RE: [WSG] page check

georg wrote: Looks like you have two layers of some of those container- borders, and not all line up well in Firefox Opera. Do you mean the navbarnthe header? do you think it will be ok, as im out of time on this, Slight weakness when font-resizing is applied,

Re: [WSG] page check

kvnmcwebn wrote: www.mcmonagle.biz/mockup/final11.htm Looks like you have two layers of some of those container- borders, and not all line up well in Firefox Opera. Do you mean the navbarnthe header? do you think it will be ok, as im out of time on this, It is looking pretty ok

Re: [WSG] page check

Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: It is looking pretty ok now. Valid code helps - at times :-) This: /div!-- navdrop -- -- ...doesn't look good in IE6. The last comment-end is visible text. Since you are commenting out navdrop, maybe it'll come out better if you end it like: /div -- !-- navdrop --

RE: [WSG] page check

georg wrote: Footer can't expand properly in Firefox etc. Looking acceptable otherwise. I know this is not good but i defined a pixel height for the footer. The background image of the div behind it was showing through the footer div's padding. I will try and use a background image for the

Re: [WSG] page check

kvnmcwebn wrote: the html validates now Tidy is still complaining of unescaped amp's in your title attributes: ul class="navlist" lia href="subcategory.htm" title="parenting"Parenting/a/li lia href="subcategory.htm" title="childcare"Childcare/a/li lia href="subcategory.htm"

[WSG] page check

back to work. I have a page thats nearly done just want to get the tires kicked. www.mcmonagle.biz/mockup/final10.htm www.mcmonagle.biz/mockup/index5.css www.mcmonagle.biz/mockup/nav.css issues 1) the purple border on the bottom right dosnt scale to the footer. 2)background img of the

Re: [WSG] page check

kvnmcwebn wrote: www.mcmonagle.biz/mockup/final10.htm i was going to use repeating background images to scale down the sides of the parent divs. any better ideas? A minimal set of nested divs with backgrounds on the outer divs - faux columns. Nested divs are not nice, but no other solution

RE: [WSG] page check

Georg wrote: Opera 8.5 and 9prev1 have got a broken header. img src=FAMILIESfinal_02.gif ... /img src=familiestag.gif ... / ...are not positioned well. Different in those two versions, so I advice you to line up those graphics without using position: relative. Clear below the search-box/nav, and

Re: [WSG] page check

kvnmcwebn wrote: www.mcmonagle.biz/mockup/final11.htm Not quite there yet :-) - HTML validator not happy. - Those header-images don't line up well in IE6. - Borders around those images in Opera and IE6 - shouldn't be there(?) - Looks like you have two layers of some of those

[WSG] page check please - mime type!

Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html lang=en

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

It looks ok. It is validated. 2005/12/7, designer [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

designer wrote: Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html lang=en

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

Looks fine in Mac Firefox 1.5 and Safari 2.02. Best regards, Marilyn Langfeld Langfeldesigns http://www.langfeldesigns.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Dec 7, 2005, at 8:13 AM, designer wrote: Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

Designer wrote: Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

On 12/7/05, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you choose to do content negotiation and serve application/xhtml+xml to browsers that support it and text/html to those that don't, be aware that it prevents incremental rendering in Mozilla. So is the best thing to target xhtml browsers?

RE: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

Message- From: Stephen Stagg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 07 December 2005 15:39 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type! Designer wrote: Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

Lachlan Hunt wrote: You may as well just use valid HTML 4.01 Strict. See XHTML is not for Beginners, the MIME type issue is just one of the many reasons. http://lachy.id.au/log/2005/12/xhtml-beginners (yes, I'm aware of the irony that the article itself is XHTML as text/html, but that's the

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

Christian Montoya wrote: doesn't work! You are all viewing text/html. Pretty soon everyone on this list will think they are serving xhtml. Yes, and a large percentage of them will serve complete garbage :-) I'll get it started right: DID NOT work in every single browser. Version 0.1 to

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

Sorry, just the map you used. My comment was meant light-heartedly. Your location map looks very like the one that can be got from http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/. As these are crown copyright, I assume that you haven't got an agreement with them to use their data unattributed.

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: http://lachy.id.au/log/2005/12/xhtml-beginners I am prohibited from getting comments through to that article. That's weird, if you contact me off list and let me know what error you received I might be able to do something about it. If you send me

RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

Return Receipt Your document: RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

Return Receipt Your RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest document

Re: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

Hi Richard, Very good work! Very nice web site! My suggestions: 1. The XHTML 1.0 recommendation states that both lang and xml:lang attributes should be used when specifying the language of an element. The value of the xml:lang attribute takes precedence. 2. The style attribute has been

Re: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

John S. Britsios wrote: Hi Richard, Very good work! Very nice web site! My suggestions: 1. The XHTML 1.0 recommendation states that both lang and xml:lang attributes should be used when specifying the language of an element. The value of the xml:lang attribute takes precedence. assuming

RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

sites need to be aesthetically pleasing as well as accessible and CSS and DOM scripting gives us more than enough power to do both. agreed, It would be hard to get customer sign off on such adesign, even soits quick loading and accessible. Perhaps you could sit down with a graphic

[WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

I have been following this list with interest for some time and I am currently working on creating my web site. I've done some testing on IE and Firefox and validated on w3. I would appreciate any feedback, regarding standards, semantics, usability, accessibility etc. The page is at

Re: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

Looks great m8 , only I would do a better header /logo that one is a bit fuzzy or it's supposed to be like that!? 2005/11/4, QM Consulting Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have been following this list with interest for some time and I am currently working on creating my web site. I've done some

Re: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

QM Consulting Ltd wrote: I have been following this list with interest for some time and I am currently working on creating my web site. I've done some testing on IE and Firefox and validated on w3. I would appreciate any feedback, regarding standards, semantics, usability, accessibility etc.

RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

, 5 November 2005 2:42 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest I have been following this list with interest for some time and I am currently working on creating my web site. I've done some testing on IE and Firefox and validated on w3. I

RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest

Return Receipt Your RE: [WSG] Page Check: www.qm-consulting.co.uk/test/indextest document

[WSG] Page check please - lionsq3

Hi All, I need some help in checking the following page is rendering Ok in IE 5.x and IE 6. I am unable to test in these browsers due to a hd crash and the subsequent decision it was time to refurbish my system. Until finished I have no access to any version of Windows. All I can test on is the

Re: [WSG] Page check please - lionsq3

On 22/07/05, Rob Unsworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I need some help in checking the following page is rendering Ok in IE 5.x and IE 6. I am unable to test in these browsers due to a hd crash and the subsequent decision it was time to refurbish my system. Until finished I have no

Re: [WSG] Page check please - lionsq3

Rob Unsworth wrote: Hi All, I need some help in checking the following page is rendering Ok in IE 5.x and IE 6. [...] http://www.lionsq3.asn.au/phorms/cabinet/ The css for the list is at, http://www.lionsq3.asn.au/css/formlist.css The main css is at,

Re: [WSG] Page Check

I find the inconsistant use of thumbnails in the category div 's (watercolors, etc.) that are href's that change a picture and then the same sized thumbnails in the left and right containers with the border frame being the only visible dif, yet they aren't clickable confusing and not very usable.

[WSG] Page Check

Comments and suggestions on this page welcome. http://www.dlaakso.com/ Thanks. David David Laakso ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list

Re: [WSG] Page Check

On 11/3/04 10:36 PM David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out: Comments and suggestions on this page welcome. http://www.dlaakso.com/ Thanks. There appear to be some accessibility warnings on WAI and 508. Cool site! Rick Faaberg ** The

Re: [WSG] Page Check

Rick Faaberg wrote: On 11/3/04 10:36 PM David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out: Comments and suggestions on this page welcome. http://www.dlaakso.com/ Thanks. There appear to be some accessibility warnings on WAI and 508. Cool site! Rick Faaberg I will address the accessibility

Re: [WSG] Page Check

David Laakso wrote: Rick Faaberg wrote: On 11/3/04 10:36 PM David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out: Comments and suggestions on this page welcome. http://www.dlaakso.com/ Thanks. There appear to be some accessibility warnings on WAI and 508. Cool site! Rick Faaberg I will address the