Re: [WSG] Opera 9.10 Margin
However I already have a background image on the li elements (the
vertical pipe separating each link), and I have not found a way to add
this extra image as a background the the first element.
Have you tried adding it to the a instead? Just use a contextual
selector after that...
li.first a {
backgroundetc
}
cheers
--
--- http://www.200ok.com.au/
--- The future has arrived; it's just not
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] CSS and non-standard properties
given they are doing it with -engine-rule their shouldn't be a problem (the w3c recommends this method for non standard rules). ...which is funny since I've heard they resist the idea of an engine-based selector rule! e.g you could have an opacity rule like : [snip] and the browser engine should pick up the one it supports best. As the engines work out any bugs with opacity (for example) they will hopefully end up using opacity : 50; and you will end up with something like this, assuming MS sits on their keyboards. My concern with this whole approach is expecting people to go back and remove the non-standard rules. In the real world we're going to be stuck with the non-standard stuff for a long time to come; particuarly when developers use them without understanding the full situation. Not all developers know the standards as well as the average reader on this list. Plenty learn by copying other CSS, so they might not even know that -moz-opacity *isn't* standard (don't scoff, it happens!). I don't immediately see the benefit to the UA developers using a custom rule... Why not just use the real thing? I can only assume there's something about the process that I'm not aware of. -Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] ATO's (lack of) standards awareness
From the Australian Tax Office page I landed on from a Google search on applying for a Tax File Number online: Please note that Mozilla is only able to be used if certain system requirements are met. However, Mozilla is an open source application and the chance of it being supported is unlikely. I almost can't believe it. I will be writing to them. This is essentially why I don't lodge tax forms electronically. If they are that clueless, why would I trust them to handle the data? Mordechai said: Netscape 6+, but not Mozilla? Never mind that they're willing to support a browser used by 1%, but not one used by 12%. Well note that they say Mozilla, not Firefox. My guess would be they've not really updated their site in years. So it's not a conscious decision about Firefox, it's a sign of a system that's not been updated much. Given that it's a seriously large government organisation, my bet - without so much as looking at the code - is that some big-name vendor sold them some big-name product for many many millions of dollars. In general, the big-name, off-the-shelf products do NOT come from standards-aware companies. They tend to come from companies that started developing PC applications and moved (with the same staff) to online delivery. PeopleSoft is a classic case - it was a desktop app before it was an online app. The thing about desktop-web conversions is that programmers were trained for relatively known environments; so their methodologies are not geared to something like the web. Plus there's nothing to say they got any training for the transition so who can really blame them for using tables - it was what worked at the time and it got them to go-live. So anyway the big vendors (and the agencies that implement them) are a seriously large goal for standards advocacy. They are very hard to approach (beware, sweeping generalisations ahead): - they already have the big contracts/business so they don't care about cost/competition - the consultants who implement them are paid by the hour so they don't care about efficiency - all companies concerned are big enough to just fight accessibility cases rather than build accessible products - they have quality assurance procedures based around the way they've been building things for years now; so they may even think moving to standards would break their QA system and reduce quality. seriously! :) - the big companies often leave interface design and development to the programmers, usually by default of not providing anyone else. it just gets lumped onto the coders. it's not their job, they're not trained for it, nor is there any reason to think they enjoy it (they're there to code!) so no wonder it's rarely done well! Just some thoughts anyway. At some point there must be an in, an opportunity will come up to win over the big challenges. I'm not quite sure what it will be, but I'm hoping that the industry grabs it when it comes up! :) - Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Books - CSS/Standards/Accessibility
If hypothetically we were thinking of running a course covering CSS design techniques, Standards and Acessibility, is there a top five book list to complement such an undertaking. Some excellent suggestions have been made; however I'd also try to get the students used to looking for their own resources online. For example, put them onto A List Apart, get them to look at speaker lists for major events and so on. Tell them that Jakob Nielsen often does great research but his conclusions go well with a proverbial grain of salt. Plenty of students won't care but for those who do, it would be great to get them used to the idea that the industry is changing rapidly and they can be as much a part of that as they want to. One thing... if you get any questions on scripting, I'd recommend pointing them to the Hijax methodology and the book DOM Scripting by Jeremy Keith. If anyone thinks that standards are restrictive, point them to Transcending CSS by Andy Clarke. I hope this helps :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Books - CSS/Standards/Accessibility
Speaker lists for some major events indicate who is best at sales training promotion to the Australian government and standards are low in my opinion. I would not attend some of these conferences due to the True, I perhaps should have made it clear that I'm talking about standards-focussed events like Web Directions South/North, @Media, Webstock, etc. Just like you wouldn't recommend any old book on web development... :) -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] No. abbreviation glyph
They aren't abbreviations they are symbols representing a word or concept. They're sort of the ultimate in abbreviation when you think about it that way ;) Reducing a whole concept to a symbol? Wild ;) The issue that I'm ultimately thinking about is vocalisation, although SEO might come into it as well. eg. How do you get a screen reader to vocalise what the author intended with a visual communication? The only available method that I can think of is to wrap an ABBR around the item in question and specify what you mean. -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] No. abbreviation glyph
If you wanted to use a symbol to represent love you would use a different unicode character, maybe U+2764 HEAVY BLACK HEART in the Dingbats block or one of the alternative Dingbats. HEAVY BLACK HEART still isn't love. I doubt anyone would get far with a line like I heavy black heart you! :) ...well, it'd work for an emo I guess ;) -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] HR tag and Semantics
So, what's so bad with separators simulated with CSS. Con: you won't have them with CSS off. Pro: cleaner code, more flexibility. (http://rimantas.com/bits/hr/nohr.html was a quick example I made in May 2005, when similar discussion is going on some of w3 mailing list). For me the con outweighs the pro; and your example actually demonstrates why I think HR is useful. Your example shows a page with clearly separate items of information - the design is giving unmissable cues that each paragraph is separated from the others. As such, your document's structure is reliant on the separator images to convey the correct meaning from the page. The integrity of the page's communication relies on the reader understanding that the three paragraphs are separated. Without CSS, you lose the separators. Your example embeds a key part of the communication in the CSS. The page should communicate the same thing with no CSS; and simply do it in a more pretty manner when CSS is applied. Separators do have semantic meaning, so when they occur we should use HR. It's just a pity the element is named according to how it is rendered, since that muddles things :) separator is a much better name for the element. For whatever another 2c is worth in this thread ;) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE 5.5 issue
It's been a while since I've had to include support for IE5 (and how great that feels), Before not supporting any browser, you should first ask what will it take to support it? Even if the number don't otherwise justify supporting IE5, if the fix is simple enough (and adding two or three text-aligns is very simple) then why not? I am comfortable supporting old browsers by sending them unstyled content; or frankly just drawing a line in the sand about testing and supporting old browsers. There are good reasons why users should not be encouraged to keep using really old browsers (and supporting them is encouragement). In particular security is a major issue - older browsers may not have strong enough encryption (eg. IE5.0), lack newer security features like anti-phishing alerts and vendors eventually stop patching old browsers so security holes just sit there waiting to be hit. Plus there's timeframe to consider. IE5.5 is two entire versions behind and was superceded many years ago - heck, IE6 is an old browser! So it's not like we're being nasty to a version that has just been superceded... it's been out of date for a *very* long time. Plus to support old browsers you end up running multiple virtual machines or whatever... there's overhead to consider. So even if it's easy to fix problems for IE5.0 I wouldn't do it unless a client specifically paid me to do so. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] No. abbreviation glyph
If the glyph for No. (as outlined in Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No.) is used, should this be in an abbreviation element to explain it? It is an abbreviation, isn't it?? What do screen-readers make of this particular glyph, if anything? Or should it be kept as No., which is quite common, and wrapped into an abbreviation element with a class of contraction, and a title of number? Personally I think glyphs/entities in HTML should have been tags with alt or title attributes. There are plenty of glyphs with multiple meanings and it would have been useful to be able to clarify usage. So I'd be comfortable wrapping the glyph in abbr. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE 5.5 issue
The problem is in IE 5.5, the content of the page is left-aligned when it should be centeredI dare say on all recent browsers the content is behaving properly (works fine in IE 6.0 + 7.0). Any ideas? Just quickly - I always ask if there's a compelling reason to be serving CSS to IE5.5 at all? ie. does the site in question still have a large user base with IE5.5 and/or client is insisting? Just a thought :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Standards War - HTML 5 vs XHTML 2.0
What impact does this have on people who have just made the transistion to xHTML 1 like me? For now, nothing. In future there should be a better option than XHTML 1, but it's not here yet. I'm an avid supporter of the web standards and have been guiding many in the ways of xHTML and validating... but it seems the issue is becoming ever more complicated, rather than clearer, as time goes by. Rather than having one standard to follow, there seems to be more and more standards. Personally I feel like despite my best efforts to be a good web designer, its becoming ever more troublesome and I'm finding myself spending more time trying to keep on the ball than actually working and earning a living. I wouldn't get too worried here... we're only talking about two alternatives :) I think it's likely that one or the other will emerge as the accepted standard, then you'll have the choice of moving to that standard as your build standard. Remember you only use one at a time, regardless of how many there are out there. If you can make the transition from building valid HTML 4 to valid XHTML 1, then you have most likely picked up a good understanding of the differences. To do that, you've developed the ability to read specs and use tools to help you build to a standard. Those skills are transportable - you will know the principles of how to read the next spec, and how to use the next validator. So if and when you decide to build to a different standard, you'll know what it is you're doing. Just a thought, anyway :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] css conventions
As you can see, the code can get messy rather quickly. He says he does it to avoid conflicts. My argument is that you should only do that when you specifically want the class only to apply to a div. If I want to use the class on another element I can't without creating a new rule. I would think the better way would be to create the class without the div. part first and in the future add the div. part if I need to be more specific. This allows the CSS to be more generic and cleaner. Any thoughts? Do you think the above code is good, bad, doesn't matter and why I personally do the direct opposite of your coworker - I only add an element to the selector when there is a specific reason to do so. In the long run I've found that it's easier for maintenance - if an element is changed you don't have to track down the CSS to update the styles. For example, if you have a class on an OL and later turn it into a UL, your coworker has to update the code and the stylesheet. Similarly, I've noticed some people use IDs when a class would be more appropriate - I only use IDs for elements that should specifically only appear one time. Often an element is the only current instance, but could easily be joined by another later on. Then to add more instances you have to add each ID or convert to classes. Just my 2c. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] question(s) on code
First question on this thread I am starting here is, is there a case where it would be ok/understandable to have code between /body and /html? I'd say no, and mention that includes comments. I've seen *many* instances of large scale apps/CMS systems which throw in comments outside html/html, usually rendered by at time info. I've never seen a case of code being inserted in such places for an actual reason, other than ignorance of standards/validation - programmers who simply didn't know it was a problem. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Art and accessibility
It's a persistent misconception that accessibility has anything to do with the design. We all have to educate clients on this point and hope the message gets out there. Ben... You must elaborate loads on that. If you're saying that a site, no matter how terribly designed, is still possible to navigate and extract information on as a yes no answer, then your comment stands. But I'm afraid you're suggesting something else. I probably should have been a bit clearer. What I meant was that good design can be put online in an accessible manner; or to put it the other way around an accessible design can be as creative and gorgeous as you want it to be. There's a misconception that accessible sites have to look like useit.com*, which is silly. Useit.com is ugly because it's ugly, not because it's accessible. I strongly suspect the usable = ugly myth is perpetuated by design firms that don't feel like updating their skills; and don't want their clients to get a clue and go elsewhere. So they spread misinformation so everyone has an excuse to keep doing the same old thing. So you're right, accessibility (and usability) and design should be considered together. But accessibility does not place any serious restrictions on design, so long as you work with accessibility in mind. Accessibility only causes serious disruption when it wasn't considered all the way through, then someone is asked to retrofit accessibility features - usually with two days to go-live. cheers, Ben * I am nicking an anecdote from Cheryl Lead here! :) -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Art and accessibility
Accessibility is/should be a way of life for anyone building websites. I don't care to hear the inevitable but that's the way the client wants it - does a doctor give a patient morphine for a burst appendix, because that's what the patient wants, for the pain to go away? No. If you consider yourself a web professional, you have a duty (in my view) to point out to the client that an inaccessible website is the wrong thing to do. It's a persistent misconception that accessibility has anything to do with the design. We all have to educate clients on this point and hope the message gets out there. I periodically wish Jakob Nielsen's site wasn't so ugly, since some people think that's an exemplar site... The architectural analogy highlights the key problem in the web industry: there's no accreditation, no real accountability. A few lawsuits do not take the place of real enforcement of standards. If a building doesn't meet the building code, then heads roll and the building is changed to meet requirements. If a website is inaccessible, the people who did it are rarely punished in any form. Anyway... I believe as web professionals we should build to standards whether the client asks for/understands it or not. If that means we charge more than a tag soup+tables shop, so be it. You get what you pay for in print, same goes for web. It's a personal integrity thing. I guess if someone offered me millions to hack out tables, I'd probably cave... but it really would have to be a *lot* of money :) ...and even then I'd try to talk them out of tables. Someone's suggestion about a legal waiver isn't such a bad idea - that might at least get their attention! cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Art and accessibility
I also think schools are an area that needs a shake up. at my uni they were still teaching inline style sheets and tablular layout in first and second year I think this is a key issue for the industry. Realistically we're not going to eradicate non-standards shops, nor are we about to get clients to suddenly recognise certification etc. What we can do is focus on winning over lecturers - probably by offering to help them! There are precious few standards-based beginner tutorials out there. I regularly see threads asking for them, but can't recall a really good one to send... although I think someone was writing one? Methodology and habit start forming at university - if we can catch incoming developers at that level, there'll be a very positive flow-on effect. A big part of it would be to stop people treating web as an add-on to programming courses (literally covered in a lecture or two); or treated as part of art/multimedia courses (which often means being taught to create flash). It needs to be taught as a serious discipline. I don't see why you couldn't teach students the basics in a semester. Get the foundations in - semantics, structure, basic accessibility and usability, XHTML, basic CSS. Then have further units on advanced layout, progressive enhancement and so on. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Art and accessibility
One of the hardest things in teaching web development is finding decent text books. By the time most get into print, they are already 2 years out of date. And few come close to standards based development. I'm sure there are more than a few texts still in circulation which heartily advocate the FONT tag. At the moment I think the way to go would be to use web resources rather than wait on a textbook. That way there isn't such a lead time so they should be more up to date. Plus the students don't have to pay for yet another textbook :) If academics could be helped to understand, or pointed at good resources, as Ben suggests, this would go a long way towards helping the next generation of developers do the right thing. There are so many challenges to motivate lecturers though - they have a big enough workload as it is, so convincing them to change lecture material they've used for years can be tough. Not to mention the long lead time on changing course structure, syllabus etc. Even a highly motivated academic could be hamstrung by procedure. I wonder if guest lectures could be a way to go - eg. contact unis to get them in touch with local standards professionals. That would have the added benefit of industry contact for the university's marketing documents ;) It's all about education. So very true. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE7/CSS issues on a site
Thanks, now I need to figure out how to fix it w/o IE7 available. If you're on WinXP you could upgrade to IE7 and use Virtual Machine and the MS-supplied test image with IE6 on it (both are free). http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2006/11/30/ie6-and-ie7-running-on-a-single-machine.aspx IMHO, it's better than the various side-by-side install tricks. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Legitimate uses of b and i
The only situation I can think of when there is an established visual standard for certain things that don't really have a semantic emphasis. I use a simple test: does the meaning conveyed need to remain if CSS is disabled? If yes, then stick with em and strong. The only place I can think of where I used i was reproducing a text-only logo (client wanted the general effect to remain no matter what). Half the word was italicised, for no real reason. It was all pretty dubious. Another way to think of it is that I don't think visual conventions were trying to say the important thing for you to know is that this bit of text was thicker than the other bit, for no reason. Generally they were saying we've used bold to show that this bit of text is significant in some way. In general, I think people mistake debates over i/b vs em/strong as being about those specific tags. They are really just suitable examples to explain the broader concept of semantics - but the downside is many people think standards advocates really really care about strong and em in particular. FWIW. IMHO. ..and other acronyms. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Time-lapse animation of a CSS site being built?
I'm looking for something that I'm pretty sure was posted to the list in the past few months, but have been unable to find in the archives. It was a GIF animation showing the various stages of a site being built in CSS (going from plain HTML - basic layout - colours fonts - etc.). Does anyone remember this have the URL? Yup: http://mboffin.com/post.aspx?id=1619 (text link in the post) cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] two-headed babies look OK
The publishing system only allows the addition of content in one area, which is actually a single table cell. Developers are expected to use the minimum of HTML, and preferably no JavaScript at all. It's pretty restrictive, and standard university web pages are fairly dull, as you might imagine. I wouldn't call that restrictive *enough*, having been there and done that ;) Uni pages are not exciting and everyone should relax and get used to it - the audience wants correct, current information and nothing more. Artistic faculties invariably complain and they have a point. However they usually take the wrong tack. Rather than try to make corporate into artistic, they should have a separate creative zone where they can be arteests, the uni's corporate website is not an art gallery. As I pitched it, the corporate website is the venue and not the performance/artwork. You can only wow your audience *after* they've successfully bought tickets, safely found their seats and know where to find the bar, toilets and exit. But I digress. It's been very difficult for me to make a case to change these pages, because they look fine (if you don't check the structure). In fact they look better than a lot of other pages on the university web site. Should these pages be changed.. or should *I* have my head examined? My main question is - why do browsers allow this kind of mess to work? Nobody will care that they don't validate. But, you might get some traction this way: 1) Massively invalid code can have unpredictable effects for search engine visibility. You might get lucky, or you might get skipped. Who knows? Still, the surrounding table-laden page is a bigger problem for SEO anyway. 2) Massively invalid code might break in future browsers. Not because they're going to start insisting on valid code, they just might get it wrong. You've got a better chance with valid code. 3) By breaking the uni's standards, they make it impossible to update the surrounding templates with confidence - the non-standard pages might break. So if/when the table site is updated with something done in XHTML+CSS, those developers may have to redo their site. To put it another way, they're probably creating more work for themselves in the long run. 4) The pages aren't really accessible. Through dumb luck the nested pages probably don't actually make the situation worse; but the uni couldn't argue that they've met any accessibility legislation with something like that. 5) Uni websites are periodically surveyed by web experts. The uni will look bad when those lists are published. The powers that be probably won't care what the list is about, but they'll care when they're not number one :) Most of these arguments aren't very strong. I'd focus on more work, hard to maintain and we'll look bad in website analysis. Good luck :) cheers, Ben ps. I'm assuming you're already subscribed to WANAU? :) http://wanau.org/ -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] tabs (was target=_blank)
No doubt this will change over time, but IMHO I feel it is too early to assume that everyone who can uses tabbed browsing. And I guess there will be some people who will always prefer not to. I think you've hit a key point there - it's about user preference. We can't assume that people will use the same thing as we do, nor can we even assume that everyone does something or design just for the majority. Even if everyone out there knew about tabs, understood them and was capable of using them; there'd still be a group who simply don't use them. One thing I've realised is that there are basically as many browsing styles out there as there are users :) Some of those styles make me cringe and/or want to scream, of course... but that's another story - Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Safari Rendering on Windows
Apple has just released GetWebKit, it allows windows users to see how Safari will render web pages without then need to install OSX. http://www.getwebkit.org/ Could be useful if the rendering is 100% consistent with the real deal. As far as I can tell, it's not an official Apple release though - even if the site's design is Apple Compliant ;) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] should ebay listing alike be tabular layout?
On 06/08/06, tee g. peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I have a question, should ebay listing alike be tabular layout? Do you mean an entire item's listing, or a page listing multiple items? A URL would be handy to clarify which bit of ebay you're talking about :) Basic test to decide on whether a table should be used: Is the information a set of data with common fields, logically organised into columns and rows? Would it look weird if the information was put into a spreadsheet format (eg. Excel)? ie. is it tabular data? If not, then a table is not appropriate. If yes, then a table is appropriate. cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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 usage of th
So are you suggesting that scope should only be used in that case? Or should we be putting scope on all of our ths to spell it out as best we can? No, I'd recommend using them all the time. It's a simple habit change, really. Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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 usage of th
I understand the th tag should be used on the items in the top row, but I'd describe it a bit differently - the th tag should be used for any cell which is a heading for other cells. After that it's just following the logic through :) The scope attribute removes ambiguity of the top left cell. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Support for IE5/Mac? (was Browser stats)
Hi, 30 mintues ago I got a call from a user of our site (a department in a major public health institution) to say our site doesn't work for him. I established that he is using IE5/Mac (OS9). ... He took extreme umbrage ... You've experienced a web developer rite of passage - phone call from enraged user, specifically the mac user variety ;) To see what went wrong for them, you could run your site through browsercam (www.browsercam.com). The free trial will show you how it works and give you an idea of what your page looks like in IE5.2/Mac. Personally I see this as evidence of why we should serve entirely unstyled (or very simply styled) pages out to IE5.2 - pages remain functional without falling foul of design issues. The user can't say they don't work, although they might think the pages look boring. The only exception would be a site with a massive proportion of IE5.2/Mac which justifies the cost of writing the extra stylesheet. We've actually removed IE5/Mac from our supported list and onto our actively recommend you upgrade list. We generally do that for browsers with known rendering, scripting and security issues - for IE5.2 it was mostly due to Microsoft formally ending its life. If a security issue is found, it won't be patched; and we feel it's an unreasonable risk to users and advise them accordingly. Still, none of that helps when the user is already upset. cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Support for IE5/Mac? (was Browser stats)
one of the things I do is I actually have a completely craptastic Windows laptop that I test every site I create on. On a related note... apparently Virtual PC is now free! http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtualpc/default.mspx I haven't had time to play with it though Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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 stats
Just wondered if anyone has a good resource for Browser stats. Currently I've got a few but most get their stats from visitors to the site which can be a bit biased. Heh, it's an evergreen question... my pre-written thoughts are at http://weblog.200ok.com.au/2005/06/lies-damn-lies-and-browser-statistics.html In short: your own server's stats will be the most relevant sample; but you can look at global stats (eg. http://www.thecounter.com/stats/) with a grain of salt and get general impression of trends. eg. while nobody knows exactly how much, we can say with some certaintly that Firefox and Opera have gained marketshare in the past year. Percentages? Nah, I wouldn't put percentages on it :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] w3c inspecting icon factory
Can animated GIFs achieves this level of animation? QT at least is better than WMP or RM format, and it's more accessible for PC users to download than having Mac user download Window Media Player (which Microsoft no longer support Mac platform) and Real Player. That just means that QT, WMP, and RM are all bad. What do Google Video and Youtube use? Flash/FLV. I would recommend FLV over any of the previous 3. This is one case where Flash really is the best option*. Experience at work has shown it's the least troubled way to provide video to users. Not perfect, but considering that video on computers tends to be a nightmare of broken plugins and not found codecs... Flash isn't so bad. -Ben [*] To those who know my opinion of Flash - yes I really did just say that ;) -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Displaying page in different resolutions
Yeap, but just remember some people may have browser widths starting at (1680 x 1024) wide screen LCDs are out there and it use. Viewing the fully fluid elastic sites at this resolution can be a bit frightening. A max-width setting (with IE6 hack where required) should take care of that problem. http://leftjustified.net/site-in-an-hour/ covers these techniques (and more! ;)) Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] how many frames in index page?
is there any serious issue about having too many frames in the index page of a website. No issues specific to it being an index page, although framesets have a common set of issues. First and foremost is if you use them, you have to use them very carefully and ensure your NOFRAMES element contains useful alternatives to enable discovery of information. Framesets need useful titles and so on. If you were to load a *really* large number of documents, load time could theoretically become a problem but it depends mostly on the content being presented - images take longer than text, no matter how they are presented. Plus, the more frames there are on a page the more complex it will be for a screen reader user; and you'd be likely to run into problems on small screen devices too. In general frames aren't great for search engine visibility, particularly since users are likely to land in a content page with no frameset. So you'd need re-framing solutions like javascripts (and manual links in NOSCRIPT statements. Basically - frames are not inherently evil, but you'd want a good reason to use them and you have to be *really* careful if you do :) cheers -Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Preparing accessibility policies/standards in readiness for WCAG2.0
I'm interested in the experiences of other universities/organisations preparing internal accessibility policies or standards in readiness for WCAG2.0. At this stage I'm taking the wait and see approach. If you were to update your policies/standards, what would be the major changes? Realistically our accessibility standards focus more on the practicalities anyway, and mostly use references to WCAG 1.0 as a benchmark or a way to add credence to what we're saying. So, in some senses what we probably wouldn't change much anyway. What sense have you made out of the guidelines and how would you interpret them for you developer base? What resources would you provide? None and I wouldn't try right now :) We'd be most likely to provide code/snippet libraries to our programmers and validation tools to everyone. Actual accessibility checking needs to be taught in workshops or some similar format, so again practical techniques would win out over expecting anybody else to read a W3C document. (I know all of this is a little premature given WCAG2.0 is still in draft but if you were to start updating your existing policies/standards, what would your priorities be? Priorities would remain much the same: 1) provide the best possible result for the user, based on available information. 2) conform to standards like WCAG 3) conform to legislation They're all important so the order doesn't really matter, but our intention is a good result and NOT just ticking the box. I would imagine that's the case for most readers on the list :) cheers, Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] WCAG 1.0 AAA Rating
Take for instance 11.3 Provide information so that users may receive documents according to their preferences (e.g., language, content type, etc.) This can practically never be fully complied with, I'd argue. Well it's certainly possible, but as you say the practicalities mean it pretty much doesn't happen. Perhaps in future we'll have this sort of power as people store data in formats like XML and have systems able to accurately automatically translate content into other languages. I think the spirit of that item would probably be more practically addressed by avoiding the nothin' but PDF syndrome :) -Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Opera 9 and standards support
I believe that Safari was the first browser to pass the acid test? Yes, then Konqueror on Linux. Opera is the first PC/Win browser and the first cross-platform browser to pass Acid2. Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Opera 9 and standards support
Not related to a site, but to the application itself: admittedly, I have quite a large number of fonts installed on my WinXP box...but for some reason, Opera 9 (and even 8.5) somehow get confused and think Copperplate is actually Verdana, and a rather gothic looking blackletter font is Tahoma. In short, it chooses the completely wrong fonts (both for page display and UI itself). Is this a known issue? Hmm, there was a font selection problem for machines with more than 1024 fonts installed; but that was supposed to have been fixed in the Windows version (see http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/windows/900/ right at the bottom). You could try the 9.01 weekly build and see if that helps - http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/ One note is that if you had a beta installed, I've found it's a good idea to uninstall that beta before installing the final version (as opposed to upgrading over the top). cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Opera 9 and standards support
FYI, Opera 9 final has been released and it has a special section for all those standards folks out there :) Apart from passing Acid2, you mean? :) http://www.opera.com/users/glenn/ hehehehe ahh those crazy kids from oslo ;) My favourite Opera 9 feature so far would have to be content blocking, though. I can actually read news websites without going crazy from the ads! Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] CSS is dead... use markup for presentation.
[snip] WCAG Samurai process inaccessible to, and hidden away from, all but the few invited elite. I will admit, however, it may be too early to pass judgement on the WCAG Samurai right now, and it's only fair that we let them give it a shot. After all, the members are unlikely to be weighed down by absurd corporate interests, but rather have the best interests of both web developers and end users in mind. From the ALA article, I guess Joe feels some members of the WAI were intimidated in some form and as a result could not work on a pure best result basis. So perhaps going behind closed doors is an attempt a) to ensure nobody can be badgered about it; b) nobody is distracted from the work having answer questions and so on; or c) to ensure that there can be no repercussions against the members if certain parties (eg. big business) take exception to whatever they produce. The other thing is that the samurai may effect some level of change just by forming/existing. Seeing another breakaway group forming might bring some more focus onto the original issue (WCAG2). My inner cynic doesn't think that option has much chance, but I thought I'd throw it out there ;) Apparently standardistas live in interesting times ;) cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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 and CSS
The way it renders things is so incompatible with modern browsers that basically you end up redoing your CSS entirely to get IE5.2 to work (using a hack to send IE5.2 a tailored stylesheet). So unless you're being paid by the hour, just don't... I wouldn't go that far. I find that most of the time I only need a few hacks, or I just live with minor rendering bugs. No need for separate CSS at all. Probably depends on the design and whether the client is willing to live with bugs or not. I guess I just happen to have had to support IE5.2 on jobs where I didn't control the design at all :) -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] NY Times redesign
The New York Times has had a major redesign and has, well, partly gone to standards. It's a bit of a mess, and it definitely assumes a big monitor, but it's good to see such a big name, high-profile site moving toward standards at least. Hmm, if this is a move towards standards then the previous version must have been pretty bad ;) Tables everywhere, embedded styles, non-semantic tags, no language statement, completely fabricated tags (NYT_FOOTER NYT_COPYRIGHT), page doesn't linearise (small screen viewing would be nasty). Some of the usability features aren't bad, eg. the most popular section breaking it up into most emailed/blogged/searched (although not *viewed*, which I find a little suspicious actually :)). One upside is that it hasn't yet harrassed me to sign up for an account, which the NYT used to do all the time. Perhaps they've reset their cookies or something - is anyone else getting the sign-up prompt? cheers, Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
