that even on a large new 21 monitor. It's not an issue of people not buying/upgrading. As I said learn above ... to get the best out of your new 24 wide-screen LCD learn how to configure your system at the highest resolution and then adjust the font to a suitable size. Now you might got my point... /* Removed - I was being facetious */ Yes...real users stand in the way of your creativity, we get it. NO ... those with no vision stand in the way of creativity. P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- Regards, Steve Bathurst Computer Solutions URL: www.bathurstcomputers.com.au http://www.bathurstcomputers.com.au e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0407 224 251 _ ... (0) ... / / \ .. / / . ) .. V_/_ Linux Powered! -- Regards, Steve Bathurst Computer Solutions URL: www.bathurstcomputers.com.au http://www.bathurstcomputers.com.au e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 0407 224 251 _ ... (0) ... / / \ .. / / . ) .. V_/_ Linux Powered! ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on
Re: [WSG] HELP: Disappearing text and other problems in IE - immport
On 06/05/25 09:10 (GMT-0400) Carolyn Diaz apparently typed: I have been given the task of updating a web site to a more accessible, standards-compliant version. Right off, I'm having problems with the absolutely positioned navigation (main navigation and smaller help navigation near top) in both IE and Firefox. Depending on the resolution and Firefox version the navs move around slightly with the help nav partially disappearing in some versions. In IE, the navs don't show up at all! Is all this caused by the fact they are absolutely positioned? The client will not budge from the navs being positioned where they are. http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/carodi1.jpg I would think they would object to being positioned where they are now. :-p Harmony between absolute positioning and accessibility is a tough nut to crack. -- All have sinned fall short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
From: Warren Cardinal [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] another point - is bestbuy.com losing customers because their text size is small and you cannot resize it? I think NOT. If customers complain - and we all know they do - they would do something about it. If you want large text, decrease your resolution. [...] --- I have to disagree. If the Best-Buy site isn't very usable it is pretty much guaranteed their online market penetration isn't a good as it could be. People will leave the site and shop elsewhere. To think people would take the time to file a complaint isn't realistic. If you go to a site and it has an issue, do you take the time to notify them and explain the situation? People tend not to complain as much as you think. If they can't negotiate the site they probably won't struggle to find out how to lodge a complaint. Moreover people lack time and patience. If I have a problem with one of my sites I usually have discover it/figure it out for myself unless a friend catches it. Instead of complain, people tend to just leave and find something they can use. Making a site usable in 800x600 should have little bearing on how stunning the design is. To me design is one of the most important aspects of a site. But that doesn't mean it can't be accessible and usable. It is a challenge at times, but without challenge we wouldn't learn and grow. This sort of leaves us with two choices when making a site: Make it usable to all, or not. Design shouldn't play that big of a role in the formation of that question's answer.. Sincerely, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: It's my only beef with the ALA site. The makers made assumptions that web developers don't use anything smaller than 1024x768. That's a pretty dangerous [making assumptions] and I seriously doubt it is true. Instead of assumptions, it's better to make allowances in my opinion. Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ While agree with the point you are making as it relates to the average user on the average site, I can see where ALA might have based their decision on the assumption that designers might be somewhat technicaly inclined, and know how to configure standard preferences. For many years Personal Computers have been fully capable of remembering changes that a user sets to his/her preferences, and allow many preference settings, including those for font sizes. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that a designer would want to test at various resolutions, know where and how to make various preference changes, and know how those preference changes might affect a website. Mark Sheppard ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
Warren Cardinal if resizing text breaks the design, why the hell allow it? If people can't read your text, why the hell put it online? Case in point is all these cool flash sites out there that even I can't read, they are so tiny. And that's a good thing? Typography is an art too - print designers can use type to add to the design - we can't?? Yes you can, but - unlike print - users can and will change the size of the text, resize their windows, change resolution, etc Good design takes these different situations into account and tries to find a solution that works at least acceptably in those cases. It's a tool, not a rule. It's the nature of the medium. Patrick Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
Folks, Think this'd be a must-read article for anyone interested in accessibility: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/tohellwithwcag2/ :o) Iano. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
On 06/05/25 08:55 (GMT-0400) Warren Cardinal apparently typed: another point - is bestbuy.com losing customers because their text size is small and you cannot resize it? I think NOT. If customers complain - and we all know they do - they would do something about it. Someone who arrives on that web site to find text too small won't be a customer, and won't likely complain, but simply take their money elsewhere (assuming they don't know how to disable page styles or enable accessibility mode). How many lost customers do you find it prudent to be responsible for? http://www.lighthouse.org/about/accessibility/bigtype_top10.htm If you want large text, decrease your resolution. o_O http://css.nu/articles/font-analogy.html Fine detail[1] equates to quality. Your directive is to trade text size for quality, which is ludicrous, as is any implication at all that any user should have to make some specific personal adjustment of any kind in order to use your web page. Astute users don't change resolution to change text size, they change resolution to change quality, up to _improve_ it. If as a result they find that sizes are inappropriate, they use the adjustments provided for that purpose. Operating systems and browsers, tools, come with adjustability precisely so their owners/users can tailor behavior to their _personal_ requirements. Interfering with those adjustments by overriding or disregarding them is entirely rude and unnecessary. In addition, modern flat panel displays come with a native resolution, one which when deviated from at all reduces quality beyond that which would be expected from a resolution decrease alone. Most new computers have these flat panel displays, often with high native resolution, since most new computers currently sold are laptops. [1] http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=resolution 6-The fineness of detail that can be distinguished in an image, as on a video display terminal. -- All have sinned fall short of the glory of God. Romans 3:23 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
From: Joseph R. B. Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] As an analogy, consider a tree. The tree that bends in a storm will last much longer than a stiff tree. The winds will eventually break it. Websites are like trees, in order to survive through the various visitors/storms to our sites encounter, they need to bend to be able to ride our the storm. [...] --- Well put, Joe. Sincerely, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
People can read the text on my sites. When you DESIGN sites that look as good as mine, you let me know. Are you in charge of this site? http://salford.ac.uk/why dont u fix this site and make it work without the www. Now thats accessibility. On 5/25/06, Patrick Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Warren Cardinal if resizing text breaks the design, why the hell allow it?If people can't read your text, why the hell put it online? Case in point is all these cool flash sites out there that even I can't read, they are so tiny.And that's a good thing? Typography is an art too - print designers can use type to add to the design - we can't??Yes you can, but - unlike print - users can and will change thesize of the text, resize their windows, change resolution, etcGood design takes these different situations into account and tries to find a solution that works at least acceptably in thosecases. It's a tool, not a rule.It's the nature of the medium.PatrickPatrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salfordhttp://www.salford.ac.ukWeb Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help** -- Warren Cardinallucid crew512.853.9693 | 901.458.5236
RE: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Ian Stalvies Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 4:23 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article Folks, Think this'd be a must-read article for anyone interested in accessibility: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/tohellwithwcag2/ Roberto Scano: I think that, due the deadline for comments for WCAG 2.0 Last Call is on 31th May 2005, is best to read WCAG 2.0 and send directly comments [1] ;-) Cheers! Roberto Scano ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IWA/HWG International Project Manager and EMEA Coordinator International Webmasters Association / HTML Writers Guild W3C Advisory Commitee Representative for IWA/HWG W3C WCAG Working Group Member - W3C ATAG Working Group Member Expert of ISO/TC 159/SC 4/WG 5 'Software ergonomics and human-computer dialogues' http://www.iwanet.org - http://www.hwg.org E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal web site: http://www.robertoscano.info [1] http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/comments/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
Claws away please girls. Be nice. Let's get back to helping each other. On 26/05/2006, at 00:24 , Patrick Lauke wrote: Steve Olive Yes...real users stand in the way of your creativity, we get it. NO ... those with no vision stand in the way of creativity. And with that you've proven your utter ignorance on the subject, as well as your arrogance. Thank you and good night. P ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] new site critique - extemely
And to quote your previous message Warren Cardinal It's a tool Tool indeed. P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
Roberto Scano I think that, due the deadline for comments for WCAG 2.0 Last Call is on 31th May 2005, is best to read WCAG 2.0 and send directly comments [1] ;-) Time to read Joe's article: 10 minutes. Time to read WCAG 2.0 (and its associated informative documents): 3 days? I'm sure we can spare those 10 minutes ;) P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] baground image random
Hi everyone. Do you know a js fro put a background image at random in css? cross browser, of course :) Tnx -- Matteo Discardi 1802 http://homepage.mac.com/matteo.discardi Transcending History and the World, a tale of Soul and Swords eternally retold SoulCalibur ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Lauke Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 5:10 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article Time to read Joe's article: 10 minutes. Time to read WCAG 2.0 (and its associated informative documents): 3 days? I'm sure we can spare those 10 minutes ;) Roberto Scano: I prefer to read documentation, and not interpretation for documentation ;-) ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
Patrick Lauke wrote: Time to read Joe's article: 10 minutes. Time to read WCAG 2.0 (and its associated informative documents): 3 days? It's taken me 2 days so far, and I'm about 1/2 way through (although, I'd estimate someone who can read at more average pace (unlike myself) would have finished by now). However, it's well worth the read for anyone who wants to take an objective look at the situation and make up their own mind. I recommend you do, I've already found several points of contention with Joe's article and I don't believe WCAG 2.0 is nearly as bad as he makes it out to be. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
I have already read this article. This is a very serious issue and I don't know what to think about it. I have seen that Eric Meyer is part of the members of WCAG Samurai. I didn't like, however, this part another thing we're not going to do is run a totally open process. Thanks, André On 5/25/06, Ian Stalvies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Folks, Think this'd be a must-read article for anyone interested in accessibility: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/tohellwithwcag2/ :o) ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
André Marcanth wrote: I have seen that Eric Meyer is part of the members of WCAG Samurai. Don't confuse the members of the CSS Samurai with those of the WCAG Samurai (both of which ar linked to from the article). Eric was a member of the CSS Samurai, but the membership of the WCAG Samurai (with the exception of Joe Clark) will, unfortunately, not be made public. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
André Marcanth wrote: I didn't like, however, this part another thing we're not going to do is run a totally open process. I think it's funny that people are criticizing their decision to make it a closed process - perhaps they didn't want everyone criticizing every other decision they make??? It is, by the way, certain individuals monopolization of WCAG working group decisions that has resulted in it being in the state that it currently is in. I can't blame the Samurai group for wanting to maintain a discussion that is more civil (of course, Joe IS heading this up, so who knows?) and less influenced (meaning bullied) by corporate and external pressures. And yes, it is a serious thing. WCAG 2.0 is in serious need of help, but I hope we don't all just abandon it as a done deal. The feedback period is still open, so there is still time to make recommendations and hopefully influence the working group to make some necessary changes. In the meantime, I hope the Samurai group can provide some practical updates to WCAG 1.0. Jared Smith WebAIM.org ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jared Smith Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 6:39 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] WCAG 2.0: Joe Clark article And yes, it is a serious thing. WCAG 2.0 is in serious need of help, but I hope we don't all just abandon it as a done deal. The feedback period is still open, so there is still time to make recommendations and hopefully influence the working group to make some necessary changes. In the meantime, I hope the Samurai group can provide some practical updates to WCAG 1.0. Roberto Scano: Agree with you Jared. Also I would like that members of this list eventually give also feedback to ATAG 2.0 that we are now closing (www.w3.org/wai/au) remembering also that the WAI guidelines are also a point of reference for the future ISO 9241-151 software ergonomics of www user interfaces. We need to move from the concept of web page to the concept of web interface and try to evalutate what are the accessibility issues that must be corrected inside the W3C / ISO normative documents for don't make the same errors that are contained in the old WCAG 1.0 (eg: colour contrast for text at level 3 means that I can create a full WCAG 1.0 AA complaint web site but making black text and background A fully WCAG 1.0 AA web site that is inaccessible to people without visual disabilities...). ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: digest for wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Thanks for sending me an email. I'm out of the office until Monday 29th May 2006 and I will not be accessing emails during this time. If you need to contact the Hiser office, please phone 03 9648 4333. Regards, Naomi Heagney ***Disclaimer*** This email and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged material and/or material subject to copyright; it is for the intended addressee(s) only. If you are not a named addressee you shall not use, retain or disclose such information. The views expressed in this email are those of the originator and do not necessarily represent the views of The Hiser Group or its parent company, Serco Group Pty Ltd. Nothing in this email shall bind Hiser or Serco in any contract or obligation. Hiser cannot guarantee that the email or any attachments are free from viruses or errors and will not be responsible for loss or damage resulting either directly or indirectly from any such virus or error. If this is a commercial electronic message within the meaning of the Spam Act, you may indicate that you do not wish to receive any further commercial electronic messages from us by sending an email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The Hiser Group Pty Ltd. Incorporated in NSW, November 1990. ACN 050 327 716 Registered office: Level 10, 90 Arthur Street, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: digest for wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
gotcha thanks. For some reason in admin everything is admin/file when it should be admin/dbasis/file public/admin/ works for login, but its supposed to be public/admin/dbasis/ to login, which says file not found Cant find why arg Bruce - Original Message - From: Heagney, Naomi [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, May 25, 2006 9:48 PM Subject: [WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: digest for wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Thanks for sending me an email. I'm out of the office until Monday 29th May 2006 and I will not be accessing emails during this time. If you need to contact the Hiser office, please phone 03 9648 4333. Regards, Naomi Heagney ***Disclaimer*** This email and any attachments may contain confidential and/or privileged material and/or material subject to copyright; it is for the intended addressee(s) only. If you are not a named addressee you shall not use, retain or disclose such information. The views expressed in this email are those of the originator and do not necessarily represent the views of The Hiser Group or its parent company, Serco Group Pty Ltd. Nothing in this email shall bind Hiser or Serco in any contract or obligation. Hiser cannot guarantee that the email or any attachments are free from viruses or errors and will not be responsible for loss or damage resulting either directly or indirectly from any such virus or error. If this is a commercial electronic message within the meaning of the Spam Act, you may indicate that you do not wish to receive any further commercial electronic messages from us by sending an email to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] The Hiser Group Pty Ltd. Incorporated in NSW, November 1990. ACN 050 327 716 Registered office: Level 10, 90 Arthur Street, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] HELP: Disappearing text and other problems in IE
A lot of your problems relate to using relative font sizes (you use % for font size) and expecting them to line up neatly over an image when you use pixels to size your images. Warren is right just quickly - I can see that you have position:absolute - but u dont specifiy a position WHERE. also - u have it floated right. Float: right; effects #help-nav not position: absolute; where as position: absolute; effects #nav not float: right; try doing position: relative and put your nav ul INSIDE the header div, allow room for it in your div height and then positon it so it is in the bottom of the header div.In your HTML put #help-nav and #nav inside #header In your CSS add position: relative; to #headerremove float: right; and the margins from #help-nav and #navadd top: 0; left: 50%; to #help-navadd bottom: 0; left: 50%; to #navthat should help, it should work on standard font sizes but increase the font size a couple of steps and problems will occur. Nick-- Nick Cowiehttp://nickcowie.com
