Re: [WSG] IE-Win / Floated List Issue
Michael Donnermeyer wrote: The Chapters are in an unordered list that's displayed inline and floated to the left. Of course the more proper browsers (Safari, Mozillas, Opera, IE-Mac) are handling everything correctly...IE Win IE6 under XP is stacking everything vertically. 2.) No tables. It's a list after all and not tabular data. 2.) Given the chapters are ordered, you might consider defining this as an ordered list. 1.) Whitespace between list items (/li li) is a recurring issue on this list. IE is known to behave differently than other browsers (check the archives for more information.) You should find removing the whitespace will give you more consistent results across browsers. Then, hopefully with Nick's advice it will all work out for you. Ben * 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] IE-Win / Floated List Issue
On Jun 9, 2004, at 00:33, Nick Gleitzman wrote: MD, this was just a real quick look, but I can't see where you have the lis floated; they are just inline. Oops, my bad...I'm working on 5 different sites at the moment and my brain is very close to turning into mush. Floats were on a different site...G Have a look at the solution Kristof came up with recently on a similar issue: http://kristof.f2o.org/test/image_thumbs_and_captions/ I think you'll be able to adapt his code pretty quickly. Hope this helps. Thanks Nick, I'll look at it better tomorrow when I'm more alert and awake. ~MD * 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] applying styles to legend
Heh.. I banged my head against the wall about this for while, then gave up and went with the flow which got the application into production sooner. Is an IE user going to be simultaneously viewing the same page in Firefox or Mozilla or Opera? Bet you it's only web developers. Wait till you see what IE does with the fieldset tag... hint: put a top border on it and a background image in :D This is the thing: don't worry about pixel perfectness, it doesn't exist. Cheers James. Marc Greenstock wrote: Hi all, I can't figure it out, Internet Explorer puts a 10px margin to the left of the legend, setting padding and margin to 0px removes about 3px but that still leaves about 7px that I don't want. * 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] applying styles to legend
It's a shame that IE doesn't come to the party with this one. legend is a stubborn mule that doesn't want to budge, I've really never come across such a problem with any other tags. I know what your talking about with the fieldset tag as well, that too was a pain in the butt, I had to wrap a seperate div around it and a span inside it to get it to do what I want. Marc - Original Message - From: James Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 5:26 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] applying styles to legend Heh.. I banged my head against the wall about this for while, then gave up and went with the flow which got the application into production sooner. Is an IE user going to be simultaneously viewing the same page in Firefox or Mozilla or Opera? Bet you it's only web developers. Wait till you see what IE does with the fieldset tag... hint: put a top border on it and a background image in :D This is the thing: don't worry about pixel perfectness, it doesn't exist. Cheers James. Marc Greenstock wrote: Hi all, I can't figure it out, Internet Explorer puts a 10px margin to the left of the legend, setting padding and margin to 0px removes about 3px but that still leaves about 7px that I don't want. * 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] Standard Hacks?
Would it be beneficial to come up with a list of Standard Hacks :-) I think the idea is that you should stay away from hacks as much as possible. One exception is the box model hack for IE5 and IE5.5 - but there are a couple of different ways of doing that one, and which one you pick depends on the particular problem you are having. We generally don't resort to hacks unless not having them would cause serious issues with the design. Even then, if it's possible to alter the design to make it more standards friendly without detracting from the look, then we try to do that. I think a lot of people (graphic designers especially) overestimate the amount of attention that clients pay to detail - they generally only look at the site in one browser anyway, so pixel perfection across platforms is not usually necessary. I don't remember the last time a Photoshop mockup looked exactly like the finished site... -- 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] Standard Hacks?
John, It is always best to avoid any sort of hack. There is always a way around a hack, if that be by adding an extra div. or changing your menu layout. Hacks are *last resort* methods to create a layout. I think a list of _standard hacks_ would just promote the use of hacks, where they are not needed. That list would become abused - well thats a guess - by newbies to XHTML and CSS... and it would lead to the same issues we have now - with inaccessability and validation. my 2 cents, chris stratford J4Web wrote: Hello I have been reading this list for a few weeks and am finding it very valuable. I think this is my first post. I am at the stage of teaching myself CSS-P and unravelling the whole issue of standards and accessibility. I am of course aware that there are all sorts of hacks available to massage standards compliant code for non-compliant browsers. The question I have been asking myself, and now ask you guys, is: Would it be beneficial to come up with a list of "Standard Hacks" :-) I mean by this a list of hacks that could be incorporated into standard CSS templates for beginning new sites, that would save the bother of hacking the most prevalent problems one by one as they arise. Perhaps such a list - or even such a template - exists already? Thanks John Saward * 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] Standard Hacks?
That is true, however already knowing of such hacks enables you to make this kind of judgement. So for the purpose of education these should help you out John http://diveintomark.org/safari/csshacks/ http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CssHack Enjoy or not ;) On Wed, 2004-06-09 at 18:15, Kay Smoljak wrote: Would it be beneficial to come up with a list of Standard Hacks :-) I think the idea is that you should stay away from hacks as much as possible. One exception is the box model hack for IE5 and IE5.5 - but there are a couple of different ways of doing that one, and which one you pick depends on the particular problem you are having. * 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] meta http-equiv
Title: meta http-equiv Hey, just a quick question, is the below the correct markup for a transitional XHTML document? I thought the meta http-equiv was text/xhtml, so I've lost confidence in the rest of the code being correct also. Thanks a lot! Sorry to always be the one with the menial questions. Jamie Mason: Design T: (01423) 700849 !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml head meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 / titleUntitled Document/title /head body /body /html
Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?
I agree with Kay, avoid them when possible, Certainly don't take the approach of including a bunch of them in every CSS regardless of whether you need them or not. If you are after more specific information on hacks (or filters as they are also known), check out http://www.google.com/search?q=css+hacks Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: +61 2 9299 9462 Fax: +61 2 9299 9463 Mob: +61 410 458 201 http://www.gruden.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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] Standard Hacks?
I think that's a great idea actually. In theory yes we should all avoid hacks but there are a few reasons where a big fat list of the standard hacks, reasons for use and pros and cons would be useful... 1. If a deadline is looming and a hack will temporarily get you through it without resorting to the old demons of HTML. 2. To help understand the source/css of sites that have used a hack to implement something. 3. To get an idea of the kind of bugs/issues that have required a hack to get over. Nick Would it be beneficial to come up with a list of Standard Hacks :-) * 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] Standard Hacks?
I think that's a great idea actually. In theory yes we should all avoid hacks but there are a few reasons where a big fat list of the standard hacks, reasons for use and pros and cons would be useful... 1. If a deadline is looming and a hack will temporarily get you through it without resorting to the old demons of HTML. 2. To help understand the source/css of sites that have used a hack to implement something. 3. To get an idea of the kind of bugs/issues that have required a hack to get over. Nick Would it be beneficial to come up with a list of Standard Hacks :-) This makes perfect sense to me especially if it were a wikipedia or similar type of site that members would update and comment and keep current. Rick Faaberg * 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] Lost password - how do i get a new one?
Title: Message
Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?
Chris Stratford wrote: It is always best to avoid any sort of hack. It's important to remember why hacks exist in the first place. More often than not, it's because a browser either doesn't support a feature of CSS, or worse, supports it incorrectly. There is always a way around a hack, if that be by adding an extra div. Adding an extra div is hacking the mark-up, which I think is much worse. Hacks are *last resort* methods to create a layout. Depends on the hack. For example, hiding style rules from NN4 with @-rules is almost alway better than changing your layout. I think a list of _standard hacks_ would just promote the use of hacks, where they are not needed. If you include comments about when and why to use it and not to use it the problem should be kept to a minimum. * 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] Action to force browser developers to clean up their act
Let me be quite clear I was NOT having a go at IE. While I do have issues with it, that was NOT the point of the post. I quite explicitly said we have to live with that. I also deliberately kept all references to specific browsers out of the post, except for the aside about IE. What my suggestion was, was that as a group (web desingers/devlopers) we could, if there was the political will, have some influence on the future development of browsers. If no one is interested fine. I am quite sanguine about the variants out their currently, but if as a community we declared a set of preferred browsers and did everything we could to promote those then we could have a real effect on the future. Finally, I thought I had also made it clear that the post was tongue in cheek and a coat trailing exercise. Yours till the next time :) Giles -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nick Gleitzman Sent: 09 June 2004 02:21 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Action to force browser developers to clean up their act On Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 10:26 AM, Peter Firminger wrote: Could it be that your site is broken, not the browser? We don't have any trouble accommodating IE with standards compliant code. I think your taking the argument too far and blaming the tool. There are very few issues remaining if you code your page thoughtfully (not in quirks mode) and ignore the features (like attribute selectors) that don't work in IE. Get over it. Giles' original post said I'm pissed off trying to fix a lump of code that is apparently compliant but breaks in one browser because some halfwit can't be bothered to develop compliant software. Ironically, he didn't say which browser - but having also suggested that 'we have to live with IE' because of 'market forces', the inference was there. My answer to Giles was supposed to say, just as you have, 'Get over it.' I obviously have to stop contributing so late at night. N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ * 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] meta http-equiv
Marc Greenstock wrote: The correct content type or MIME type for an XHTML document is application/xhtml+xml. Although I might add internet explorer doesn't understand it so you need to determine if the users browser accepts it.You can do this in PHP by writing: ?php if(strstr($_SERVER['HTTP_ACCEPT'],application/xhtml+xml)) header(Content-type: application/xhtml+xml); else header(Content-type: text/html); ? So how would you include the last bit of code(charset) as shown below: meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 / And do I just put your php snippet within the head tags ? Jeffery Fernandez http://melbourne.ug.php.net * 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] Some links for light reading....
Web Standards Award winner for the month: http://www.webstandardsawards.com/previous/readymade_mag.html Web standards survey: http://webstandards.org/survey/200406 Stop Design reload II: http://www.stopdesign.com/log/2004/06/08/reloaded.html Some Fun With Valid and Some Not So Valid CSS: http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=B0C48 John Allsopp's web standards article makes it into mainstream media: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/02/1086058908173.html?oneclick=true Budget design - free downloadable pdf http://www.sinelogic.com/ Thanks Russ * 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] meta http-equiv :- CORRECTION
Nope sorry, The correct content type or MIME type for an XHTML document is application/xhtml+xml. This (mime type issue) is only required for XHTML 1.1. You don't have to do it for XHTML 1.0 Transitional (which the example was). The answer to Jamie's original question is to have a look at the source of some valid XHTML documents (like http://we04.com/ off the top of my bald head) to see what others use or paste the code you sent us into a validator (I suggest http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/validator/direct.html for direct input) or even more simple, validate it in your code editor. If you're not using a code editor (notepad isn't a code editor it's a text editor) get one! It's simply amazing what google will show you on these topics as well! http://www.google.com/search?q=xhtml+mime+type http://www.google.com/search?q=xhtml+doctype Sorry Jamie, just trying to teach people how to fish (on a very well documented issue) instead of catching and cooking it. Sorry if this approach offends anyone but if it saves just 10% of the stuff coming into my inbox it's worth it (66 posts and 161 bounces from this list so far today). Peter * 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] meta http-equiv
The correct content type or MIME type for an XHTML document is application/xhtml+xml. Although I might add internet explorer doesn't understand it so you need to determine if the users browser accepts it.You can do this in PHP by writing: : SNIP: The suggested method doesn't work when you go to validate your pages, see the discussion at: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Alan * 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] height problem in firefox
Hello. http://eutest.cpea.ro/contul_meu.php Please take a look at that and maybe you can find out why the white background is not rendering OK in Firefox. The CSS: http://eutest.cpea.ro/stiluri/layout.css * 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] Thanks for Div/Float Help
Thank you to Michael and Andrew for your help on the float. Everything works beautifully now and I am sucking up the new knowledge. Rosie Norwood * 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] meta http-equiv
Alan Milnes wrote: The correct content type or MIME type for an XHTML document is application/xhtml+xml. Although I might add internet explorer doesn't understand it so you need to determine if the users browser accepts it.You can do this in PHP by writing: : SNIP: The suggested method doesn't work when you go to validate your pages, see the discussion at: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Alan * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * That is because w3c doesn't send the server it's accepted MIME types. You can fix this by: ?php if(strstr($_SERVER['HTTP_ACCEPT'],application/xhtml+xml) || strstr($_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT'],W3C_Validator)) header(Content-type: application/xhtml+xml); else header(Content-type: text/html); echo ?xml version=\1.0\ encoding=\iso-8859-1\?.\n; ? * 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] Standard Hacks?
media=screen is not a hack, thats statin the proper display device target for the relavent stylesheet. Hacks are things like the IE Underscore hack, they tend to be workarounds for CSS properties that are not yet implemented in certain browsers or that need slightly differnt values, theres differnt hacks for each of the dodgy browsers. But you sould always look towards creating your site hack free as that is the best was to make sure its backward/forward and bloody even sideways compatible! Hacks are for the Cowbot webdesigner who hasnt done his job right in the first place! ( or for a client thats given too much hassle and not enough cash to make the recode cost effective! ;] ) Mark www.phunky.co.uk On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:11 , J4Web [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent: Well; I am surprised, but pleased actually, that so many of you are saying that hacks are not part of the Standards Arsenal. I had got the impression that I needed to become familiar with gadzillian hacks and be able to draw the appropriate one out of the woodwork every ten lines of CSS code. But I am getting the message that one can produce Standards Compliant pages without hacking. I am not quite totally convinced, though, and some of the replies have gone in the direction of supporting a big fat list, if not including some hacks in standard templates. I wondered if there are some workarounds that people on this list use habitually and forget they use them, so I did a quick sample of some of the URLs at the bottom of peoples' posts and the only hack I found so far (but I have not searched very thoroughly) was on the webstandards.org.au site : @import url(/stylesheets/wsg_advanced.css); media=screen Is the import hack a candidate for first (or sole) item on the list of standard hacks? It seems pretty essential to me to get version 4 browsers to degrade gracefully. I am enjoying learning from those who have been in this game much longer than me. John 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] Standard Hacks?
J4Web wrote: style type=text/css media=screen@import url(/stylesheets/wsg_advanced.css);/style link rel=stylesheet href=/stylesheets/wsg_main.css type=text/css media=screen Is the import hack a candidate for first (or sole) item on the list of standard hacks? After giving it some thought, I wouldn't call this a hack. CSS provides two ways of accessing external style sheets: @import and link/. Both are valid CSS. What the hack does is feed styles which aren't intended for NN4 by using a method which NN4 doesn't support. Compare this to what most hack do: they use irregular, but technically valid, ways of writing rule to take advantage of parsing errors in order to hide rules. Another example of a not a hack hack might be conditional comments. Here too is a case of not parsing rather than unable to parse. * 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] Standard Hacks?
Russ and I have discussed this at length and we have come to the opinion that the @import rule (when used in that manner) is indeed a hack but a harmless one. The reasoning is that it exploits a bug or particular behaviour in a browser. In this case, older browsers don't understand it at all and they ignore it so that the real styles that will break them can be put in there safely. We believe (and maintain) that it is harmless as we can't envisage any browser manufacturer not obeying it in the future as it is actually the preferred method. Regards, Peter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mark Harwood Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 11:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks? media=screen is not a hack, thats statin the proper display device target for the relavent stylesheet. Hacks are things like the IE Underscore hack, they tend to be workarounds for CSS properties that are not yet implemented in certain browsers or that need slightly differnt values, theres differnt hacks for each of the dodgy browsers. But you sould always look towards creating your site hack free as that is the best was to make sure its backward/forward and bloody even sideways compatible! Hacks are for the Cowbot webdesigner who hasnt done his job right in the first place! ( or for a client thats given too much hassle and not enough cash to make the recode cost effective! ;] ) Mark www.phunky.co.uk On Wed, 09 Jun 2004 23:11 , J4Web [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent: Well; I am surprised, but pleased actually, that so many of you are saying that hacks are not part of the Standards Arsenal. I had got the impression that I needed to become familiar with gadzillian hacks and be able to draw the appropriate one out of the woodwork every ten lines of CSS code. But I am getting the message that one can produce Standards Compliant pages without hacking. I am not quite totally convinced, though, and some of the replies have gone in the direction of supporting a big fat list, if not including some hacks in standard templates. I wondered if there are some workarounds that people on this list use habitually and forget they use them, so I did a quick sample of some of the URLs at the bottom of peoples' posts and the only hack I found so far (but I have not searched very thoroughly) was on the webstandards.org.au site : @import url(/stylesheets/wsg_advanced.css); media=screen Is the import hack a candidate for first (or sole) item on the list of standard hacks? It seems pretty essential to me to get version 4 browsers to degrade gracefully. I am enjoying learning from those who have been in this game much longer than me. John 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 * * 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] Standard Hacks?
Is the import hack a candidate for first (or sole) item on the list of standard hacks? It seems pretty essential to me to get version 4 browsers to degrade gracefully. CSS hacks are one of those questions (like font sizes) that bring out the fanatics from all sides. On one side you will have people who are completely opposed to hacks. At the other end of the spectrum are people who use hacks scattered throughout their CSS. A lot of this stems from a difference between theory and reality. Theoretically it is bad to use any hacks. In reality, you or your client may need to get a layout to behave in a particular manor that cannot be achieved without some form of hack. Sometimes you can work around these issues without hacks, sometimes you can persuade clients that layout differences are not important, but other times there may be no alternative - this is a commercial reality. Basically, hacks come down to - personal choice - the amount of knowledge you have of workarounds - the specific design you are trying to achieve If you design your own layouts, you can often avoid hacks simply because you can be keeping the main browser issues in mind when designing (not so easy if you are implementing someone else's design). For this reason it is vital that you read up on all the major browser bugs - so you can head them off at the pass. The best place to go for the main IE bugs is here: http://positioniseverything.net/ The @import hack is one solid method of hiding content from older browsers - even though that it is not its intended purpose - which is why it is classified as a hack. For more on this go here: http://www.mail-archive.com/wsg%40webstandardsgroup.org/msg00841.html To see a tutorial that explains how to use the @import hack go here: http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/process/ The particular step in the tutorial dealing with older browsers is: http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/process/index_step10.cfm Which hacks would I use? I generally try to avoid any hacks apart from the @import hack, but will sometimes use the display: inline fix to avoid double margins on floats. I don't think I have ever used a box model hack. Work around where possible, hack sparingly, shower regularly. :) 2 cents Russ * 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] Standard Hacks?
Hacks are for the Cowbot webdesigner who hasnt done his job right in the first place! ( or for a client thats given too much hassle and not enough cash to make the recode cost effective! ;] ) quite true - but there are hacks that are used to counteract behavours in browsers. Camz www.t94xr.net.nz * 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] Standard Hacks?
-- Original Message - From: scott parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] I do not know what industry you work in but in every industry I have worked in there is a great need for pixel precise layouts. Can you name some industries? ... Clients and the many print trained art directors want pixel precision... ... Why not to export entire page from photoshop as GIF, JPEG, or PNG and put it on the website? That's the only way I know to get pixel percision. How do you and your clients imagine pixel precision in screen readers, mobile phones and PDAs? How do they know is this layout pixel presice or not? For me talks about pixel prescion is an indicator that nobody really cares what and whom this website is for. Regards, Rimantas * 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] Standard Hacks?
I do not know what industry you work in but in every industry I have worked in there is a great need for pixel precise layouts. When you go through 13 rounds of changes with a client and discuss things like the letter spacing on single superscript letters then you just might have to put in the odd hack. Or it might be time to educate your client with regards to the web is not print. What's next: discussions about exact colour matching, across all browsers? Browsers render differently, and while we might all like to say that hacks are bad and not needed I think that is a disservice to people just learning to use CSS-p for layouts. In terms of taming browser bugs when it comes to layouts, yes...hacks (clean CSS based workarounds, not ugly abuses of markup) are still required...although it's nicer if one can get away with not having to use them by reorganising the html (but I know, this is not always easy). When I was learning css part of learning all the browser quirks was learning how to get around them, but you cannot learn all that at once and sometimes you need to focus on learning part A properly before you move on to part B. Very true. I find that the best thing is to first concentrate on the standards-compliant, clean, ideal way of doing things (previewing the work in standards-compliant browsers), just to get the idea of the bigger picture of how things can and should be done. Only later should one tackle the special cases in which hacks are required. So, going from the general (the way it should be) to the specific (the few hacks you need to achieve the ideal way). Clients and the many print trained art directors want pixel precision... Again, part of the solution is educating the client. Heck, I've just had a long winded discussion with a company sub-contracting me to do a bit of web work, who kept saying the pages need to all fit within the browser window...scrolling is bad. Patrick Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk * 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] Standard Hacks?
-- Original Message - From: Peter Firminger [EMAIL PROTECTED] Russ and I have discussed this at length and we have come to the opinion that the @import rule (when used in that manner) is indeed a hack but a harmless one. The reasoning is that it exploits a bug or particular behaviour in a browser. In this case, older browsers don't understand it at all and they ignore it so that the real styles that will break them can be put in there safely. ... So it is a bug. Not a hack. Imagine an webdesigner who never saw NN4.x nor he cared to much about it's bugs. He uses perfectly valid @import rule. And all of sudden you claim him using hacks. Why? Then you use something not for that it's been intended - it is a hack. Now it's just a bug/not implemented feature. Regards, Rimantas * 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] height problem in firefox
Razvan Pop schrieb, am 09.06.04 14:36: http://eutest.cpea.ro/contul_meu.php Please take a look at that and maybe you can find out why the white background is not rendering OK in Firefox. The CSS: http://eutest.cpea.ro/stiluri/layout.css #main doesn't have any non-floating and hence height relevant content. You might try adding some clearing element at the end of #container, after #main or just add float: left to the definition of #container. I tried this via edit-styles bookmarklet in Mozilla and it works, I think there shouldn't be any problems with other browsers, but check. Have a look at Eric Meyer's Containing Floats article to understand what's happening. http://www.complexspiral.com/publications/containing-floats/ HTH Susanne * 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] Standard Hacks?
No, we do it to specifically exploit this bug or particular behaviour so it is a hack. If you look at the stylesheets you'll see that there is basic css in the one that NN4 can see and all the other more advanced stuff is in the one it can't see. All quite deliberate using both methods to achieve it. So it is a bug. Not a hack. Imagine an webdesigner who never saw NN4.x nor he cared to much about it's bugs. He uses perfectly valid @import rule. And all of sudden you claim him using hacks. Why? Ignorance of the law is no excuse :-) and he (or she) would get an unstyled page in NN4, doesn't bother me a bit as long as it is semantically correct as well. I would say this person was hacking at all. It's the use of BOTH methods to target NN4 that is a hack. Regards, Peter * 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] height problem in firefox
Thank you Susane. Any idea how i could make the left blue column fit the height of the page? Kindest Regards, Razvan Pop Susanne Jaeger wrote: Razvan Pop schrieb, am 09.06.04 14:36: http://eutest.cpea.ro/contul_meu.php Please take a look at that and maybe you can find out why the white background is not rendering OK in Firefox. The CSS: http://eutest.cpea.ro/stiluri/layout.css #main doesn't have any non-floating and hence height relevant content. You might try adding some clearing element at the end of #container, after #main or just add float: left to the definition of #container. I tried this via edit-styles bookmarklet in Mozilla and it works, I think there shouldn't be any problems with other browsers, but check. Have a look at Eric Meyer's Containing Floats article to understand what's happening. http://www.complexspiral.com/publications/containing-floats/ HTH Susanne * 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] Thanks for Div/Float Help
Rosie Norwood wrote: Thank you to Michael and Andrew for your help on the float. Everything works beautifully now and I am sucking up the new knowledge. Rosie Norwood Please send thank-you emails offlist directly to the people you are thanking. -- Ryan Christie| e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Harrisonburg, VA | w: http://shadyland.theward.net ---() ()-- * 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] meta http-equiv
Hi,
This does work if you use PHP to provide the correct alternative instead of
just changing the MIME-type. Since XHTML 1.1 should NOT be served as
text/html, this is the code I use on my site:
? $isXHTML11 = ;
if (stristr($_SERVER[HTTP_ACCEPT],application/xhtml+xml)) {
$isXHTML11 = 1;
header (Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml;
charset=UTF-8);
echo ('?xml version=1.0?
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd;');
} else {
$isXHTML11 = 0;
header (Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8);
echo ('!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0
Strict//EN
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd;');
} ?
Then further down in the head section I have:
? if($isXHTML11 == 0) {
echo (' meta http-equiv=content-type content=text/html;
charset=UTF-8 /');
} ?
What this does is check if the user's browser can accept the
application/xhtml+xml MIME-type. If it does, the page is sent with a full
XML declaration and XHTML 1.1 doctype. If not, an XHTML 1.0 doctype is
inserted and further down the content-type meta tag is inserted. The W3C
say that XHTML may be served as text/html so I think this covers all bases:
namely XML ready browsers and non-XML ready.
Thanks
P.S. I am a PHP noob so please excuse my code if it is inefficient. It
works. :)
--
Iain Gardiner
http://www.firelightning.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Alan Milnes
Sent: 09 June 2004 12:45
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] meta http-equiv
The correct content type or MIME type for an XHTML document is
application/xhtml+xml. Although I might add internet explorer
doesn't understand it so you need to determine if the users browser
accepts it.You can do this in PHP by
writing:
: SNIP:
The suggested method doesn't work when you go to validate your pages, see
the discussion at:
http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html
Alan
*
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
*
[WSG] Added .noscript element is breaking our page
Good Day, List, In my effort to further comply with guidelines, I have inserted a noscript element in the page: http://www.wdfcs.ca/contact.htm Default styles are here (I've got it right, this time): http://www.wdfcs.ca/fcss/default.css Page specific styles are here: http://www.wdfcs.ca/fcss/contact.css Everything is validated. Rendering is as one would expect (scripting on/off) in Op7.23, NS7.1 FF0.8 (Win XP 98SE), but to no surprise, IE Win XP 98 (5.01/5.5/6.0 SP1) is breaking. It is most evident when the page is re-sized or scrolled. A giant gap is appearing through which can be seen the background pattern of the wrapper. Furthermore, it is even more evident when all font colors, styles and sizes are ignored (internet tools-accessibiltiy). The .h2 element is being forced below the line of the last button on the nav menu (in line with). To witness this effect further, (in ignore mode) hover on the menu item Character Education. The added left-margin (used for effect) causes to the text to overflow its container and wrap to the next line. This in turn pushes everything on the right, below and including the .h2, downward. That's with scripting turned on. Now when one turns scripting off, the entire contact information box drops below the nav line at certain widths, and returns to its correct postion at others. Rather disconcerting, to be sure. I've tried clearing the float on the nav, to no avail. There are a couple of .br class=clear / (in default.css) in the content area, as well. The one immediately preceeding the .h2 element is effective in eliminating the venetian blind effect that was occuring when the page is scrolled up and down. (The .h2 and its borders will come and go while scrolling). To further complicate this problem, the .h1 element pops in and out without apparent reason when the page is refreshed at certain widths. I can live with the gap below the contact information box, but the disappearing act above and below it is rather unnerving. May I request the assistance of the list with this problem, please? No doubt, the cure is right under my nose, but it's just not readily apparent through the fog of my own frustration. Thank you in advance, Roy * 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] height problem in firefox
Please take a look at that and maybe you can find out why the white background is not rendering OK in Firefox. I couldn't see any other replies to this (but mail delivery seems to have been an issue here lately). I have just had a look in Firefox (0.8 version) and cannot see any difference between that and IE. 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 individuals portfolio can only be made after an examination of the particular clients investments, financial circumstances and requirements. ABN AMRO Morgans Limited (ABN 49 010 669 726 AFSL 235410) A Participant of ASX Group
Re: [WSG] Standard Hacks?
I just think it is a little simplistic and idealistic to tell newcomers to css that all hacks are bad. Good post Scott...It's a relief seeing real world scenarios used to backup reasons and choices. I'm often surprised at the number of educate your clients to understand why they cannot have their design looking the way they want it when the other design company down the road CAN do it (even though their source is frightening!) etc... type arguments raised. I don't now about everyone else but I already spent huge amounts of time educating clients about everything from content classification to signatures in emails to what a web browser is. When I get them to follow the need for standards then that in itself is a good enough step for me. Honestly how many clients have the time to be constantly educated on the ins and outs of web site development? As I see it for most clients before the web there was print (mmm still is...but get the idea) and how often did they need to learn about the ins and outs of how their brochure was put together and why this may not line up exactly with that, etc... Anyway, to re-emphasise John's question: Would it be beneficial to come up with a list of Standard Hacks :-) He merely asked if a list of standard/stroke common hacks would be useful, not whether hacks are good/bad or should/shouldn't be used. Personally, I'd say it would be useful for the reason I cited in an earlier post and whether you use them or not is dependant on your real world situation. Nick * 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] height problem in firefox
If you read this tutorial at A List Apart, it'll show you how to achieve what you want. http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fauxcolumns/ Cheers Jeff Lowder Accessibility 1st Website: www.accessibility1st.com.au Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Razvan Pop Sent: Thursday, 10 June 2004 1:14 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] height problem in firefox Thank you Susane. Any idea how i could make the left blue column fit the height of the page? Kindest Regards, Razvan Pop Susanne Jaeger wrote: Razvan Pop schrieb, am 09.06.04 14:36: http://eutest.cpea.ro/contul_meu.php Please take a look at that and maybe you can find out why the white background is not rendering OK in Firefox. The CSS: http://eutest.cpea.ro/stiluri/layout.css #main doesn't have any non-floating and hence height relevant content. You might try adding some clearing element at the end of #container, after #main or just add float: left to the definition of #container. I tried this via edit-styles bookmarklet in Mozilla and it works, I think there shouldn't be any problems with other browsers, but check. Have a look at Eric Meyer's Containing Floats article to understand what's happening. http://www.complexspiral.com/publications/containing-floats/ HTH Susanne * 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 * * 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 to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
2 other links which may help are: http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/productinfo/XPSP2/securebrowsing/popup_devimp.aspx http://msdn.microsoft.com/security/productinfo/XPSP2/securebrowsing/lockdown_devimp.aspx -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy Mobile: +61 403 8000 27 Neerav wrote: I foresee in my crystal ball a lot of headaches for web developers who use popups Heres something that might help http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/dnwxp/html/xpsp2websites.asp * 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 to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
Hi Neerav, Thanks for the link :) Very useful to know... Just another good reason to build accessible interfaces... I now know a few of my older sites will have problems due to SP2 but I wouldn't have realised if not for those checkpoints! Cheers, Mt. -Original Message- From: Neerav [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 10:11 AM To: WSG Subject: [WSG] How to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2 I foresee in my crystal ball a lot of headaches for web developers who use popups Heres something that might help http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en- us/dnwxp/html/xpsp2websites.asp -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy Mobile: +61 403 8000 27 * 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] How to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
Not many of these restrictions affect me, because I do most of my dynamic things on the server side with ColdFusion. But I read this with some alarm - does it mean that the DHTML menus I spent so much time getting to work will cease dropping down? [quote] Q: What does Internet Explorer consider a pop-up window? Internet Explorer will attempt to block any window opened automatically from: A script, with the exception of createPopup(). Modal and modeless dialogs. DHTML elements overlapping content on the page [/quote] Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.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] How to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
On Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 10:40 AM, Neerav wrote: I foresee in my crystal ball a lot of headaches for web developers who use popups Heres something that might help http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/ dnwxp/html/xpsp2websites.asp Anybody else get a 404 appearing in the LH column at the URL above? :-0 N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ * 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 to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
theres should be no space between en-us/ and dnwxp in the link -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy Mobile: +61 403 8000 27 Nick Gleitzman wrote: On Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 10:40 AM, Neerav wrote: I foresee in my crystal ball a lot of headaches for web developers who use popups Heres something that might help http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/ dnwxp/html/xpsp2websites.asp Anybody else get a 404 appearing in the LH column at the URL above? :-0 N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ * 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 to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
The link worked OK; the space happened when I quoted your original message. I've sent you a screenshot direct to show you what I mean... N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ On Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 12:25 PM, Neerav wrote: theres should be no space between en-us/ and dnwxp in the link -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy Mobile: +61 403 8000 27 Nick Gleitzman wrote: On Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 10:40 AM, Neerav wrote: I foresee in my crystal ball a lot of headaches for web developers who use popups Heres something that might help http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-us/ dnwxp/html/xpsp2websites.asp Anybody else get a 404 appearing in the LH column at the URL above? :-0 * 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 to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
You actually can download the XP Service Pack 2 _Beta_ To test whats happening with the IE thats with it. I haven't done it myself, since I only use one laptop to do my coding on, and I dont wank to screw it up with a BETA... But yeah. Just goto ms.com search for SP2 There will be a link or two with some help for you! If anyone has, will or wants to do this, please keep us up to date on what you notice has changed with the new IE... Because I want to know if they have added any extended CSS Support... Thanks! Chris Stratford Neerav wrote: I foresee in my crystal ball a lot of headaches for web developers who use popups Heres something that might help http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url="">
[WSG] HTML email - mac testers please
Hi All I've got an HTML email that I need to prepare for a client. The mockup can be seen at: HTML: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/ CSS: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/lib/main.css We didn't design it, we just did the HTML CSS work. An initial review by the designers (MAC users) has resulted in them coming back saying there are padding/margin issues on Safari 1.1.1 and IE 5.2. Bascially the blue area on the right side (the bit starting with You are subscribed to...) has a couple of pixels white space at the top bottom. This blue should be sitting flush with the header footer. I've tested it on IE 5.1.7 (it looks fine), but don't have access to either of these other browsers. I've got two questions: 1) What mail client are available on the MAC and what browsers do they use for rendering HTML content? 2) What is causing this issue and what can I do to fix it? Thanks in advance. Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: +61 2 9299 9462 Fax: +61 2 9299 9463 Mob: +61 410 458 201 http://www.gruden.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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] HTML email - mac testers please
IMHO that testing is not correct because you should test web sites in web browsers and therefore you should test HTML email in different Email clients eg: Outlook, Outlook Express, Lotus Notes, Novell Groupwise, Eudora, Mozilla Mail etc AFAIK (untested): * Outlook / Outlook Express will use the rendering engine of IE on that machine * Mozilla Mail uses the Gecko rendering engine independent of which Mozilla browsers are installed on the PC I dont know about others, but I do know that HTML mail is fraught with formatting difficulties. It may be wise to send emails in dual HTML/Text format, I think this is possible so that Text only email clients see the text and HTML capable clients see the HTML. This method will obviously increase (roughly double) the emails size. -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy Mobile: +61 403 8000 27 Mark Stanton wrote: Hi All I've got an HTML email that I need to prepare for a client. The mockup can be seen at: HTML: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/ CSS: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/lib/main.css We didn't design it, we just did the HTML CSS work. An initial review by the designers (MAC users) has resulted in them coming back saying there are padding/margin issues on Safari 1.1.1 and IE 5.2. Bascially the blue area on the right side (the bit starting with You are subscribed to...) has a couple of pixels white space at the top bottom. This blue should be sitting flush with the header footer. I've tested it on IE 5.1.7 (it looks fine), but don't have access to either of these other browsers. I've got two questions: 1) What mail client are available on the MAC and what browsers do they use for rendering HTML content? 2) What is causing this issue and what can I do to fix it? Thanks in advance. Mark * 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] HTML email - mac testers please
Mark: Mac OSX comes with a prog called Mail (known as Apple Mail), then there's, I guess, Entourage for MS Office users, Outlook Express, Eudora - and others. I use Mail - which by logic should use the Safari engine for rendering HTML - but I've had similar problems with unwanted white space in my messages as rendered by Mail. The bad news is, I gave up on trying to fix it, and loosened the layout to compensate - not an option in your case, I can see. One hint, though - my problem had to do with table cells as well, and I've an idea that it has something to do with font sizes and baselines, even if there's no text in the cell. Mind you, I wasn't using pure CSS for the layout; I stick with traditional bloated HTML for maximum compatibility. My main concern is the browser-based mail clients - Hotmail et al - that do horrible things to CSS-based emails. See article on A List Apart http://www.alistapart.com/articles/cssemail/ for more info... BTW, your mockup renders fine in Safari 1.0.2 and IE5.2.2 (on OSX 10.2.8). Let me know direct if you want screenshots. G'luck! Nick ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ On Thursday, June 10, 2004, at 01:08 PM, Mark Stanton wrote: Hi All I've got an HTML email that I need to prepare for a client. The mockup can be seen at: HTML: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/ CSS: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/lib/main.css We didn't design it, we just did the HTML CSS work. An initial review by the designers (MAC users) has resulted in them coming back saying there are padding/margin issues on Safari 1.1.1 and IE 5.2. Bascially the blue area on the right side (the bit starting with You are subscribed to...) has a couple of pixels white space at the top bottom. This blue should be sitting flush with the header footer. I've tested it on IE 5.1.7 (it looks fine), but don't have access to either of these other browsers. I've got two questions: 1) What mail client are available on the MAC and what browsers do they use for rendering HTML content? 2) What is causing this issue and what can I do to fix it? Thanks in advance. Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: +61 2 9299 9462 Fax: +61 2 9299 9463 Mob: +61 410 458 201 http://www.gruden.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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 *
[WSG] Rant about Bobby
Don't mind me I just want to rant about Automatic Accessibility checkers such as bobby. Bobbycontradicts it's self all the way through the WAI test, failing everything it THINKS is wrong. Let me give youa few examples... Problem: Do not use the same link phrase more than once when the links point to different URLS. Contradiction 1: Is there a site map or table of contents... Contradiction 2: Is there a clear, consistent navigation structure? Ok this seems straight forward right, don't have "read more" links all over the page, keep every thing concise as to explain what the user will be clicking on. Sure works well in principle, but what about when you want a site map? If you follow checkpoint 13.4 then you should keep a navigation all through out the site, right? Well Bobby doesn't think so... Bobby doesn't like links named the same, even though those links that are named the same go to the same place. Bobby kicks and screams all the way down the site map. Now I know I can quick to point blame, but I'm not sure if this is a fault of Bobby or an oversight with the WCAG. My initial thought would be Bobby is to blame, but then again it's just following orders, doing explicitly what WCAG says and not bothering to read in-between the lines. Anyway thanks for putting up with my rant. Have a nice day ;)
Re: [WSG] HTML email - mac testers please
Hey there Mark, html in emails is a bit trcky and doesn't take too kindly to external css files or using css for positioning. To cover all bases, I usually code the emails in html 3.2 - using as much inline crappy html as possible. It ain't pretty but it works. Go here for some more info : http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=StyleInEmail And check here for the nifty little mail program I use called Dada mail : http://mojo.skazat.com/ As long as you whack in html 3.2 - all will be gravy. A bientot, Benvolio - Original Message - From: Mark Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 1:08 PM Subject: [WSG] HTML email - mac testers please Hi All I've got an HTML email that I need to prepare for a client. The mockup can be seen at: HTML: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/ CSS: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/lib/main.css We didn't design it, we just did the HTML CSS work. An initial review by the designers (MAC users) has resulted in them coming back saying there are padding/margin issues on Safari 1.1.1 and IE 5.2. Bascially the blue area on the right side (the bit starting with You are subscribed to...) has a couple of pixels white space at the top bottom. This blue should be sitting flush with the header footer. I've tested it on IE 5.1.7 (it looks fine), but don't have access to either of these other browsers. I've got two questions: 1) What mail client are available on the MAC and what browsers do they use for rendering HTML content? 2) What is causing this issue and what can I do to fix it? Thanks in advance. Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: +61 2 9299 9462 Fax: +61 2 9299 9463 Mob: +61 410 458 201 http://www.gruden.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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] HTML email - mac testers please
Hey there Mark, html in emails is a bit trcky and doesn't take too kindly to external css files or using css for positioning. To cover all bases, I usually code the emails in html 3.2 - using as much inline crappy html as possible. It ain't pretty but it works. Go here for some more info : http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=StyleInEmail And check here for the nifty little mail program I use called Dada mail : http://mojo.skazat.com/ As long as you whack in html 3.2 - all will be gravy. A bientot, Benvolio - Original Message - From: Mark Stanton [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 1:08 PM Subject: [WSG] HTML email - mac testers please Hi All I've got an HTML email that I need to prepare for a client. The mockup can be seen at: HTML: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/ CSS: http://mark.gruden.com/beerworth/lib/main.css We didn't design it, we just did the HTML CSS work. An initial review by the designers (MAC users) has resulted in them coming back saying there are padding/margin issues on Safari 1.1.1 and IE 5.2. Bascially the blue area on the right side (the bit starting with You are subscribed to...) has a couple of pixels white space at the top bottom. This blue should be sitting flush with the header footer. I've tested it on IE 5.1.7 (it looks fine), but don't have access to either of these other browsers. I've got two questions: 1) What mail client are available on the MAC and what browsers do they use for rendering HTML content? 2) What is causing this issue and what can I do to fix it? Thanks in advance. Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: +61 2 9299 9462 Fax: +61 2 9299 9463 Mob: +61 410 458 201 http://www.gruden.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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] How to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
Hi all This would be better discussed on a place like the Sitepoint.com forums, as it's about general web development. Having a discussion about where you have sent screenshots is not for the list, it's for the person you sent the screenshots to. Cheers James * 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] HTML email - mac testers please
Thanks guys Let me clarrify something quickly - I hate HTML email and I'm pretty sure I will burn in hell for my sins against the STMP protocol or whatever, but... I have a problem here that I need solved. I know HTML rendering in email client like lotus notes is very poor and I realise that multi-part emails are a great way to go, but... my current scope of work is to get a good enough version of the HTML layout complete. I'm not designing or running the campaign so most of these decisions are not mine to make. I guess I'm just interested what rendering engine do 90% on a MAC use when they look at an HTML email and then testing in that environment. Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: +61 2 9299 9462 Fax: +61 2 9299 9463 Mob: +61 410 458 201 http://www.gruden.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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 to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2
So James I have to go off and sign on for yet ANOTHER forum (I already have more than 800 emails a day to wade through, and 8 forums to check each day) just to ask if my DHTML menus are going to break here??? Surely there's someone here who knows the answer. How hard is it to just answer the question instead of starting a debate about whether or not to discuss it here or whether I should pack my bags and move to another forum. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Ellis Sent: Thursday, 10 June 2004 1:57 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] How to Make Your Web Site Work with Windows XP Service Pack 2 Hi all This would be better discussed on a place like the Sitepoint.com forums, as it's about general web development. Having a discussion about where you have sent screenshots is not for the list, it's for the person you sent the screenshots to. Cheers James * 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] HTML email - mac testers please
Big thanks Nick, I've gone for a table based layout for these reasons, CCS-P in mail clients is asking for trouble. I guess the next step is removing all my CSS and just going the old school route as suggested by Ben. If most Mac users are on Mail or Outlook (which I guess means Safari IE) at least I know what I'm aiming for. Thanks for testing in those browsers - I'll go back to the designers and see what they think. Cheers Mark -- Mark Stanton Technical Director Gruden Pty Ltd Tel: +61 2 9299 9462 Fax: +61 2 9299 9463 Mob: +61 410 458 201 http://www.gruden.com mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * 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] CSS Menu Issues - Client Site
Hello there. Im developing a site for a local hat shop, and Im having some problems with the menu. If you could please take a look at the following link: http://www.affectus.net/freelance/2004_05_phathats/ Here are the issues I am experiencing: 1) I would like for the navigation to stretch 100% of the width (750px). I will style the a:active stuff later, once the base is aligned the way I would like. 2) I notice there is a break between the different boxes of the navigation. Id like to know how to get rid of these things. 3) In Firefox .8 (which I test on), I find that there is a break in the white background right about where the navigation is. I would like to make a solid white background from header to footer. Thanks so much for your time. I hope you guys can figure it out, Ive been banging my head on the table for the last two hours. Jeremy Shields www.jezzjournal.com www.affectus.net [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [WSG] Ordered List numbering format
Looks like a neat solution to me
--
Neerav Bhatt
http://www.bhatt.id.au
Web Development IT consultancy
Mobile: +61 403 8000 27
Miles Tillinger wrote:
Is there an accepted number format for ordered lists? When using ordered lists in a
structured document, e.g. a Policy or Standards document, I'm using the following
numbering format:
ol li {
list-style-type: decimal;
}
ol li li {
list-style-type: lower-alpha;
}
ol li li li {
list-style-type: lower-roman;
}
which gives the output:
1. HEADING
1. Level One
a) Level Two
b) Level Two
i) Level Three
ii) Level Three
c) Level Two
2. Level One
2. HEADING
1. Level One
a) Level Two
b) Level Two
i) Level Three
ii) Level Three
c) Level Two
2. Level One
etc.
So parts of the document can be referenced as 1.2 section a item i, which seems pretty
messy... There probably isn't a standard as such, but if there is I can't find any
reference to it.
Cheers,
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
*
