Re: [WSG] Site redesign - complete
Nice job, Chris. I think modifying a blog template is probably one of the best ways to get your feet wet with XHTML ande CSS because you learn why things do what they do and how to change it. From here, you can start taking what you've learned and applying it to new designs. ~john _ Dr. Zeus Web Development http://www.DrZeus.net content without clutter on 3/4/2005 12:49 AM Chris Coonce-Ewing said the following: Hello all, I'm new to the group. I've recently moved to WordPress and a brand new CSS and XHTML layout. I'm curious what people think. http://www.coonce-ewing.com Thanks, Chris ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Semantic Web
Is there anyone interested in semantic web? I'd like to try to spread this topic in the forum I use to attend (http://forum.html.it), but I see that it doesn't interest a lot. I think that the principles of semantic web can help us understand much better the importance of clean and logical coding. So, can anyone help me understand how to spread the message in a simple and interesting way? Thanks, Piero. ** 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] Semantic Web
Piero, I am definitely interested in this topic though I have not a big experience in that domain. Semantic Web will be one of my priorities in the future. So I am ready to participate to any initiative in that area. Pat -Original Message- Is there anyone interested in semantic web? I'd like to try to spread this topic in the forum I use to attend (http://forum.html.it), but I see that it doesn't interest a lot. I think that the principles of semantic web can help us understand much better the importance of clean and logical coding. So, can anyone help me understand how to spread the message in a simple and interesting way? Thanks, Piero. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Z-index Problem
You are using the same z-indez number in both classes. You should use
different z-index numbuer for each absolute div.
att,
Genau L. Jr
www.meucarronovo.com.br
James Oppenheim wrote:
Hi all,
I am having trouble with css z-index. Here is a portion of it:
img.y {
position: absolute;
top: 147px;
z-index: 1;
}
img.x {
position: absolute;
top: 201px;
z-index: 1;
}
.main_content {
position: relative;
left: 0px;
top: 0px;
z-index: 2;
text-align: left;
padding: 50px 20px 15px 34px;
color: #494949;
font-size: 12px;
height: 350px; /* Start of IE min-height hack */
min-height: 290px;
}
htmlbody .main_content {
height: auto;
min-height: 290px; /* End of IE min-height hack */
}
At the moment it all works well, except for IE. IE does not like the
fact that there is not a left position allocated. So it puts the
images in the centre of the screen, but under the text, so the Z-index
works. If I make the position: relative; the images will not be
placed underneath the text.
Any ideas??
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Browser incompatibility - was Site redesign - complete
You seem to have the following in your CSS:
#header {
background: url(http://...glencoe_crop.jpg)no-repeat top;
(I snipped the URL to make it fit on one line for this msg...)
I found that the problem is that there is no space between the ) and
no-repeat.
Odd that the CSS validator does validate and adds the space for you.
Hope that helps,
Erik
Chris Coonce-Ewing wrote:
Standards question...
I've been having problems with browser differences. Viewed in Opera, I
have background graphics in my header and footer, yet they don't show
up in IE.
I've already validated the XHTML and the CSS
The site: http://www.coonce-ewing.com
The CSS : http://www.coonce-ewing.com/themes/scotland/scotland-layout.css
Chris
**
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] Browser incompatibility - was Site redesign - complete
That was it!
It's been driving me crazy as the validator wasn't picking up anything
wrong. By adding the space that did resolve the problem.
Chris
On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 08:59:21 -0500, Erik Peterson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You seem to have the following in your CSS:
#header {
background: url(http://...glencoe_crop.jpg)no-repeat top;
(I snipped the URL to make it fit on one line for this msg...)
I found that the problem is that there is no space between the ) and
no-repeat.
Odd that the CSS validator does validate and adds the space for you.
Hope that helps,
Erik
Chris Coonce-Ewing wrote:
Standards question...
I've been having problems with browser differences. Viewed in Opera,
I have background graphics in my header and footer, yet they don't
show up in IE.
I've already validated the XHTML and the CSS
The site: http://www.coonce-ewing.com
The CSS :
http://www.coonce-ewing.com/themes/scotland/scotland-layout.css
Chris
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
[WSG] Information about validation logos
I have put together a page using some information from various sites and adding / changing bits to come up with the following page: http://www.fit2gether.co.uk/aboutsite.html You will see that there is a small link at the bottom of the page that a user can click on to get to this page. What do you think of the way I have done this and what I have on this page? That's the web site complete now barring any final changes requested. Thanks, Stephen -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.0 - Release Date: 02/03/2005 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] SEO, Semantics, and Web Standards
It's probably safer to say at this point that semantic coding certainly can't hurt your search engine ranking :) Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jono Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 4:49 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] SEO, Semantics, and Web Standards I've always been fascinated by the search results for for certain words on Google. Sometimes it is hard to tell - by viewing page source - why the top result is in fact the top result. For exampel, try searching for Fried Chicken on Google. Take a look at the top two results, and then take a look at their code. You'll discover that Number 2 is much worse than number 1, which is not very good to begin with. If clean code has anything to do with SEO, this is definitely a good case study. The third result has the worst coding of them all... I'm not sure how it even made it to number 3? There is also a lop-sided brand competition between the top two ( see 1 2 in Google search results for Fried Chicken ), which probably has a lot to do with it as well. On Feb 24, 2005, at 7:48 PM, heretic wrote: So can I hear it from the experts (ie: you guys) what the truth behind SEO really is. Are semantics worth anything? Well, it's hard to find the hard data to back this up... but what does come up consistently is this: semantically-correct markup will improve rankings. I can't say definitively how much it will improve, but it does seem to work :) ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Information about validation logos
Hi Stephen, On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 14:13:28 -, Stevio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have put together a page using some information from various sites and adding / changing bits to come up with the following page: http://www.fit2gether.co.uk/aboutsite.html You will see that there is a small link at the bottom of the page that a user can click on to get to this page. What do you think of the way I have done this and what I have on this page? I'm not so sure about the usefulness of validation icons on every page, but I like the idea of having a page stating the importance of web standards. Under the section, Why is validation so important, you could extend it to include something along the lines of how separating presentation from content helps ensure that the content is machine readable, making it more compatible with assistive devices for accessibility, and obviously making it much easier for search engines to index and rank. Best regards, Gez _ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Mac (IE5.2 + Safari) users: please could you check...
I've just amended the CSS again for this site, thanks to the feedback from John and Barry, and I wondered whether they, or anyone else could take another quick look at the areas specified in the original message...? It seems that adding little more than a 'position:absolute' declaration to the problem containers cured it (at least, as far as I can tell with Browsercam) Thanks, Stuart Stuart Homfray wrote: ... I have tested the site with the usual PC browsers (IE4, IE5, IE5.5, IE6, Firefox, Opera 7, even NN4.7) and I'm reasonably happy, and I've looked at the layout using Browsercam for Safari, IE5.2, Konqueror and Opera 6 and (aside from a bit of trouble in Opera 6) ... The two areas that need checking are the 'VIEW COACHES' open/close menu toggle link, and, the 'see example' 'pop-up' help on 'Information' label in the small form at the bottom of the coach pages (the Jimmy Hogan/William Townley/Jack Reynolds pages). I've taken a couple of screen grabs of what they're SUPPOSED to look like as a comparison - see: menu: http://elbombin.stuarthomfray.co.uk/menu_beforeAfter.gif coach page info rollover: http://elbombin.stuarthomfray.co.uk/coachespage.png The site url is http://elbombin.stuarthomfray.co.uk/ - if you feel it would be better to contact me directly, please use [EMAIL PROTECTED], and if you feel the need to give anything on there a 'good kicking' in public - maybe the use of an inline style on the toggle link (Opera seems to demand it in order to work correctly) or the use of a clearing div (IE needs one, so using the excellent Easy Clearing float at P.I.E. seemed a bit pointless) - I'm more than happy to take it! -- === = El Bombin http://elbombin.stuarthomfray.co.uk Stuart Homfray http://www.stuarthomfray.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] Mac (IE5.2 + Safari) users: please could you check...
Everything works in Firefox 1.0 Mac and Safari 1.2.4 (v125.12) for OS 10.3.8. The Expandable View Coaches menu works fine in IE 5.2.3 but the (see example) popup does not work in IE. On Mar 4, 2005, at 3:02 PM, Stuart Homfray wrote: The two areas that need checking are the 'VIEW COACHES' open/close menu toggle link, and, the 'see example' 'pop-up' help on 'Information' label in the small form at the bottom of the coach pages (the Jimmy Hogan/William Townley/Jack Reynolds pages). I've taken a couple of screen grabs of what they're SUPPOSED to look like as a comparison - see: menu: http://elbombin.stuarthomfray.co.uk/menu_beforeAfter.gif coach page info rollover: http://elbombin.stuarthomfray.co.uk/coachespage.png The site url is http://elbombin.stuarthomfray.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] TheNews.com.au
Steven Clark mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Thursday, March 03, 2005 7:46 PM said: I don't usually post to the list mainly because sometimes forums and lists get a bit personal. [snip] Anyway its a very good sign that views are changing when trends reach Tasmania (please no mean emails off list or on - its only a posting, thanks). ?_? Oh, and I got a 404. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Internet Explorer - Whats going on here!!!
Hey Everyone, Just wondering if anyone can help me. My website - www.simplyrewarding.net looks great in FireFox. Yet IE has this little bug: http://www.simplyrewarding.net/media/ie_dumb.jpg I am not sure WHICH bug it is, so I can fix it! Any help?? Thanks everyone! (/BTW: If you dont see what the error is - the white box, should line up with the blue box... Thanks :]/) -- Chris Stratford [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.neester.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Internet Explorer - Whats going on here!!!
On 5 Mar 2005, at 1:35 PM, Chris Stratford wrote: My website - www.simplyrewarding.net looks great in FireFox. Yet IE has this little bug: http://www.simplyrewarding.net/media/ie_dumb.jpg I am not sure WHICH bug it is, so I can fix it! Any help?? I stopped looking as soon as I saw the custom DTD - how can you predict results when you move outside of standards? BTW - your header is even worse in IE5/Mac - screenshot coming offlist.. N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Internet Explorer - Whats going on here!!!
Hey Nick, The customised DTD simply allows: target=_blank Thats all. It is otherwise the standard XHTML Strict DTD. Nick Gleitzman wrote: On 5 Mar 2005, at 1:35 PM, Chris Stratford wrote: My website - www.simplyrewarding.net looks great in FireFox. Yet IE has this little bug: http://www.simplyrewarding.net/media/ie_dumb.jpg I am not sure WHICH bug it is, so I can fix it! Any help?? I stopped looking as soon as I saw the custom DTD - how can you predict results when you move outside of standards? BTW - your header is even worse in IE5/Mac - screenshot coming offlist.. N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- Chris Stratford [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.neester.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Internet Explorer - What's going on here!!!
Hello Chris;
Am a little tired, but you have one of the padding bugs in there, which one
am not sure;
Looking at your CSS though gives this for the element in question:
#header div.time strong {
background: #FFF;
font-size: 0.8em;
padding: 0 0.5em;
border: 1px solid #000;;
border-right: none;
}
Clean that one up some to become:
#header div.time strong {
background: #ff;
font-size: 0.8em;
padding: 0 0.5em 0 0; (assuming you want this to have right padding with 0.5em)
border-top: 1px solid #00;
border-right: none;
border-bottom: 1px solid #00;
border-left: 1px solid #00;
}
and see if that helps.
As for XHTML Strict DTD and target new, go back to use the standard DTD,
and a href=http://www.simplyrewarding.net/someurl/;
onclick=window.open(this.href); return false;Some link text here/a
Regards
~Veine
At 02:10 PM 3/5/2005 +1100, you wrote:
Hey Nick,
The customised DTD simply allows: target=_blank
Thats all.
It is otherwise the standard XHTML Strict DTD.
Nick Gleitzman wrote:
On 5 Mar 2005, at 1:35 PM, Chris Stratford wrote:
My website - www.simplyrewarding.net looks great in FireFox.
Yet IE has this little bug:
http://www.simplyrewarding.net/media/ie_dumb.jpg
I am not sure WHICH bug it is, so I can fix it!
Any help??
I stopped looking as soon as I saw the custom DTD - how can you predict
results when you move outside of standards?
BTW - your header is even worse in IE5/Mac - screenshot coming offlist..
N
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
Veine K Vikberg
http://www.vikberg.net
Professional Web Guru
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.6.1 - Release Date: 3/4/2005
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Internet Explorer - What's going on here!!!
Hey Veine,
Thanks for the help - although I dont think it is related to that little
box.
I am so stupid.
The image is too wide.
:S
The borders are what casused the issues.
The image is the right width, but because of the borders being 2 pixles
(left and right).
IE has that problem.
Yeah.
Well. Fixed :)
Thanks for the help!!!
Veine K Vikberg wrote:
Hello Chris;
Am a little tired, but you have one of the padding bugs in there,
which one am not sure;
Looking at your CSS though gives this for the element in question:
#header div.time strong {
background: #FFF;
font-size: 0.8em;
padding: 0 0.5em;
border: 1px solid #000;;
border-right: none;
}
Clean that one up some to become:
#header div.time strong {
background: #ff;
font-size: 0.8em;
padding: 0 0.5em 0 0; (assuming you want this to have right padding
with 0.5em)
border-top: 1px solid #00;
border-right: none;
border-bottom: 1px solid #00;
border-left: 1px solid #00;
}
and see if that helps.
As for XHTML Strict DTD and target new, go back to use the standard
DTD, and a href=http://www.simplyrewarding.net/someurl/;
onclick=window.open(this.href); return false;Some link text here/a
Regards
~Veine
At 02:10 PM 3/5/2005 +1100, you wrote:
Hey Nick,
The customised DTD simply allows: target=_blank
Thats all.
It is otherwise the standard XHTML Strict DTD.
Nick Gleitzman wrote:
On 5 Mar 2005, at 1:35 PM, Chris Stratford wrote:
My website - www.simplyrewarding.net looks great in FireFox.
Yet IE has this little bug:
http://www.simplyrewarding.net/media/ie_dumb.jpg
I am not sure WHICH bug it is, so I can fix it!
Any help??
I stopped looking as soon as I saw the custom DTD - how can you
predict results when you move outside of standards?
BTW - your header is even worse in IE5/Mac - screenshot coming
offlist..
N
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
Veine K Vikberg
http://www.vikberg.net
Professional Web Guru
--
Chris Stratford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neester.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
RE: [WSG] TheNews.com.au
I apologise for the 404. Obviously as a developer you must realise day one can have its glitches and you won't take it as a personal thing. Day ones are like that. If you continue to get 404's though I'd check your server or installation because you should have got the old version while the site was being worked on again this morning. Unless you dialled up as it was being reloaded of course. While we do everything we can to ensure a good experience the client has every right to take it off the air on us at a moments notice and tell us when we get into work lol. The colour changes have been completed and we're aware of your discontent as a user. _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
