Re: [WSG] A simple IE and JS detection method?
Mike,
You might find it easier to use the Modernizr script to detect
JavaScript (amongst other tests it runs to see the capabilities of a
browser) and then apply a similar method to what you have described
here, but on the body tag instead.
!DOCTYPE html
html lang=en dir=ltr class=no-js
head
title!-- Enter a title here --/title
meta charset=utf-8
!--[if ! lt IE 6]!--
link rel=stylesheet href=/styles/screen.css media=screen,
projection /
link rel=stylesheet href=/styles/print.css media=print /
!--![endif]--
!--[if gte IE 6 ]
link rel=stylesheet href=/styles/ie.css media=screen, projection /
![endif]--
script src=/scripts/modernizr-1.5.min.js/script
/head
!--[if lt IE 6 ] body class=iex ![endif]--
!--[if IE 6 ] body class=ie6 ![endif]--
!--[if IE 7 ] body class=ie7 ![endif]--
!--[if IE 8 ] body class=ie8 ![endif]--
!--[if IE 9 ] body class=ie9 ![endif]--
!--[if (gt IE 9)|!(IE)]!--
body
!--![endif]--
Modernizr replaces the class of no-js in the HTML tag, with js when
JavaScript is present. This combined with the conditional statements on
the BODY tag will couple to give you what you require.
http://www.modernizr.com/
Kevin Rapley
DigiKev
0772 345 7862
digikev.co.uk http://digikev.co.uk
On 28/10/2010 14:21, Foskett, Mike wrote:
Hi All,
I was wondering if you had a little time to comment on the following
technique?
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd;
!--[if IE]
![if gt IE 8]html lang=en-gb class=gtIE8 xml:lang=en-gb
xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml;![endif]
![if IE 8]html lang=en-gb class=IE8 xml:lang=en-gb
xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml;![endif]
![if IE 7]html lang=en-gb class=IE7 xml:lang=en-gb
xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml;![endif]
![if IE 6]html lang=en-gb class=IE6 xml:lang=en-gb
xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml;![endif]
![endif]--
!--[if !IE]!--html lang=en-gb class=xIE xml:lang=en-gb
xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml;!--![endif]--
script
type=text/javascript/*![CDATA[*/document.documentElement.className+=
hasJS;/*]]*//script
... yada ...
style type=text/css
body {background:#ccc; color:#000}
.IE8 body {background:#fcc;}
.IE7 body {background:#cfc;}
.IE6 body {background:#ccf;}
.xIE body {background:#fff;}
/style
... yada ...
Not thoroughly tested I admit but it appears reasonable.
The only failure I can see is detecting IEv6 and JS on because:
.IE6.hasJS {background:#f000}
will not work as IE 6 cannot concatenate class names.
What do you think?
Regards,
Mike Foskett
http://websemantics.co.uk/
This is a confidential email. Tesco may monitor and record all emails.
The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and not Tesco.
Tesco Stores Limited
Company Number: 519500
Registered in England
Registered Office: Tesco House, Delamare Road, Cheshunt, Hertfordshire
EN8 9SL
VAT Registration Number: GB 220 4302 31
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
[WSG] Card payment details best practice
I am to build a form that will handle collecting the relevant information to take card payment. This is the step before going to a 3D Secure service like Verified by Visa or Mastercard Securecode. Can anyone suggest best practice for form labels such as the CVV2 number, valid from/to dates, issue numbers etc. I remember reading somewhere that some websites make use of type of card options in a select box which then dynamically change fields below depending on card (or can recognise what type of card based on digits). Any guidance on this will be much appreciated. -- Kevin Rapley DigiKev 0772 345 7862 digikev.co.uk http://digikev.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] WCAG 2.0 compliance and best practise on the Skip to function [SEC=UNOFFICIAL]
I agree with the consensus that less is more with the skip navigation links at the top of the document. “Skip to main content” in the majority of cases will be all you need. If you are getting to a point where by rights you need a skip link, to skip the list of skip links, as they have grown so long you know you are following a bad path ;) Another school of thinking is to write the HTML source order so that navigation appears after the content, and use CSS to relocate the menu to the top of the page for sighted users. Of course you would still benefit from a skip link at the start of the navigation menu to skip past it/return to start of content. Note, it is a common misconception that users of assistive technologies linearly read a web page, when in fact the tools they have at their disposal allow them to traverse a page in multiple different ways. For instance, they can call out a dialog which lists all of the links on the page, or gain context by traversing a semantic document tree of the nested headings on the page. In these contexts, skip navigation is largely useless. This may be overkill, I will be interested to hear opinions, but I also place a note with ability to return to the top of the page too: div class=accessibility role=note smallEnd of page./small hr / a href=#pageReturn to top of page/a /div!-- / .accessibility -- /body /html I guess this could be extended to have a further link to “Return to start of content.” The idea with this is to notify the user that they have reached the end of the document, and rather than leave them at a loose end, give them options to traverse elsewhere. On 5 June 2012 05:49, Blumer, Luke luke.blu...@ato.gov.au wrote: ** Hi All, We are currently in the process of redesigning our website and are looking into the Skip to functionality. We are currently considering using: - Skip to Search - Skip to Primary Navigation - Skip to Secondary Navigation - Skip to Main Content - Skip to Sitemap We are wondering if there is any information on best practice for the Skip to function and whether there is a generally acceptable limit as to how many Skip to links should be used? We are also wondering whether we should be considering other ways for users to navigate around our pages such as AccessKey *** http://validator.w3.org/accesskeys.html*http://validator.w3.org/accesskeys.htmland whether this technique should be used to reduce the number of Skip to links we have listed above? Is there any native browser functionality that performs any of these functions that we should account for? Thankyou in advance for any advice. Regards, *Luke Blumer* Web Project Officer | Corporate Relations Australian Taxation Office Phone: 02 621*6 2970* ** IMPORTANT The information transmitted is for the use of the intended recipient only and may contain confidential and/or legally privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, disclosure, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited and may result in severe penalties. If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Privacy Hotline of the Australian Taxation Office, telephone 13 2869 and delete all copies of this transmission together with any attachments. ** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** -- Warm regards, Kevin Rapley / User Experience Consultant 0115 714 2337 / 0772 345 7862 http://yoo-zuh-buhl.co.uk Yoo-zuh-buhl, The Terrace, Cultural Quarter, Grantham Road, Lincoln, LN2 1BD *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
[WSG] Source order of content / navigation
*I have started a new thread for this discussion, as not to hijack the thread on skip links.* Thanks for the reply Steve. As I said, it is another school of thought (not necessarily my own). I wouldn’t use content first source ordering for commercial implementations as the overhead of relocating items in CSS far outweighs any accessibility benefits (at this time). However, with newer layout methods on the horizon, such as CSS flex-box, where reordering source order will be far simpler, this is a very real and worthwhile possibility. I disagree that it is really bad practice. As mentioned, users of assistive technologies will rarely read a page in a linear fashion. WCAG 2 likes to contradict itself (but I am sure you knew that already: *WCAG 2.0, includes Success Criterion 2.4.3, which states:* 2.4.3 - Blocks of content that are repeated on multiple perceivable units are implemented so that they can be bypassed. (Level 2) *WCAG 2.0 - Guideline 2.4.3* The document, Understanding WCAG 2.0 (Working Draft 23 November 2005), includes the following as one of the techniques that can be used to meet Success Criterion 2.4.3: Structuring the content so the main content comes first (in structure - but the default presentation may be a different order), and adding links to the blocks of repeated content. On 5 June 2012 22:57, Steve Green steve.gr...@testpartners.co.uk wrote: I do not recommend putting the navigation after the content. In fact I would go as far as to say it’s a really bad practice because it violates every user’s expectation of where the navigation will be. Using CSS to position it above the content makes things even worse because the tab order no longer follows the visual order. ** ** The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines specifically state that the DOM order should match the visual order – see http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20120103/C27 ** ** I have no problem with the ‘Return to top of page’ link, although the purists would argue that it is merely replicating the function of the Home key. Of course tablets and mobile phones don’t have a Home key, which sort of undermines that argument. ** ** Steve ** ** *From:* li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] *On Behalf Of *Kevin Rapley *Sent:* 05 June 2012 22:37 *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* Re: [WSG] WCAG 2.0 compliance and best practise on the Skip to function [SEC=UNOFFICIAL] ** ** I agree with the consensus that less is more with the skip navigation links at the top of the document. “Skip to main content” in the majority of cases will be all you need. If you are getting to a point where by rights you need a skip link, to skip the list of skip links, as they have grown so long you know you are following a bad path ;) ** ** Another school of thinking is to write the HTML source order so that navigation appears after the content, and use CSS to relocate the menu to the top of the page for sighted users. Of course you would still benefit from a skip link at the start of the navigation menu to skip past it/return to start of content. Note, it is a common misconception that users of assistive technologies linearly read a web page, when in fact the tools they have at their disposal allow them to traverse a page in multiple different ways. For instance, they can call out a dialog which lists all of the links on the page, or gain context by traversing a semantic document tree of the nested headings on the page. In these contexts, skip navigation is largely useless. ** ** This may be overkill, I will be interested to hear opinions, but I also place a note with ability to return to the top of the page too: div class=accessibility role=note smallEnd of page./small hr / a href=#pageReturn to top of page/a /div!-- / .accessibility -- /body /html ** ** I guess this could be extended to have a further link to “Return to start of content.” The idea with this is to notify the user that they have reached the end of the document, and rather than leave them at a loose end, give them options to traverse elsewhere. ** ** On 5 June 2012 05:49, Blumer, Luke luke.blu...@ato.gov.au wrote: Hi All, ** ** We are currently in the process of redesigning our website and are looking into the Skip to functionality. We are currently considering using: - Skip to Search - Skip to Primary Navigation - Skip to Secondary Navigation - Skip to Main Content - Skip to Sitemap ** ** We are wondering if there is any information on best
Re: [WSG] cross-browser or vendor-specific CSS
Firstly “Do websites need to look exactly the same in every browser?”
http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/
This wasn't on my radar, but even still, there are better solutions out
there to handle CSS. I looked through the little documentation that this
tool gave, and I doubt it has the level of support that Compass and SASS
have. I would stick with Compass and SASS; they have a good following and
community around them and there are loads of extensions (mixins, functions
etc.) in Github and the like.
http://compass-style.org
http://sass-lang.com
On 30 June 2012 13:55, Tom Livingston tom...@gmail.com wrote:
Learn something new everyday. Never heard of this before!
Sent from iOS 5
On Jun 30, 2012, at 12:03 AM, David Hucklesby huckle...@gmail.com wrote:
On 6/29/12 11:08 AM, coder wrote:
- Original Message - From: David Hucklesby
Start with a simple design for mobile and old browsers. Add advanced
CSS inside @media queries or qualified by :root.
qualified by :root? can you give us an example here?
In HTML, :root is functionally equivalent to html. Not supported by IE
prior to version 9, so a rule like this:
:root .thumbs .figure { display: inline-block; }
...would be ignored by old IE.
HTH
--
Cordially,
David
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
--
Warm regards,
Kevin Rapley / User Experience Designer
0772 345 7862
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
Re: [WSG] which tag to use for link to reference?
I would go with David Dorwood’s suggestion, this seems the most logical. I would try and avoid the sup tags, as these are for superscript, which is really presentational and should be handled by CSS if this is the style that is required. On 2 July 2012 11:41, Patrick H. Lauke re...@splintered.co.uk wrote: On 02/07/2012 04:35, Teddy Knoy wrote: These e-mails aren't intended for me, but I keep on receiving them. Ted Knoy Dear Ted, welcome to the wonderful world of email mailing lists. You must have signed yourself up at some point? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/**mail/guidelines.cfmhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/**join/unsubscribe.cfmhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberhelp@webstandardsgroup.**orgmemberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** To unsubscribe, follow the link in the footer that comes with each email to this list. Cheers, P -- Patrick H. Lauke __**__**__ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/**redux/http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ __**__**__ twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke __**__**__ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/**mail/guidelines.cfmhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/**join/unsubscribe.cfmhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberhelp@webstandardsgroup.**orgmemberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** -- Warm regards, Kevin Rapley / User Experience Designer 0772 345 7862 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
