Re: [WSG] REST HTTP error codes and responses for form/parameter validation
On 04/09/2006, at 7:30 PM, James Ellis wrote: The RFC for this is at ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2616.txt via http://www.w3.org/Protocols/#Specs which includes the available codes in the Spec. Yep though its a shame that within a given domain the status code definitions are so vague that the spec is useless as a standard between developers, driving most people to just stick to 200 or 400 for everything. I think you could use 409 Conflict for invalid data. Maybe even 410 Gone if a client interacts with the resource no longer there.. etc etc. If found this in google: http://www.oreillynet.com/onlamp/blog/2003/12/ restful_error_handling.html One of the ideas there is to use an extra header to denote a more specific error I love that idea. Maybe just return 400 Bad Request for validation errors with some extra headers for domain specific info? So you could have something like this which would allow you to target the actual error... HTTP/1.1 409 Gone X-API-Error 1500 Record foo no longer available xml... msg error code1500/code messagerecord foo is no longer available/message /msg The current Rails approach for validation errors when trying to create resources is to return 400 Bad Request with the following response: ?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8? errors errorPassword confirmation can't be blank/error errorPassword is too short (minimum is 4 characters)/error errorPassword can't be blank/error errorLogin is too short (minimum is 3 characters)/error errorLogin can't be blank/error errorEmail is too short (minimum is 3 characters)/error errorEmail can't be blank/error /errors It could definitely be improved by at least including the resource attribute the error relates to: ?xml version=1.0 encoding=UTF-8? errors type=ActiveRecord::Errors error attribute=password_confirmationPassword confirmation can't be blank/error error attribute=passwordPassword is too short (minimum is 4 characters)/error error attribute=passwordPassword can't be blank/error error attribute=loginLogin is too short (minimum is 3 characters)/error error attribute=loginLogin can't be blank/error error attribute=emailEmail is too short (minimum is 3 characters)/error error attribute=emailEmail can't be blank/error /errors -- tim *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML Marquee
HI Christian - where did you get this rule. I'd be keen to read the source and see what else it says... R :o) - Original Message - From: Christian Heilmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 3:34 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] XHTML Marquee I've updated the script and taken in to account the contrast factor as well as the accessibility issue. If I were to take it to the exterme, I'd dynamically generate the control links. As it is, i've chucked them into a separate div http://www.grafx.com.au/wip/marquee.html That is not the extreme, it is a prerequisite. Rule 1: JavaScript dependent elements should be generated with JavaScript, otherwise you promise functionality that may not be available. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
After years of studying them all I use three: Movable Type Expression Engine Wordpress In that order. Reasons? They are easily configurable and accessible systems which allow changes and additions very easily. Any cms you are thinking of, spend some time studying the templates and menu systems. Are they easy to access and make changes or are they all over the place? Any besides these I have found to be basically nuke lookalikes. Complex, templates inside templates and inconfigurable without a steep learning curve that just isn't worth it. I agree totally with Jeff Veen: Making A Better Open Source CMS http://www.veen.com/jeff/archives/000622.html been there done that. You can make any system strict if you want. Events calendar just add one on. Or get one with an events calendar and spend two weeks trying to configure and learn the rest of it Bruce Prochnau BKDesign Solutions - Original Message - From: Elle Meredith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 9:58 PM Subject: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS Hey, I am new to CMS and find it hard to select one that will work for me and my client (non-profit organisation) and thought I could use some advice. I am interested in a CMS that is: * XHTML Strict * Built-in Accessibility features. I also need one that has the following: * Blog with commenting * RSS syndication * Events calendar and option for people to sign up for events * Basic image galleries * Search options * Donation option in the future I was looking at Xaraya or Web GUI. But any advice would be much appreciated. Cheers, Elle ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: [WSG] The DOM
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can I ask a DOM question here? Is there a way to use JavaScript and the Dom to make an element be focusable? Some browsers support the proposed ability to use the tabindex on almost any element [1], where a positive value will add it to the tabbing order and a negative value will make the element focussable (e.g. by clicking) but not within the keyboard tabbing order. For most purposes, tabindex=0 should work for you. To work around the validation errors, you could set the attribute via the DOM. [1] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#the-tabindex -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
-Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Wonsil Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 4:13 AM To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS CivicSpace was designed to do all of these. It is built on Drupal. You can demo either at: CivicSpace: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=510 Drupal: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=132 Roberto Scano: Also their backend conform to accessibility requirements? ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
CivicSpace was designed to do all of these. It is built on Drupal, but has not been updated to work with the last 3 Latest releases including the current Drupal 4.7.3 On 9/8/06, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Wonsil Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 4:13 AM To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS CivicSpace was designed to do all of these. It is built on Drupal. You can demo either at: CivicSpace: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=510 Drupal: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=132 Roberto Scano: Also their backend conform to accessibility requirements? ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** -- chaim cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: [WSG] XHTML Marquee
Richard Czeiger wrote: poor old me I still have opera 7.5 and it's fine there. I might try and download opera 9, though I'm tempted to give up on it. Logs for most of my clients show ALL versions of opera total a massive 0.8% of users. I don't think I can waste my time on that No problem. Developer tools in Opera show that the script seems to be working, but I didn't dig any further. And for the record: if Marquee were in regular use, then I would probably block it anyway. Maybe I already have - I'm to lazy to check. Such blocking-mechanisms exist in many browsers, so that should be taken into account on regular sites. Probably not a problem on more targeted sites. Anyone else finding this to be the case? At what point do you throw them the print style sheet instead? :-) Many sites might gain on something like that - in all browsers. Should be a regular 'progressive enhancement' alternative. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML Marquee
Rule 1: JavaScript dependent elements should be generated with JavaScript, otherwise you promise functionality that may not be available. Strange rule, indeed. What if with JS element does something, without JS - just sits here and provides its content? Like, say, collapsible trees, which are just some nested ULs if JavaScript is not available. I can see how this rule applies to something like show/hide link, which will not work if JS is disabled, or JS powered stylesheet switcher, but this rule is far from being general. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] web check please??
Hey, thanks for these guys - just tweaking and I shall be back - minor emergency: whilst gleefully clicking away in my creative, fluffy world (having conveniently forgotten the fact that I was 'watching' Harvey (my 2 year old) whilst Michelle popped upstairs) I have just discovered that he too has been creating across our garden wall with a permy marker!! I have created a monster - worse still ... a designer!! And worse STILL - one as verbose as me!! no teeny weeny scribblings in the corner for this chap, its full rolf-harris thing. anyway - back soon with new improved approach - and hopefully a work around for the min/max width thang. cheers, Max. aka The Pig Farmer www.thepigfarmer.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] web check please??
Tony Crockford wrote: Hey John! how about signing up with GAWDS? (www.gawds.org) lots of very knowledgeable folk there. an alternative starting point: http://diveintoaccessibility.org/ Dive Into Accessibility and a very useful forum here: http://www.accessifyforum.com/ Accessify Forum: Accessibility Discussion Forums and although I haven't bought it *yet* this book looks very promising: http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/1590596382/ HTH ;o) cheers Tony - will look at these! *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML Marquee
On 9/8/06, Rimantas Liubertas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rule 1: JavaScript dependent elements should be generated with JavaScript, otherwise you promise functionality that may not be available. Strange rule, indeed. What if with JS element does something, without JS - just sits here and provides its content? Like, say, collapsible trees, which are just some nested ULs if JavaScript is not available. I think the keyword there is JavaScript dependent - the tree itself is not JavaScript dependent, but any controls for manipulating it are. K. -- Kay Smoljak business: www.cleverstarfish.com standards: kay.zombiecoder.com coldfusion: kay.smoljak.com personal: goatlady.wordpress.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site content stolen is there anyone to report it to in the USA
On 9/7/06, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I just followed that link from the google results to google's cached page. Doesn't look to me as if they are duplicating your page but rather linking to it and telling people what your site is about. Don't know about you, but I'm always happy about free cross links. Seconded - that site wasn't ripping any content, it's a site directory providing links and descriptions to other sites (and googlejuice too). Way to over-react - are you going to sue Google too for 'republishing' your content?! *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] document.write and JS dependent features (was: XHTML Marquee)
David Dorward wrote: This has the issue that the user will get a Return link even if there is nowhere to return to (e.g. if the opened the link in a new tab). That was ONLY a quick for-example's-sake example to simply get the idea across since a couple of members didn't seem to understand the rule as stated. I would typically only use something like that on an error page or another page I felt someone was going to be coming to from somewhere else on my site and not via a new window or tab. But you're right, Back buttons rule and are the safest most usable route. Regarding the deprecation of document.write, I added I think. I put that because I am unsure and didn't want anyone to get the notion that I was certain about it. Somewhere along the way I was led to understand that document.write is no longer going to be the best way to add JS to pages. [...] document that conforms to an XHTML DTD but is served as text/html is considered tag soup and not XHTML [...] Regarding tag soup and XHTML being served as text/html instead of application/xhtml+xml I have no comment and I don't even want to go there. It's a dead horse discussion. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] document.write and JS dependent features (was: XHTML Marquee)
... Regarding tag soup and XHTML being served as text/html instead of application/xhtml+xml I have no comment and I don't even want to go there. It's a dead horse discussion. ... However, the way you serve page determines will document.write work or not. It does not depend on XHTML version: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#docwrite http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1091626816count=1 Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] document.write and JS dependent features (was: XHTML Marquee)
On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 05:30:08PM +0300, Rimantas Liubertas wrote: ... Regarding tag soup and XHTML being served as text/html instead of application/xhtml+xml I have no comment and I don't even want to go there. It's a dead horse discussion. ... However, the way you serve page determines will document.write work or not. It does not depend on XHTML version: Which was my point -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] web check Part II
John 'Max' Maxwell wrote: HI All, http://www.project.ex16.co.uk/index3column.htm Gone for a change of tac with new layout - all checks appreciated. I have not added a max-width hack for IE yet but will have a look at it - meanwhile the change of banner design should get rid of the 'orrible blank banner etc (though I know - it doesnt help the 'widescreen' text effect). so far so good. cheers, Max. Max, Just a very cursory look on my end, and some hasty notes... It may be a good idea to view your page in a test browser and validate the markup. What is your page about? Should the document title and the h1 heading read: Tiverton Rugby Club? View your page in Opera/9.01 and then compare it to Firefox/1.5.0.6. Do you want the page centered or hugging the left viewport? Best, ~dL -- http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] document.write and JS dependent features (was: XHTML Marquee)
Rimantas Liubertas wrote: However, the way you serve page determines will document.write work or not. It does not depend on XHTML version: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#docwrite http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1091626816count=1 Thank you for the references. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] document.write and JS dependent features
David Dorward wrote: On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 09:11:29AM -0400, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: My method here does have a flaw thought in that document.write is deprecated in the XHTML 1.1 spec I think. No, it's not deprecated (though I think it should be). document.write is, IIRC, not documented in any standard. Ah, yeah it is! It's in DOM 2 HTML! [1] AFAIK there is no browser actually supports it in XHTML documents (including 1.0 documents). Currently, that's correct. However, AIUI, the WHATWG will soon be defining how it can work in XHTML and browsers will probably be implementing it. It will be defined with well-formedness constraints, such that if you pass it a non-well formed fragment, it will result in an error. The difficulty is in defining how and where it gets injected back into the parser in the middle of the file stream, though such problems exist for tag soup as well [2]. Personally, I consider document.write() to be incredibly bad practice and I think it should be left behind with tag soup and never used in XHTML, ever! [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-2-HTML/html.html#ID-75233634 [2] http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1155195074count=1 -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] document.write and JS dependent features
On Sat, Sep 09, 2006 at 01:03:57AM +1000, Lachlan Hunt wrote: document.write is, IIRC, not documented in any standard. Ah, yeah it is! It's in DOM 2 HTML! [1] Ah, it slipped me by by virtue of being in /2/. What is support like for DOM 2 these days? If its reached a reasonable level I might have to throw myself into the spec. AFAIK there is no browser actually supports it in XHTML documents (including 1.0 documents). Currently, that's correct. However, AIUI, the WHATWG will soon be defining how it can work in XHTML I seem to recall some Mozilla related discussion that boiled down to: The XML needs to be parsed, then document.write statesments executed, then the XHTML reparsed and remain well formed throughout. Personally, I consider document.write() to be incredibly bad practice and I think it should be left behind with tag soup and never used in XHTML, ever! aolme too!/aol :) -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] web check Part II
Max, Just a very cursory look on my end, and some hasty notes... It may be a good idea to view your page in a test browser and validate the markup. What is your page about? Should the document title and the h1 heading read: Tiverton Rugby Club? View your page in Opera/9.01 and then compare it to Firefox/1.5.0.6. Do you want the page centered or hugging the left viewport? Best, ~dL Hi David, The page isn't about anything yet - the rugby club content is merely to pad the structure - I am looking for a cross browser happy layout at this stage. as to alignment - I usually go for centred but this layout has a max of 1000px so I guess it'll only 'hug' the left viewport (less the 20px padding) in browsers (less IE) set to be wider than that. I'll have a play. right now - just making sure it doesn't go awry in any particular browser/platform combo. Hope that makes sense? Cheers, Max. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] document.write and JS dependent features (was: XHTML Marquee)
Thank you all for the information regarding document.write. As I noted before I typically only use the specific example I gave on error pages. But armed with the information provided I reviewed my other domains and found one poor usage of this on my experiments pages at http://mikecherim.com and replaced the feature with something more usable. If anyone happens to spot other usages on any of my domains (I have seven just for my own use) at any time in the future, a heads up will be appreciated. I don't know it all and I never will, and I'll never get it all right or satisfy everyone, but I am serious about at least doing the very best I can. The advice I give, even when it's wrong, is my honest attempt at being helpful. Perhaps the specific example I gave was not a good one, but the idea was to convey the not the back link scripting, but rather the concept of using JavaScript to print JavaScript to a page. Thank you to all who shed more light on the subject for me. As usual all sorts of quality information was gleaned, which is why I put up with the sometimes counter-productive discussions when they get off-track. This WSG list is mostly beneficial. Respectfully, Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] web check Part II
John 'Max' Maxwell wrote: Max, [...] Hi David, The page isn't about anything yet - the rugby club content is merely to pad the structure - I am looking for a cross browser happy layout at this stage. In reference to your uri: http://www.project.ex16.co.uk/index3column.htm : 48 screen captures (linux, mac, win/2000, xp). I did not wait for them to load. http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=283003 ... Max. Best, ~dL *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] web check Part II
~davidLaakso wrote: John 'Max' Maxwell wrote: Max, [...] Hi David, The page isn't about anything yet - the rugby club content is merely to pad the structure - I am looking for a cross browser happy layout at this stage. In reference to your uri: http://www.project.ex16.co.uk/index3column.htm : 48 screen captures (linux, mac, win/2000, xp). I did not wait for them to load. http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=283003 ... Max. Best, ~dL *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Nice one - Thanks David!! - by the way - its now valid HTML and CSS though I need to change the way the flash is embedded. I don't like my content area either ... but that's all cosmetic - no problem. Thanks again, Max. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Target.com case moves forward
http://webaim.org/blog/2006/09/08/target_lawsuit/ This is a very significant case in the United States. This ruling provides much needed clarification that the Americans with Disabilities Act applies to web sites and that lawsuits can be brought under that civil rights act. It's not yet clear if this applies to all web sites or only to web sites that have a bricks and mortar presence. The case continues and will hopefully provide more clarification and precedence about what is accessible and what is not. Other recent finding in the U.S. have used WCAG 1.0 as the defining reference. Jared Smith WebAIM.org *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
Fear not - I am close to securing 'Grade 2 Listed' status for my web sites as an area of outstanding natural beauty ... nothing is to be touched ... a wheelchair ramp or even the teeniest handrail or elevated plug socket would just destroy the ambience that is my art bloody peasants - can you imagine them in the Victoria and Albert The Monalisa - are you sure - but its just tooo small and then this one here is huge. Pardon step back?? no, no n - you need to fit a scroll wheel to the frame dear boy, so EVERYone can enjoy it you see. sorry. Max aka The Pig Farmer - fighting for the spiral stair case ... PS - You're wrong ... I haven't even started the wine yet ... oh dear. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
Max aka The Pig Farmer - fighting for the spiral stair case ... Being a wheelchair user myself, I find your statements to be offensive at a personal level and misguided at a professional level. I don't think adding alternate ways of navigating a web site will encroach on your art. If you feel you can't add the appropriate WCAG modifications to your site without stifling your creativity, why not add an alternate link to accessible (artistically ugly) pages? Hopefully we learned from the Jim Crow laws that we can't segregate an entire segment of the population and call ourselves a Democratic Society. Regards, Kepler Gelotte (one of the 'peasants') *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
I of course have no intention of starting an argument over whats best and so on. My only criteria for a CMS is configurability. I have installed Drupal, Mambo and related on quite a few occasions. Always seems to be configuration issues. Using them as is will be fine, but I always found that when you want to do customizations, anything more than a drop in template, the way they are programmed, the templates, menu systems etc make it very difficult to do so. Perhaps I am wrong? I really don't think so but have known many saying the same thing... Bruce Prochnau - Original Message - From: c h a i m [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 3:50 AM Subject: Re: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS CivicSpace was designed to do all of these. It is built on Drupal, but has not been updated to work with the last 3 Latest releases including the current Drupal 4.7.3 On 9/8/06, Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Wonsil Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 4:13 AM To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS CivicSpace was designed to do all of these. It is built on Drupal. You can demo either at: CivicSpace: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=510 Drupal: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=132 Roberto Scano: Also their backend conform to accessibility requirements? ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** -- chaim cohen [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
Kepler Gelotte wrote: Max aka The Pig Farmer - fighting for the spiral stair case ... Being a wheelchair user myself, I find your statements to be offensive at a personal level and misguided at a professional level. I don't think adding alternate ways of navigating a web site will encroach on your art. If you feel you can't add the appropriate WCAG modifications to your site without stifling your creativity, why not add an alternate link to accessible (artistically ugly) pages? Hopefully we learned from the Jim Crow laws that we can't segregate an entire segment of the population and call ourselves a "Democratic Society". Regards, Kepler Gelotte (one of the 'peasants') *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** excellent - there's always one - and thank you for identifying yourself. You clearly exposed me as an individual who actually is fighting for spiral staircases and disrespects all forms of democracy, no no - it wasn't a joke - you're quite justified don't worry - I can only help that my platform provided you with a satisfactory position from where to correct me. Misguided? I'll take my chances there - to be honest - going to war in Iraq with a 50 year old weapon was misguided, but I survived that. But offensive? If you can honestly tell me that you as an individual were offended by my humour then I can only wholeheartedly apologise as it is something I do not take any pleasure in and until tonight had managed to avoid. All of my websites these days are valid, clearly constructed and encourage access by all members of society using all variations of hardware and software. Regards. ***List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmUnsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfmHelp: [EMAIL PROTECTED]***
RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
Also take a look around at OpenSource CMS, All of the CMS they have listed link to working demos. http://www.opensourcecms.com/ -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG Sent: September 8, 2006 3:34 AM To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Wonsil Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 4:13 AM To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS CivicSpace was designed to do all of these. It is built on Drupal. You can demo either at: CivicSpace: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=510 Drupal: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=132 Roberto Scano: Also their backend conform to accessibility requirements? ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
I replied before reading further and had not noticed http://www.opensourcecms.com/ was already suggested, The lesson I learned today is: Read before you Write. -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG Sent: September 8, 2006 3:34 AM To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Wonsil Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 4:13 AM To: cms@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS CivicSpace was designed to do all of these. It is built on Drupal. You can demo either at: CivicSpace: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=510 Drupal: http://www.opensourcecms.com/index.php?option=com_contenttask=viewid=132 Roberto Scano: Also their backend conform to accessibility requirements? ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
Interesting. I work for a/the local newspaper company and it would be hell to try and make everything accessible... so many different departments doing different things to the site - not to mention the old-school programmers that could care less about accessibility. Also, all of the third-party scripts we have going would make any type standards upgrade nearly impossible. I would hate to own an e-commerce company that was in the same boat as above... If that ruling passes, I would like to see some sort of grandfather clause, or at least some sort of grace period. I would imagine this would only apply to big-name e-commerce sites? ...Personal and/or small-business sites too? I know that a lot of folks use e-commerce apps/scripts which are far from being accessible. Can anyone name one app/script that does? Am I missing the point here? Cheers, Micky -- Wishlist: http://snipurl.com/vrs9 Switch: http://browsehappy.com/ My: http://del.icio.us/mhulse *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
Hi Micky You need to show good faith effort to make your site accessible. Target was warned 6 months prior to the initial filing that they had significant problems and suggestions were given to fix them. The Target site did not make it difficult to use, it made it impossible for a blind person to purchase and get online-only discounts. Those are the two issues, are you making a good faith effort and are you providing services to everyone regardless of ability. If your newspaper can show that they've made an honest effort to fix accessibility issues, they should be safe. Those basic steps would include adding alternate text to images and making sure your only navigational elements are not hidden behind javascript, flash, and/or image based without alt attributes. If your paper is still suffering from these elements, it's your duty as a professional web developer to make the adjustments. It will also provide your paper with better search engine results. Ted http://www.last-child.com -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micky Hulse ... I work for a/the local newspaper company and it would be hell to try and make everything accessible... so many different departments doing different things to the site - not to mention the old-school programmers that could care less about accessibility. Also, all of the third-party scripts we have going would make any type standards upgrade nearly impossible. I would hate to own an e-commerce company that was in the same boat as above... If that ruling passes, I would like to see some sort of grandfather clause, or at least some sort of grace period. ... Am I missing the point here? Cheers, Micky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
A review of the Target website with screenshots, it still has 556 HTML errors one year later and blank space everywhere. Wal-Mart and many other American sites need a kick in the behind as well. http://www.hereticpress.com/Dogstar/Publishing/USAweb.html#targetstore Tim On 09/09/2006, at 9:09 AM, Ted Drake wrote: Hi Micky You need to show good faith effort to make your site accessible. Target was warned 6 months prior to the initial filing that they had significant problems and suggestions were given to fix them. The Target site did not make it difficult to use, it made it impossible for a blind person to purchase and get online-only discounts. Those are the two issues, are you making a good faith effort and are you providing services to everyone regardless of ability. If your newspaper can show that they've made an honest effort to fix accessibility issues, they should be safe. Those basic steps would include adding alternate text to images and making sure your only navigational elements are not hidden behind javascript, flash, and/or image based without alt attributes. If your paper is still suffering from these elements, it's your duty as a professional web developer to make the adjustments. It will also provide your paper with better search engine results. Ted http://www.last-child.com -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Micky Hulse ... I work for a/the local newspaper company and it would be hell to try and make everything accessible... so many different departments doing different things to the site - not to mention the old-school programmers that could care less about accessibility. Also, all of the third-party scripts we have going would make any type standards upgrade nearly impossible. I would hate to own an e-commerce company that was in the same boat as above... If that ruling passes, I would like to see some sort of grandfather clause, or at least some sort of grace period. ... Am I missing the point here? Cheers, Micky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** The Editor Heretic Press http://www.hereticpress.com Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
Hi Russ and Ted, many many many thanks for all the great tips, info and advice! russ - maxdesign wrote: - Does the site offer users a clear and easy-to-find method of contacting you (like an email address or more importantly a phone number) should all else fail? - Are alt attributes used for all descriptive images? - Does the site work with JavaScript disabled? - Does the site work with images disabled? - Does the site use visible skip menus to allow users to jump over large areas of content? - Is there sufficient colour brightness/contrasts? - Is colour alone used for critical information? - Are all links descriptive (for blind users)? - Does the site use well structured code such as heading levels to make it easier for assistive devices? - Does the site use accessible forms? - Does the site use accessible tables? Great checklist, I will forward it to my manager. Trust me, I would love to do a re-build of the whole site... but too many managers and departments and red tape for me (a very part-time Web Content Editor) to tackle. :( Thanks again Russ/Ted, I completely agree with the info/tips/advice you have given. I will confer with my boss soon and chat about these issues. Cheers, Micky -- Wishlist: http://snipurl.com/vrs9 Switch: http://browsehappy.com/ My: http://del.icio.us/mhulse *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Target.com case moves forward
Tim wrote: A review of the Target website with screenshots, it still has 556 HTML errors one year later and blank space everywhere. Wal-Mart and many other American sites need a kick in the behind as well. http://www.hereticpress.com/Dogstar/Publishing/USAweb.html#targetstore Ah, very interesting. I would have expected these sites to be on top of the latest web-design trends. Kinda reminds me of Disney site... it is strange how they reverted back to oldschool coding standards. http://disneystore-shopping.disney.co.uk/ Sidenote: Never get a Target credit card! If you are late on one payment watch-out for 30% interest rates! -- Wishlist: http://snipurl.com/vrs9 Switch: http://browsehappy.com/ My: http://del.icio.us/mhulse *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: digest for wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
I will be out of the office until Thursday 14th September 2006. If your enquiry is urgent please contact my colleague Doug Laird on 02 9422 2423 or by email [EMAIL PROTECTED] . If not then I will respond to your enquiry on my return. Kind Regards Alastair *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
At the risk of taking this thread somewhere else completely, I would suggest you consider Wordpress (wordpress.org). Yes, it's a blogging tool, but in point of fact it's little more than a CMS with a bent toward blogging. My whole site (http://clwill.com) is driven by it, and yet the blog is only one part of it. Because of this CMS nature I get things like searching and tagging for free. WP is infinitely configurable, easy to write/post in, and has 12-bazillion third-party plug-ins to do a huge range of things. No, it doesn't do your laundry list of things right out of the box, but if you want flexibility built on a solid base (its been downloaded over a million times), it's a great place to start... for free. Just my $0.02, Chris -Original Message- From: Bruce Subject: Re: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS My only criteria for a CMS is configurability. I have installed Drupal, Mambo and related on quite a few occasions. Always seems to be configuration issues. Using them as is will be fine, but I always found that when you want to do customizations, anything more than a drop in template, the way they are programmed, the templates, menu systems etc make it very difficult to do so. Perhaps I am wrong? I really don't think so but have known many saying the same thing... ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
I know I'm chiming in a bit late, but here goes. I am a bit partial to the Textpattern CMS myself. I and a few other guys are writing a book on it for Friends of ED. Its templating engine is incredibly flexible, so you can use any flavor of XHTML you want. http://textpattern.com/ -- Nathan Smith 208 348 2213 - w 859 229 9587 - m http://sonspring.com On 9/7/06, Elle Meredith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, I am new to CMS and find it hard to select one that will work for me and my client (non-profit organisation) and thought I could use some advice. I am interested in a CMS that is: * XHTML Strict * Built-in Accessibility features. I also need one that has the following: * Blog with commenting * RSS syndication * Events calendar and option for people to sign up for events * Basic image galleries * Search options * Donation option in the future I was looking at Xaraya or Web GUI. But any advice would be much appreciated. Cheers, Elle ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: [WSG CMS] Strict CMS
Nathan Smith wrote: http://textpattern.com/ Yeah, TXP rocks! I kinda get tired of hearing WP is so great. :) Stoked to hear that Friends of Ed are writing a book for it. -- Wishlist: http://snipurl.com/vrs9 Switch: http://browsehappy.com/ My: http://del.icio.us/mhulse ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
