RE: [WSG]
Surely that would depend on your contract with the client - I'm pretty sure ours has all sorts of wriggly little disclaimers to guard against that kind of thing. Our expensive legal advice tells us that disclaimers (however wriggly) usually cannot be used to avoid responsibility under the law - and are not even generally worth the bandwidth they travel on. So if the law is framed in such a way that is similar to things like building codes (and speeding laws) then the developer and or the development company can be held as responsible as the owner of the site. It may be very similar to Tax Law. If you go to a Tax Accountant and convince them (outside of their better judgement and knowledge) to claim things that you cannot reasonably claim within said Tax Law, then the Tax Accountant is just as liable as you (given they are the lodging agent). Gary Menzel Web Development Manager IT Operations Brisbane -+- ABN AMRO Morgans Limited Level 29, 123 Eagle Street BRISBANE QLD 4000 PH: 07 333 44 828 FX: 07 3834 0828 To unsubscribe from this email please forward this email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]If this communication is not intended for you and you are not an authorised recipient of this email you are prohibited by law from dealing with or relying on the email or any file attachments. This prohibition includes reading, printing, copying, re-transmitting, disseminating, storing or in any other way dealing or acting in reliance on the information. If you have received this email in error, we request you contact ABN AMRO Morgans Limited immediately by returning the email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and destroy the original. We will refund any reasonable costs associated with notifying ABN AMRO Morgans. This email is confidential and may contain privileged client information. ABN AMRO Morgans has taken reasonable steps to ensure the accuracy and integrity of all its communications, including electronic communications, but accepts no liability for materials transmitted. Materials may also be transmitted without the knowledge of ABN AMRO Morgans. ABN AMRO Morgans Limited its directors and employees do not accept liability for the results of any actions taken or not on the basis of the information in this report. ABN AMRO Morgans Limited and its associates hold or may hold securities in the companies/trusts mentioned herein. Any recommendation is made on the basis of our research of the investment and may not suit the specific requirements of clients. Assessments of suitability to an individual?s portfolio can only be made after an examination of the particular client?s investments, financial circumstances and requirements.ABN AMRO Morgans Limited (ABN 49 010 669 726 AFSL 235410) A Participant of ASX Group
RE: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability
On Wed, 26 May 2004 14:52:27 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: Sounds fair, so what would I do in a case where I identified the issues but they are ignored? I don't get it - who's ignoring them? You design the page to be accessible and if the client asks for changes that would make it inaccessible (and you really, really cant think of a way to do them 'properly') explain to him why its illegal for you to do that. But I think it would be pretty rare to get something like that. If you have the sort of situation where you design something and someone else implements it, and they include inaccessible items which weren't in your original design, unless they are under your oversight, then you aren't responsible, although to cover your bum you probably want to keep copies of your design work :) ymmv Lea -- Lea de Groot Elysian Systems - I Understand the Internet http://elysiansystems.com/ Web Design, Usability, Information Architecture, Search Engine Optimisation Brisbane, Australia * 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]
Jeffrey Veen caused a big debate by loudly proclaiming I don't care about accessibility - and he's right. If you code nice html, you don't need to care. While there is some truth in this, I'd be hesitant to make such a strong statement. Jeffrey Veen was trying to make the point that using valid, semantically correct and CSS-based code will take you a long way towards accessibility. If you follow those basic principles many points on the WAI priority checklist are addressed. However, depending on your definition of 'nice code', there are still specific accessibility issues that fall outside straight coding, that need to be addressed such as: - Scaleable content for vision impaired - Colour contrasts for colour deficient users - Use of colour for critical info - Responsiveness for dropdown menus etc - Visible Skip menus for motor skill impaired users (and blind users) - Accessible tables (table summaries, captions, id's and headers for etc) - Accessible forms (fieldsets, legends, labels etc) - Descriptive links for blind users To name a few... To get back to Taco's original question - Are there currently any laws in Australia that dictate a website should be accessible to vision impaired people At the big September event - Web Essentials 04 - one of our presenters on Day 1 will be Bruce McGuire (the blind user who successfully sued SOCOG) who many would consider to be the best source of information on accessibility laws in Australia. In fact, this topic is what Bruce will be talking about in detail during his presentation. An essential presentation to attend for any Government web developer. Russ The Australian Museum. Australia's first - and leading - natural sciences and anthropology museum. Visit www.amonline.net.au The views in this email are those of the user and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Australian Museum. The information contained in this email message and any accompanying files is or may be confidential and is for the intended recipient only. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this email or any attached files is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete it and notify the sender.The Australian Museum does not guarantee the accuracy of any information contained in this e-mail or attached files. As Internet communications are not secure, the Australian Museum does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or attached files.
RE: [WSG]
Jeffrey Veen caused a big debate by loudly proclaiming I don't care about accessibility - and he's right. If you code nice html, you don't need to care. I would be very hesitant to be quoting this sort of thing, I've seen a lot of good web standards development that is still not including some basic accessible features into the site, like visible skip links, accesskeys, labels for form elements etc... so lets not forget about something that hasn't been fully learnt or addressed yet, I believe that it would be irresponsible to say lets forget about accessibility before everyone is coding fully accessible web standards based sites. Cheers Jeff www.accessibility1st.com.au -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kay Smoljak Sent: Wednesday, 26 May 2004 3:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] Basically, we are still lucky at this stage, because many ppl with such disabilities don't use the net. Or if they do, they expect to encounter difficulties. However, the use is rapidly increasing. And I think that the software is getting very good at overcoming problems that a lot of sites have. I understand that skip nav links, for example, are not really necessary as most screen readers can do that automatically. It's also worth noting that if you read the SOCOG incident proceedings, all the guy was essentially demanding was alt tags - hardly a huge inconvenience to add. If we code our sites using web standards, we should be safe from lawsuits - and by web standards I mean both valid standard code and also the spirit of standards, like not relying on _javascript_ or Flash to get your message across, not setting text in images, keeping as much presentation in css as possible, having good navigation, and resizable text. Jeffrey Veen caused a big debate by loudly proclaiming I don't care about accessibility - and he's right. If you code nice html, you don't need to care. K. -- Kay Smoljak Senior Developer/QC Leader/Search Optimisation PerthWeb Pty Ltd - http://www.perthweb.com.au/ Ph: 08 9226 1366 - Fax: 08 9226 1375 * 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]
Jeffrey Veen caused a big debate by loudly proclaiming I don't care about accessibility - and he's right. If you code nice html, you don't need to care. I would be very hesitant to be quoting this sort of thing, Aha! Jeffrey was massively quoted out of context, and so have I been :) You're missing the bit where I said: If we code our sites using web standards, we should be safe from lawsuits - and by web standards I mean both valid standard code and also the spirit of standards, like not relying on JavaScript or Flash to get your message across, not setting text in images, keeping as much presentation in css as possible, having good navigation, and resizable text. :) Moral of the story: Stay Away From Sweeping Statements -- Kay Smoljak Senior Developer/QC Leader/Search Optimisation PerthWeb Pty Ltd - http://www.perthweb.com.au/ Ph: 08 9226 1366 - Fax: 08 9226 1375 * 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] wsg newbie questions
I'm wondering whether these could be considered standards for this list: - no html emails, only text (I'm tired of resizing fonts and stuff to make messages readable - always have some text in the subject field that describes the subject ? Thanks! Great list, otherwise! :-) Rick * 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] legal requirements for accessability
On Wed, 26 May 2004 14:52:27 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: Sounds fair, so what would I do in a case where I identified the issues but they are ignored? I don't get it - who's ignoring them? You design the page to be accessible and if the client asks for changes that would make it inaccessible (and you really, really cant think of a way to do them 'properly') explain to him why its illegal for you to do that. I am not specifically referring to my work, it can also be advice given about work others performed. Also, it could be things like I recommend not to use 8px for font width, I recommend not to use those color schemes, due to the low contrast but the client wants it anyway, etc... * 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] legal requirements for accessability
On Wed, 26 May 2004 17:09:08 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: I am not specifically referring to my work, it can also be advice given about work others performed. Also, it could be things like I recommend not to use 8px for font width, I recommend not to use those color schemes, due to the low contrast but the client wants it anyway, etc... Hon, if your advice is 'make it accessible' and they then don't make it accessible, it wont be *you* at risk, surely :) Particularly when you keep your correspondance to show that you *did* tell them to make it accessible, as above :) Lea -- Lea de Groot Elysian Systems - I Understand the Internet http://elysiansystems.com/ Web Design, Usability, Information Architecture, Search Engine Optimisation Brisbane, Australia * 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] legal requirements for accessability
What about all the redesigns that I don't get because I insist on at least attempting to increase accessibility? What about all the bidding wars I lose because I'm going to take that little bit longer? My clients expect total revision of a page according to some obscence specs to take 20 minutes flat. They struggle when I tell them it'll take a few hours or a day (or whatever). If I tell them that what they want is inaccessible, they'll simply find someone who doesn't care I don't know what kind of world the rest of you live in, but my clients are NOT interested in the website as a specific form of media that has its own rules and regulations. They've never even heard of websites like that. They get a website so they can tell people that they have one. They don't expect anyone to actually use it, and anything which adds to the cost, time or hassle of dealing with someone to organise their public statement of being an important enough business to have a website is something to be discarded and dismissed So, please, folks, while we're here : How do you get your clients to care about accessibility? Are you dealing with folks large enough that they actually consider the chance that they might be sued, or do they actually care if people can use their site? The same goes for standards, actually. I understand the concept of just doing it. And that's what I do. Until the client asks about such and such and I let slip either of those cursed words : 'standards' or 'accessibility'. Whoa. Reign in there, fella! Who told you to go around doing things like this? How much is that costing me? Every time I have quoted for a job by mentioning standards or accessibility, my quote has been rejected. If I don't mention it in the quote and it comes up later, I'm royally stuffed I may be drifting off the thread here. Hell, I may have cut it! But I feel the point is pertinent : my clients don't care about the legalities, and if I try to push the point, they are no longer my client So, how do the rest of you deal with this? - Original Message - From: Lea de Groot I don't get it - who's ignoring them? You design the page to be accessible and if the client asks for changes that would make it inaccessible (and you really, really cant think of a way to do them 'properly') explain to him why its illegal for you to do that. But I think it would be pretty rare to get something like that. * 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] legal requirements for accessability
Hon, if your advice is 'make it accessible' and they then don't make it accessible, it wont be *you* at risk, surely :) Particularly when you keep your correspondance to show that you *did* tell them to make it accessible, as above :) Yeah but are you sure about that? Lot's of contradicting statements say otherwise in this thread if I understood correctly. I guess it's like Mark said I don't think anyone could give you a 100% accurate answer on that. PS. Is that hon for honarable or honey? ;-)) PPS. I always keep track of suggestion that were dismissed by the business, i.e. !--- Suggested XY but business wanted YZ --- * 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] legal requirements for accessability
Lachlan, So, please, folks, while we're here : How do you get your clients to care about accessibility? None of our clients, large or small, care or even think about accessibility, for the most part. That's partly because we don't make them sites with fixed microfonts or JavaScript or Flash dependency, so it never even comes up. You mentioned just doing it - that's our approach. We don't mention anything to clients beyond they fact that we strive to make the site user-friendly, which I think covers most areas of accessibility. And it's not standards - it's making the site work in different browsers. It's not 10% - 15% of users have JavaScript turned off - it's 10% to 15% of your customers won't be able to order from your competitor's shopping cart. The big seller for us is search engines. Everyone these days wants to make more sales, get more web enquiries, be found more easily. If we did have a client that wanted something that was going to make their site inaccessible, long before we pulled them up on accessibility issues we'd be warning them it would be affecting their Google ranking. That might be a good approach for you. Kay. -- Kay Smoljak Senior Developer/QC Leader/Search Optimisation PerthWeb Pty Ltd - http://www.perthweb.com.au/ Ph: 08 9226 1366 - Fax: 08 9226 1375 * 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] legal requirements for accessability
Haha, I love your rant! It's very true. The question most asked by a client is How much does a website cost?, this reflects immediately on the client as having less than half a clue. Some (not all) of my clients I have dealt with have this mentality, they don't have a clue what a website is or does, their only concern is how much? and when?. To these people I don't mention anything about accessibility, standards or the like, I have grown to pay attention to my standards, and always make sure all the site is 100% xhml compliant regardless if requested by the client or not. With regards to accessibility on the other hand that is a different story all together, I am learning it at the moment, trying to apply the content from design separation method with CSS, and I am progressing quite well. It's a matter of unlearning everything I knew about layouts with tables and learning a whole new method. I think that once I am comfortable with building sites in this manner I will be able to produce sites in the same time frame as a site with tables for layouts. To sum this up and try to answer your question, don't tell your client everything, if their the kind of client who asks how much? and when, don't tell them about standards and accessibility, just do it anyway. I know it may take a little longer, but sooner or later it will become trendy to sue inaccessible websites, and the developers who are savvy with accessibility and standards will be the ones who come out on top. The developers who don't care are going to suffer. Just my two cents ;) - Original Message - From: Lachlan Hardy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 5:57 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability What about all the redesigns that I don't get because I insist on at least attempting to increase accessibility? What about all the bidding wars I lose because I'm going to take that little bit longer? My clients expect total revision of a page according to some obscence specs to take 20 minutes flat. They struggle when I tell them it'll take a few hours or a day (or whatever). If I tell them that what they want is inaccessible, they'll simply find someone who doesn't care I don't know what kind of world the rest of you live in, but my clients are NOT interested in the website as a specific form of media that has its own rules and regulations. They've never even heard of websites like that. They get a website so they can tell people that they have one. They don't expect anyone to actually use it, and anything which adds to the cost, time or hassle of dealing with someone to organise their public statement of being an important enough business to have a website is something to be discarded and dismissed So, please, folks, while we're here : How do you get your clients to care about accessibility? Are you dealing with folks large enough that they actually consider the chance that they might be sued, or do they actually care if people can use their site? The same goes for standards, actually. I understand the concept of just doing it. And that's what I do. Until the client asks about such and such and I let slip either of those cursed words : 'standards' or 'accessibility'. Whoa. Reign in there, fella! Who told you to go around doing things like this? How much is that costing me? Every time I have quoted for a job by mentioning standards or accessibility, my quote has been rejected. If I don't mention it in the quote and it comes up later, I'm royally stuffed I may be drifting off the thread here. Hell, I may have cut it! But I feel the point is pertinent : my clients don't care about the legalities, and if I try to push the point, they are no longer my client So, how do the rest of you deal with this? - Original Message - From: Lea de Groot I don't get it - who's ignoring them? You design the page to be accessible and if the client asks for changes that would make it inaccessible (and you really, really cant think of a way to do them 'properly') explain to him why its illegal for you to do that. But I think it would be pretty rare to get something like that. * 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] legal requirements for accessability
There's a saying in the sales business (/me thinking back all those years to when I was a sales trainer):Sell them what they want, and all the rest comes along for free. If the customer loves the car's hot stereo, sell them the hot stereo and the rest of the car comes along for free. IF the house buyer falls in love with the kitchen, let them have the kitchen, and the rest of the house comes along for free. IF they want an accessible site, sell them an accessible site, and the good design and easy navigation comes along for free. If they want a web presence, sell them a web presence, and the accessible design, good layout, easy navigation comes along for free. SO it's your job when you first meet a prospective client to find out what it is they want. And what they need. (Not necessarily the same things) Then you sell them that. When you build it, you build it as well as it's possible to do, given your cost and time parameters. Just because the client wanted this and that and something else, without mentioning standards compliance, doesn't mean you cant build a site like that. When you get a house built, you tell the builder you want this room, that cupboard, this kind of roof, that kind of bathroom, but he still builds structural strength, water proofing, adequate foundations etc in even if you didn't specify it in your requirements. And as to cost, I've found that building to standards has REDUCED my time (and therefore my cost) to build a site. By forcing discipline on my html code, and completely separating content and presentation, it's made many things more simple. And since the ongoing maintenance of the site is FAR easier, it's going to make the cost of ownership of a site over the whole life much lower than it would otherwise have been.It's my opinion that if you are losing business because you are quoting on standards-compliant sites, then you're doing it all wrong. Standards compliance should give you a competitive advantage over the other mugs who haven't learned about standards yet. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lachlan Hardy Sent: Wednesday, 26 May 2004 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability [snip] So, please, folks, while we're here : How do you get your clients to care about accessibility? Are you dealing with folks large enough that they actually consider the chance that they might be sued, or do they actually care if people can use their site? The same goes for standards, actually. I understand the concept of just doing it. And that's what I do. Until the client asks about such and such and I let slip either of those cursed words : 'standards' or 'accessibility'. Whoa. Reign in there, fella! Who told you to go around doing things like this? How much is that costing me? Every time I have quoted for a job by mentioning standards or accessibility, my quote has been rejected. If I don't mention it in the quote and it comes up later, I'm royally stuffed I may be drifting off the thread here. Hell, I may have cut it! But I feel the point is pertinent : my clients don't care about the legalities, and if I try to push the point, they are no longer my client So, how do the rest of you deal with this? * 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] legal requirements for accessability
Hear Hear, Excellent Post! Another tip I have found to be very successful, is the following quote (and this was told to me by a client!) The client is not paying you for the few minutes it takes to change the site from blue to green, he is paying you to know what buttons to push and what methods to use to best implement this - if the client is billed $100 for a 30 second change that occurs site wide - they are going to think they got off cheap and you are going to feel like a bandit who got away with the king's jewels! Especially, since you did it so quickly for them. It's a win - win situation! You look good and so does the client! Sincerely, Brian Grimmer theGrafixGuy http://www.thegrafixguy.com 503-887-4943 925-226-4085 (fax) This reply to your initial e-mail is sent in accordance with the US CAN-SPAM Law in effect 01/01/2004. Removal requests can be sent to this address and will be honored and respected. -Original Message- From: Michael Kear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 2:38 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability There's a saying in the sales business (/me thinking back all those years to when I was a sales trainer):Sell them what they want, and all the rest comes along for free. If the customer loves the car's hot stereo, sell them the hot stereo and the rest of the car comes along for free. IF the house buyer falls in love with the kitchen, let them have the kitchen, and the rest of the house comes along for free. IF they want an accessible site, sell them an accessible site, and the good design and easy navigation comes along for free. If they want a web presence, sell them a web presence, and the accessible design, good layout, easy navigation comes along for free. SO it's your job when you first meet a prospective client to find out what it is they want. And what they need. (Not necessarily the same things) Then you sell them that. When you build it, you build it as well as it's possible to do, given your cost and time parameters. Just because the client wanted this and that and something else, without mentioning standards compliance, doesn't mean you cant build a site like that. When you get a house built, you tell the builder you want this room, that cupboard, this kind of roof, that kind of bathroom, but he still builds structural strength, water proofing, adequate foundations etc in even if you didn't specify it in your requirements. And as to cost, I've found that building to standards has REDUCED my time (and therefore my cost) to build a site. By forcing discipline on my html code, and completely separating content and presentation, it's made many things more simple. And since the ongoing maintenance of the site is FAR easier, it's going to make the cost of ownership of a site over the whole life much lower than it would otherwise have been.It's my opinion that if you are losing business because you are quoting on standards-compliant sites, then you're doing it all wrong. Standards compliance should give you a competitive advantage over the other mugs who haven't learned about standards yet. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lachlan Hardy Sent: Wednesday, 26 May 2004 5:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability [snip] So, please, folks, while we're here : How do you get your clients to care about accessibility? Are you dealing with folks large enough that they actually consider the chance that they might be sued, or do they actually care if people can use their site? The same goes for standards, actually. I understand the concept of just doing it. And that's what I do. Until the client asks about such and such and I let slip either of those cursed words : 'standards' or 'accessibility'. Whoa. Reign in there, fella! Who told you to go around doing things like this? How much is that costing me? Every time I have quoted for a job by mentioning standards or accessibility, my quote has been rejected. If I don't mention it in the quote and it comes up later, I'm royally stuffed I may be drifting off the thread here. Hell, I may have cut it! But I feel the point is pertinent : my clients don't care about the legalities, and if I try to push the point, they are no longer my client So, how do the rest of you deal with this? * 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
Re: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability
Lachlan Hardy wrote: I understand the concept of just doing it. And that's what I do. Until the client asks about such and such and I let slip either of those cursed words : 'standards' or 'accessibility'. Whoa. Reign in there, fella! Who told you to go around doing things like this? How much is that costing me? I understand what you're saying Lachlan, but surely the important point is what your answer to such a question would be. I know that in my case the answer would be nada, zip, zero, not a penny extra. Standards compliant mark-up and accessibility hooks aren't extra features that get bolted on with an associated cost. They're simply a regular way of working (which, as I understood it, was the point of Jeffrey Veen's speech). If your client is going to get extremely pedantic about it then I guess you could answer that adding labels to form elements, summary attributes to tables and alt attributes to images could cost minutes of time. All in all though, they probably take less time than the duration of your bathroom breaks during any given project. ;-) As for valid mark-up costing more, my experience has been the opposite. If the mark-up is written in a sloppy or non-standard fashion to begin with, then the time spent debugging for various browsers/platforms increases greatly. Every time I have quoted for a job by mentioning standards or accessibility, my quote has been rejected. If I don't mention it in the quote and it comes up later, I'm royally stuffed I don't see why. Unless they're labouring under the misapprehension that standards and accessibility cost money. The truth is they're just good habits. So don't fear the money question. Just give them a straight, truthful answer. Oh, and while you're at it, you might want to tell them about the Search Engine Optimisation benefits of standards-compliant, accessible mark-up. In my experience, clients who couldn't care less about visually impaired human beings care greatly about making their sites accessible to the Googlebot. Explain to them that Google is essentially blind. Then they'll get it. HTH, Jeremy -- Jeremy Keith a d a c t i o http://adactio.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 *
[WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here)
Title: Message Hi, I recently downloaded standalone versions of old versions of the major browsers for testing (and am aware of the imperfections of these) but was curious after reading the post on 'Lynx'... Does anyone know the names (and ideally urls) to download speech, textbrowsers etc? I know nothing about these and would really love a chance to be able to test my work on these directly. Apologies for not knowing the correct pc term for categorising these. Thanks in advance, Jamie Mason: Design
RE: [WSG] legal requirements for accessibility
There's a simple business argument in favour of accessibility: more hits and, for those with physical or cerebral impairments (and by that we are not simply talking blind or otherwise disabled users but those in their autumn years who represent a considerable and growing online audience), a reason to bookmark the site. Simple economics. A standards-compliant site is, by its very nature, well on the way to accessibility. Check out http://www.maccaws.org for a brief on the business case for standards compliance. Incidentally, the Guild of Accessible Wed Designers - www.gawds.org - officially opens its doors to membership today, and we're offering the opportunity to ... yes, you guessed it, do a site redesign. We've even got those wonderful things call prizes to give away at http://www.gawds.org/about/competition.php :o) Mike Pepper Accessible Web Developer www.seowebsitepromotion.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] legal requirements for accessability
Afternoon all, One of the best quick overviews of the state of accessibility I have seen is: http://www.webcredible.co.uk/user-friendly-resources/web-accessibility/uk-we bsite-legal-requirements.shtml It covers the UK's DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) and has some handy links to background material , EU standards, the Syndney Olympics background, a review of 1000 sites, etc regards Giles *** Splash!PR Marketing Windmill Oast Benenden Road, Rolvenden Kent TN17 4PF t: 01580 241177 f: 01580 241188 THIS MESSAGE MAY BE CONFIDENTIAL: if received by you in error, I apologise - please tell me and delete the message * 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] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here)
Hi there, First post with the WSG since joing the other day... Anyway (FAO) Jamie, for PC users, you can download a 30 day trial of a Screen Reader at: http://www-3.ibm.com/able/solution_offerings/hpr.html I've not tried it myself, but i got the link from an article on A List Apart (itself a decent read at: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/wiwa/ - check it out). Hope this is of help (and use). Chi From: Jamie Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here) Date: Wed, 26 May 2004 11:16:04 +0100 Hi, I recently downloaded standalone versions of old versions of the major browsers for testing (and am aware of the imperfections of these) but was curious after reading the post on 'Lynx'... Does anyone know the names (and ideally urls) to download speech, text browsers etc? I know nothing about these and would really love a chance to be able to test my work on these directly. Apologies for not knowing the correct pc term for categorising these. Thanks in advance, Jamie Mason: Design _ Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo * 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] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here)
Title: Message Ok, the proper general term for this is "Assistive Technology" (AT for short). Text/braille browsers: Lynx and BrailleSurf Screenreaders and speech browsers: Dolphin Supernova, JAWS, IBM HPR, pwWebSpeak, WindowsEyes. Most of these have demo versions you can download. Howerver, I would say that - unless you actually know what you're doing when using these browsers - it may do more harm than good to test in these (especially the screenreaders), as your testing will not reflect the way a regular user would employ them. There are many setting etc (e.g. verbosity settings) that are not ideal in the default. Also, many people make the mistake of listening to the entire output of the screenreader, whereas visually impaired users will skip through a page at high speed, then often backtrack and slow down as needed (similar to visually skim-reading the page). Without good command of the software, your testing will be inherently flawed. Patrick Patrick H. LaukeWebmaster / University of Salfordhttp://www.salford.ac.uk -Original Message-From: Jamie Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: 26 May 2004 11:16To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here) Hi, I recently downloaded standalone versions of old versions of the major browsers for testing (and am aware of the imperfections of these) but was curious after reading the post on 'Lynx'... Does anyone know the names (and ideally urls) to download speech, textbrowsers etc? I know nothing about these and would really love a chance to be able to test my work on these directly. Apologies for not knowing the correct pc term for categorising these. Thanks in advance, Jamie Mason: Design
RE: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here)
Title: Message Hey Pat, Thanks a lot for the advice, It's best then if I steer away from 'hands on' testing of Assistive Technology and just follow the guidelines as is. Thanks again, that was a huge help. Jamie Mason: Design -Original Message-From: P.H.Lauke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 May 2004 15:06To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here) Ok, the proper general term for this is "Assistive Technology" (AT for short). Text/braille browsers: Lynx and BrailleSurf Screenreaders and speech browsers: Dolphin Supernova, JAWS, IBM HPR, pwWebSpeak, WindowsEyes. Most of these have demo versions you can download. Howerver, I would say that - unless you actually know what you're doing when using these browsers - it may do more harm than good to test in these (especially the screenreaders), as your testing will not reflect the way a regular user would employ them. There are many setting etc (e.g. verbosity settings) that are not ideal in the default. Also, many people make the mistake of listening to the entire output of the screenreader, whereas visually impaired users will skip through a page at high speed, then often backtrack and slow down as needed (similar to visually skim-reading the page). Without good command of the software, your testing will be inherently flawed. Patrick Patrick H. LaukeWebmaster / University of Salfordhttp://www.salford.ac.uk -Original Message-From: Jamie Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: 26 May 2004 11:16To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'Subject: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here) Hi, I recently downloaded standalone versions of old versions of the major browsers for testing (and am aware of the imperfections of these) but was curious after reading the post on 'Lynx'... Does anyone know the names (and ideally urls) to download speech, textbrowsers etc? I know nothing about these and would really love a chance to be able to test my work on these directly. Apologies for not knowing the correct pc term for categorising these. Thanks in advance, Jamie Mason: Design
RE: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here)
It's a real heads-up to listen to a website the way the people using speech software like JAWS hear it. Or, as I always say: it's a real eye opener ;) (and before anybody pipes up about how un-PC this is, a colleague of mine who is visually impaired often uses that phrase as well - for a bit of shock value) P * 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] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here)
I agree with Patrick, blind users use quick access methods like jumping through links and headings on the page that you'd need to know about. Having the tools at hand is still useful as it allows you to get a basic grasp of how they work. You can also test small parts of a page to see how it works. The best method to see how your site works for blind users is to go and watch a blind user in action. In Sydney, the Royal Blind society has a service (Adaptive Technology Consultancy Service - 02 9334 3400) that allows you to book a time and sit with vision impaired and blind users - for a small fee. I'm sure most capital cities would do the same. You can be treat it as part of your general user testing - giving users tasks to perform and observing how they achieve the tasks (how quickly, easily, how many clicks, problems etc). Most blind users are only too happy to tell you where you can improve your methods. :) Russ Hey Pat, Thanks a lot for the advice, It's best then if I steer away from 'hands on' testing of Assistive Technology and just follow the guidelines as is. Thanks again, that was a huge help. Jamie Mason: Design -Original Message- From: P.H.Lauke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 May 2004 15:06 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here) Ok, the proper general term for this is Assistive Technology (AT for short). Text/braille browsers: Lynx and BrailleSurf Screenreaders and speech browsers: Dolphin Supernova, JAWS, IBM HPR, pwWebSpeak, WindowsEyes. Most of these have demo versions you can download. Howerver, I would say that - unless you actually know what you're doing when using these browsers - it may do more harm than good to test in these (especially the screenreaders), as your testing will not reflect the way a regular user would employ them. There are many setting etc (e.g. verbosity settings) that are not ideal in the default. Also, many people make the mistake of listening to the entire output of the screenreader, whereas visually impaired users will skip through a page at high speed, then often backtrack and slow down as needed (similar to visually skim-reading the page). Without good command of the software, your testing will be inherently flawed. Patrick Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk http://www.salford.ac.uk/ -Original Message- From: Jamie Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 26 May 2004 11:16 To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: [WSG] Impairment browsers (insert correct pc term here) Hi, I recently downloaded standalone versions of old versions of the major browsers for testing (and am aware of the imperfections of these) but was curious after reading the post on 'Lynx'... Does anyone know the names (and ideally urls) to download speech, text browsers etc? I know nothing about these and would really love a chance to be able to test my work on these directly. Apologies for not knowing the correct pc term for categorising these. Thanks in advance, Jamie Mason: Design * 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] Browsers Emulator
Justin French wrote: What I'd like to see is a program for Mac OS X that will load a URL into all currently running browsers (including those in X11, VirtualPC and MacClassic, so it's truly cross-platform), take a screen shot, and present them back in one tabbed interface as a series of screen shots which the designer can view to get a decent overview of what's going on browser-to-browser in one location. Not exactly what you asked for... but this kinda works too: Paste this mystical code between head and /head meta http-equiv=refresh content=5 / Open your page in all required browsers, wait 5 secs for them all to reload your page after you made any changes. Screw opensource -- I would pay serious cash for such a tool! This is gonna cost you! ;-) -- Kristof * 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] Help - tableless design with 2 colums
Hello, Please go to http://www.seoed.com/index.php I'm trying to position 2 divs. The Main div and the right column div. They should look like here: http://play.cpea.ro/screen/seod.gif I had a hard time with the menu. Took me an hour to make it work in IE, Firefox and Opera. This is giving me a headache. Any feedback/suggestions would be appreciated. The css: http://www.seoed.com/styles/seoed.css Thank you. Please check it with Firefox and Opera also * 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] wsg newbie questions
Rick Faaberg wrote: - no html emails, only text (I'm tired of resizing fonts and stuff to make messages readable A better solution would be to ask people that if they send HTML to use some minimum size. Also, perhaps to always send a plain text version as an option. - always have some text in the subject field that describes the subject People are already suppose to do this. But should you be complaining? wsg newbie questions says nothing of value about your questions. In fact, it is even somewhat misleading, which is even worse. Thanks! Great list, otherwise! :-) That it is. * 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] Making Flash Codes validate
Hello everyone I am facing some validation issues (XHTML 1.0 Transitional) with the following flash object codes: OBJECT classid=""> codebase=""> WIDTH=126 HEIGHT=272 PARAM NAME=movie VALUE=scripts/flash/scs_news.swf PARAM NAME=menu VALUE=false PARAM NAME=quality VALUE=high PARAM NAME=wmode VALUE=opaque PARAM NAME=bgcolor VALUE=#5D5329 EMBED src="" menu=false quality=high wmode=opaque bgcolor=#5D5329 WIDTH=126 HEIGHT=272 TYPE=application/x-shockwave-flash PLUGINSPAGE=http://www.macromedia.com/shockwave/download/index.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash/EMBED /OBJECT Its the 1st time I am adding some flash content so am unsure of whats right or wrong. The demo page can be found here http://designs.sodesires.com/scs/ Any pointers will be great. Thanks. Best Wishes, Jaime ...
Re: [WSG]
Hi, Taco asked: Are there currently any laws in Australia that dictate a website should be accessible to vision impaired people etc.? Answer: Yes - The legislation is the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. I wrote an overview of the (specifically) Australian situation a while back, with links that give you much more information: http://www.cogentis.com.au/website-accessibility-issues.html Hope it helps. Best regrds Chris - Original Message - From: Ted Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 15:16:57 -0700 Subject: RE: [WSG] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is an old article. The sydney games lawsuit was the shot that rang around the world. As far as I know, he won the suit and governments around the world have begun requiring compliance wtih disabilities acts. In the United States, it is section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Any company that does business with the government must have an accessible web site. England has just begun requiring accessible web sites. I spoke with a man from Italy that says they are also required to pass the minimum level of Bobby tests. The new Olympic web site for the games in Greece are supposed to be fully accessible. It's not difficult to program a site to be accessible, you just need to be aware of what is needed. A standards compliant web site is almost always an accessible web site. Just make sure you use your alt tags and title tags and you are 75% there. If you haven't downloaded and installed the web developers tool bar for mozilla, go to http://www.chrispederick.com/work/firefox/webdeveloper/ and get it. It will give you accessibility testing and lots more for free. Ted www.superiorpixels.com -Original Message- From: Taco Fleur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 2:51 PM To: Web Standards Group (E-mail) Subject: [WSG] Are there currently any laws in Australia that dictate a website should be accessible to vision impaired people etc.? If so, to what websites does it apply and has anyone taken any websites to court over not being accessible? What I could find so far only the following: - http://www.sportslawnews.com/archive/Articles%202000/SportsBriefs904.htm Are there any links to what standards certain websites need to apply? I believe this has been asked before however a quick scan though my mailbox did not return anything. Thanks Register now for the 3rd National Conference on Tourism Futures, being held in Townsville, North Queensland 4-6 August - www.tq.com.au/tfconf * 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] Browsers Emulator - On open source [OT]
Sorry, I just couldn't let this one go.. Its a common misconception that you cannot sell open source software. http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html ;) On Wed, 2004-05-26 at 11:56, Justin French wrote: Screw opensource -- I would pay serious cash for such a tool! This is MUCH better than browsercam, because * 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] [wsg] position: absolute on the mac not displaying images
I have 2 images used for a bar graph where one over laps the other. however on ie5.1 mac its not displaying the images when the css tells the images to position absolutely. anyone got any ideas? thanks Benjamin Life through a polaroid www.lifethroughapolaroid.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 *
[WSG] A New Community Based Web Site for Review
Well, I suppose it's about time I outed myself... Having spent half the winter creating this site, the owner is ready to officially unveil it in the coming weeks.: It had its unofficial launch on April 2nd, this year. I chose the Standards Based method for two reasons (apart from the obvious: accessibility): 1. Forward looking: I like to think that in more capable hands than mine, the site can be easily shaped in the future. 2. Simpler: Since the folks who will be looking after it have no web development experience, I wanted markup that could be easily understood and content that is readily accessible. Hopefully this will go a long way toward preventing mistakes. The home page is below: http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm The stylesheet can be found at, http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm/fcss/default.css There is one validation warning in the stylesheet for which I have no explanation; to wit: Line 0 : font-family ... a generic font should be given as a last resort. To avoid using fonts that may or may not exist on the visitor's computer, I opted to use only the generic serif and sans-serif fonts in most cases. Is there a problem with this approach? Also, the topmost rule was added to prevent Opera from breaking. I've tried to arrange the cascade to please that browser, since it is the pickiest about that sort of thing. I spent hours rearranging the sheet, and found that putting a dummy rule at the top cured a lot of the problem. Someday I'll be able to figure out why. It's a relatively small site, about 22 pages. For a framework, I adopted Russ's two-column layout (Thanks Russ!), and 'borrowed' the technique for the navigation from Eric Meyer. Hopefully, I have done enough development work on these ideas to render the result 'loosely derivative.' The site is very elastic, with marginal breakage to the masthead in the small window of Opera. As the image is absolutely positioned, and not floated, the textual content has nowhere to go but down, and cannot slip below the image. The audience is very likely not of the internet set, being primarily seniors, so there is nothing of eye candy, and virtually no images. Our area comprises of mostly dial-up users so bandwidth was a serious concern. I've made every effort to ensure that the site meets with all three Priority levels in the WAI guidelines, and every page is validated XHTML 1.0 Strict.. The site uses one table for layout on the Contact Us page. I had floats but was running into problems with them so reverted to a table. The page is still Bobby rated AAA. The stylesheet for this table is at, http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm/fcss/datab.css There is one other data table, which uses the following stylesheet: http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm/fcss/feetab.css The navigation in the main menu has hidden pipes to comply with Priority 3 guidelines which stuipulate that adjacent links must be separated by a non-whitespace character surrounded by whitespace. Since I don't use em's, and they are inline, I chose that element as my hidden container. Previously I was using span's, and later I used p's, but the menu printed vertically when styles were removed. Now it prints horizontally. The markup is expanded to make maintenance and revision simpler for the non-html familiar staff who will be looking after the site (once they're trained). There is one issue, though, which relates to the use of Javascript to publish e-mail addresses as the page is loaded. I cannot figure out a way to include noscript/noscript elements in a manner that will validate. Is it an inline/block level issue? As this is a secondary issue (for the most part) I have simply included information to explain that e-mail addresses will not be visible if scripts are not supported (or turned off) in the user's browser. If there is a better way to do this, I'm listening. The site is mounted on Telus's Shared Hosting servers, so there is very little in the way of Server-side that can be done; plus the fact that I'm a newbie, and know nothing of server-side includes, anyway. My test environment (Windows XP and Win98SE) includes IE 6/Win, Mozilla Firebird 0.7 and Firefox 0.8, Netscape 7.1 and Opera 7.23, all of which render the pages in like fashion, with only very slight differences. I have had to use a couple of hacks in the sytles, most notably to ensure that the nav menu renders the same width in Opera/NS/FF as it does in IE6/Win, and to prevent the 3 pixel jump to the left that occurs when the navbar content runs out. Too bad this hack won't work for UL's, OL's or DL's, though. To combat the shift, I've had to invent content that will push the list below the line of distortion. I had to combat the 'chopped div' effect in the Contact page, so applied the Holly Hack to that. The little disclaimer div would partially disappear as the page was scrolled up and down using the scrollbar. The hack worked to put a stop to that. A clearing div is used to preserve
Re: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability (bringing clients to the table)
Thanks folks for the great responses. I will certainly incorporate some of the things you've mentioned into my business behaviours from now on However, it seems fairly apparent that none of you have encountered the problems I'm talking about (except Marc, I think). Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. The kind of clients I get are clients who think this is a great site : www.canadianlakes.com.au And it does look quite nice. Pity about the fact that it still isn't indexed by Google after it has been up for around two years. And you folks can easily spot all the other problems such as the poor navigation, table layout, and the fact that many pages have no text on them whatsoever. They don't even use CSS to colour fonts or links (but who needs to when you can use yet another image?). A year ago, that site had no text at all If you still don't know what I'm talking about; if you've never encountered this, don't trouble yourselves. You're lucky Mike Kear says It's my opinion that if you are losing business because you are quoting on standards-compliant sites, then you're doing it all wrong. Standards compliance should give you a competitive advantage over the other mugs who haven't learned about standards yet. I totally agree with you, Mike, which is why I adopted standards and attempt to provide accessibility. Unfortunately, it is not working for me. So, what do you do? Thanks again, folks Lachlan * 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] legal requirements for accessability (bringing clients to the table)
The kind of clients I get are clients who think this is a great site : www.canadianlakes.com.au And it looks fine, for the kind of site it is. If I had worked on it, it would look almost the same, except it would be valid html and css and it wouldn't use frames. Just because you're building sites in a valid way doesn't mean your pitches to clients or the sites you deliver need to look any different (ok, they will look better, but an untrained eye probably wouldn't notice anything specific, nor should they). K. -- Kay Smoljak Senior Developer/QC Leader/Search Optimisation PerthWeb Pty Ltd - http://www.perthweb.com.au/ Ph: 08 9226 1366 - Fax: 08 9226 1375 * 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] A New Community Based Web Site for Review
D;oh! Here are the correct links to the style sheets: http://www.wdfcs.ca/fcss/default.css http://www.wdfcs.ca/fcss/datab.css http://www.wedfcs.ca/fcss/feetab.css Sorry, folks. Roy - Original Message - From: RC Pierce [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 6:19 PM Subject: [WSG] A New Community Based Web Site for Review Well, I suppose it's about time I outed myself... Having spent half the winter creating this site, the owner is ready to officially unveil it in the coming weeks.: It had its unofficial launch on April 2nd, this year. I chose the Standards Based method for two reasons (apart from the obvious: accessibility): 1. Forward looking: I like to think that in more capable hands than mine, the site can be easily shaped in the future. 2. Simpler: Since the folks who will be looking after it have no web development experience, I wanted markup that could be easily understood and content that is readily accessible. Hopefully this will go a long way toward preventing mistakes. The home page is below: http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm The stylesheet can be found at, http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm/fcss/default.css There is one validation warning in the stylesheet for which I have no explanation; to wit: Line 0 : font-family ... a generic font should be given as a last resort. To avoid using fonts that may or may not exist on the visitor's computer, I opted to use only the generic serif and sans-serif fonts in most cases. Is there a problem with this approach? Also, the topmost rule was added to prevent Opera from breaking. I've tried to arrange the cascade to please that browser, since it is the pickiest about that sort of thing. I spent hours rearranging the sheet, and found that putting a dummy rule at the top cured a lot of the problem. Someday I'll be able to figure out why. It's a relatively small site, about 22 pages. For a framework, I adopted Russ's two-column layout (Thanks Russ!), and 'borrowed' the technique for the navigation from Eric Meyer. Hopefully, I have done enough development work on these ideas to render the result 'loosely derivative.' The site is very elastic, with marginal breakage to the masthead in the small window of Opera. As the image is absolutely positioned, and not floated, the textual content has nowhere to go but down, and cannot slip below the image. The audience is very likely not of the internet set, being primarily seniors, so there is nothing of eye candy, and virtually no images. Our area comprises of mostly dial-up users so bandwidth was a serious concern. I've made every effort to ensure that the site meets with all three Priority levels in the WAI guidelines, and every page is validated XHTML 1.0 Strict.. The site uses one table for layout on the Contact Us page. I had floats but was running into problems with them so reverted to a table. The page is still Bobby rated AAA. The stylesheet for this table is at, http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm/fcss/datab.css There is one other data table, which uses the following stylesheet: http://www.wdfcs.ca/index.htm/fcss/feetab.css The navigation in the main menu has hidden pipes to comply with Priority 3 guidelines which stuipulate that adjacent links must be separated by a non-whitespace character surrounded by whitespace. Since I don't use em's, and they are inline, I chose that element as my hidden container. Previously I was using span's, and later I used p's, but the menu printed vertically when styles were removed. Now it prints horizontally. The markup is expanded to make maintenance and revision simpler for the non-html familiar staff who will be looking after the site (once they're trained). There is one issue, though, which relates to the use of Javascript to publish e-mail addresses as the page is loaded. I cannot figure out a way to include noscript/noscript elements in a manner that will validate. Is it an inline/block level issue? As this is a secondary issue (for the most part) I have simply included information to explain that e-mail addresses will not be visible if scripts are not supported (or turned off) in the user's browser. If there is a better way to do this, I'm listening. The site is mounted on Telus's Shared Hosting servers, so there is very little in the way of Server-side that can be done; plus the fact that I'm a newbie, and know nothing of server-side includes, anyway. My test environment (Windows XP and Win98SE) includes IE 6/Win, Mozilla Firebird 0.7 and Firefox 0.8, Netscape 7.1 and Opera 7.23, all of which render the pages in like fashion, with only very slight differences. I have had to use a couple of hacks in the sytles, most notably to ensure that the nav menu renders the same width in Opera/NS/FF as it does in IE6/Win, and to prevent the 3 pixel jump to the left that occurs when the navbar content runs out. Too bad this hack won't work for UL's, OL's or DL's, though. To combat the
[WSG] Accessibility related
Howdy People, Lame as it may sound but other than the UK which other countries in Europe are complying to the Accessibility criterion? Any takers? ... and Russ, Just like we have your wonderful work on Web Standards(http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/benefits/) How about creating one on Accessibility? Or if members of the WSG mailing list wish to do one?? Just bouncing off me ideas. Regards, Amit Karmakar www.karmakars.com ** This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain privileged information or confidential information or both. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it and notify the sender. ** * 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] Definition list formatting problem in IE
Surprise! A formatting problem in IE... In IE5+ and Opera, the second dd, which contains the Category links, is jumping up and floating to the right of the first dd with the URL. It displays fine in Firefox and Netscape 7. html/css is at http://www.streetdaddy.com/wsg/index2.html Thanks in advance, Miles. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
