On 1/31/06, Lachlan Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Christian Montoya wrote:
> > Please send Clear Blue Day another e-mail and ask them if they have
> > any dinosaurs in their office.
>
> This is not intended as an attack on Christian, nor anyone else. Not at
> all. I'm dead serious on that
>
On 31/01/2006, at 4:59 PM, Taco Fleur - Pacific Fox wrote:
Let's say I have my global style sheet where I style my
etc. but on one page I have a div with id #editableArea
I want that div to have no style applied that is defined in the
style sheet, is that possible?
You would have to undefin
Hi,
Thanks for emailing me. I'll be in Europe on business from January 30-February
6.
I'll be checking email daily.
Regards,
Lisa Welchman
http://www.welchmanconsulting.com
http://www.cmsadvisor.com
**
The discussion list for http://webst
With the use of the object tag is it possible to include an alternate
> navigation, should FLASH fail?
I don't know if you can do that directly with the object tag but you
could look at using unobtrusive javascript to add your flash to the
page, replacing an existing .
Have a look at Bobby van
Hello all.
Just wondering if there is such a thing as a header
tag for a HTML list, or , such as the TH tag or the Summary
tag for a table? Would be a handy feature, but I haven't seen anything like this
out there yet?
So you could have:
The following are the days of the
week
1. Monda
Paul,
on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 at 11:39 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
What's wrong with this?
The following are the days of the week
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
regards
Martin
**
The discussion list for http://webstandard
Regrettably not. I'd also love some way to associate a header element
with content, much like fieldset's legend element does, but
unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately, because it'd be potentially
hellish to make work consistently with some automated content
management stuff!) no such thing exists.
Sarcasm Alert :)
Stephen.
On 31 Jan 2006, at 11:09, Martin Heiden wrote:
Paul,
on Tuesday, January 31, 2006 at 11:39 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
What's wrong with this?
The following are the days of the week
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
regards
Martin
**
On 31/01/2006, at 8:39 PM, Paul Collins wrote:
Just wondering if there is such a thing as a header tag for a HTML
list, or , such as the TH tag or the Summary tag for a table?
No, sadly. The only way to 'associate' a header with some following
content is to wrap the set in a div, or similar
Hello,
1)
I'm going to create a new website fully standard, CSS, XHTML, WAI...
I'd like to know your opinion about which DTD I should use, advantages and
disadvantages...
XHTML 1.0 Transitional
XHTML 1.0 Strict
XHTML 1.1
2)
What's your opinion about HTML, CSS and Javascript compresion
G'day Paul,
I haven't done coding on this, however I think it may be possible by
setting a class for your bold heading with no bottom padding or margin
and then using an ordered list.
Regards,
Ric
Paul Collins wrote:
Paul Collins wrote:
Hello all.
Just wondering if there is such a thin
Hi thanks all for your replies.
Stephen, are definition lists supported by JAWS or
any other screen reader? Last time I tried to test them with JAWS it didn't seem
to pick up that it was anything different to normal text. Maybe you can tell me
otherwise.
Thanks
Paul
- Original Me
1) HTML 4.01 Strict, unless you've got really ambitious plans and a
very good idea what user agents will be in play: keeping in mind
Internet Explorer doesn't support XHTML served as
application/xhtml+xml, so it's still going to be parsed as straight
HTML in that browser.
2) So far as I'm aware, t
Thanks Ric, you're definitely right and this would
work. It would be nice however if there was an equivalent to the Summary or
Legend attribute where a screen reader would read out that there is an
unordered list with say, 10 items and then read the summary at the
top.
What you say would w
Roberto Santana wrote:
1)
I'm going to create a new website fully standard, CSS, XHTML, WAI...
I'd like to know your opinion about which DTD I should use, advantages and
disadvantages...
XHTML 1.0 Transitional
XHTML 1.0 Strict
XHTML 1.1
HTML 4.01 Strict.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/s
> Lea de Groot
> Wouldn't
>
>
> be nice? :)
So what do you do when you have 2 or more elements that the heading refers to?
etc?
It's not really a scalable solution, IMHO.
As someone already mentioned, the source order should be enough to inform what
the heading refers to, without the ne
patrick wrote
"As someone already mentioned, the source order should be enough to inform
what the heading refers to, without the need for explicit association."
sorry i dont understand this could someone please explain?
-best
kvnmcwebn
**
Th
--- Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> HTML 4.01 Strict.
>
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd";>
>
> I recommend HTML over XHTML for various reasons I
> won't go into now
So even if a site is written fully XHTML 1.0 Strict
compliant, and validates as such, it is still
recomm
Thanks for your answers I'll use HTML 4.01 Strict, I've been 'googling' and
as Lachlan said the word seems not to be ready to XHTML.
About compression, I wasn't talking about gzip, just talking about removing
unnecesary spaces and line breaks... It seems that it doesn't matter to
google, I've been
> kvnmcwebn
>> patrick wrote
>> "As someone already mentioned, the source order should be
>> enough to inform
>> what the heading refers to, without the need for explicit
>> association."
>
> sorry i dont understand this could someone please explain?
If you have a heading, followed by some oth
So even if a site is written fully XHTML 1.0 Strict
compliant, and validates as such, it is still
recommended to use HTML 4.01 Strict?
Francesco
Francesco,
Many list members here are going to suggest that you use HTML 4.01
instead as technically what the user agents (browsers in this case
> As a "far-from-guru-status" Web Standards supporter/coder (I try) I have
> witnessed, on this list and on another css-specific list, quite a bit of
> condescending and 'forced-opinion' type of replies. It doesn't make for a
> nice atmosphere when looking to these lists for help.
Completely agree
On 1/31/06 2:59 AM, "Christian Montoya" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As for if anyone on this list is getting on a moral high-horse because
> they know about standards, I have yet to see it. From my point of
> view,
As a "far-from-guru-status" Web Standards supporter/coder (I try) I have
witne
russ - maxdesign wrote:
*snip
Completely agree. The most common off-list comments I receive are along the
lines of "a great list, very helpful, but sometimes a bit of attitude".
*snip
Part of the reason I stopped reading the list was that I was getting so many threads filled with near reli
On 1/31/06, Taco Fleur - Pacific Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Is there any way to specify in CSS that a certain area is to have no style
> at all.
All browsers have a default style sheet, and there's differences
between the default styles in different browsers, so there's no such
thing as 'no
From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Web Standards Group"
Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2006 9:38 AM
Subject: Re: Moral High-horse - was Re: [WSG] Failed Redesign and the
Media
As a "far-from-guru-status" Web Standards supporter/coder (I try) I
have
witnessed, on this list and on a
Hi,
Last time i checked I thought IE could manage links and sources that
started with / to mean the root folder.
http://carolinemylon.co.uk/index.php
the images and links are working in Safari and Firefox (OSX and Win),
but having tested it on one machine on IE6 and another on IE7, it's
On 1/31/06, Al Sparber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> LOL. I've been guilty of editorializing (from differing perspectives)
> at times and I find that slowing the trigger on the send button along
> with a healthy does of mindfulness goes a long way :-). When you have
> too many chefs in the kitchen,
Christian Montoya wrote:
Well if anyone did think my joke was offensive then I can refrain
from making it again.
Maybe some desensitizing is called for - on all sides?
I think we can all handle a joke from time to time... :-)
...along with the standard stuff.
Tom Livingston wrote:
Also, I don'
Actually, on this XHTML/HTML point I have an anecdote to share.
I recently started in a new job at a place that was aware CSS/semantic
markup was the way to go, but didn't really have a clue as to how to
go about that. Their content management system is filled with various
legacy markup components
Practically speaking, it's a good idea to reset font-size, padding and
margin on * at the start of your CSS file. This does help improve
consistancy somewhat.
* {
padding:0;
margin:0;
font-size:100.01%;
}
Then, obviously, you can style individual elements from that, and you
know what the default
To be honest I don't care if it takes the style of the browser, I did not
want it to take the other styles defined.
I am thinking I will be using an iframe, which should do the trick.
Kind regards,
Taco Fleur - CEO
Free Call 1800 032 982 or Mobile 0421 851 786
Pacific Fox http://www.pacificfox
On 31/01/06, Taco Fleur - Pacific Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there any way to
specify in CSS that a certain area is to have no style at
all.
Let's say I have my
global style sheet where I style my etc. but on one page I
have a div with id #editableArea
I want that div to
have no
Francesco wrote:
So even if a site is written fully XHTML 1.0 Strict
compliant, and validates as such, it is still
recommended to use HTML 4.01 Strict?
There is much much more to XHTML than just ensuring the pages are
well-formed, validate and conforms to the XHTML recommendation, Many of
th
That's still going to be 1em of whatever 1em becomes by the time you
get down to #editableArea (i.e. 1em of (x) on #editableArea of (y) on
#body of (z) on #html), isn't it?
On 2/1/06, Seona Bellamy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One possible solution would be not so much to have 'no style' but to h
Hi folks,
I've been on this list since returning from WE05 in Sydney last October,
hoping that the same feeling of sharing and openness would prevail. It does
to a certain extent, but the few glaring exceptions have tended to put me
off posting to the list.
Some people write as if there were
On 01/02/06, Joshua Street <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
That's still going to be 1em of whatever 1em becomes by the time youget down to #editableArea (i.e. 1em of (x) on #editableArea of (y) on#body of (z) on #html), isn't it?
Hmm... good point. Might need some tweaking, but I'm not sure how.
Hi.
developing a disability internet database, for about 190 countries, 12
disabilities, 11 services, and in the final process of editing all the pages
at the moment.
things are going really well, except got a few problems.
if any one can help me out, with tips, links, or code examples specific
Hello WSG,
I am currently building a website. It displays correctly in Fire Fox
but I am having difficulties with Internet Explorer.
http://www.monsterboxproductions.com/pcmedic_temp/pcmedic_temp.html
The page has two fixed div elements. There is a div at the top and bottom of
the page.
Good point Helen,
I like that this is coming up at the beginning of the year by a few people
on list.
The truth is that people have been scared off the list and that's a shame
when the focus here is to share information and promote standards based
design and development.
One of the strong points
That's devious! I love it!
On 2/1/06, Joshua Street <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've found that the BEST way to make developers co-operate is to
> quietly put a bit of PHP in the header to serve application/xhtml+xml
> to browsers that support it, then watch them scratch their heads as
> previous
Hi there,
> I've been on this list since returning from WE05 in Sydney last October,
> hoping that the same feeling of sharing and openness would prevail. It does
> to a certain extent, but the few glaring exceptions have tended to put me
> off posting to the list.
I doubt an email list could eve
Joshua wrote:
> Launched a website [ http://yahoo7.com.au/sunrise/family/ ]
and
> the BIGGEST problem (so far as I'm concerned) is with Firefox 1.0.x on the
> "Meet the Family" page [http://sunrisefamily.com.au/current/content/meet/ ]
I cant replicate it here using firefox 1.0.2 and win xp. you ma
> It is easy to get on a moral high-horse just because we know about standards
It is an occupational hazard and one standardistas have to be careful
about. I happen to believe we do hold the moral highground; but that's
a bit different to jumping on the high horse about it.
...did that makes sens
IE (up to IE6) does not recognise position:fixed.
Try something like
http://web.tampabay.rr.com/bmerkey/examples/fake-position-fixed.html
Cheers,
Grant
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Brown
Sent: Wednesday, 1 February 2006 02:56
To
On 2/1/06, Peter Ottery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I cant replicate it here using firefox 1.0.2 and win xp. you may have
> fixed it..?
Nope, but it occurs less frequently on FF1.0.x/XP than on other OSs,
and I've only actually looked at it in Firefox 1.0.7 in XP (I figured
it'd be relatively con
On 1/31/06, Lachlan Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I also appreciate that changing 6 or 8 or 10 years of coding practice
> and philosophy of web development is incredibly difficult
Just wanted to come back to this...
Let's not defend the hermit. If your practice has not changed in 6
years, th
On 31/01/2006, at 10:54 PM, Patrick Lauke wrote:
It's not really a scalable solution, IMHO.
Possibly true, but it doesn't make the concept entirely useless.
As someone already mentioned, the source order should be enough to
inform what the heading refers to, without the need for explicit
> -Original Message-
> From: Christian Montoya [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 1 February 2006 5:22 PM
>
> On 1/31/06, Lachlan Hardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I also appreciate that changing 6 or 8 or 10 years of
> coding practice
> > and philosophy of web developmen
On 2/1/06, Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And if your habits haven't changed in 10 years, then would you even be
> making any money? Isn't the web only 12 years old?
Another thing to remember is that not everyone in web publishing has
any financial incentive whatsoever. We're also
Hi folks
Can someone pleeese just put this thread to its death?
There are much more important things going on in this list...this is a
waste of space...
I agree with Lisa, keep it positive folks...
ray
At 05:21 PM 1/02/2006, you wrote:
On 1/31/06, Lachlan Hardy
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I also
Hey Grant,
I changed the doctype to strict locally and still the scrollbar does
appear. I also already have those additional tags added. Do you know of a
website that has enough content that scrolls and has div banners such as
mine only done in css? I cannot say I have saw many that do. I
On 01/02/2006, at 4:54 PM, Ray Cauchi wrote:
Can someone pleeese just put this thread to its death?
There are much more important things going on in this list...this
is a waste of space...
No, its important that we define what behaviour is correct and
acceptable in the community we are buil
G'day
Andrew Brown wrote:
I changed the doctype to strict locally and still the scrollbar does
appear. I also already have those additional tags added. Do you know of a
website that has enough content that scrolls and has div banners such as
mine only done in css? I cannot say I have saw
54 matches
Mail list logo
