HI.
CAN SOME ONE TAKE A FINAL LOOK AT THIS SITE.
AND GOT 2 FONTS.
ONE VERDANA AND ONE Arial black.
do i need any other fonts.
and does it look really good?
and also any other improvements.
let me know.
and if i need to make any changes.
tell me how to do this.
marvin.
Marvin Hunkin wrote:
HI.
CAN SOME ONE TAKE A FINAL LOOK AT THIS SITE.
AND GOT 2 FONTS.
ONE VERDANA AND ONE Arial black.
do i need any other fonts.
and does it look really good?
and also any other improvements.
let me know.
and if i need to make any changes.
tell me how to do this.
marvin.
2c from me:
Clean up the main navigation - make it one deck - move copyright and
credits links to the footer.
Henrik Madsen
+61 08 9387 1250
hen...@igenerator.com.au
www.igenerator.com.au
On 04/02/2010, at 6:47 AM, Marvin Hunkin wrote:
HI.
CAN SOME ONE TAKE A FINAL LOOK AT THIS SITE.
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of Marvin Hunkin
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 2:47 PM
To: WSG@WEBSTANDARDSGROUP.ORG
Subject: [WSG] FINAL VERSION OF MY SITE
HI.
CAN SOME ONE TAKE A FINAL LOOK AT THIS SITE.
AND GOT 2 FONTS.
ONE
When I am validating a site that I am working on using the W3C Validator I
get errors with *-moz-border-radius-bottomleft*.
Is this because it is CSS3?
Error Reads:
Property -moz-border-radius-bottomleft doesn't exist : 5px 5px
Cheers
Daniel
-moz is a vendor prefix (not CSS3)
--
Regards,
Thierry | www.tjkdesign.com
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of Daniel Anderson
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 3:12 PM
To: wsg
Subject: [WSG] CSS Validation Error
When I am
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
http://www.raulferrer.com/joe/html/
Marvin,
As I mentioned in a previous post, font-family names that contain a space
need to be between quotes, so you should use:
h1 {
font-family: Arial Black;
text-align: center;
}
instead of:
h1 {
font-family: Arial
At 2/3/2010 02:47 PM, Marvin Hunkin wrote:
http://www.raulferrer.com/joe/html/
Hi Marvin,
Overall I found this to be a clear and attractive site. Good work!
A few quick notes:
1) Phone number formats vary from place to place, but in North
America at least the convention is to insert
At 2/3/2010 02:47 PM, Marvin Hunkin wrote:
http://www.raulferrer.com/joe/html/
You should check the Top of page links on the Recipes page. They each
seem to go to the start of the previous recipe rather than to the top of
the Web page.
Kerry
Marvin,
Have you thought about using a fluid-width layout for your web page?
It would ensure your page is viewable on browsers smaller than your
current maximum fixed-width.
Otherwise, I actually think the rest of your site is fine. The
simplicity of it all is so refreshing! :)
Karl
On Thu,
For your named anchor tags (a name=Marvin/a, they don't have to
be inside 'p' tags. They *do* need to be inside a block-level element,
but they are already inside the 'main_content' div, so you should be
fine for validation.
Ethically, you probably should make your page more accessible to
people
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of Karl Lurman
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 4:15 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] FINAL VERSION OF MY SITE
For your named anchor tags (a name=Marvin/a, they don't have to
be inside
Hi Marvin,
On Wed, February 3, 2010 11:50 pm, Webb, KerryA wrote:
You should check the Top of page links on the Recipes page. They each
seem to go to the start of the previous recipe rather than to the top of
the Web page.
Kerry
That is, you have links with duplicate link-text pointing
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of Stuart Foulstone
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 4:55 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] FINAL VERSION OF MY SITE
Hi Marvin,
On Wed, February 3, 2010 11:50 pm, Webb, KerryA wrote:
Fwiw, I don't agree about accesskeys [1].
The article on your site seems to advocate the use of access keys. The
concept of allowing users to define which access keys they can use is
an interesting and clever approach. Have you got an example of this
out in the wild? There are certainly pitfalls
Marvin:
Here is a list of common installed fonts. Not all fonts you declare in you
CSS will be pre-installed on pc/macs.
+
http://www.ampsoft.net/webdesign-l/WindowsMacFonts.html
+
Dennis
On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 6:54 PM, wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of Karl Lurman
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 5:22 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] FINAL VERSION OF MY SITE
Fwiw, I don't agree about accesskeys [1].
The article on your site seems
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Paul Novitski p...@juniperwebcraft.com wrote:
A few quick notes:
1) Phone number formats vary from place to place, but in North America at
least the convention is to insert spacing or punctuation between the first
'1' and the area code. I would change
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Thierry Koblentz
thierry.koble...@gmail.com wrote:
-moz is a vendor prefix (not CSS3)
Actually, vendor prefixes are a part of both CSS 2.1
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#vendor-keywords as well as the
CSS3 working draft... they're for proprietary
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of Joshua Street
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 5:53 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] FINAL VERSION OF MY SITE
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Paul Novitski
p...@juniperwebcraft.com
Hi
You can safely ignore any -prefix validation errors (-moz, -webkit, -opera)
- they are never going to validate on the W3C validator. The point of the
vendor specific rules is to do stuff the W3C haven't standardised yet.
The validator should probably ignore them as well. If you really must
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org]
On Behalf Of Joshua Street
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 5:59 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS Validation Error
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Thierry Koblentz
thierry.koble...@gmail.com
#blob {
border-radius : 5px;
-webkit-border-radius : 5px;/* safari, chrome, arora etc */
-moz-border-radius : 5px;/* firefox and pals*/
-khtml-border-radius : 5px;/* konquerer */
}
I believe it would make more sense to reverse that order and have
border-radius come *last* in the
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Thierry Koblentz
thierry.koble...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 10:23 AM, Thierry Koblentz
thierry.koble...@gmail.com wrote:
-moz is a vendor prefix (not CSS3)
Actually, vendor prefixes are a part of both CSS 2.1
Marvin Hunkin wrote:
http://www.raulferrer.com/joe/html/
Marvin,
Your site is fine. Take what you will. Ignore the rest. Remember, not to
forget, you are an An Officer and a Gentleman.
Best,
Helen
--
desktop
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
mobile
On 4 Feb 2010, at 03:29, Joshua Street wrote:
The prefix may be part of it to address parsing issues, but - afaik - that
does not make these extensions CSS properties.
Indeed - yet therein lies the frustration at the validator failing to
correctly parse as per spec.
The validator does
On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 6:16 PM, David Dorward da...@dorward.me.uk wrote:
On 4 Feb 2010, at 03:29, Joshua Street wrote:
The prefix may be part of it to address parsing issues, but - afaik - that
does not make these extensions CSS properties.
Indeed - yet therein lies the frustration at the
27 matches
Mail list logo
