Re: [WSG] Text Size Statistics
Ah - ok ... now i get it .. sorry ... firday ... going home now :o) r - Original Message - From: Peter Williams I think confused. I took this to mean that: - you create a standards compliant site - a visitor with an older browser visits and sees mush - a page explains why the page looks like mush and that the problem is with the older browser and explains ways to improve matters for the visitor. This seems to be an extension of the WASP's .ahem campaign to create awareness of the desirability of upgrading old, non standards compliant browsers. ** 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] Text Size Statistics
Thanks Andreas and Peter, your clarifications said what I meant ;) At the risk of starting a flame war, there has to come a time when full acceptance of a standard (in whatever business/industry/walk of life) is made, and that can only happen at the expense and exclusion of non-compliant systems/products/methods. Backwards compatibility can only extend so far, and relaxation of a standard dilutes the purpose and impact of the standard. Why have a standard if there is no effect in not applying or adhering to it? Regards Scott Swabey Lafinboy Productions www.lafinboy.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] Text Size Statistics
-Original Message- From: Scott Swabey - Lafinboy Productions [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 2 September 2005 3:59 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Text Size Statistics Thanks Andreas and Peter, your clarifications said what I meant ;) At the risk of starting a flame war, there has to come a time when full acceptance of a standard (in whatever business/industry/walk of life) is made, and that can only happen at the expense and exclusion of non-compliant systems/products/methods. Backwards compatibility can only extend so far, and relaxation of a standard dilutes the purpose and impact of the standard. Why have a standard if there is no effect in not applying or adhering to it? Ah, completely agree with you! But does it look professional if we put up a page somewhere saying: you can't see our page because your browsers are old? That's like going back to the habit of writing this website is made for 800x600 at the bottom of the page. Both looks like a cheap excuse. I would say: forget about old browsers like Netscape 4.7, but don't try to write any excuses about it. The client's don't care about our excuses anyway: either they can see the site or they can't. ** 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] Text Size Statistics
On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 03:44:33 -0400, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But does it look professional if we put up a page somewhere saying: you can't see our page because your browsers are old? That's like going back to the habit of writing this website is made for 800x600 at the bottom of the page. Both looks like a cheap excuse. I would say: forget about old browsers like Netscape 4.7, but don't try to write any excuses about it. The client's don't care about our excuses anyway: either they can see the site or they can't. Frankly, I have basically forgotten about NS4 as well as IE5 Mac. What they see is what they get. I'm sure they are used to it. That should be a clue in and of itself to update. As far as putting up a page saying you can't see our page because your browsers are old is far different than the 800x600 thing. This website is made for 800x600 basically means 'I made my site wrong'. The former means 'You are looking at a modern, standards-compliant and correctly constructed Website using outdated software'. -- Tom Livingston Senior Multimedia Artist Media Logic www.mlinc.com Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ ** 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] Submenus anyone?
Has anyone got any good examples of submenus that work good and are compliant with XHTML 1.0 strict? I've been using Project 7 menus but I'm finding they are just too difficult to sort out all the kinks, plus there has always been the problem that if you move the mouse fast enough they don't always close. I figure there must be better working menus than that. I usually have my links change background and foreground colour, so would like that, but would like the link to stay changed colours while the mouse is hovering over the submenu that has appeared, and then to go back to normal when I mouse off the submenu and it vanishes. Thanks, Stephen -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 02/09/2005 ** 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] Submenus anyone?
Hi, I cant remember where I got it from but I use a xhtml and css based menu system, an example can be found at http://www.kevinarrowsmith.co.uk/menu/menu.htm It validates to xhtml1.1 and the css validates too, the only thing I did have to do was to include the javascript just to get it to work in IE, it works fine without the javascript in most other browsers. The only problem I did have was aligning it all, I have also had a horizontal menu bar working, if you want I can find an example Kevin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stevio Sent: 02 September 2005 20:37 To: Web Standards Group Subject: [WSG] Submenus anyone? Has anyone got any good examples of submenus that work good and are compliant with XHTML 1.0 strict? I've been using Project 7 menus but I'm finding they are just too difficult to sort out all the kinks, plus there has always been the problem that if you move the mouse fast enough they don't always close. I figure there must be better working menus than that. I usually have my links change background and foreground colour, so would like that, but would like the link to stay changed colours while the mouse is hovering over the submenu that has appeared, and then to go back to normal when I mouse off the submenu and it vanishes. Thanks, Stephen -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.10.18/89 - Release Date: 02/09/2005 ** 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] Submenus anyone?
Iwould be interested in an example of a horizontal menu. TIA Phil I cant remember where I got it from but I use a xhtml and css based menu system, an example can be found at http://www.kevinarrowsmith.co.uk/menu/menu.htm It validates to xhtml1.1 and the css validates too, the only thing I did have to do was to include the javascript just to get it to work in IE, it works fine without the javascript in most other browsers. The only problem I did have was aligning it all, I have also had a horizontal menu bar working, if you want I can find an example Kevin ** 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] Submenus anyone?
I found it on a site I am currently building for someone, the alignment isn't 100% in my opinion but it isn't far off but is work in progress. Kevin -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phil Gohr Sent: 02 September 2005 22:45 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Submenus anyone? Iwould be interested in an example of a horizontal menu. TIA Phil I cant remember where I got it from but I use a xhtml and css based menu system, an example can be found at http://www.kevinarrowsmith.co.uk/menu/menu.htm It validates to xhtml1.1 and the css validates too, the only thing I did have to do was to include the javascript just to get it to work in IE, it works fine without the javascript in most other browsers. The only problem I did have was aligning it all, I have also had a horizontal menu bar working, if you want I can find an example Kevin ** 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] Submenus anyone?
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 14:44:42 -0700, Phil Gohr wrote: I would be interested in an example of a horizontal menu. TIA Phil Hi Phil, you may be interested in this pure CSS solution from Thierry: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/dropdown/demo.asp Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 9/2/2005 http://www.hucklesby.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] Text Size Statistics
-Original Message- From: Tom Livingston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 2 September 2005 11:02 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Text Size Statistics On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 03:44:33 -0400, Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But does it look professional if we put up a page somewhere saying: you can't see our page because your browsers are old? That's like going back to the habit of writing this website is made for 800x600 at the bottom of the page. Both looks like a cheap excuse. I would say: forget about old browsers like Netscape 4.7, but don't try to write any excuses about it. The client's don't care about our excuses anyway: either they can see the site or they can't. As far as putting up a page saying you can't see our page because your browsers are old is far different than the 800x600 thing. This website is made for 800x600 basically means 'I made my site wrong'. The former means 'You are looking at a modern, standards-compliant and correctly constructed Website using outdated software'. That is quite a statement. Why does the website is made for computers with large monitors mean it was made wrong and the website was made for computers running the latest software is correct? In both cases the assumption is made that users have upgraded their machines to the latest technology. ** 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] Text Size Statistics
Andreas Boehmer wrote In both cases the assumption is made that users have upgraded their machines to the latest technology. It's not so much a case of upgrading to the latest physical technology that is required though in many cases, but an upgrade simply in the browser. In almost all cases a free upgrade at that. I concede that a P1 Win95 with 75MB of RAM may not be as efficient in use as a new machine, but the display on a modern, standards compliant browser on both machines should be no different. That said there may be hardware/software issues that prevent a modern browser being used on an old, low spec machine, and this is where a realistic view needs to be taken regarding the advancement of a technology/standard over the ability of users to keep pace with said technology. I think this discussion has now moved far enough away from the originally posted question to warrant it redundant. Regards Scott Swabey Lafinboy Productions www.lafinboy.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] Submenus anyone?
From: Stevio [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Web Standards Group wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 3:37 PM Subject: [WSG] Submenus anyone? Has anyone got any good examples of submenus that work good and are compliant with XHTML 1.0 strict? I've been using Project 7 menus but I'm finding they are just too difficult to sort out all the kinks, plus there has always been the problem that if you move the mouse fast enough they don't always close. Which menu are you using? This will not happen with our commercial Pop Menu Magic system, guaranteed. Here is a demo site using the menu, let me know if you can get the menu to stick open - I sure can't :-) Al Sparber PVII http://www.projectseven.com Designing with CSS is sometimes like barreling down a crumbling mountain road at 90 miles per hour secure in the knowledge that repairs are scheduled for next Tuesday. ** 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] Submenus anyone?
From: Al Sparber [EMAIL PROTECTED] Which menu are you using? This will not happen with our commercial Pop Menu Magic system, guaranteed. Here is a demo site using the menu, let me know if you can get the menu to stick open - I sure can't :-) and this is the demo site :-) http://www.projectseven.com/tutorials/accessibility/pop_integrated/pmmsite/ -- Al ** 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] css buttons only hot over text in ie
kvnmcwebn wrote: hello, that did the trick it would be nice if it worked with the width: auto; but its a lot better now if the whole buttons hot. I guess you meant *without* the width:auto... so I think I have good news for you ;) Try display:inline-block instead of width:auto HTH, Thierry | www.TJKDesign.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] Submenus anyone?
Thanks David, I will check it out. It looks at first glance like something I can use. Thanks again, Phil Hi Phil, you may be interested in this pure CSS solution from Thierry: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/dropdown/demo.asp Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 9/2/2005 http://www.hucklesby.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] css buttons only hot over text in ie
Thierry Koblentz wrote: I guess you meant *without* the width:auto... so I think I have good news for you ;) Try display:inline-block instead of width:auto Or, better, remove the *extra* float declaration you have for these anchors ;-( That declaration *resets* the first one and you end up with anchors that are block elements, but *not* floats. That would be fine with most of the browsers, but feeding IE with a height declaration makes it *expand* the anchors full width (unless they are floats). HTH, Thierry | www.TJKDesign.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 **
