Re: [WSG] Internationalization for hindi (data getting corrupted while sendng from jsp to action)
On 23 Feb 2007, at 06:55:01, Nisha Kumari wrote: Hi I have done all following changes in my jsp page. I am using struts and even have saved my Hindi text in a application recourse file and have save that file in a UTF-8 encoding format. I can see in browser the encoding is getting set to UTF-8 because of the jsp tag ([EMAIL PROTECTED] encoding=UTF-8 contentType=text/html;charset=UTF-8%). But still its showing me something other than Hindi (may be garbag). I tried commenting out the page encoding from jsp page and then I explicitly changed the page encoding from browser then the text appears perfectly in Hindi. What could be the reason? As manually changing the encoding in the browser shows the Hindi correctly, you are obviously sending the correct data, so that's not the problem. When the browser attempts to identify the character set of the document, it looks first for a Content-Type HTTP header, and only if that isn't found does it look for a meta element specifying the character set - see [1]. I don't know Struts, but a look at the JSP documentation suggests that you should be using pageEncoding instead of encoding in your @page directive. [2] I don't know if this affects the Content-Type header, or just creates a meta element, though. If changing that doesn't work, then I would suggest looking at the raw HTTP headers for your page, to see if the Content-Type header is correctly specifying UTF-8. If you use Firefox, there are various ways to do this via extensions such as Firebug, although going to Tools menu-Page Info may tell you what you need to know. Assuming you're using Microsoft Windows, a free application called Fiddler, written by a chap at Microsoft, will allow you to examine the raw HTTP traffic between your browser and your server [3]. If it turns out that the Content-Type header in the HTTP response is overriding any Meta element in the document, then you need to change your server configuration; at that point, my lack of knowledge of your configuration leaves me unable to help any further :-( [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/charset.html#h-5.2.2 [2] http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/syntax/1.2/ syntaxref1210.html#15653 [3] http://www.fiddlertool.com/fiddler/ HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] layout - choices?
On 22 Feb 2007, at 12:07:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A far bigger problem in my opinion is this recent fad for placing tabular data in definition lists. Where did that come from? The result really is incomprehensible because even the best screen readers can make little sense of the resulting code, no matter how semantically perfect it might be, whereas there are numerous tools for reading and navigating data tables if they are marked up correctly. The widespread abuse of definition lists is indeed a baffling phenomenon, and almost every example I've seen is best characterised as completely ignoring the semantics of such a list - although the person responsible will claim that it's more semantic than a table. It's similar to the fad from a couple of years ago for marking up calendars using floated divs (or, possibly, ols). I think that when people get the idea that tables shouldn't be used for layout they somehow end up translating that into their heads as tables should never be used for any purpose whatsoever. When faced with clearly tabular data, they then scratch around in Google looking for some semantically pure way of representing it, and finish up following articles with all these crazy dls, never truly understanding what they're doing and why it's so wrong. In fact, I think some people believe semantically correct is a synonymous term for not having any table elements. Given the range of accessibility features built into the table model (things like colgroup, and the axis, scope and headers attributes) it's clearly of great potential benefit to users of assistive devices if tables are used properly as needed (i.e. for tabular data). I believe that many current assistive technologies make little use of such features, but that's probably because those features are so seldom used in the wild. Perhaps if we abandoned our shenanigans with definition lists and started marking up our tables correctly, we could make it worthwhile for the manufacturers of such technologies to support those features. (End rant.) Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility - display: none v.s. left: -9999px
On 15 Feb 2007, at 02:06:11, Michael MD wrote: Do any screen readers support some kind of metadata or semantic markup that could be used to embed such content in the page? No, because screen readers never actually see the markup - they're designed to work with Windows applications that support MSAA (Microsoft Active Accessibility), not just browsers. (After all, a user who paid all that money for Jaws would probably be pretty annoyed if all it could do was read web pages, but not email or Excel spreadsheets.) So what happens is that the application does whatever it does (e.g. a browser parses and renders the page, Excel parses a file and builds a visual representation of a spreadsheet) and then exposes the contents of its display to the screen reader via the MSAA API. The screen reader then queries the application via that API to find out what is being displayed, and reads it out. This is presumably why display: none and visibility: hidden don't work, but margin-left: -px does - in the first two cases, the element is never made a part of whatever internal representation of the render tree IE builds for its display (this is not the same as the DOM, by the way), whereas in the last case it _is_ included in the internal representation, but when that representation is actually drawn on the screen, it is in a position where Window's built-in clipping to window boundaries means it is never seen. So any attempt to include markup just for screen readers is doomed to failure - screen readers don't use markup. Please note that I'm not claiming to be an expert on this particular topic, but I think this explanation covers what actually happens. There's more info on MSAA (primarily aimed at application developers) at http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/ msaa/msaastart_9w2t.asp and you can get some idea of the range of applications other than web browsers (from Access to WinZip :-) that Jaws is used with from the dropdown list on the FAQ page: http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_support/Specific_Product.cfm? ProdID=1 Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] CSS and non-standard properties
On 14 Feb 2007, at 01:13:52, Ben Buchanan wrote: My concern with this whole approach is expecting people to go back and remove the non-standard rules. In the real world we're going to be stuck with the non-standard stuff for a long time to come; particuarly when developers use them without understanding the full situation. The non-standard stuff may add a few bytes to file sizes, but other than that it's harmless: a compliant CSS parser which doesn't recognise the non-standard rules will ignore them according to the rules for handling parsing errors http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ syndata.html#q4. Not all developers know the standards as well as the average reader on this list. Plenty learn by copying other CSS, so they might not even know that -moz-opacity *isn't* standard (don't scoff, it happens!). They'll soon find out when they test it in IE :-) I don't immediately see the benefit to the UA developers using a custom rule... Why not just use the real thing? I can only assume there's something about the process that I'm not aware of. Because the real thing doesn't exist yet - of the 31 parts of CSS 3 (not counting the Introduction), just three are currently at the Candidate Recommendation stage (one step before becoming a Recommendation), while two others have been at that stage, then dropped back to Working Draft. Any use of vendor-specific stuff is purely for experimental purposes, and should never be used in the real world. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility - display: none v.s. left: -9999px
On 14 Feb 2007, at 15:48:00, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Nick Fitzsimons wrote: So any attempt to include markup just for screen readers is doomed to failure - screen readers don't use markup. Do screen readers reveal cover-ups ? Example: http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_chaos_14.html I don't know. It's entirely dependent on two factors: first is how Internet Explorer creates its internal representation used to render the display (just to reiterate, this is not the same as the DOM), and how it exposes that representation via the MSAA API. Then the other factor kicks in: how well the screen reader deals with the information it gets from those APIs. So the best people to ask would be the developers from the IE Team and at the screen reader vendors :-) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility - display: none v.s. left: -9999px
On 14 Feb 2007, at 14:49:43, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 15 Feb 2007, at 02:06:11, Michael MD wrote: Do any screen readers support some kind of metadata or semantic markup that could be used to embed such content in the page? No, because screen readers never actually see the markup - they're designed to work with Windows applications that support MSAA (Microsoft Active Accessibility), not just browsers. To follow myself up with some hard facts: The page at http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/browser/accessibility/ overview/invisible.asp states that: With Internet Explorer 6 and later, the pvarState parameter of the IAccessible::get_accState property receives STATE_SYSTEM_OFFSCREEN when the object is invisible because of scrolling and receives STATE_SYSTEM_INVISIBLE when the object is invisible because its IHTMLStyle::visibility property is set to hidden, or its IHTMLStyle::display property is set to none. This means that using offscreen positioning is seen by the browser as making an object invisible by scrolling - but as Windows (or at least IE) doesn't support the concept of scrolling to a negative position, it can't be seen. Screen readers apparently treat STATE_SYSTEM_OFFSCREEN as meaning that the content of the object should still be spoken - fairly obviously, as otherwise a wide or tall page would only have its visible region spoken. However, said screen readers treat STATE_SYSTEM_INVISIBLE as meaning that the content of the object should not be spoken. Thus display:none and visibility:hidden prevent the content from being spoken. More info is available at http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/workshop/browser/ accessibility/accessibility_node_entry.asp and in particular the article at https://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/browser/accessibility/overview/ overview.asp is definitely enlightening. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility - display: none v.s. left: -9999px
On 14 Feb 2007, at 16:44:22, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: To follow myself up with some hard facts: OK, I've written up what is hopefully a factual and detailed account of exactly what's going on with the display:none, visibility:hidden and left:-px techniques, explaining what the interaction between the browser and the screen reader is. It's at http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/2007/02/14/why-left-px-is-better-for- accessibility-than-display-none/ HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Should I use P or BR?
On 13 Feb 2007, at 20:09:39, Jason Pruim wrote: Hi Everyone, On this website: http://www.raoset.com/terms/#materials Specifically at the Materials section, I want to make it the most readable/useable that I can. So I'm wondering if I should use BR (Which is what is there now) or use a new P tag for each paragraph? (As I typed that I may have figured it out...) Each of your sections is numbered; this makes it an ordered list. Each list item then contains a heading and one or more paragraphs. So I would suggest that you need to use some structure along the lines of ol li h4 id=proposalsProposals/h4 pProposals are subject to.../p /li li h4 id=cancellationCancellation/h4 pOrders may be.../p /li /ol with use of CSS to get your list numbering inside the h4 elements, and of course multiple p elements in the appropriate sections removing the need for the br elements. This should also help somewhat with the accessibility aspects of the page. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Not a Good Impression
Opened for me with Safari. On 8 Feb 2007, at 09:41:16, Tim wrote: I tried it in Opera on a Mac and got this javascript error message. Error message Statement in line 4:Expression did not evaluate to a function object: document.bodyinsertAdjacentHTML A Javascript error? Yup, insertAdjacentHTML is an IE-Win-only method. Obviously it saw the MSIE that Opera includes in its default User Agent string and decided to charge ahead with the IE version. Bloody amateurs. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] No. abbreviation glyph
On 8 Feb 2007, at 14:49:26, Andrew Maben wrote: On Feb 7, 2007, at 8:44 PM, Andrew Cunningham wrote: Would it make any sense to read out I black hearts suit unicode? The symbol has been used to indicate the word love. FWIW, I happened to be reading the paper yesterday where the film whose title is represented in its ads and title on screen by I U +2665 Huckabees was referred to as I Heart Huckabees rather than I Love Huckabees. Its title is indeed I Heart Huckabees. From the IMDB trivia page for the film: 'Many theater managers mistakenly wrote the film's title on marquees and in showtime listings as I Love Huckabees. This is most likely because on all promotional material and in the film itself the title is written with a heart symbol instead of the word heart.' Perhaps the theater managers should have used a screenreader? ;-) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] is html done? [was semantics]
On 8 Feb 2007, at 15:49:00, Designer wrote: Forgive my complete lack of knowledge here, but can you (or someone) point me to details on where I can just transform it into html 4.01 (or xhtml) in the browser? It's a serious question - I'd love to code/markup in xml. http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt Enjoy :-) On the other hand, browser support is fairly restricted and can be buggy, especially if you plan to use any DOM Scripting/Ajax type stuff. For real-world usage, you're better off doing the transformation on the server. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] CSS and non-standard properties
On 8 Feb 2007, at 19:15:07, Paul Bennett wrote: Hi all, I just noticed via Roger Johansson's blog[1] that the Safari team are building in non-standard CSS properties[2]. I know this is nothing new, as Firefox / Mozilla has it's non-standard CSS commands too (mainly for XUL development?)[3] etc, but wonder what the motivation is. Isn't this the 2007 equivalent of the blink and marquee tags we all know and hate? What advantage does it give to browser vendors to implement non- standard CSS properties? These are usually properties specified in the as-yet-incomplete CSS 3. By implementing them now they allow users to test them and, if CSS 3 is ever completed, can immediately enable them using the standard name. Also, note that a W3C Draft can only become a Recommendation (synonymous with standard) if there are working, interoperable real- world implementations from more than one vendor; so once the CSS Working Group finally end their deliberations over CSS 3, having these implementations out there can greatly speed up the process of moving from Candidate Recommendation to Recommendation status. So it's actually pretty much the opposite of blink and suchlike: it's a way of helping the community prepare for future standards, and of ensuring that implementations are available at the time the standard is ratified. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability Questions for Quicktime
On 6 Feb 2007, at 21:50:28, Tim Palac wrote: I've upgraded all the videos on my site to Flash, and there is code (Flash Satay, amongst others) that works with all browsers and still follows all standards. snip This is the code I use to embed Flash on my site that doesn't give the W3C Validator any errors: object classid=clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-44455354 width=400 height=300 param name=movie value=your.swf / param name=wmode value=transparent / param name=quality value=high / !--[if !IE] -- object data=your.swf width=400 height=300 type=application/x-shockwave-flash param name=quality value=high / param name=wmode value=transparent / /object !-- ![endif]-- /object Robert Nyman has recently written on this topic, presenting an even shorter version of the above code: http://www.robertnyman.com/2007/02/01/how-to-write-valid-htmlxhtml- code-to-include-flash/ His code is basically the same as the code I've used (when the designers force me to include Flash ;-) for about three years now, without encountering any problems - see, for example, http:// www.leicestersound.co.uk (but not the ad code, over which I had no control). Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE7 and the * html hack
On 29 Jan 2007, at 19:58:47, Paul Bennett wrote: How does one go about finding out whether IE7 is rendering in quirks or standards/strict mode? Try this: http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/2006/06/04/quirks-or-strict-a-quick-way-to- tell/ HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Browser Specific Stylesheets
On 25 Jan 2007, at 10:59:24, Jim Callender wrote: Anyone have any up to date links/resources on using alternative stylesheets, for other browsers than IE. Opera, netscape.. You should turn the problem around. It's easy to produce CSS that works for Firefox, Opera and Safari (and other browsers that support the standards). Then produce a separate stylesheet that fixes the bugs in IE and include it using a conditional comment [1] that only IE can understand. Making stuff that works in IE first, and then trying to fix it to work in other browsers, is a world of pain. Going the other way around is usually pretty trivial, once you get the hang of it and understand IE's bugs. For one large site with a complex layout I completed recently, my IE6-specific stylesheet consisted almost entirely of rules setting zoom: 1' to trigger the hasLayout property [2],[3]. If support for the broken box model in IE5.x is a concern, again, the additional rules included via a CC are usually trivial. Oh, and always use strict rendering mode: some people think using quirks mode makes life easier but they're wrong - or rather, I strongly disagree :-) [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/overview/ ccomment_ovw.asp [2] http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/onhavinglayout.html [3] http://msdn.microsoft.com/workshop/author/dhtml/reference/ properties/haslayout.asp HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Tooltips (was: Title attributes)
On 25 Jan 2007, at 15:03:37, Barney Carroll wrote: In particular, the new Google Image search - flashy effect, but utterly useless. Ouch, I hadn't seen that before. I completely agree: they're just pimping it out with something of no value at all. To paraphrase Chris Rock, just because you can do it doesn't mean it's to be done. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Google Image changes: inaccesssibility for all
Hi, As Barney Carroll mentioned in a post to the group earlier today, Google Images has changed so that information such as image dimensions and domain is only displayed when mousing over an image. My tests in Firefox show that using the tab key to give focus to an image doesn't reveal the hidden information, making that information inaccessible to users who don't use a mouse or similar pointing device. Matt Cutts of Google has blogged about it [1], and the comments so far are universally opposed to the change. I'm NOT suggesting that we start a flame war on his blog (he's not responsible for the change, merely pointing it out), but if anybody else feels strongly about this retrograde step they may wish to leave a useful comment there, as he has usually been willing to pass concerns like this along to the right people within Google. If you do comment there, note that he moderates all first-time commenters. So only put him to the trouble if you have something worthwhile to add to the discussion, and don't keep re-posting the same comment wondering why it hasn't shown up yet. [1] http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/refresh-of-images-and-groups/ Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Styling a Code Listing
On 25 Jan 2007, at 18:50:17, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Thierry Koblentz wrote: Hi all, I'd appreciate any comment that would help me improve this article: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/how_to_style_a_code_listing.asp If whitespace needs to be preserved even when CSS is off (can't remember...is it python or something that actually depends on having the right number of spaces for indentation?), then possibly a pre could be wrapped around the code elements as well. Obligatory mention of the Whitespace programming language: only spaces, tabs and newlines are considered syntax. http://compsoc.dur.ac.uk/whitespace/ -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari - Drop down menu over a flash movie
On 25 Jan 2007, at 20:44:10, Micky Hulse wrote: 2. Avoid using flyouts completely. That gets my vote. They're irritating and a usability nightmare. If clients ask for them it's our job to educate them out of such stupidity. (Just my 0.02GBP.) Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE 7 OL problem
On 22 Jan 2007, at 18:26:33, Tom Livingston wrote: Hi listers, I saw a post about numbers being aligned to the bottom of Lis in an OL in IE7. Adding vertical-align:top; to the Lis fixed that, but I am having a problem where every LI is numbered #1. Anyone have this before? Is there a fix? I can’t post the page... It's a hasLayout-related bug; there's some info on it at http://www.quirksmode.org/bugreports/archives/2005/07/ IE_60_does_not_render_ordered_list_correctly.html The display: list-item; fix in the last comment works on IE 6, so I assume it will also work in IE7. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Comments Creeping Left
On 22 Jan 2007, at 18:40:06, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/cryptomundo-20-is-up/ #comments The problem is with IE6 the comments are slowy creeping to the left and getting cut-off. A real head-scratcher I think. Does anyone know what might be causing this? It's the same mark-up/same CSS repeated over and over so I'm sort of stymied. Looks like the Magik Creeping Text bug: http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer/creep.html which is caused by the combination of left padding and a bottom border. There are some fixes mentioned on the above page, but the key thing is to trigger hasLayout on the boxes with the creeping text. Try setting zoom: 1; on them to avoid mucking anything else up (although that won't fix it for IE6, IIRC). HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Downloading images, not viewing them
On 21 Jan 2007, at 18:00:14, Mark Stickley wrote: Hi guys, I am trying to make a feature where a user can click a link to download an image. The trouble is of course that the image loads into the browser. Does anyone know of a way to force a download of an image rather than the behaviour I've been experiencing? I'd rather not have to include text instructing the user on how to right click etc as it kind of messes with the layout... You can use the Content-Disposition header to tell the browser to save the file rather than displaying it: Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=someImage.png although there are some issues with older versions of IE Win, as described at http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ TheContentDispositionSagaControllingTheSuggestedFileNameInTheBrowsersSav eAsDialog.aspx There's a more detailed explanation of the process at http://www.boutell.com/newfaq/creating/forcedownload.html HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Background images turned off? (was Visited Links and Accessibility)
On 12 Jan 2007, at 11:30:01, Barney Carroll wrote: This is what I believe the solution to be [http://www.sarmal.com/] - javascript tests for viewport dimensions and serves appropriate CSS. Try firing it up on a desktop and re-sizing your browser window. Thoughts? Try firing it up on a handheld device (e.g. a phone or PDA) which supports CSS but not JavaScript? One of the points of using the handheld media type to serve appropriate styles to devices is that a manufacturer doesn't have to also implement an unrelated technology (JS) to give their users a better experience via CSS. Of course, it would help if IE Mobile would stop honouring the screen styles *as*well*as* the handheld styles... Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
On 11 Jan 2007, at 12:53:59, James Crooke wrote: So what does everyone think would suit a clickable button, (default) arrow cursor or finger-pointer cursor? (For now, let's forget the fact that Microsoft invented the convention of a default arrow and that we all tend to give in to the default attributes to prevent breaking conventions.) What makes you think MS invented it? On my Mac, the cursor remains in the default state (arrow) when over a button. This has been the case since I started using Macs in the early 90s. The behaviour is the same in all applications, and is in accordance with the Apple Human Interface Guidelines [1]. When using a site which turns the cursor to the link-style cursor when hovering over a button, I would tend to assume that it wasn't a button (which causes an action [2]) but a hyperlink (which merely causes navigation) styled to look like a button. Links and buttons aren't the same thing, in terms of the fundamental principles of UI design, which is why they give different feedback. If your buttons are just links that look like buttons, then set the cursor to the link-style cursor; if they are action buttons, then leave them with the default cursor. The conventions were established for a reason. If users are confused as to where or how to click on a site, that would suggest to me that the design has deeper problems than can be fixed by mucking about with the default behaviour of the system. There's no reason that graphic design can't enhance usability, but if it hinders it, it becomes a problem. Regards, Nick. [1] http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/ Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGCursors/chapter_15_section_2.html#// apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002724-TPXREF101 [2] http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/ Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGControls/chapter_18_section_2.html#// apple_ref/doc/uid/TP3359-TPXREF186 -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
On 11 Jan 2007, at 14:30:05, Barney Carroll wrote: Conceive of a persona who is not a read-up fan of Apple's UI recommendations (my target audience, incidentally). Are they going to hover their cursor over a button, see it turn into a hand, and get baffled? I very much doubt it. In fact I think it would elucidate the functionality of the button. The point of being consistent is that the user notices nothing. As Jakob Nielsen puts it, Users spend most of their time on other websites... This means that they form their expectations for your site based on what's commonly done on most other sites. If you deviate, your site will be harder to use. [1] The fact that it's a button elucidates its functionality. If you need to offer additional cues, you need to redesign your button. The cursor, in my mind, has no bearing on this difference. On the contrary, the cursor is a crucial element of the user experience. If it starts behaving in ways other than expected, the potential for confusion is there. I don't think I'm flippant in thinking that this is standardisation gone mad - it is at the point where designing no longer requires insight or creativity, and simply demands mechanical processing according to ancient presets without analysis. Please don't take this personally (it so happens it's one of my bugbears, and I tend to start ranting when it comes up) but one of the worst problems on the web is graphic designers who think that their vision or creativity or whatever overrides the need for usability. Graphic design for the web (or, indeed, anywhere) must always be subordinate to usability; great graphic design recognises this, and actually enhances usability, as well as being aesthetically pleasing. As for ancient presets: Apple carried out several years of regular user testing in the process of designing the Mac user interface [2]. They still do this, and the default cursor behaviour is one of the things they have found no reason to change. The expression If it ain't broke, don't fix it is often used inappropriately (as Kent Beck's grandmother says, If it stinks, change it [3]) but in this case I don't believe anything is broken, and you are solving a problem that doesn't exist. Kind regards, Nick. [1] http://www.useit.com/alertbox/9605.html [2] http://folklore.org/StoryView.py? project=Macintoshstory=Do_It.txttopic=User% 20InterfacesortOrder=Sort%20by%20Datedetail=medium [3] Quoted in the book Refactoring: Improving the design of existing code by Martin Fowler et al. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Refactoring- Improving-Design-Existing-Technology/dp/0201485672/sr=8-1/ qid=1168528154/ref=pd_ka_1/026-4118605-6022024?ie=UTF8s=books -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
On 11 Jan 2007, at 15:36:52, Barney Carroll wrote: @Nick: I think it's fair to conclude that we simply disagree! I agree :-) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
On 10 Jan 2007, at 15:09:12, Andrew Maben wrote: When I read the first couple of messages in this thread, I had a look at my two browsers - IE6/PC and Safari/Mac. It was interesting to see that IE displays what I believe is the correct behavior (the cursor becomes insertion bar over text), while in Safari it remains an arrow - or does it? I noticed a flicker, and moving the cursor very slowly from a blank area to text it does, for an instant, become an insertion bar before returning to the arrow. Somewhat bizarre and not in keeping with the vaunted Macintosh easy to use UI? Strange: my Safari 2.0.4 (419.3) turns the cursor into an insertion bar over text. Did you see this on more than one site? More generally, I'd think that the different cursors displayed are an OPERATING SYSTEM rather than APPLICATION UI issue, and as such should be left alone - after all, if the insertion bar is hard to see in IE then it's equally hard to see in MS Word, and the user should be left to decide for herself whether to make a system-wide change of cursor types. Surely taking decisions of this kind out of the user's hands in the browser environment runs counter to the spirit of usability? Absolutely agree with you. We shouldn't be trying to override system- wide preferences in the control of the user because of our own personal preference. After all, OS manufacturers have done enormous amounts of research into usability; it's unlikely that one solitary web developer is going to discover something they've been doing wrong all these years. (And the good people at Opera would do well to take this on board, too.) Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Last letter of a line appearing on next row (IE6...)
On 13 Dec 2006, at 22:18:42, Rob O'Rourke wrote: I need to get control of what hasLayout and what doesn't before I can work out what's really going on. Use Microsoft's IE Developer Toolbar's DOM Inspector: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx? familyid=e59c3964-672d-4511-bb3e-2d5e1db91038displaylang=en It will allow you to walk through the DOM tree for your page; hasLayout will show up in the Styles pane for all elements having that most peculiar property. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Last letter of a line appearing on next row (IE6...)
On 14 Dec 2006, at 17:46:58, Rob O'Rourke wrote: Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 13 Dec 2006, at 22:18:42, Rob O'Rourke wrote: I need to get control of what hasLayout and what doesn't before I can work out what's really going on. Use Microsoft's IE Developer Toolbar's DOM Inspector: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx? familyid=e59c3964-672d-4511-bb3e-2d5e1db91038displaylang=en It will allow you to walk through the DOM tree for your page; hasLayout will show up in the Styles pane for all elements having that most peculiar property. I like it, thanks! No problem :-) I need to turn google toolbar off to use it though, tried outlining inputs and it crashed my PC. It doesn't surprise me in the least though... Nor me :-( Have you checked you have the latest version of Google Toolbar? I know the two have had problems running together in the past, but thought there'd been a fix. (Still, it's only a Beta.) I'm getting a mac for christmas =] A Mac is for life, not just for Christmas :-) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Skip Navigation question
On 13 Dec 2006, at 17:54:14, Barney Carroll wrote: Thierry Koblentz wrote: Also, I think (I may be wrong though) the WCAG 2 (FWIW) recommends to display the elements in the same sequence as they show in the markup. Would be interested to see if this is the case. Quickly skimmed the guidelines but couldn't find anything. WCAG 2.0 requires that When the sequence of the content affects its meaning, that sequence can be programmatically determined. [1] Understanding WCAG 2.0 explains what is meant by a meaningful sequence [2] and links to Techniques for WCAG 2.0 which gives an example of incorrect use of CSS breaking this guideline, in which positioning is used to provide the appearance of two lists when only one list is present in the markup. [3] Basically, what it all comes down to is that you shouldn't use CSS to arrange content in such a way as to add meaning: the content should be marked up in a meaningful way to start with. Given that moving around the chunks of a page (navigation, header, etc.) doesn't actually add further meaning to the content of those chunks, those considerations don't (IMHO) apply in the case under discussion. HTH, Nick. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/guidelines.html#content-structure- separation [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/Overview.html#content- structure-separation-sequence [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/ Overview.html#F1 -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Background image rendering
On 27 Nov 2006, at 13:42:24, Tom Livingston wrote: On 11/21/06 3:31 PM, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Presuming that you're doing XHTML, rather than HTML...you're probably better off applying the background image to the HTML element, not the BODY. In XHTML, BODY isn't magical anymore in that it's just as big as its content...but what you describe (which I couldn't bother trying to replicate) sounds like a bug in the browser's redrawing/ recalculation of BODY. P -- Patrick H. Lauke Sounds logical. However, I am using IDs on the body to give, among other things, different bg images to site sections. Can I give the HTML element an ID instead? I just never heard of doing this type of thing to that element. Afraid not, the HTML element can only have lang and dir attributes: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#edef-HTML Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Background image rendering
On 27 Nov 2006, at 14:22:12, Tom Livingston wrote: On 11/27/06 9:14 AM, Nick Fitzsimons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Afraid not, the HTML element can only have lang and dir attributes: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#edef-HTML Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ OK. So. Can I still use the different body IDs to send different bg images to the HTML element or is that somehow flawed? Afraid not, as it isn't possible in CSS for the presence of something to affect the styling of an ancestor or (putting it the other way around) for something to be styled differently based on its descendants; so you can't do things like the XPath expression: [EMAIL PROTECTED]'a']] which selects an html element that has a child body element that has an id attribute with valuea. I once read an explanation of why CSS selectors can't do this, but I can't find it now. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Background image rendering
On 27 Nov 2006, at 15:38:30, Tom Livingston wrote: On 11/27/06 9:48 AM, Philippe Wittenbergh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This only applies to HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.1. XHTML 1.0 allows for the id attribute on HTML. AvK has some details and references http://annevankesteren.nl/2003/08/html-id Philippe So then with this DOCTYPE: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; I can put IDs on the HTML element and go on my merry way. Right? Yes. (My, it feels pleasant to say Yes for a change :-) (FWIW, I checked it in IE6 and it works, despite the fact that IE doesn't support XHTML. FF1.5 and Safari 2 also work, as expected.) Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari DOM inspector
On 16 Nov 2006, at 11:41:40, Barney Carroll wrote: I do know that generally it [Safari] treats the styling of forms with disdain (plus I'm using javascript on them for display purposes, oo-er). Is there any other significant 'bug' I should know about? Long, long ago - well, within the last few years - there was a general belief that styling of form controls was a Bad Thing from a usability perspective, as it meant the user got an experience with web form controls that wasn't consistent with the appearance of such controls within their operating system. A number of cutting-edge and utterly horrible examples of over-the-top styling of form controls by too-enthusiastic designers helped to reinforce the idea that it shouldn't be done. In particular, Safari has always enforced the idea that a checkbox (for example) is going to look-and-feel exactly the same in a web page as it does in any other part of the OS user interface. Now that we've all grown up a bit, and (much more importantly) we also know that (with appropriate usability considerations by designers) users don't have a problem with pretty form controls, it is generally accepted that it is an OK thing when done in moderation. Even Apple/the Safari team have accepted this, and the next version of Safari will be much more permissive of widget styling, by providing a mechanism to relax the enforcing of OS conventions through the W3C standard method of providing vendor-specific CSS extensions. Dave Hyatt, who left Mozilla to become lead developer (or something - don't know his actual title) on Safari, has blogged about it: http://webkit.org/blog/?p=17 Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: WebKit: '-khtml' ?!! (Was: Re: [WSG] Safari DOM inspector)
On 16 Nov 2006, at 14:37:50, Barney Carroll wrote: -khtml-text-decorations-in-effect ...Which I have seen in effect - proprietary and usually only used in Apple sites since it is naturally not w3 css. It depends what you mean by W3C CSS. The CSS spec allows for vendor- specific extension properties of the form shown; so it is in fact fully compliant with W3C CSS: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q4 although it is, by definition, not one of the CSS properties specified by the W3C (which I assume was what you meant). I'm not sure what the validator does with this kind of by-the-spec extension property but, if it flags it as an error rather than a warning, it's (IMHO) a flaw in the validator: CSS implementations may not recognize such properties and may ignore them according to the rules for handling parsing errors Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari DOM inspector
On 16 Nov 2006, at 17:16:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bad Thing(tm) Mike And there I was thinking the bt in bt.com stood for British Telecom (tm) ;-) -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Gap in FF and Safari
On 16 Nov 2006, at 21:04:40, Tom Livingston wrote: http://66.155.251.18/mlinc.com/06/index.cfm In Firefox's DOM Inspector, I did the following: Remove the br class=clear / from after both navbar and header; Set float: left; on both header and navbar, to make them contain their floated elements. Fixed it, at least on that browser; not sure what IE will do, but it'll probably be something wrong :-) HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] CSS resources for Graphic designers?
On 14 Nov 2006, at 07:13:48, Paul Novitski wrote: I'm leaning toward the opinion that Photoshop is not a good tool in web design ... Fonts are anti-aliased At one design studio where I worked I went round to all the designers showing them how to turn off Photoshop's font anti-aliasing. They complained that it didn't look as good; I pointed out that that's what it would look like in the browser (at least on Windows without ClearType, which is still pretty much the default), so if they expected me to implement their designs, the original designs had to look as bad as they would in a browser. That helped to jolt them out of their print-centric attitudes and beliefs to some extent. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Replacing target attribute in form
On 13 Nov 2006, at 21:45:07, Christian Montoya wrote: On 11/13/06, Chris Price [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't suppose there's any reason why I shouldn't keep coding to xhtml 1.0 but specify html 4.01 when I need to use the target attribute. That might be a good idea; on the *one* page that uses the target attribute, use the HTML 4.01 doctype (with .. instead of .. /) and you'll never have to worry about maintaining any javascript hacks. Use of the target attribute has nothing to do with use of HTML versus XHTML; it's a matter of using Transitional versus Strict doctypes. XHTML 1.0 Transitional and HTML 4.01 Transitional include the target attribute; XHTML 1.0 Strict and HTML 4.01 Strict don't. From the XHTML 1.0 Transitional DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/ dtds.html#dtdentry_xhtml1-transitional.dtd_a Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Cynthia Reports Warnings 9.4 and 9.5 as relates to form
On 10 Nov 2006, at 16:11:14, Emma Sax wrote: label for=answerinput type=radio value=0 name=answer alt=make your mark id=answer /Text/labelbr / Being picky, the name isn't actually required (unless being used in scripts etc). The 'for' attribute of the label gets matched with the 'id' attribute of the associated form field. The name is needed for each member of a group of radio buttons: it's how they're grouped. For other input fields, the name is needed if the form is going to be submitted to the server, as otherwise there's no way to form a name:value pair, and so the field can't be submitted. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Real world font sizing
On 3 Nov 2006, at 16:32:27, Felix Miata wrote: 3-IE truncates the 62.5% to 62%: http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/bugs/browsers/css/IE-Win/ ie_percent_test.html Just a quick note: this remains the case in IE 7. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] page loads in safari and then jumps to the middle
On 3 Nov 2006, at 19:13:00, Rob O'Rourke wrote: Steve Green wrote: Wow, it's even worse now (or maybe it would have done this before but I never tried it). If I hover the mouse over a link and leave it there, the page continuously reloads and it jumps up and down between the Cocktail Bartender and Web Designer subheadings. It gets slower and slower till the 'beachball of death' appears and I have to force quit the browser. We've seen some weird stuff in our time but nothing quite like this. Steve :$ poop... I don't think on online cv that breaks safari is going to get me very far... I've stripped out the CSS now... any joy? It seems to work ok in swift except it loads up with the high contrast large print css for some reason. Rob O It's now jumping on load to the bit where you have: object style=display:none; data=#robert-orourke class=include type=text/html/object just before h3 class=summary titleWeb Designer and Developer/h3 so it looks like something to do with the object referencing part of the page via a URL hash. As to why you're embedding the page in itself as an object, I really can't guess... HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Articles/reasearch/experience of screen readers
On 2 Nov 2006, at 14:36:22, Barney Carroll wrote: Not sure if this is exactly the place to ask, but I am very eager to get any authoritative (and by now, 'authoritative' can be qualified by anybody who's so much as seen one) information on screen readers. Despite the fact I haven't been able to find anyone who has ever used a screen reader, Have you asked any blind people? There's probably some charitable organisation local to you that would be able to put you in touch with people with various degrees of visual impairment, using assorted assistive technologies to various levels of competence, who would be willing to participate in a properly-constructed program of user testing. Only I can never know if I have achieved it, because I can't test it; nor can I find anybody else to test for me, or even pin-point known problems. You can download trial versions of all the major screen-reading applications. (Learning to use them in the same way as a visually impaired user is a different challenge, hence the importance of user testing.) I think the myth surrounding screen readers is an incredibly bad thing because it fills the community with superstition. A great many otherwise intelligent, adventurous and imaginative potential innovators in the world of web design are completely crippled by this thing that they have no experience of whatsoever - it may as well be imaginary. My blind friend Andy would kick you in the balls for describing an awareness of the difficulties he faces as superstition or imaginary. He wears heavy boots, too. w3c's accessibility guidelines are highly revered, and for the most part there is good cause for this - and as I've said I am a supporter of the notion of standardisation - but when talking about the precepts of design for the blind, I become very cynical because this stuff is pure idle theory from sighted people. Not so. There is plenty of good information out there based on the actual experiences of blind and partially sighted people. Also note that the W3C's accessibility guidelines are not exclusively concerned with visual impairment. I would love any links to articles/archived polemic/research studies/the appropriate list... If anybody here has actual experience of a screen reader, I would be overjoyed to hear from them. Download and use one (or preferably several). And read, mark, learn and inwardly digest the book Web Accessibility: Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance (Thatcher et al., pub. Friends of Ed 2006). Likewise, if this is wholly irrelevant to this list then please tell me. :) I think any discussion of accessibility is valuable when intended to improve awareness of the issues involved :-) Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Valid characters in class names
On 20 Oct 2006, at 12:41:02, Charles Roper wrote: Hi, Can anyone point me to a reference (or simply post here) of characters that are valid to use in HTML class attribute values. I've searched and searched but can't find a definitive list. When in doubt, read the spec ;-) HTML 4.01 defines the class attributes a being of type cdata-list: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#adef-class A cdata-list is a whitespace-separated collection of values containing CDATA: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#type-cdata which is a sequence of characters from the document character set (which means anything you like if you're using UTF-8). Note that the id attribute is defined as being of type name, which has further restrictions applied to it, including being required to begin with a letter (A-Z a-z), but the spec doesn't, in my interpretation of it, impose the same constraint on classes. Therefore 12345 would be a valid class name, but not a valid id. Oh, and both class and id are case sensitive, so fred and Fred are different. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Valid characters in class names
On 20 Oct 2006, at 13:42:51, Anders Nawroth wrote: Charles Roper skrev: Can anyone point me to a reference (or simply post here) of characters that are valid to use in HTML class attribute values. Be aware that there are different rules for class names in CSS vs. HTML! http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q6 In CSS 2.1, identifiers (including element names, classes, and IDs in selectors) can contain only the characters [A-Za-z0-9] and ISO 10646 characters U+00A1 and higher, plus the hyphen (-) and the underscore (_); they cannot start with a digit, or a hyphen followed by a digit. Good point, Anders; Charles, please note this as a correction to the relevant part of my own response to your original question. I knew I should have double-checked with the CSS spec :-( Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Valid characters in class names
On 20 Oct 2006, at 15:26:10, Lachlan Hunt wrote: Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 20 Oct 2006, at 13:42:51, Anders Nawroth wrote: Be aware that there are different rules for class names in CSS vs. HTML! http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#q6 Good point, Anders; Charles, please note this as a correction to the relevant part of my own response to your original question. I knew I should have double-checked with the CSS spec :-( No, you were (almost) right the first time, without checking the CSS spec. Even though a class selector may have limitations with which characters it can use directly, escape sequences allow the use of absolutely any character at all. So, if you have a need to use such characters, then you can do so with too much difficulty. Yes, but the linked part of the CSS 2.1 spec states of identifiers used in CSS, including class names used in class selectors, that they cannot start with a digit, or a hyphen followed by a digit. So when I originally stated that 12345 is a valid value for the class attribute (or words to that effect) I was correct in terms of HTML 4.01, but such a class could not then be the subject of a class selector in CSS. I think... :-) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE6 - IE7
On 20 Oct 2006, at 17:26:35, Rahul Gonsalves wrote: Ted Drake wrote: I don't get the paranoia. IE7 is much more secure than IE6. If you don't like IE7, you can simply uninstall it and ie6 is restored after a reboot. As a web dev, you need to install IE7 and test your sites. Ignoring it isn't going to help your web development. Ted Paranoia? I see a zero-day exploit, and a partly new codebase. With Microsofts' reputation for security, I'd prefer to be safe rather than sorry. Known devil, etc, etc. Either way, I only use IE (all variants) for testing. I run IE7 in an isolated virtual machine (Microsoft Virtual PC) for testing, as mentioned earlier. I just don't see the point of installing it on my main machine. It's not a zero-day exploit; it already exists in IE6 and that advisory is just a repeat of an advisory from about a year ago, with a 7 stuck on it to generate a bit of buzz. As to why MS haven't fixed it yet... I agree, though, that a virtual machine is the way to go for those who need multiple installs, especially given that Virtual PC for Windows is now a free download. I run Parallels Desktop on my MacBook with separate installs of WinXP with IE6 and IE7, and also an install of Vista (just in case IE7 somehow behaves differently there). Once I find my Win2k CD, I can have IE5 and 5.5 too, and I don't have to muck about with standalones and the potential anomalies that can arise. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Valid characters in class names
On 20 Oct 2006, at 18:34:44, Charles Roper wrote: OK, so urn:lsid:ubio.org:namebank:530114 would actually be a valid class name then? The LSID would almost certainly never be used as a CSS selector (should never rule the possibility out, though), so if it's valid in its unescaped form then that's great news. Yes, by any reading of the spec it's a valid value of the HTML class attribute. We tend to associate class so closely with its use in CSS class selectors that we forget that it's also, or even primarily, for general-purpose processing by user agents. Your use as part of a microformat fits in perfectly with that. Those that want to target it with CSS will have to be aware of the additional handling they need to do to work with it according to spec; but that's Somebody Else's Problem :-) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] can the legend include block level elements
On 13 Oct 2006, at 19:42, Mel wrote: The HTML4 and XHTML1.0 Strict dtds both describe legend as an inline element - which would suggest that you can't use it to enclose a block level header element. Actually, they don't specify legend as being either an inline or a block element, so it is presumably neither. They do however specify that it can only contain inline content: !ELEMENT LEGEND - - (%inline;)* -- fieldset legend -- Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Article: creating drop cap on the fly
On 6 Oct 2006, at 10:19, Paul Novitski wrote: At 10/4/2006 08:49 AM, Thierry Koblentz wrote: I'd appreciate any comment that would help me improve this article: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/the_perfect_image_replacement_technique.asp and http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/the_perfect_drop_cap.asp But why not simply download the desired markup in the first place? The more work is done server-side, the less relevant the question of whether the user has access to JavaScript. Paul: I think you're missing the point of image replacement techniques. The idea is that the text, without images, _is_ the desired markup. JavaScript is then used to enhance it visually for those user agents capable of supporting such techniques, but the original markup is in principle more easily accessed by those using non-visual user agents, or who choose not to allow images to be downloaded. Producing the image-laden markup server-side would defeat the entire purpose, as well as potentially reducing the accessibility of the page. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG]
On 5 Oct 2006, at 12:16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As far as I can see, DL's are not deprecated, but they probably should be, as the vast majority of use cases are semantically incorrect. The one you describe included; surely a vCard or other microformat is more appropriate - the _definition_ of a particular company is a difficult concept to define, but I'm fairly sure its not their contact details! The fact that people abuse a markup component isn't a reason to deprecate it. Tables are without doubt the most-abused markup component going, yet nobody in their right mind would want future versions of (X)HTML to deprecate them, as they are essential for their intended purpose. I agree completely that definition lists should under no circumstances be used for the purpose described. If anything, such information would actually make more sense in a table... if it was marked up correctly of course, including microformats :-) Given that the post to which you were responding spoke of dls work[ing] well for displaying business listings from a database, the fact that database records are held in tables might have given a clue as to how they could best be marked up. Next week, how to do a calendar using unordered lists ;-) Regards, Nick. P.S. Sorry if the formatting of the quote comes out strange, I'm not sure how this webmail system works, and my client's firewall won't let me get mail out any other way. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Article: using JS to plug IMG in headings
On 4 Oct 2006, at 21:07, David Dorward wrote: On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 08:49:46AM -0700, Thierry Koblentz wrote: I'd appreciate any comment that would help me improve this article: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/ the_perfect_image_replacement_technique.asp It suffers from the usual problem of having no text at all if images are disabled by CSS isn't. I don't see that problem occurring on the demo page http:// tjkdesign.com/articles/TIP_6.asp. If I disable images, I see the text. Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Article: using JS to plug IMG in headings
On 4 Oct 2006, at 21:53, David Dorward wrote: On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 04:31:20PM -0400, Christian Montoya wrote: I don't see that problem occurring on the demo page http:// tjkdesign.com/articles/TIP_6.asp. If I disable images, I see the text. Same here. David, under what test conditions did you not see text with images disabled? Were you using a simulator (like FF dev toolbar) or did you actually disable images and reload the page? I am using the FF dev toolbar, but its not that uncommon a piece of software and makes for a quick way of disabling images in the real world. I also used the FF dev toolbar to disable images, and the text appeared for me: FF1.5.0.7, Web Developer toolbar 1.0.2, all on Mac OS X 10.4.7. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Validates only EN? (was: Validate multiple (X)HTML pages)
On 25 Sep 2006, at 18:55, Niels Fröhling wrote: This is my header: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//ES http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=es lang=es No, it _is_ the //ES, why is that? Any other validator I know don't mind to validate spanish HTML. The PUBLIC identifier in the Document Type Declaration _must_ end / EN as it is a reference to the XHTML DTD (which happens to have been written in English), and unrelated to the language in which the XHTML document is written. If you look at the DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/dtds.html#a_dtd_XHTML-1.0-Strict you'll see that it states what the PUBLIC and SYSTEM identifiers are: This DTD module is identified by the PUBLIC and SYSTEM identifiers: PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN SYSTEM http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; By changing your Document Type Declaration to use ES, you are basically saying that your document type is _not_ XHTML 1.0, but some non-existent document type. As the validator cannot find any such Document Type Definition, it has nothing to validate your document against. The definitions of the Document Type Declaration and associated requirements might make this clearer: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#h-7.2 http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#strict HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] What version of IE should be build to
On 21 Sep 2006, at 17:55, Ted Drake wrote: No no no no no Don't use * html! That won't work. * html will work to separate IE6 rules from IE7 rules, as IE7 no longer understands it (given that it's parsing in strict mode). See http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/09/02/460115.aspx Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari filter
On 14 Sep 2006, at 06:32, Terrence Wood wrote: On 14/09/2006, at 7:05 AM, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 13 Sep 2006, at 18:46, Kenny Graham wrote: Internet Explorer Mobile, for one, will load both screen and handheld media types Unless use specify Screen apparently. Yes, I'd come across the fact that specifying media=Screen will prevent IE Mobile from loading the stylesheet; it's another thing which makes it seem likely that IE Mobile isn't just a re- compiled version of the Trident codebase. It also exposes an anomaly in the HTML 4.0 spec: section 6.13 specifies that media descriptors are to be parsed case-sensitively, yet the descriptions of the media attribute for the link and style elements specifies that they are case-insensitive. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari filter
On 14 Sep 2006, at 02:32, Kenny Graham wrote: If it's for your own site then you might as well just do what works for you, but if it's a commercial site, or something you're doing for a client, I'm afraid you're in for a world of pain :-( Luckilly it's a semi-personal site. It's an interface for a database used by me and a large group of friends. That's why I'm able to serve as XHTML. I can just say if you want access, don't use IE. So Safari support isn't a complete necessity, but since it's generally a good browser, I'd rather not discourage its use among my non-nerd friends. As a Mac user, I agree that it's worth supporting Safari :-) Given the nature of the site, I don't suppose your friends will worry too much about whether it looks identical from browser to browser. You could even tell them it's a feature :-) But you mentioning that most mobile devices are buggy with styles makes me strongly consider solving all this by simply not using a handheld stylesheet. Because of the type of site it is, styling isn't at all necessary. Each page pretty much consists of: h1, h2, ul, h2, ul, h2, ul. IE may have many more bugs than Safari, but at least there they can be worked around with something as simple as a child selector or a conditional comment. If you've got well-constructed HTML, you're already more than halfway there with mobile support. I've found that, for the moment, it's best to just use handheld CSS to add a touch of colour here and there; support for layout-related elements is too patchy from what I've seen, and there are very few guarantees over font sizing - it's often just ignored. From my tests, people are more concerned about page weight than anything else, with mobile net access tending to be so slow. Clean markup will do it for you every time :-) Good luck, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari filter
On 13 Sep 2006, at 20:11, Al Sparber wrote: FWIW, my experience is that you won't get very far using media types for applying screen versus handheld styles anyway. Internet Explorer Mobile, for one, will load both screen and handheld media types, and a communication from a member of the Windows Mobile team told me that this was by design. Other handheld browsers will load both because they were written by some jerk who didn't read the spec, and never realised what they were supposed to be doing. I think the fact that a screen browser is rendering a handheld media type is the issue, no? ... I would be concerned about a screen browser that can't process the media type attribute correctly - even if it's a minor player like Safari. Well, Safari handles the media attribute of the link element just fine in my tests on 2.0.4 (i.e. it ignores the handheld stylesheet). Given that Kenny clearly wants to serve different styles to handheld devices, I thought it was helpful to point out that with current technologies, he'll have to override just about everything from the screen stylesheet in the handheld stylesheet too. Frankly, my job would end with a proper handheld style sheet. If someone was using a browser that didn't honor it, I wouldn't consider it my problem. When your client is a big organisation, hundreds of whose employees are accessing the site with IE Mobile, the fact that you've delivered a proper handheld stylesheet doesn't matter - as far as the chairman of the board is concerned, it doesn't work on his company phone or PDA, so it doesn't work full stop. It's more likely to work correctly if one devises some way of sending only the styles needed through server-side techniques. Delivering content to handhelds makes me feel like I'm back in 1996 :-( Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari filter
On 13 Sep 2006, at 20:57, Kenny Graham wrote: FWIW, my experience is that you won't get very far using media types for applying screen versus handheld styles anyway. Internet Explorer Mobile, for one, My Samsung A900's ugly default browser uses handheld stylesheets pretty much flawlessly, seems to just love the xhtml mime type... it just plain respects standards. Unfortunately, that's not the case with the majority of mobile browsers. There's a decent article about the hoops Yahoo!'s people went through creating a mobile-accessible site for the FIFA World Cup: http://www.designinteract.com/features/yahoofifa/ They found it necessary to test on ten different devices, and implement two different sets of markup, just to be sure they were allowing the maximum number of devices access to the site. Considering the quality of IE's -main- browser, I can only imagine how horrible some side-project based off of it is. In fact, it's better than IE 6 - I think that, just as IE Mac used to be, it's a different team with a different codebase. The version I have on my PDA supports transparency in PNGs, for example, and it has support for attribute selectors. On the other hand, it has no idea what the button element is... There's a table showing its CSS support at http://blogs.msdn.com/windowsmobile/articles/213771.aspx Luckilly, as far as I know, it doesn't have extremely high market share in that segment. Actually, there's a large number of handheld devices (phones and PDAs) running Windows Mobile; I felt the need to buy such a device purely for testing. I have an aversion to using the link element for some reason. I have an aversion to doing most of the things one has to do to get a working cross-platform implementation for handhelds :-) If it's for your own site then you might as well just do what works for you, but if it's a commercial site, or something you're doing for a client, I'm afraid you're in for a world of pain :-( Good luck, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG CMS] RE: digest for cms@webstandardsgroup.org
On 13 Sep 2006, at 00:57, Paul Noone wrote: And just as a final (from someone who regularly builds sites for NGOs) I'm going to give the same opinion I always do. Visit http://cmsmadsimple.org . This ripper of a CMS, though still in its infancy, has finally gone to v1.0.1. That link (well, piece of text beginning with http:) doesn't go anywhere. Did you mean http://cmsmadesimple.org/ by any chance? It's always worth checking these things before sending them to a large number of people ;-) -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] **
Re: class names and IDs (was Re: [WSG] p:first-line)
On 6 Sep 2006, at 12:13, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I often find myself using 'functional' class names for a handful of
specific tasks, but often these are used in parallel with semantic
class
names, for example:
div class=navBar noPrint
.noPrint has only one simple rule, which I know will never change.
Similarly I occasionally use .leftAlign .rightAlign but again only
with very simple rules that won't change: visually styling is done by
other means.
Surely the question of whether .navBar will print or not has nothing
to do with the content, and has no place in the markup?
Assuming .noPrint means Don't output on a printer, a print
stylesheet containing
.navBar {
display: none;
}
will make explicit what you are doing, and means you don't have to
put information about how the document is presented _in certain
circumstances_ into the document itself. Otherwise you could finish
up with your document littered with classes for handling its
presentation on a wide variety of media (screen, handheld, aural,
projection, not-yet-invented), which is exactly the kind of creeping
presentationitis CSS was specifically designed to avoid.
Just my 0.02GBP,
Nick.
--
Nick Fitzsimons
http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] PDF no chance to open in browser !?
On 25 Aug 2006, at 14:21, Gaspar wrote: Sow iam thiking of in a way of dont give the chance to user open the PDF in browser instead of that compel the pdf to prompt be download or open width choose program . You can use the Content-disposition HTTP header: Content-disposition: attachment; filename=something.pdf (where something.pdf is the filename). This will cause the browser (all modern browsers, I believe) to prompt the user to save or open the file using the specified name (although the user can specify their own name when saving if they want). If they choose to open the file, it will be downloaded in the background and then opened in whatever application they have configured (e.g. Acrobat Reader, Mac OS X Preview) rather than using the browser window. As for how you implement it, that depends on your server environment. Google for content-disposition and you should find somebody who's done it before on your server platform. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE5.2/Mac... How sites deal with a dead browser
On 22 Aug 2006, at 05:44, Micky Hulse wrote: Hmmm, actually, that would be interesting April fools day trick... spoof your browser stats - anyone know how to do this? I would love to surf the web and have folks thinking I was using IE 1.0! Lol, what a trip - 1.0... where do you even download that anymore? Can XP run it? Here you are: http://browsers.evolt.org/?ie/32bit/1.0 :-) No idea if it runs on XP or not, although I wouldn't be surprised to find it did - MS are pretty hot on backwards compatibility... Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Unwanted gap in IE
On 21 Aug 2006, at 09:16, Adam Morris wrote:
Something to do with inline elements then and having to alter them
to 'block'
On 21/08/06, Robbie Shepherd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
img{
display: block;
}
also fixes the issue.
On 8/21/06, Adam Morris wrote:
http://www.maxbulley.com
In IE, there is a space underneath the photograph (ugly); in FF,
there isn't (nice). How to get rid??
Exactly. When an image is inline (which is the default display
property value for images), its vertical-align property has the
default value of baseline, meaning, aligned with the baseline of
the text it is assumed to be inline with. However, the descenders on
letters like g and y need space below the baseline, hence the gap
you were seeing. Setting the image's display property to block
means that the browser no longer has to make allowance for the
possibility of a lower-case g or similar appearing inline with it,
and therefore it no longer leaves space for it.
HTH,
Nick.
--
Nick Fitzsimons
http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/
**
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] list elements
On 21 Aug 2006, at 16:13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Are list elements (ul, ol, li, etc.) block level or not? My HTML book is no help on this subject and I don't seem to be able to find the answer in the W3C specs for HTML 4.01. Check the DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/sgml/dtd.html#block %block includes %list which includes OL and UL. Oddly enough, LI appears to be neither block nor inline... HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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] xhtm 1.1 and Ruby annotations
Tee G. Peng wrote: And the boss is just too busy dealing with client and bring in more clients so that I can pay rent :) Standards are important, but rent is essential :-) -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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] xhtm 1.1 and Ruby annotations
Tee G. Peng wrote: Thanks to Eugenio, I was reading the article from sitepoint forum. XHTML 1.1 deprecates the lang attribute (in favour of xml:lang) and also the name attribute for a and map tags. It also adds a number of elements for Ruby annotations. I have a question about XHTM 1.1, Ruby annotations and validation. I do CSS coding for a company that its clients' sites are developed in Ruby. Every time I receive a job, I am curious why they used XHTML 1.1 - I asked once but it was never answered. Now this part is clear with the article I'd just read. All jobs I received, the markup are full of errors (xhtml and html all mixed up), fixing the validation errors really isn't part of my job but I try my best to clean up as much as possible (no pay because I was not asked to do it) however sometimes it's just not possible to help fixing it because almost every page uses iframe that the code is generated from server. I learned that XML is about well-formness and with XTHML, no markup error should exist or browsers give parsing errors - those sites are served with XML and XHTML 1.1, but none of the sites I visited ever broken. Why? tee Two different meanings of the word Ruby: its clients' sites are developed in Ruby is the case of the Ruby programming language [1]. It also adds a number of elements for Ruby annotations is the case of special characters use to annotate ideographic languages [2]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_programming_language [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruby_character It sounds like they don't actually understand what XHTML is or how to produce it, they just want to believe they're using the latest cool thing. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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] XHTML strict maxlength
Paul Collins wrote: As far as I can see, maxlength is a valid XHTML strict attribute, can anyone tell me why this isn't validating?! Cheers, Paul It's only valid on input elements: http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/dtds.html#dtdentry_xhtml1-strict.dtd_input There is no equivalent for textarea: http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xhtml1-20020801/dtds.html#dtdentry_xhtml1-strict.dtd_textarea Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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 standards support very bad according to some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Quoting Bruce [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Looks to me like he's blaming ie for his design problems. On www.newscloud.com there is 226 errors returned by the validator. Scrollbars at 800px in all browsers, image distortion and odd text sizes... might some of those things not be because of IE(6/7) workarounds? Maarten No. If you disable CSS then Firefox doesn't even render the plain HTML correctly because it's so malformed. I got 209 errors from the HTML validator. The CSS validator can't even validate the page because the markup is broken. As for the page: well, for starters, it is served with an XHTML Doctype, but the CSS uses upper-case names for some elements (e.g. H5.tags A), so that's wrong. I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve with markup like: ulli/li/ul Overall, I'd describe the page as having shoddy markup, and the CSS as having been produced by somebody with a limited understanding of the standards. If he expects it to work, it's his responsibility to do it right first. Granted, nobody's claiming that IE7's CSS 2.1 support is perfect, but the fact that he encountered such problems with his layout should have given him a clue that his code was broken. I think he just gave way to a knee-jerk reaction of OMFG! IE sux!!! and then made a fool of himself by drawing the attention of the world to his lack of craftsmanship. Note that in the blog post you originally cited, he is quoting an article slagging off IE 7's CSS implementation in Beta 1. That version had no CSS bug fixes whatsoever - they came in Beta 2. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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 standards support very bad according to some
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: lack of craftsmanship. haha..great insight :-) Did you comment to his blog? Maarten No, because one has to register to comment. I don't really have time to give my details to some random guy on the net, just so I can insult his work :-) Anyway, there are already several comments there pointing out things like the validation errors, and they don't seem to have inspired him to act. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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 standards support very bad according to some
Tom Livingston wrote: On 8/9/06 6:36 AM, Nick Fitzsimons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not sure what he's trying to achieve with markup like: ulli/li/ul Maybe it's me. Is the issue was that he had this empty UL sitting around in his code or is there something wrong with this that I am too un-caffinated to see? Was it wrong for the doc-type? I didn't look at his code... I should have shown more of the surrounding markup: this was embedded in another list as the contents of the first list item. In other places, it contains a link to a video or audio file, so I assume his CMS is just too brain-dead to omit it when there's nothing to link to. I removed it using DOM Inspector, and its absence doesn't break the layout. When there _is_ a link there, it has a title attribute but no content, or just a single nbsp; as content, and is then made visible using CSS background images. This is a really bad practice; an icon linking somewhere deserves to be in the page if it's the only visible content for that link. I don't think that site will be getting any awards for accessibility any time soon. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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] htaccess, help please
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i repurposed the svg. firefox still doesn't get it but opera 9.01 renders it correctly. is there something i am missing? dwain Which version of Firefox are you using? FF only supports SVG from version 1.5 onwards, IIRC. I can see the file looking (I assume) correct on Opera 9; in Firefox 1.5.0.6 it displays, but is absolutely huge - I mean hundreds, maybe even thousands of screen widths and screen heights in size. Looking at it in the Firefox DOM Inspector shows it as having width and height of 2.8E+06, which is almost 3 million pixels square. This is specified at the start of your SVG in the width and height attributes: svg xmlns=http://www.w3.org/2000/svg; xml:space=preserve width=2.8E+006px height=2.8E+006px style=shape-rendering:geometricPrecision; text-rendering:geometricPrecision; image-rendering:optimizeQuality; fill-rule:evenodd; clip-rule:evenodd viewBox=0 0 2.8e+006 2.11667e+006 xmlns:xlink=http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink; Why Opera manages to shrink it down to a manageable size, I don't know, but Firefox appears to be doing the right thing. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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] htaccess, help please
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Nick Fitzsimons wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i repurposed the svg. firefox still doesn't get it but opera 9.01 renders it correctly. is there something i am missing? dwain Looking at it in the Firefox DOM Inspector shows it as having width and height of 2.8E+06, which is almost 3 million pixels square. This is specified at the start of your SVG in the width and height attributes: svg xmlns=http://www.w3.org/2000/svg; xml:space=preserve width=2.8E+006px height=2.8E+006px style=shape-rendering:geometricPrecision; text-rendering:geometricPrecision; image-rendering:optimizeQuality; fill-rule:evenodd; clip-rule:evenodd viewBox=0 0 2.8e+006 2.11667e+006 xmlns:xlink=http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink; i'm using the latest version. when i converted the file to svg it was supposed to be, if i remember correctly 800px x 800px. i used corel draw 13 for the conversion. mozilla.13 and ie6 render the file sans the z-index. since my math skills aren't real sharp, what would be the appropriate numbers to make the file a 1024x768? and why or how did the conversion get that far out of kilter? dwain Disclaimer: I'm no expert on SVG :-) Open the SVG file up in your usual text editor (it's just XML) and change the width, height and viewBox attributes of the svg element to 1024, 768 and 0 0 768 1024 respectively, like this: svg xmlns=http://www.w3.org/2000/svg; xml:space=preserve width=1024 height=768 style=shape-rendering:geometricPrecision; text-rendering:geometricPrecision; image-rendering:optimizeQuality; fill-rule:evenodd; clip-rule:evenodd viewBox=0 0 768 1024 xmlns:xlink=http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink; and see how that does. As to why it was so weirdly enlarged, I really don't know. It could be something to do with pixel density or some related setting in Corel Draw; not having used that software since about 1994, I'm unable to help with that one :-) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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] Default browser stylesheet values
Paul Hempsall wrote: Hey all, Just wondering if anyone is aware of any web resources that detail the default style values given to various elements by browsers (specifically IE6)? You could download and install the IE Web Developer toolbar from Microsoft: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e59c3964-672d-4511-bb3e-2d5e1db91038displaylang=en Then load an unstyled document containing the elements you want to know the values for, select View DOM from the toolbar and, in the Current style pane, select the Show default style values checkbox. Then, in the document tree view, select the elements in turn to see what the style values are. HTH, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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] Standards Table Layout
pdr Lists wrote: We can blame that sell web design software for the public misconception that building a valuable web site/blog/presence/application/anything is easy and inexpensive. After all, people will be more likely to buy a copy ... As a result, many people believe that what we do is easy, ( isnt it just like writing a Word document? ), does not require any knowledge other than how to run a program, and worse yet, they believe they are also experts in the field because they use the web. Tell me about it. A few years ago I was designing and implementing a workflow system: it allowed the department to define workflows (including points at which emails were automagically sent requesting authorisation from managers), provided complete traceability of all processes, and generated reports on utilisation of resources (== people). It had a SQL Server back end, ASP middleware and an Ajax UI (although we didn't know it was called Ajax then). Three months in, the department head went on a 2 day course in DreamWeaver, and on her return wanted to know why it had taken me so long when it was only a few pages. Shortly after they didn't renew my contract, getting in a recent graphic design graduate (at a lower rate) to finish it off. From what I heard, it never was finished. These days, I'm very careful to explain in excruciating detail exactly what I'm doing and why; the client may never read the reports, but it covers me somewhat against idiocy like that. Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** 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 based menu popping behind Flash movie only in Safari problem
From what I can find in the bug reports at http://bugzilla.opendarwin.org/ at least some WebKit developers seem to be of the opinion that this is due to a bug in the Flash plugin - see for example the comments at: http://bugzilla.opendarwin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=10111 But also see http://bugzilla.opendarwin.org/show_bug.cgi?id=6996 which casts some doubt on where exactly responsibility lies. Rommil Santiago wrote: I've seen this behavior first hand. Z-index doesn't help. The flash movie tends to peak through most things that appears on top of it - ESPECIALLY if it is animated in anyway. My solution: on rollover - hide the movie. Safari seems to be the only one that has this problem in fact. www.rommil.com | www.webflightcheck.com http://www.webflightcheck.com/ On 31-Jul-06, at 11:17 AM, Ted Drake wrote: This works in IE6 and not safari!?! I would confirm the z-index of your dropdown parent container and flash parent container. If you haven’t set this, apply position:relative z-index:1 to the flash container and position:relative; z-index:5 to the dropdown container to see if that helps. Applying it to the container instead of the dropdown/flash themselves will help you in ie6. you may have to do both: flash container – z-index1, flash- z-index:2, dropdowncontainer:z-index5; dropdown:z-index:10… If you can survive without zindex, you are better off. I’d also check to see how you are embedding the flash movie. Are you using the UFO script, embed, object, combination…? Ted www.last-child.com http://www.last-child.com/ * From: * listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Corrie Potter *Sent:* Monday, July 31, 2006 7:58 AM *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org mailto:wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* [WSG] CSS based menu popping behind Flash movie only in Safari problem I have a CSS based dynamic menu that drops down and there is a flash movie that is right under the menu. The flash movie is set to transparent and the menu pops down over the flash menu in all browsers correctly except in Safari. In Safari the menu displays over the flash movie but when you go over the top of sub menu items they drop behind the flash movie for some reason. Is there anyone out there that can help me? I really appreciate it! Corrie Potter -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
