date:20041215

On 16/12/04 3:04 AM, david [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi Sam
 
 Whilsts not completely off-topic, this is relevant:
 
 It depends on the complexity of the CSS code for layout
 
 Macromedia's Contribute uses the same page-render engine as Dreamweaver, and
 we all know what that's like to work with ;)

Actually, at a Macromedia seminar I attended last year, Bob Regan told us
that the Contribute render engine was definitely NOT the same as
Dreamweaver's (newer and more advanced in fact, as my own tests seem to
indicate). He did say however that they were working towards integration and
uniformity of the two products, and I got the impression that meant
migrating Contribute's engine to Dreamweaver.

-- 
Kevin Futter
Webmaster, St. Bernard's College
http://www.sbc.melb.catholic.edu.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] Modular XHTML with iFrames, eh?

2004-12-15 Thread mike . lindsay


Return Receipt
   
Your  Re: [WSG] Modular XHTML with iFrames, eh?
document   
:  
   
was   Mike Lindsay/NSO/CSDA
received   
by:
   
at:   2004-12-16 09:22:40  
   






**
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread Kornel Lesinski

On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine as  
Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with the  
layout.
Are you sure? Some time ago there was a deal between Macromedia and Opera:
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2002/07/20020702.dml
(oh, and Apple: http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/30/opera)
Test it:
body {content: It's Opera;}
--
regards, Kornel Lesiski
**
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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

2004-12-15 Thread Lindsay Evans

Your two example pages look identical to me.
Running Firefox 1.0 on Windows XP

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:18:49 +0100, JohnyB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 It looks that the body style is applied only to the content area, not to
 the whole viewport, as it used to. It can be solved by styling html
 element instead of the body element, but I just want to ask in general -
 is this difference a standard behavior and a standard interpretation of
 the XML parser?

-- 
Lindsay Evans
http://lindsayevans.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] using IE7 script

2004-12-15 Thread Andreas Boehmer

Hi guys,

I was just wondering whether any of you have used the Dean Edwards
Javascript for IE7 (http://dean.edwards.name/ie7) and what the general
opinion on it is? 

To be honest I am bit hesitant to use it, as I don't want to rely on my
users having javascript turned on, but I guess the worst that could
happen is for the design in IE not to look 100% okay if JS is turned off.

Does anybody have prior experiences with it?


Andreas Boehmer
User Experience Consultant

Phone: (03) 9417 0468
Mobile: (0411) 097 038
http://www.addictiveMedia.com.au
Consulting | Accessibility | Usability | Development
**
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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

yes but your second link is re-adobe on apple and the first is only
for Macromedia products on the Mac also:

Opera and Macromedia will work together to develop and maintain an
application programming interface (API) for an embedded browser on the
Mac platform, enabling further technical collaboration between the two
companies in the future. Opera's core technology will be used as
default browsing technology in a number of Macromedia products on the
Mac platform and will give users the opportunity to test their Web
pages with the world's most standards-compliant browser.




On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 23:19:09 -, Kornel Lesinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine as
  Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with the
  layout.
 
 Are you sure? Some time ago there was a deal between Macromedia and Opera:
 http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2002/07/20020702.dml
 (oh, and Apple: http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/30/opera)
 
 Test it:
 body {content: It's Opera;}
 
 --
 regards, Kornel Lesiski
 
 **
 The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
 
  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  for some hints on posting to the list  getting help
 **
 
 


-- 
Website Designer/Developer
www.nataliebuxton.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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

2004-12-15 Thread Rene Saarsoo

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:40:49 +1100, Lindsay Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
wrote:

Your two example pages look identical to me.
Running Firefox 1.0 on Windows XP
No difference in my Linux version of Firefox 1.0 too...
**
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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

Your two example pages look identical to me.
Running Firefox 1.0 on Windows XP
Sorry, my fault... Now it should be OK. (You've seen another interesting 
fact - if html element has an attached bg, body always shrinks to fit 
only the content)

--
Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz | designlab.cz | janbrasna.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] using IE7 script

2004-12-15 Thread David R

I've used IE7 a few times, but mainly just for enabling the :hover 
psuedo-class on elements other than anchors.

I don't really have much of an opinion on it, considering that its stil 
in Beta (0.7 last time I checked).

But as soon as the script supports more exotic CSS, such as attribute 
selectors and display: table-cell;, I won't be using it as much.

Just my $0.02
-David R
Andreas Boehmer wrote:
Hi guys,
I was just wondering whether any of you have used the Dean Edwards
Javascript for IE7 (http://dean.edwards.name/ie7) and what the general
opinion on it is? 

To be honest I am bit hesitant to use it, as I don't want to rely on my
users having javascript turned on, but I guess the worst that could
happen is for the design in IE not to look 100% okay if JS is turned off.
Does anybody have prior experiences with it?
**
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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

difference between HTML and XHTML. This is usually referred to as BODY 
not being magical anymore, and it's expected behaviour.
OK, thank you for information, I found it mentioned also in 
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html#xhtmldiff - new 
feature to me, so I just wanted to find some background about it.

Thanks for your time.
--
Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz | designlab.cz | janbrasna.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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

2004-12-15 Thread Terrence Wood

The behaviour is correct, although my following eplanation may not be =-).
In xml body is just another tag -- the root element is html. When 
sent as html the body tag is the root element. So when sending xml you 
need to apply styles to html to style the entire viewport.

Terrence Wood.
On 2004-12-16 12:18 PM, JohnyB wrote:
It looks that the body style is applied only to the content area, not to 
the whole viewport, as it used to. It can be solved by styling html 
element instead of the body element, but I just want to ask in general - 
is this difference a standard behavior and a standard interpretation of 
the XML parser?

--
You know you've achieved perfection in design, not when you have 
nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away. 
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery
**
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] using IE7 script

On 16/12/04 10:50 AM, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I wouldn't even be relying on my users having IE7, let alone JS being on or
 off.

Hi Natalie,

Andreas is not referring to MS's official IE7 here, but an extensive
JavaScript solution (confusingly called IE7) that attempts to make IE6
behave in a more standards-compliant manner. See the link that Andreas
supplied for more details.

-- 
Kevin Futter
Webmaster, St. Bernard's College
http://www.sbc.melb.catholic.edu.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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

need to apply styles to html to style the entire viewport.
Well, actually this behavior is also somehow magic :) - html is just 
another element and is not connected to the viewport... So it might 
someday be threated the same as now the body is :)

// Yes, I agree this behavior is alright and I know the solution - I 
just wanted someone to show me this point written or described 
somewhere, that's all - thanks for it.

--
Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz | designlab.cz | janbrasna.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] using IE7 script

I Know - I think everyone missed my second post that states as much :)

From: Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:54:13 +1100
Subject: Re: [WSG] using IE7 script
Oh Hang on, I just read the MS forum on the issue.

IE7 isn't actually IE7, its a JS. My Badtrade;

To quote:

Re: Firefox Users IE 7 is coming
   In: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
As far as I can tell, this isn't an official new browser. It's merely the
name of a JavaScript API that reinterprets CSS and fixes it in Internet
Explorer 5/6. Thus, you include it on a web-page as a script
type=text/javascript src=ie7.js/script - nothing more, nothing less.

It's a great idea though, and one that should be given support. After all,
if you can fix it in JS, surely MS can fix it in source :)

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 11:08:32 +1100, Kevin Futter
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 16/12/04 10:50 AM, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  I wouldn't even be relying on my users having IE7, let alone JS being on or
  off.

 Hi Natalie,

 Andreas is not referring to MS's official IE7 here, but an extensive
 JavaScript solution (confusingly called IE7) that attempts to make IE6
 behave in a more standards-compliant manner. See the link that Andreas
 supplied for more details.

-- 
Website Designer/Developer
www.nataliebuxton.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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread J Rodgers

I can say with 99% certainty the rendering is not IE nor Safari it is
Macromedia's own rendering engine. In C3 when you browse web pages you get
Safari or IE but when you click edit it flips to MM's own rendering engine.
C3 was an improved rendering engine over Dreamweaver MX 2004 and the upgrade
path continues. 

C3 in edit mode renders pretty well, there are still a lot 'nice to have'
stuff in the bug base. Nothing is perfect though, and the Contribute team
has done a great job improving things.

The best way to get Contribute and Dreameaver to improve is for people from
places like here that care about standards to get involved on the Macromedia
Forums and bug them to let you into their beta programs. If there are more
voices asking for better standards support from rendering to code generation
the products will improve faster. Once thing I will say with absolute
certainty is that the Macromedia development teams listen to their
community. If their community is largely the 'how do I create a table?' type
then that is the product you get...

Jesse


On 12/15/04 6:19 PM, Kornel Lesinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine as
 Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with the
 layout.
 
 Are you sure? Some time ago there was a deal between Macromedia and Opera:
 http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2002/07/20020702.dml
 (oh, and Apple: http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/30/opera)
 
 Test it:
 body {content: It's Opera;}
 


--
Jesse Rodgers 
Manager, Web Communications
Communications  Public Affairs - University of Waterloo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 519.888.4567 ext. 3874 


**
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] using IE7 script

I wouldn't even be relying on my users having IE7, let alone JS being on or off.


On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:41:50 -0800, Andreas Boehmer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi guys,
 
 I was just wondering whether any of you have used the Dean Edwards
 Javascript for IE7 (http://dean.edwards.name/ie7) and what the general
 opinion on it is?
 
 To be honest I am bit hesitant to use it, as I don't want to rely on my
 users having javascript turned on, but I guess the worst that could
 happen is for the design in IE not to look 100% okay if JS is turned off.
 
 Does anybody have prior experiences with it?
 



-- 
Website Designer/Developer
www.nataliebuxton.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] using IE7 script

On 16/12/04 11:16 AM, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I Know - I think everyone missed my second post that states as much :)

Actually, a little bit OT, but I often receive posts out of order or out of
sync, so my post actually went off long before your second post arrived. I
think this is why when the list admins scream CLOSED on a thread, messages
for that thread can still arrive thereafter - we're not being rebellious,
just slow to catch up!


-- 
Kevin Futter
Webmaster, St. Bernard's College
http://www.sbc.melb.catholic.edu.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] x-browser javascript: is this OT?

2004-12-15 Thread Paul Connolley

On 14 Dec 2004, at 23:10, Barry Beattie wrote:
we're building a large web app where JS is vital to make it work. 
Things
like modal windows, tabbed data entry forms, RPC data exchange with
xmlhttprequest, xml manip within the page, etc.
[snip]
Trying to run it on NN4, PDA's and mobile devices just won't happen, 
I'm
afraid.
I see that you mention xmlhttprequest. With note to this wonderful 
pseudo-standard, I believe that you should take care not to abuse it. 
The possibilities of this method are wonderfully endless but it should 
not, at this stage, be used to circumnavigate the submit button. Use it 
for all your needs, but remember the other browsers.

Imagine a test case, if you will, where you wish to present several 
select box* with topic followed by sub-topic etc. By using 
xmlhttprequest you could streamline the results for the following 
select box and so on. This would allow for a greater usability 
experience for certain users. To maintain a backwards compatibility 
you would still offer all of the choices initially so that a user of a 
less capable browser would still be able to follow along. The 
alternative would be to allow a user to submit through each topic and 
subtopic with the select elements appearing after each post operation.

I hope that wasn't too in-depth.
*The select element in html which allows a single/multiple choice 
selection
--
Paul Connolley
SQL/Systems Programmer
Egocentric - http://egocentric.co.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
**

[WSG] formatting the a tag

2004-12-15 Thread Helen . Rysavy

Hi

Can anyone tell me why when using classes sometimes I can style the a by
itself (e.g. .myclass a) and other times this doesn't work and I have to
style a:link (i.e. .myclass a:link)

Any pointers would be appreciated.

Thanks
Helen
***
Helen Rysavy
Web Designer, Teaching  Learning Development
Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory 0909
Tel: 8946 7779 Mobile: 0403 290 842
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.cdu.edu.au
CRICOS Provider No: 00300K
***


**
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] Dreamweaver : was [ Standards Macromedia Contribute]

2004-12-15 Thread Terrence Wood

isn't the DWMX editor essentially homesite anyway? I'm a mac user so 
I've never seen or used homesite.

Terrence Wood.
On 2004-12-16 2:39 PM, heretic wrote:
Realistically... we probably could have stuck with HomeSite :)
--
You know you've achieved perfection in design, not when you have 
nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away. 
-Antoine de Saint-Exupery
**
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] formatting the a tag

a:link is for  a href
a is for a mailto or a id or similar.

a:link only applies if there is an href within the a.


On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:02:10 +0930, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Hi
 
 Can anyone tell me why when using classes sometimes I can style the a by
 itself (e.g. .myclass a) and other times this doesn't work and I have to
 style a:link (i.e. .myclass a:link)
 
 Any pointers would be appreciated.
 
 Thanks
 Helen
 ***
 Helen Rysavy
 Web Designer, Teaching  Learning Development
 Charles Darwin University, Northern Territory 0909
 Tel: 8946 7779 Mobile: 0403 290 842
 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 www.cdu.edu.au
 CRICOS Provider No: 00300K
 ***
 
 **
 The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
 
  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  for some hints on posting to the list  getting help
 **
 
 


-- 
Website Designer/Developer
www.nataliebuxton.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] Dreamweaver : was [ Standards Macromedia Contribute]

2004-12-15 Thread James Ellis

Hi all

This is a good discussion, lets try and keep it on how to apply the
mentioned software to create standards compliant content rather than a
rundown of its various features and comparison to other software.

Cheers
James

admin



On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:41:42 +1100, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 This is probably getting OT...
 
 The DW editor isn't much like homesite at all anymore.
 
 Many more advanced features. It is worth downloading the free demo and
 having a look using CODE VIEW. Lots of built in things I like - the
 Oreilly's pocket guides, the inbuilt validation controls and the
 ability to add file type extensions via the xml file.
 
 
 On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:41:52 +1300, Terrence Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  isn't the DWMX editor essentially homesite anyway? I'm a mac user so
  I've never seen or used homesite.
 
  Terrence Wood.
 
  On 2004-12-16 2:39 PM, heretic wrote:
 
   Realistically... we probably could have stuck with HomeSite :)
 
  --
  You know you've achieved perfection in design, not when you have
  nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away.
  -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
  **
  The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
 
   See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
   for some hints on posting to the list  getting help
  **
 
 
 
 
 --
 Website Designer/Developer
 www.nataliebuxton.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
 **
 

**
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] formatting the a tag

2004-12-15 Thread russ - maxdesign

Start at the beginning. If you want to style every a element on the page,
you can do:

a:link { color: red;}

If you want to style a particular link, you can do it using a direct id or
class applied within a link like this:
HTML - a class=foo href=#text/a
CSS - a:link.foo { color: green;}

Or using a descendant selector, where the id or class is used in the element
or container above:
HTML - p class=fooa href=#text/a/p
CSS - .foo a:link { color: yellow;}

If you are having problems getting these to work, there is probably an issue
with specificity - meaning that you have written another a:link rule within
your css that is either more specific or appears after your current rule
within your style sheet.

The best thing to do is check through your css for all a:link rules and then
work out where the conflicts occur.

A really important step in all of this is to understand the document tree.
It may be worth drawing a basic document tree for your current page so you
can more easily see how to apply css to specific instances of an a element.

More on document tree here:
http://css.maxdesign.com.au/selectutorial/document_tree.htm

Russ



 Hi
 
 Can anyone tell me why when using classes sometimes I can style the a by
 itself (e.g. .myclass a) and other times this doesn't work and I have to
 style a:link (i.e. .myclass a:link)
 
 Any pointers would be appreciated.

**
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] formatting the a tag

2004-12-15 Thread Patrick H. Lauke

russ - maxdesign wrote:
If you want to style a particular link, you can do it using a direct id or
class applied within a link like this:
HTML - a class=foo href=#text/a
CSS - a:link.foo { color: green;}
Although the above CSS seems to work, I believe that the more correct 
form for this selector is

a.foo:link
See the example at 5.11.2 The link pseudo-classes: :link and :visited
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/selector.html#link-pseudo-classes
--
Patrick H. Lauke
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
**
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] Cross browser background-position

2004-12-15 Thread Jonathan T. Sage

Alright, so, I am out of ideas...

page :  http://apathy.jtsage.com/

css: http://apathy.jtsage.com/wp-layout.css

is there any way that the effect achieved in firefox / mozilla can be
achieved in IE/Win as well?  (that of the multiple background images
with the one under the content div being fixed at the bottom of the
viewport)

My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?)  not sure which
browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect is the one in
firefox.

anyway, would love to hear what people thing about this.
-- 
Jonathan T. Sage
Theatrical Lighting / Set Designer
Professional Web Design

[HTTP://www.JTSage.com]
[HTTP://design.JTSage.com]
[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] formatting the a tag

2004-12-15 Thread russ - maxdesign

 Although the above CSS seems to work, I believe that the more correct
 form for this selector is
 
 a.foo:link

Quite correct! Written in a hurry.
My apologies
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] Cross browser background-position

2004-12-15 Thread Charles Martin

Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?)  not sure which
browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect is the one in
firefox.
 

Actually, you were referring to:
background-attachment: fixed;
And not background-position.  As for support, IE only supports it for the BODY 
tag.  One of my fav references for checking support of certain tags/properties 
is www.blooberry.com.  The following link is its information about 
background-attachment.
http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/css/properties/colorbg/bgattach.htm
Charles Martin
**
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] Cross browser background-position

On 16/12/04 2:29 PM, Jonathan T. Sage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Alright, so, I am out of ideas...
 
 page :  http://apathy.jtsage.com/
 
 css: http://apathy.jtsage.com/wp-layout.css
 
 is there any way that the effect achieved in firefox / mozilla can be
 achieved in IE/Win as well?  (that of the multiple background images
 with the one under the content div being fixed at the bottom of the
 viewport)
 
 My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
 in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?)  not sure which
 browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect is the one in
 firefox.

IIRC, background-position declarations are supposed to apply to any element
that can take an image as a background, but IE/Win supports it only on the
body element of a document.

-- 
Kevin Futter
Webmaster, St. Bernard's College
http://www.sbc.melb.catholic.edu.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] Cross browser background-position

2004-12-15 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
Alright, so, I am out of ideas...

...

My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
 in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?)  not sure which 
browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect is the one in 
firefox.

anyway, would love to hear what people thing about this.
Maybe some fresh ideas here (?):
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/fixedBackground.html
Georg
**
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] formatting the a tag

2004-12-15 Thread John Horner

This may be too obvious to mention, but one reason why the formatting 
of a:link doesn't work might be that it's actually an a:visited and 
therefore *supposed* to be a different colour.

The developers' toolbar in FireFox will reset all links for you 
(under Miscellaneous) so that you can at least eliminate that from 
your testing.

   Have You Validated Your Code?
John Horner(+612 / 02) 9333 3488
Senior Developer, ABC Online  http://www.abc.net.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] Length of ALT attribute

2004-12-15 Thread Anura Samara

Thanks for that link, it makes interesting reading.

There are two options for passing this requirement  The ALT attribute
value must be less than 100 characters for English text or the user
must confirm that the Alt text is as short as possible.

Well, I am trying to describe some complex images, involving
(Government) program changes over a period of time. Yes, I have a
longer text description available but I want there to be enough ALT
text to give the user a sense of what is there, and therefore whether
they want to go and read/hear the full text description.

So, who is the user? em I /em think the ALT text is as short as
possible, to convey the meaning of the image. But, of course, I would,
wouldn't I?

Anura

 According to WCAG20, the ALT text for English should be less than
100 characters.
 Here is the link:
 http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test3.html
**
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] Cross browser background-position

2004-12-15 Thread Jonathan T. Sage

On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:46:55 -0600, Charles Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
 
 My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
 in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?)  not sure which
 browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect is the one in
 firefox.
 
 
 Actually, you were referring to:
 
 background-attachment: fixed;
 

correct.  sorry for the confusion.  and in knowing that the only way i
could fix that image was to apply it to the body I was curious if
anybody knew of some nice magic to get those other 2 columns.  would
this be a good attempt at a 3 column layout, fix the width of the
center one?  and if so, how could I control 1 and 3 to be equal?  just
thinking out loud.

~j

-- 
Jonathan T. Sage
Theatrical Lighting / Set Designer
Professional Web Design

[HTTP://www.JTSage.com]
[HTTP://design.JTSage.com]
[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] Western Australian Government Website

2004-12-15 Thread Gary Menzel

Just to add into the conversation... the Queensland Government has
done HEAPS in regarding to CUE across most (but still not quite) all.

The best place to start is:

http://www.qld.gov.au/departments/index.html

You'll note that even when you move sites (which often means moving
departments) that they have a not only a consistent look and feel -
but even a consistent standards compliant approach.

Having said all that - there is no gaurantee you wont find something
that LOOKS like the other sites but that still uses horrid markup.

Regards,
Gary Menzel

[PS if government people in other states require contacts in the QLD
Government for potential experience sharing please contact me off list
and I will try and put you in touch with the right people]



On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:19:35 +0800, Kay Smoljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:05:49 +1100, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 snip http://www.wa.gov.au/ snip
  Alas, I was wrong and it's killing me how poor it is in relation to
  standards, accessibility and usability.
 
 I know some of the people involved with upgrading the web sites for
 the entire WA government to a common look and feel. As far as I
 understand it will be happening in the next few months (ie, before the
 election is called, at which point all non-essential changes to the
 sites are frozen).
 
 While I'm not sure if 100% validation is one of their goals for the
 new site, I do know that accessibility is a big issue for them and I
 have no doubt the new sites will be much, much better than what's
 there now. I believe that several years of planning and discussion has
 gone into the project!
 
 I might drop an email to someone and try to find out more...
 
 Cheers,
 K.
 
 --
 Kay Smoljak
 http://kay.smoljak.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
 **
 

**
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] Western Australian Government Website

2004-12-15 Thread Nick Cowie

I went to do a search on public holidays (which I am compiling from
all Government Websites) and being a proud WA girl, thought our site
would be the best.

Visit
http://www.docep.wa.gov.au/lr/LabourRelations/Content/Wages%20and%20Conditions/Public%20Holidays/Public_Holidays.html
for the information.

Alas, I was wrong and it's killing me how poor it is in relation to
standards, accessibility and usability.

And no this site does not validate, the CMS only likes HTML 4.01 and the code
used for the drop downs is valid XHTML 1.1 transitional but not 4.01
transitional. It is something we are hoping will be fixed in the next version
of the CMS.

Another problem is that the content is cut and pasted from MS Word. Many
content contributors, none who know or understand HTML.

However, that site is accessible and has decent usability. Traffic has doubled
in the last six months since the redesign (no promotion or any other changes,
just redesigned and the information architecture improved).

Does anyone on this list work in any dept in WA that could perhaps
enlighten the powers that be at how bad the site makes WA look
compared to other government sites?

Yes.

See http://www.egov.dpc.wa.gov.au/index.cfm?fuseaction=projects.policy for the
Guidelines for State Government Web Sites. There is a push for standards based
sites from the office of e-government and it is slowly happening, but very
slowly.

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] Western Australian Government Website

Hi Nick

Your site (docep) is fine, it's the main site that is a killer. It is
completely un-accessible to say the least.

I understand it hasn't been touched since 2001 - and that would
certainly explain it.

Regarding that link - that was another of my peeves. The average
person isn't going to think of looking under Labor Relations or Work
and Conditions for that info (I myself missed that link.) I think
Public Holidays isn't even mention in the title of the search result
but about 15 words into the description :(

I'm not intending to be negative - all I was is dissapointed that the
site was so hard to use, almost every page was actually a different
sub domain or domain, and looked totally different from the last :(

On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 14:00:25 +0800, Nick Cowie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

I went to do a search on public holidays (which I am compiling from
all Government Websites) and being a proud WA girl, thought our site
would be the best.

Visit
http://www.docep.wa.gov.au/lr/LabourRelations/Content/Wages%20and%20Conditions/Public%20Holidays/Public_Holidays.html
for the information.

Alas, I was wrong and it's killing me how poor it is in relation to
standards, accessibility and usability.

Another problem is that the content is cut and pasted from MS Word. Many
content contributors, none who know or understand HTML.

However, that site is accessible and has decent usability. Traffic has
doubled in the last six months since the redesign (no promotion or any other
changes, just redesigned and the information architecture improved).

Does anyone on this list work in any dept in WA that could perhaps
enlighten the powers that be at how bad the site makes WA look
compared to other government sites?

Yes.

See http://www.egov.dpc.wa.gov.au/index.cfm?fuseaction=projects.policy for
the Guidelines for State Government Web Sites. There is a push for standards
based sites from the office of e-government and it is slowly happening, but
very slowly.

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
**

--
Website Designer/Developer
www.nataliebuxton.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] Float problem (perhaps) in IE 5 on www.mccn.org.au

2004-12-15 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

Nick Lo wrote:
I've just released...
http://www.mccn.org.au/
...and realised a little late that some last minute tweaks (possibly)
 have thrown out the Stay Informed column on the home page in PC IE
5.
Some stuff in there widens the column in IE5/win.
For a start, take out (or hack) the width:
ul#subscribe li a
{
color: #fff;
font-weight: bold;
/*width: 285px;*/
}
Then you can make it look a little better in IE5/win, using old quirks
mode unitless values.
@media all {
* html div#features
{
width: 310;
margin: 0 -10;
padding: 1;
}
}
The above is not a complete fix, but will make it work somewhat. Lots of
box-model problems and other weaknesses still in there...
Oh and if there are any other things people would like to point out 
please feel free.
Font-resizing breaks the subscribe line-up. Text overflowing.
regards
Georg
**
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] Webstandards for your iPod

2004-12-15 Thread Tom Livingston

Just installed this. Very cool.  :-)
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
mlinc.com

russ - maxdesign wrote:
Well, John and Maxine must have been busy...
Westciv's Complete CSS Guide is now available as a free CSS podGuide for
the iPod:
http://www.westciv.com/news/podguide.html
Interesting stuff
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
**

**
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] Modular XHTML with iFrames, eh?

2004-12-15 Thread david

From about 10 minutes worth of internet research and Googling, one can come to 
the conclusion that despite the iframe tag being depreciated (read: 
invalid), you can quite easily bring back the functionality with the 
object tag

Well, we all know that said method simply doesn't work :) (Once again, another 
round of applause to Microsoft!)

Then with a few more minutes of Googling, I found that using the iframe XHTML 
1.1 module, you can bring it back _and_ keep the page valid XHTML

Now here's the question *how*

Nowhere on teh intarweb, does it give details on how to import the iframe 
module into an XHTML 1.1 document.

Any suggestions?

Regards
-David
**
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] Dreamweaver : was [ Standards Macromedia Contribute]

2004-12-15 Thread designer

Hi Mario and all,

- Original Message - 
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Standards  Macromedia Contribute

 Also, I must admit I'm growing rather weary of all the negative remarks
 about Dreamweaver. From my humble perspective I use Dreamweaver MX 2004
 and find it to be an extremely robust and well crafted authoring tool.
 Dreamweaver produces fairly good XHTML, and has a feature to Clean Up
 XHTML, and coupled with HomeSite's code sweeper you can produce clean,
 valid markup. All in addition to using the W3C's Code Validator, and being
 able to apply changes in Dreamweaver's code view I just don't see the down
 side.

I must say I agree. As with all tools, you find out how best to use them and
what (if any) downsides there are.  I must say I rarely use design view with
the 'new standards' kind of work (it' s pretty hopeless at displaying divs
properly for layout) but the code editor is superb.  Not only that, the
'convert for version 3 browsers' facility is excellent, if you find you need
support for an ancient browser.

Just my 2p's worth.

Bob McClelland,
Cornwall (U.K.)
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread J Rodgers

Sort of:

http://pole.uwaterloo.ca/cpadev/engtest/index.html

I am currently working on a template that keeps to KISS so not to drive some
folks insane but can be maintained in C3. Just about to hit it with JAWS and
the ilk. I have had a couple students that rely on JAWS try it out and they
have no complaints.

Few things to add as yet and the search isn't implemented very well but C3
behaves. There are some limitations from inserting tables and images but the
parts it leaves out are relatively minor. If you want to chat specifically
about it send me an email.

Regards,
Jesse

--
Jesse Rodgers 
Manager, Web Communications
Communications  Public Affairs - University of Waterloo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | 519.888.4567 ext. 3874

On 12/15/04 9:15 AM, Sam Hutchinson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Anyone out there got any experience of adding a fully devised compliant
 template to Contribute to let the content owners manage their own pages ?
 Is it simply a case of defining the editable regions or should you build the
 site and then define the content that can be changed?
 
 Was planning on implementing along with:
 http://www.sammyco.co.uk/acttrwebpre/company.php
 
 ...would be interested to hear of any results good and bad - off list of you
 feel your reply isn't wide enough for everyone to be interested...




**
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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread Hugh Todd

On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine as 
Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with the 
layout.

However, your client would have to have a Mac. :)
-Hugh Todd
On 16/12/2004, at 3:04 AM, david wrote:
Macromedia's Contribute uses the same page-render engine as 
Dreamweaver, and we all know what that's like to work with ;)

Well, provided your design doesn't use floats, different display: 
properties, and relative positioning, you should be fine (with the 
latest version, of course)
**
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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread David R

Kevin Futter wrote:
Actually, at a Macromedia seminar I attended last year, Bob Regan told us
that the Contribute render engine was definitely NOT the same as
Dreamweaver's
My bad, I was thinking of Contribute 2
Still... there isn't a single renderer out there that is 100% standards 
compliant, even Opera misses a few bits of CSS2

-David R
**
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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

Hi all,
I've come across a weird thing - Gecko browsers in XHTML 1.1 with 
Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml render the visual style of the body 
element in a bit different way than without this header (so the SGML 
parser processes it differently than the XML parser). You can see it 
here - http://tmp.anum.biz/bug-app-xhtml.php and 
http://tmp.anum.biz/bug-app-xhtml.php?xml=false ...

It looks that the body style is applied only to the content area, not to 
the whole viewport, as it used to. It can be solved by styling html 
element instead of the body element, but I just want to ask in general - 
is this difference a standard behavior and a standard interpretation of 
the XML parser?

--
Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz | designlab.cz | janbrasna.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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread Hugh Todd

Kornel,
Yes, I'm sure.
http://www.macromedia.com/software/contribute/productinfo/features/ 
static_tour/mac/


On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine  
as Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with  
the layout.
Are you sure? Some time ago there was a deal between Macromedia and  
Opera:
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2002/07/20020702.dml
(oh, and Apple: http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/30/opera)
Not Apple. Adobe.
Test it:
body {content: It's Opera;}
You what??
:) Hugh
**
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] Visual rendering in gecko with app/xhtml

2004-12-15 Thread Patrick H. Lauke

JohnyB wrote:
I've come across a weird thing - Gecko browsers in XHTML 1.1 with 
Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml render the visual style of the body 
element in a bit different way than without this header  
[...]
It looks that the body style is applied only to the content area, not to 
the whole viewport, as it used to. 
Your examples displayed the same, but yes, the issue is a fundamental 
difference between HTML and XHTML. This is usually referred to as BODY 
not being magical anymore, and it's expected behaviour. See for instance:

4. Also on the subject of CSS, the body element is somewhat magical 
in HTML, but not in XML. The technical background is not worth delving 
into; the upshot is that if you define CSS styles on body, you should 
define them on html as well. For example, if you define a background 
color on body, it will apply to the entire page in HTML, but it may not 
in XML. You'll need to define the background on html as well.

http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html
--
Patrick H. Lauke
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
**
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] using IE7 script

Oh Hang on, I just read the MS forum on the issue.

IE7 isn't actually IE7, its a JS. My Badtrade;

To quote:

Re: Firefox Users IE 7 is coming
In: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
As far as I can tell, this isn't an official new browser. It's merely the
name of a JavaScript API that reinterprets CSS and fixes it in Internet
Explorer 5/6. Thus, you include it on a web-page as a script
type=text/javascript src=ie7.js/script - nothing more, nothing less.

It's a great idea though, and one that should be given support. After all,
if you can fix it in JS, surely MS can fix it in source :)


On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:50:59 +1100, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 I wouldn't even be relying on my users having IE7, let alone JS being on or 
 off.
 
 
 On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:41:50 -0800, Andreas Boehmer
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Hi guys,
 
  I was just wondering whether any of you have used the Dean Edwards
  Javascript for IE7 (http://dean.edwards.name/ie7) and what the general
  opinion on it is?
 
  To be honest I am bit hesitant to use it, as I don't want to rely on my
  users having javascript turned on, but I guess the worst that could
  happen is for the design in IE not to look 100% okay if JS is turned off.
 
  Does anybody have prior experiences with it?
 
 
 
 --
 Website Designer/Developer
 www.nataliebuxton.com
 


-- 
Website Designer/Developer
www.nataliebuxton.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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread Hugh Todd

Kornel,
Opera is the only browser I know that supports replacing elements with 
generated content and positioning of generated content.
Safari supports this:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2003_12.html#004377 (see 
note 18). Dave Hyatt is the development leader on Safari.

:) Hugh
**
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] Standards Macromedia Contribute

2004-12-15 Thread Kornel Lesinski

Are you sure? Some time ago there was a deal between Macromedia and  
Opera:
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2002/07/20020702.dml
(oh, and Apple: http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/30/opera)
Not Apple. Adobe.
oops. It was supposed to be and Adobe.
Test it:
body {content: It's Opera;}
You what??
Opera is the only browser I know that supports replacing elements with  
generated content and positioning of generated content.

BTW:
Opera misses few bits from CSS2, but has complete implementation of CSS2.1.
When I frist heard that I thought that its a paradox and it must be  
untrue, but later I realized that CSS2.1 drops some quirks of CSS2 making  
Opera fully compiliant.

Gecko still has very incomplete implementation of CSS2.1 Generated  
Content, and even new display: properties aren't officially there yet.

--
regards, Kornel Lesiski
**
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] Dreamweaver : was [ Standards Macromedia Contribute]

2004-12-15 Thread heretic

Hi all (hmm, this would be a de-lurk..),

  Also, I must admit I'm growing rather weary of all the negative remarks
  about Dreamweaver. From my humble perspective I use Dreamweaver MX 2004
 I must say I agree. As with all tools, you find out how best to use them and
 what (if any) downsides there are.  I must say I rarely use design view with
[snip]

Not sure if this has been mentioned already, but we have to remember
that DW comes with most of its key standards/accessibility options
*switched off by default*.

So a misleading message can go out to the less savvy people out there
- they may think they're creating standards-compliant/accessible pages
because they're using DW MX2004, when actually they'd have to change a
large number of preferences for this to become the truth.

Part of the idea of a WYSIWYG is to create a certain output without
the user having to be an expert. You still have to be an expert to
create valid pages with DW; and as you note don't bother trying to use
design view on a div-based design.

Realistically... we probably could have stuck with HomeSite :)

All opinion, obviously.

h

-- 
--- http://cheshrkat.blogspot.com/
--- The future has arrived; it's just not 
--- evenly distributed. - William Gibson
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list  getting help
**

RE: [WSG] using IE7 script

2004-12-15 Thread Ryan Nichols

I did install it briefly to check it out. I think I found it to be slow?
I didn't really investigate it. I also think it was an all or nothing
solutions? Maybe it wasn't. I would like a version
that I could scale to alow do a few small things like sibling selectors
and such. I was thinking of writing a slimmed down version but maybe
I'll give IE7 a second chance.


Ryan Nichols
Graphic Design / Web Development
 
Matrixwebs.com
1.800.711.2829
 
18330 Sutter Blvd.
Morgan Hill, CA 95037

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Andreas Boehmer
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 3:42 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] using IE7 script

Hi guys,

I was just wondering whether any of you have used the Dean Edwards
Javascript for IE7 (http://dean.edwards.name/ie7) and what the general
opinion on it is? 

To be honest I am bit hesitant to use it, as I don't want to rely on my
users having javascript turned on, but I guess the worst that could
happen is for the design in IE not to look 100% okay if JS is turned
off.

Does anybody have prior experiences with it?


Andreas Boehmer
User Experience Consultant

Phone: (03) 9417 0468
Mobile: (0411) 097 038
http://www.addictiveMedia.com.au
Consulting | Accessibility | Usability | Development
**
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] using IE7 script

2004-12-15 Thread Adrian Lynch

Andreas Boehmer wrote:
Does anybody have prior experiences with it?
We use it for all our sites, and have found it to be excellent. We only 
load it for IE, so other browsers are not forced to download it, and we 
have configure Apache to force the browsers to cache the javascript 
file, so it is only downloaded once.

It allows us to develop to standards, get everything looking correct in 
Firefox, and then be 99% ready for IE.

One problem  we have encountered (which should be resolved in the next 
version) is it causes problems with your print style sheets.

The fixes are numerous, but a short list of the best are:
anything:hover
min/max-width/height
png transparency
parent  child
-
Adrian Lynch
**
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] Dreamweaver : was [ Standards Macromedia Contribute]

This is probably getting OT...

The DW editor isn't much like homesite at all anymore.

Many more advanced features. It is worth downloading the free demo and
having a look using CODE VIEW. Lots of built in things I like - the
Oreilly's pocket guides, the inbuilt validation controls and the
ability to add file type extensions via the xml file.


On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:41:52 +1300, Terrence Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 isn't the DWMX editor essentially homesite anyway? I'm a mac user so
 I've never seen or used homesite.
 
 Terrence Wood.
 
 On 2004-12-16 2:39 PM, heretic wrote:
 
  Realistically... we probably could have stuck with HomeSite :)
 
 --
 You know you've achieved perfection in design, not when you have
 nothing more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away.
 -Antoine de Saint-Exupery
 **
 The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
 
  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
  for some hints on posting to the list  getting help
 **
 
 


-- 
Website Designer/Developer
www.nataliebuxton.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] Western Australian Government Website