[WSG] CSS DIV problem, as weird as simple
Hello!
I've an extrange problem, you can see it here:
http://www.2much4u.net/Problem/problem.gif
The page with the XHTML and CSS: http://www.2much4u.net/Problem/example.html
Page code source:
---
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
Strict//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"
html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"" xml:lang="en"
lang="en"
head
titleTest Page/title
meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=utf-8" /
style type="text/css" media="screen"
#Example {
width: 229px;
background-color: #2F;
}
/style
/head
body
div id="Example"img src="" width="150"
height="112" alt="Sample Image" //div
/body
/html
---
Why there's a margin with any
browser excepts IE6?
Regards,
R. Santana
Re: [WSG] CSS DIV problem, as weird as simple
G'day
The page with the XHTML and CSS:
http://www.2much4u.net/Problem/example.html
...
Why there's a margin with any browser excepts IE6?
Because the default alignment for images in most of the other
browsers is baseline. Add the following to your CSS and see if
it fixes the problem:
#Example img { vertical-align:top } /* or bottom or middle */
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
**
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 DIV problem, as weird as simple
Thanks Bert! that solved my problem.
Bert Doorn escribi:
G'day
The page with the XHTML and CSS:
http://www.2much4u.net/Problem/example.html
...
Why there's a margin with any browser excepts
IE6?
Because the default alignment for images in most of the other browsers
is "baseline". Add the following to your CSS and see if it fixes the
problem:
#Example img { vertical-align:top } /* or bottom or middle */
Regards
Re: [WSG] Target sued over non-accessible site
Absalom Media wrote: Amount of Javascript disabled based on various client profiles I've got: My site: Less than 0.1% Commercial music site: Less than 0.5% Commercial / education health care site: Less than 0.7% What methodology are you using to identify humans as opposed to search engines and other robots? I am used to seeing figures of around 5% in global stats for non-JavaScript users, and assumed this is grossly distorted by something. Very interested to find out more... Cheers Ian -- _ zStudio - Web development and accessibility http://zStudio.co.uk Snippetz.net - Online code library File, manage and re-use your code snippets links http://snippetz.net ** 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] Target sued over non-accessible site
What methodology are you using to identify humans as opposed to search engines and other robots? -sorry this doesnt awnser your question and maybe this its not worth mentioning- Even hotmail.com doesnt work if javascript is disabled. That says something i think. Of course there is the search engines to consider but unless im mistaken my biggest concern when using javascript is to do it unobtrusively so as not to set off blockers. is this skewed? -kvnmcwebn ** 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] IE6/7 have horizontal scrollbars on this
Second day and I keep coming back to the same problem...IE6/7 keeps placing a hortizontal scrollbar on this template. IE5, however, does not. http://client.vaska.com/escaut/index5.php There are a number of other issues here (like the height of a div being created by javascript) that I'll deal with later. But for now, is there some way that I can get IE6/7 to stop doing this? It's clearly caused by the nav items at the top of the page. All the modern browsers seem just fine with this... You will note that I'm using a pretty common technique that essentially creates fake frames so that I can have a fixed position footer at the bottom of the page. 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] IE7 Compatibility Team
Thierry Koblentz wrote: height:1% or height:0 or whatever height you set gives layout to an element, which is not the case with display:inline. Making sure an element hasLayout is a big tool in the box when it comes to fix IE bugs. Just FYI, over on CSS-D there was a thread today about a web chat with the MS IE7 developers, in which hasLayout was mentioned and I thought this specific point was quite important: IE7 will respect height: 1%, which if not filtered away from it could break many layouts. They are retaining hasLayout as an internal property and recommend using zoom: 100% for inducing hasLayout as a replacement technique for height: 1%. More here http://sltclan.com/images/cj/ie7.html Cheers Ian -- _ zStudio - Web development and accessibility http://zStudio.co.uk Snippetz.net - Online code library File, manage and re-use your code snippets links http://snippetz.net ** 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] IE6/7 have horizontal scrollbars on this
I'm guessing its due to the overflow: auto; in your #content div. Remove that, and use the DOM and some _javascript_ to reset your footers (tutorial on http://www.alistapart.com/articles/footers/ ) On 2/10/06, Vaska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Second day and I keep coming back to the same problem...IE6/7 keepsplacing a hortizontal scrollbar on this template. IE5, however, doesnot.http://client.vaska.com/escaut/index5.php There are a number of other issues here (like the height of a divbeing created by _javascript_) that I'll deal with later. But for now,is there some way that I can get IE6/7 to stop doing this? It'sclearly caused by the nav items at the top of the page. All the modern browsers seem just fine with this...You will note that I'm using a pretty common technique thatessentially creates fake frames so that I can have a fixed positionfooter at the bottom of the page. Help!;)**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] IE7 Compatibility Team
Ian Anderson wrote: IE7 will respect height: 1%, which if not filtered away from it could break many layouts. They are retaining hasLayout as an internal property and recommend using zoom: 100% for inducing hasLayout as a replacement technique for height: 1%. Which W3C standard/recommendation for CSS defines the zoom property? I don't see it in the CSS 2.1 spec. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/propidx.html If indeed it's not defined in any CSS standard/recommendation, are MS effectively saying: We recommend you write invalid CSS so things work in our new browser which has better support for standards? Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading, user-friendly websites ** 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] IE6/7 have horizontal scrollbars on this
This article does not create a footer that is fixed to the bottom of the screen. If your content is longer it will push the footer off the bottom of the screen. On 10 Feb 2006, at 11:33, Robbie Shepherd wrote: I'm guessing its due to the overflow: auto; in your #content div. Remove that, and use the DOM and some javascript to reset your footers (tutorial on http://www.alistapart.com/articles/footers/ ) ** 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] IE6/7 have horizontal scrollbars on this
ah yes youre right, I see what you're trying to do now...(though heaven knows why! :P I'm sure you have your reasons though :) sorry I threw you a red herring thereOn 2/10/06, Vaska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This article does not create a footer that is fixed to the bottom ofthe screen. If your content is longer it will push the footer off thebottom of the screen.On 10 Feb 2006, at 11:33, Robbie Shepherd wrote: I'm guessing its due to the overflow: auto; in your #content div. Remove that, and use the DOM and some _javascript_ to reset your footers (tutorial on http://www.alistapart.com/articles/footers/ )**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] IE7 Compatibility Team
Bert Doorn wrote:
Which W3C standard/recommendation for CSS defines the zoom property?
I don't see it in the CSS 2.1 spec.
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/propidx.html
Look in MS special non-standard instead.
If indeed it's not defined in any CSS standard/recommendation, are MS
effectively saying: We recommend you write invalid CSS so things
work in our new browser which has better support for standards?
Yes. That's exactly what they are saying.
style
.gainlayout {zoom: 1;}
/style
...
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/IETechCol/cols/dnexpie/expie20050831.asp
...
Remember: avoid all hacks that aren't approved by Microsoft, and you'll
be fine ;-)
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
**
[WSG] Vertical align
Hello! I want to create an horizontal bar with some elements on it, some text, a text box for searches, and date time, just below the top part of the page. What's the best way to create a vertical-center content with XHTML 1.0 Strict and CSS2? Thanks!
Re: [WSG] Vertical align
2006/2/10, Roberto Santana [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello! I want to create an horizontal bar with some elements on it, some text, a text box for searches, and date time, just below the top part of the page. What's the best way to create a vertical-center content with XHTML 1.0 Strict and CSS2? Thanks! Hello, that´s it's always a problem, i thing vertical-align only works with inline-level and 'table-cell' elements. u have to deal with the padding or margin and heigh... depends of what u are using... your text gonna start hat same nivel and you have to ajust to the text box-- Nuno Gaspar - Designer ---http://www.artideias.com
Re: [WSG] Vertical align
Roberto Santana wrote:
I want to create an horizontal bar with some elements on it, some text,
a text box for searches, and date time, just below the top part of the
page.
What's the best way to create a vertical-center content with XHTML 1.0
Strict and CSS2?
Don't know about best, but... If the horizontal bar has a fixed
height, you can position it absolutely, half-way down the page,
and give it a negative margin-top that's half the height of the
bar. So for example:
CSS:
body { margin:0; padding:0; }
#contentbar {
position:absolute;
top:50%;
width:100%;
height: 10em;
margin: -5em 0 0;
padding:0;
background-color:#ccc;
color:#000;
}
#contentbar div { margin:1em }
(x)HTML:
div id=contentbar
divContent here/div
/div
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
**
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] IE7 Compatibility Team
From: Bert Doorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] Which W3C standard/recommendation for CSS defines the zoom property? I don't see it in the CSS 2.1 spec. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/propidx.html If indeed it's not defined in any CSS standard/recommendation, are MS effectively saying: We recommend you write invalid CSS so things work in our new browser which has better support for standards? Yes. Good analysis :-) -- 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] Target sued over non-accessible site
On 09/02/06, Conyers, Dwayne, Mr [C] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I believe accessibility is an important design issue, is there legal precedent for suing someone for poor design? It seems a bit like suing Mickey Dees for spilling hot coffee in the lap... Yes, but spilling hot coffee in the lap isn't at all relevant to good or poor design, nor to accessibility. Not a great comparison, sorry ;) And yes, I'd also assume there are precedents of people in wheel chairs suing a company over poor design. -Rob. N���.�Ȩ�X���+��i�� n�Z�֫v�+��h��y�m�쵩�j�l��.f���.�ץ�w�q(��b��(��,�)උazX����)��
RE: [WSG] Today's lesson: Respect - be courteous up or leave
I wholeheartedly agree with these incorrect/correct replies for a forum such as this one. About two or three years ago while reading a newsgroup post for Borland Delphi someone posted suggested rules for posting on any forum or newsgroup which was excellent, in the same vein as these by Russ...of course I have no idea were it is now but this post will light a fire under me to locate it once again. Kevin S Gallagher http://www.ormap.com/ (a work in progress) -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of russ - maxdesign Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2006 1:58 PM To: Web Standards Group Subject: [WSG] Today's lesson: Respect - be courteous up or leave I want to talk today about respect. For those of you who have not heard of this concept, respect is sometimes defined as courteous regard for people's feelings. When you reply to a post on the list, you should at all times try to do so with respect. Everyone on this list is entitled to their own opinion. Sometimes they may be factually incorrect, other times they may have a different view from you but EVERYONE should be treated with respect. Below are some examples of replies that LACK respect: You are totally wrong That is silly That is stupid You know nothing about... You are dumb You smell Below are some more respectful alternatives: I'm not sure I agree with that I think you may be misinterpreting... I respectfully disagree for the following reasons Have you considered taking a bath? Today's lesson: when replying to others, be courteous or leave! In the near future I will cover a more subtle concept: how not to always have the last word on a subject. However, that is a bit advanced for now, one step at a time. Russ Miss Manors ** 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] Today's lesson: Respect - be courteous up or leave
Lachlan Hunt wrote: Unfortunately, top posting (or failing to quote at all) is often the result users of broken e-mail clients (usually Outlook or some web based mail). I find the best approach is to just set a good example, and hope that others eventually get the idea and/or switch mail clients. For those users married to their MS Office suite (and thus Outlook), you may be interested in this: http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/outlook-quotefix/ Problem solved. JF -- John Foliot [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web Accessibility Specialist WATS.ca - Web Accessibility Testing and Services http://www.wats.ca Phone: 1-613-482-7053 ** 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] Target sued over non-accessible site
On Feb 10, 2006, at 8:24 AM, Rob Mientjes wrote: On 09/02/06, Conyers, Dwayne, Mr [C] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: While I believe accessibility is an important design issue, is there legal precedent for suing someone for poor design? It seems a bit like suing Mickey Dees for spilling hot coffee in the lap... Yes, but spilling hot coffee in the lap isn't at all relevant to goodor poor design, nor to accessibility. Not a great comparison, sorry ;) And yes, I'd also assume there are precedents of people in wheelchairs suing a company over poor design. In fact, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has an enforcement responsibility, though not specifically for the Internet, since it was established prior to the growth of the Web. http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/enforce.htm What is new(ish) is extending the accessibility argument to private companies, since Section 508 applies only to the US government (and is not taken very seriously, IMHO). See Derek Featherstone's post on the WaSP site: http, Taking Aim at Target(.com): http://www.webstandards.org/ I see the Web as tremendously liberating for the disabled, and partially-abled or differently-abled, as well as the rapidly growing senior population. Being able to shop online may save an entire day's worth of effort for some. Being able to type instead of sign may facilitate a huge amount of conversation between hearing and non- hearing. Etc. We may not think of it that way if that's not our own experience, but maybe we should try to imagine life without sight or hearing, etc. Best regards, Marilyn Langfeld Langfeldesigns http://www.langfeldesigns.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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] Vertical align
I want to create an horizontal bar with some elements on it, some text, a text box for searches, and date time, just below the top part of the page. I've used this example: http://www.wellstyled.com/css-single-line-vertical-centering.html Thanks Nuno and Bert!
RE: [WSG] Target sued over non-accessible site
Conyers, Dwayne, Mr While I believe accessibility is an important design issue, is there legal precedent for suing someone for poor design? Does the Ramada/Priceline debacle count? http://news.com.com/Travel+sites+agree+to+changes+for+the+blind/2100-1038_3-5318568.html P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ N���.�Ȩ�X���+��i�� n�Z�֫v�+��h��y�m�쵩�j�l��.f���.�ץ�w�q(��b��(��,�)උazX����)��
Re: [WSG] IE6/7 have horizontal scrollbars on this
Sorry to break this to you, but you're trying to accomplish something that's as good as impossible (maybe not impossible, but you're most likely to unless you drop IE5 or alternatively give it another stylesheet that don't have a fixed footer. It just won't work for IE5 because of something or another. Robbie is right in one thing and that is it's the overflow:auto; that's causing your problems in IE5, take it away and the site will work.I'm quite sure that you may solve this with DOM and some _javascript_, but I don't know where you'd might find it. I essentially gave up the whole thing, part because of trouble with IE5 and part because I didn't like how it turned out in FireFox and IE6 either. On 2/10/06, Vaska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This article does not create a footer that is fixed to the bottom ofthe screen. If your content is longer it will push the footer off thebottom of the screen.On 10 Feb 2006, at 11:33, Robbie Shepherd wrote: I'm guessing its due to the overflow: auto; in your #content div. Remove that, and use the DOM and some _javascript_ to reset your footers (tutorial on http://www.alistapart.com/articles/footers/ )**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] IE6/7 have horizontal scrollbars on this
haha...after two days and coming back to the same problem four times...i got the message! thanks for th enote though... ;) On 10 Feb 2006, at 17:43, Vincent Hasselgård wrote: Sorry to break this to you, but you're trying to accomplish something that's as good as impossible (maybe not impossible, but you're most likely to unless you drop IE5 or alternatively give it another stylesheet that don't have a fixed footer. It just won't work for IE5 because of something or another. Robbie is right in one thing and that is it's the overflow:auto; that's causing your problems in IE5, take it away and the site will work. I'm quite sure that you may solve this with DOM and some javascript, but I don't know where you'd might find it. I essentially gave up the whole thing, part because of trouble with IE5 and part because I didn't like how it turned out in FireFox and IE6 either. On 2/10/06, Vaska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This article does not create a footer that is fixed to the bottom of the screen. If your content is longer it will push the footer off the bottom of the screen. On 10 Feb 2006, at 11:33, Robbie Shepherd wrote: I'm guessing its due to the overflow: auto; in your #content div. Remove that, and use the DOM and some javascript to reset your footers (tutorial on http://www.alistapart.com/articles/footers/ ) ** 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: Edit: Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.
Stephen Stagg wrote: And how, pray tell, would a screen reader know - based on a series of presentational rules - what the meaning of a made-up tag soup is? The same way that they would with normal HTML, by reading the XML, and the stylesheet and guessing, if an element has the font-weight:bold element, then it should be emboldened. Wrong. Screen readers do not look at the CSS and try to guesstimate what is a heading, what's a paragraph, what's a list, etc. Screen-Reader hints are still presentational devices. Screen readers look at the structure of the document, which is clearly defined as it's standardised in the HTML specification. I believe (tho haven't checked) that there are a whole load of CSS properties to do with controlling assistive-technologies output. There are aural stylesheets, which only give hints about how to present something aurally. They do not define purpose or role of the elements they refer to, and THAT is what counts. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ 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] Fluid column and a float
Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote: http://mcdowell.sitesbyjoe.com/agents.asp Trouble is if I stick a floated element in the center column and then try to clear it with another element, the element with the style of clear clears the whole left column instead of just the floated element within the center column. Is there a fix for that behavior? Is it a matter of sticking a position style of some kind on the center column? It's a matter of isolating the center column - or parts of it - from the rest of the page. That can be done by establishing a new 'block formatting context'[1] for the good browsers, and playing around IE/win Layout-bugs[2] to achieve the same. IE7 is harder to convince, but it can be done. I tried that in your page, and it worked in Opera and IE/win, but some of that javascript stuff created problems for such a solution in Firefox 1.5.0.1 - made it freeze, so I gave up. It might be worth a try at your end though. regards Georg [1]http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#q15 [2]http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/onhavinglayout.html -- 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] IE6/7 have horizontal scrollbars on this
http://solardreamstudios.com/learn/css/footerstick was one I remember from ages ago, but there's now a message there pointing to a revised version: http://www.themaninblue.com/experiment/footerStickAlt/ Not certain this is the behaviour you want, but it's pretty nifty nonetheless. On 2/11/06, Vaska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: haha...after two days and coming back to the same problem four times...i got the message! thanks for th enote though... ;) On 10 Feb 2006, at 17:43, Vincent Hasselgård wrote: Sorry to break this to you, but you're trying to accomplish something that's as good as impossible (maybe not impossible, but you're most likely to unless you drop IE5 or alternatively give it another stylesheet that don't have a fixed footer. It just won't work for IE5 because of something or another. Robbie is right in one thing and that is it's the overflow:auto; that's causing your problems in IE5, take it away and the site will work. I'm quite sure that you may solve this with DOM and some javascript, but I don't know where you'd might find it. I essentially gave up the whole thing, part because of trouble with IE5 and part because I didn't like how it turned out in FireFox and IE6 either. On 2/10/06, Vaska [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This article does not create a footer that is fixed to the bottom of the screen. If your content is longer it will push the footer off the bottom of the screen. On 10 Feb 2006, at 11:33, Robbie Shepherd wrote: I'm guessing its due to the overflow: auto; in your #content div. Remove that, and use the DOM and some javascript to reset your footers (tutorial on http://www.alistapart.com/articles/footers/ ) ** 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 ** -- Joshua Street http://www.joahua.com/ +61 (0) 425 808 469 ** 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] ServerSide Includes and Divs
I discovered something weird today. When I was creating my layout that contains includes for some reason my rules would not work properly only if the layout was like this. -- code starts Main Layout div id=header Include header.php; /div div id=content Include content.php; /div div id=footer Include footer; /div --End of Main Layout --Sample Include //header.php div class=taglineBlah/div div class=logoutLogout/div -- end of code BUT! If I did this --code starts Main Layout Include header.php; div id=content Include content.php; /div Include footer; ---End of Main Layout --Sample Include //header.php div id=header div class=taglineBlah/div div class=logoutLogout/div /div --end of code As you can see as long as I added my header wrapper in the header.php the rules would work fine, but if I didnt then the rules would break. Has anyone experienced this? Is there any specific reason why rules would fail with includes? TIA ...helmut
Re: [WSG] cool FAQ page [follow up]
My sincerist apologies to Thierry, his interpretation of Nielsen was indeed correct. And thanks, I have certainly learnt something With reference to the articles Thierry cited earlier Jakob Nielsen responded to my request for clarification as follows: Does this imply that links to content situated on the same page confuse users? Or, put another way ,is your recommendation suggesting that all links must load a new document into an existing browser window? Yes to both. kind regards Terrence Wood. ** 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] Target sued over non-accessible site
Nic, Whoops! I missed that subtle distinction between the ADA and the Rehab Act. It's been a rough week. Slap me with a blink tag. In any case, I really would like to see a Section 508 (or ADA) case here in the States brought against a private company. The law itself needs a court challenge to test its validity and its viability with respect to electronic accessibility. Only then can we as web developers have any teeth with web standards, including accessibility. At the same time, a successful court case in favor of Section 508 (or ADA) would have repercussions much wider than many may realize. Can you imagine how some big web clients would react to find out their sites are not accessible after their high profile web developers assured them they were? We've already seen on this list a discussion about such a firm and their code on some big name sites. Cheers, I hope my long mail hasn't bored you to tears Oh, no way! It's refreshing to read here about the (potential) ramifications of the code we create. Any honest discussions of web standards needs to have regular doses of real-world effects of that code. Dennis Nic [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: To [EMAIL PROTECTED] wsg@webstandardsgroup.org rdsgroup.org cc Subject 02/09/2006 11:07 RE: [WSG] Target sued over AMnon-accessible site Please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED] roup.org Dennis, thanks for that link, an interesting opinion, and one that flies in the face of several court cases throughout the US (in particular Florida a few years ago) The New York State Attorney General offered a legal opinion that all web site originating within that state are subject to Section 508 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act I read that and I thought huh? That can't be right. And reading the page on the link provided, it turns out that statement isn't quite right. The NY State AG said that the Americans With Disabilities Act requires that private web sites be accessible to blind and visually impaired Internet users. Two things of note here: First, it is the ADA that is cited, NOT Section 508 of the US Vocational Rehabilitation Act. Section 508 is NOT applicable as the VRA applies soleley to US Federal agencies (and some organisations funded primarely with federal money, such as some universities), it always has, and always will. This is an important distinction, because the ADA does not mention anywhere in its text that it covers access to the internet (It was written pre-1990 and signed on July 26, 1992). Therefore, to state that the ADA applies also to companies doing business over the internet is a point that can be argued. In fact, while it seems logical that it *should* apply, that very argument has been used several times to lose court cases and make bad precedents (I don't have time to dig my archives for references, but if anyone's interested, I'll be pleased to do so). -- snip -- ** 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] IE7 Compatibility Team
Does this mean we're supposed to make all the sites we've ever made useless in IE5 and IE6?Maybe it's time we just give up on Internet Explorer and design for standards compliant browsers instead?The sad thing is that of course everyone who's using Explorer will blame the designer of the site and our clients will rip the hair out of their heads because most people use IE anyway. If you ask me we're all properly and royally fd by Microsoft. Why won't they play ball with us (and their users)?On 2/10/06, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cade Whitbourn wrote: The compatibility issue is caused by our use of CSS filters. They specificially highlight our use of Star HTML Hack, Selector HTML Hack and the Holly Hack. Although they don't say it explicitly, the implication is that we should remove these from our CSS as the use of these filters fails in IE7.Hi, this is the MS IE Team. We've removed the bugs that were exploitedfor CSS filters, but didn't actually fix the fundamental problems that caused people to use filters in the first place. We decided that youshould use conditional comments instead...--Patrick H. Lauke__re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com__Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Forcehttp://webstandards.org/ __**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] Target sued over non-accessible site
In the store itself they wouldn't see any better but would still pick out shirts, pants, etc. It is the alt tags that make the difference for their software to read a site. Without the alt tags the software doesn't tell them if it's a shirt or a wheelbarrow. LauraOn 2/9/06, Leslie Riggs [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The only thing I don't understand is how on earth does a blind person pick out items that rely on a photograph (clothes etc)... If you go to Target's home page, you will find, in the left column what appear to be headlines describing sale and special items. They are images - and there is no Alt text. Blind people do shop :-).There are varying degrees of blindness, too, so someone looking at one of those images may go, Oh, wait, is that a red jumper or a parka?Alt text can help in that respect, if the user has a good text-to-speechtool installed.-- http://www.thatgrrl.cahttp://www.thatgrrl.ca/blog The Internet Unplugged
Re: Edit: Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.
On 10 Feb 2006, at 19:14, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Stephen Stagg wrote: And how, pray tell, would a screen reader know - based on a series of presentational rules - what the meaning of a made-up tag soup is? The same way that they would with normal HTML, by reading the XML, and the stylesheet and guessing, if an element has the font- weight:bold element, then it should be emboldened. Wrong. Screen readers do not look at the CSS and try to guesstimate what is a heading, what's a paragraph, what's a list, etc. Not wrong actually, Good screen-readers DO read the CSS to work out various things, incuding to see if someting has a display:hidden. I do acknowledge that this is an area that would have to be developed in screen-readers but that does not invalidate the idea. Screen-Reader hints are still presentational devices. Screen readers look at the structure of the document, which is clearly defined as it's standardised in the HTML specification. And they PRESENT it to someone with visual impairment, The presentational properties should be set in the presentational layer I believe (tho haven't checked) that there are a whole load of CSS properties to do with controlling assistive-technologies output. There are aural stylesheets, which only give hints about how to present something aurally. They do not define purpose or role of the elements they refer to, and THAT is what counts. As is said, I wasn't sure about the exact nature of the aural stylesheets. Thanks for the info, Perhaps this is something that could be developed to improve the designers' control over output to screen-readers? no? -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ 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 ** ** 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] IE7 Compatibility Team
Vincent Hasselgård wrote: Does this mean we're supposed to make all the sites we've ever made useless in IE5 and IE6? No need to dump earlier versions. IE7 has some bug-fixes and somewhat better selector-support. Apart from that it's just an IE6 which is slightly harder to make behave like a standard-compliant browser, since it is indicated that IE7 won't support all that much more CSS2/2.1 than its predecessors. No big deal, really. Maybe it's time we just give up on Internet Explorer and design for standards compliant browsers instead? Are we not doing that..? Do anyone on [WSG] really /design/ for Internet Explorer? The sad thing is that of course everyone who's using Explorer will blame the designer of the site and our clients will rip the hair out of their heads because most people use IE anyway. Don't panic... Sit down - relax - and wait for the final MSIE7 release. There are no real problems ahead, just the same old fixing of weak CSS support. If you ask me we're all properly and royally fd by Microsoft. Why won't they play ball with us (and their users)? Mind your language, and ask them :-) ...or study some of their responses so far: http://sltclan.com/images/cj/ie7.html ...interesting ;-) 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] Target sued over non-accessible site
Dennis Lapcewich wrote: In any case, I really would like to see a Section 508 (or ADA) case here in the States brought against a private company. According to http://www.phillipsnizer.com/internetlib.htm, there has been a Court challenge under the ADA and the private company won: Access Now, Inc., et al. v. Southwest Airlines, Co. Case No. 02-21734-CIV-Seitz/Bandstra (S.D.Fla., October 18, 2002) Court holds that defendant Southwest Airlines Co.'s web site is not a place of public accommodation under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, (ADA) and accordingly that Southwest has no obligation under Title III to make its web site accessible to the visually impaired. Title III of the ADA prohibits those who operate places of public accommodation from discriminating against individuals with disabilities. The Court held that under the plain and unambiguous language of the ADA a public accommodation must be a physical, concrete structure. Because defendant's website was not such a structure, the Court dismissed plaintiffs' claims for relief under Title III of the ADA. (more detail at http://www.phillipsnizer.com/library/cases/lib_case298.cfm) (see also http://news.com.com/Judge+Disabilities+Act+doesnt+cover+Web/2100-1023_3-962761.html) So, beware of the law - it's a double edged sword in the Land of the Fee ;-) The law itself needs a court challenge to test its validity and its viability with respect to electronic accessibility. 508 is better than nothing, but it's still kinda weak and has outs all through it for the government agencies. Some commentators think that most complaints will be settled with agreements rather than lawsuits and I tend to agree. Governments don't like appearing in their own courts. So, if you want some form of action, start making complaints. Do what John Allsopp did in Aus. and start surveying the websites that don't comply. If everybody waits for someone else to do it, it'll never happen. Only then can we as web developers have any teeth with web standards, including accessibility. At the same time, a successful court case in favor of Section 508 (or ADA) would have repercussions much wider than many may realize. You still seem to be confusing the Rehabilitation Act with the ADA - 508 is part of the Rehab Act and the Rehab Act *only* applies to Federal (not even State) agencies. I don't think that's a subtle distinction, as you suggest above - it's a major piece of the ball of wax. Any court action that will have meaningful effect on the private sector must come under the ADA and, currently, the legal opinion is that the ADA does not cover the Internet because it doesn't mention it specifically. Which is nuts, but there you go - put 3 lawyers in a room, get 7 opinions, all conflicting. 508 does specifically apply to the Internet, and other electronic goods and services, but you generally start there with an administrative complaint (http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/508/report2/complaints.htm) and lots of processes to bog down the complaint long before it gets near a court. Can you imagine how some big web clients would react to find out their sites are not accessible after their high profile web developers assured them they were? We've already seen on this list a discussion about such a firm and their code on some big name sites. With respect, I think you're being a little naive about this. It is far more cost-effective for a big company to sic lawyers on an issue than to actually rectify the problem - vis Microsoft vs. just about everybody. When big companies are spending millions to fight having to clean up toxic waste dumps they created, I can't see accessibility on the Internet being high on their corporate radar. Doesn't mean we stop trying, of course... Oh, no way! It's refreshing to read here about the (potential) ramifications of the code we create. Any honest discussions of web standards needs to have regular doses of real-world effects of that code. I agree completely - we need the discussions on this as much as we need the esoterica of CSS code. Regards Mark Harris Technology Research and Consultancy Services ** 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] IE7 Compatibility Team
On 2/10/06, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Vincent Hasselgård wrote: The sad thing is that of course everyone who's using Explorer will blame the designer of the site and our clients will rip the hair out of their heads because most people use IE anyway. Don't panic... Sit down - relax - and wait for the final MSIE7 release. There are no real problems ahead, just the same old fixing of weak CSS support. Actually, I would say that the lack of max-width support in IE 7 is a real problem. MS doesn't even think it's important. I'm just hoping they get it in before IE 7 launches. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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: Edit: Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.
Stephen Stagg wrote: Screen readers look at the structure of the document, which is clearly defined as it's standardised in the HTML specification. And they PRESENT it to someone with visual impairment, The presentational properties should be set in the presentational layer So by your logic we could even have stuck with using font size=+3This is a heading/font as screen readers could theoretically just have picked that up and magically deduced it's a heading... -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ 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: Edit: Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: generic XML + CSS would be meaningless without some third technology that defines semantics (a DTD, XBL, etc) Neither a DTD nor XBL define document semantics at all. A DTD only defines the document syntax and structure. XBL is only a binding language for attaching behaviour to an element, it doesn't define semantics either. The closest thing there is for describing semantics is the XML namespace, but even then it only loosely associates the elements with the semantics defined in the relevant specification (if one exists). See this post for an interesting discussion of why DTDs don't define semantics. http://groups.google.fi/group/comp.text.sgml/msg/c3e53dee2c152a81?output=gplain -- 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 **
