Re: [WSG] Address Element

[Miika Mäkinen]

Christian, that's what I kinda thought. Still, what struct me on the definition is "or a major part of a document such as a form". Now what is the major part of a document that lists contact information for one or multiple businesses? These documents are used to contact the listings, not the author. Also, who is the author if we are just publishing listings provided (or "authored") by the businesses?
About appearing once, would you think it is correct to use it on a page that represents a single listing? For example 
http://yellowpages-cambodia.com/media/publishers-graphic-designers-prepress-etc/iq-design-13728.htmlStill not too convinced... though might change it to hcard anyways.Thanks,MiikaHeh. Sometimes I wish I never heard about semantic markup ;)
On 2/19/06, Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/19/06, Miika Mäkinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Dear WSG members, I'm a bit confused about the correct use for> address-element.>> W3C documentation states that it should be used "to supply contact
> information for a document or a major part of a document such as a form.".> Now as I'm working on phone (and address) directories, I am currently using> the element to mark up addresses of all listings (no matter how many of the
> listings are on a page).>> What do you think? Is this correct usage or not?Sorry, no it's not. Address is only for contact information for theauthor of the document (this would be you)... and it can only appear
once.I think you could look at http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard for themicroformat approach, or some other list members can recommend variousoptions... definition lists might work well.
Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] Address Element

[Christian Montoya]

On 2/19/06, Miika Mäkinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear WSG members, I'm a bit confused about the correct use for
> address-element.
>
> W3C documentation states that it should be used "to supply contact
> information for a document or a major part of a document such as a form.".
> Now as I'm working on phone (and address) directories, I am currently using
> the element to mark up addresses of all listings (no matter how many of the
> listings are on a page).
>
> What do you think? Is this correct usage or not?

Sorry, no it's not. Address is only for contact information for the
author of the document (this would be you)... and it can only appear
once.

I think you could look at http://microformats.org/wiki/hcard for the
microformat approach, or some other list members can recommend various
options... definition lists might work well.

--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] Address Element

[Miika Mäkinen]

Dear WSG members, I'm a bit confused about the correct use for address-element. W3C documentation states that it should be used "to supply contact information
for a document or a major part of a document such as a form.". Now as I'm working on phone (and address) directories, I am currently using the element to mark up addresses of all listings (no matter how many of the listings are on a page). 
What do you think? Is this correct usage or not? Yours sincerely,Miika Mäkinen

Re: [WSG] [CSS Question] Single Vs Multiple.

[Christian Montoya]

On 2/18/06, Andrew Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks Christian,
>
> Thank you for your help.

Hey, since you happen to be looking for CSS links, here's two you
might not have found:

http://www.cssliquid.com
http://www.christianmontoya.com/2006/02/01/pure-css-image-rollover/

Enjoy.

--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] Overflow and inheritance problems with a 2-column layout

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

Steve Olive wrote:

:-) pony below


I guess it's just a matter of trying to keep up the good ideals and 
getting more designers on board with XHTML served as XHTML & HTML. 
I'm actually surprised how many tutorials I see that use HTML 4.01 in

 computer magazines in 2006. If we can't convince these people to
code to XHTML 1.0 Transitional standards we have real problems.


I agree. Depending on the job I use Transitional or Strict.
I tend to recommend XHTML 1.0 Strict to others though, and that they at
least _test it_ by serving it as xhtml, so they will avoid nasty
surprises in the future.

Generally I don't have a problem with the use of Strict, valid and
complete HTML 4.01. It is the latest HTML standard, and can easily be
converted to its XHTML 1.0 counterpart.
Myself, I prefer to hone my skills on working xhtml now, which means I
can just do a bit of "mime-jumping" when the time comes that all the
major browsers are able to handle "application/xhtml+xml".
Some say the MSIE team might get version 8 up to the task - in a few
years time.

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
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] flash z-index conflict

[James Ellis]

>From memory i think that objects are displayed above everything else.
Setting the wmode to transparent might work but if you have clickable
widgets in the flash movie they will interfere with the dhtml?

If it is anything in an object does this mean images as well? or is it
just "plug in" content?

Cheers
James

On 2/19/06, Sam Sherlock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I came across this the other day also . Since flash was colliding with
> my use of sweet titles.
>
> I was advised to set wmode to transparent, I works I am not begruding
> that but is there
> any logic to this. Surley wmode would just allow you to see through the
> flash object if set
> to transparent. Are there any draw backs to using wmode=transparent?  I
> thought flash
> was displayed above the browser via the system and this was why flash
> content was always
> displayed above other content.
>
> is this just one of those odd things sent to  try us??
>
**
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] flash z-index conflict

[Ted Drake]

You Rawk!

I haven't seen a diva put in here place like that since Julia Childs told
Emeril his chicken was scrawny.

For the record, here's my ufo script


var FO = { movie:"/images/home-flash-standin.png", width:"710",
height:"250", majorversion:"6", wmode:"transparent", build:"0" };
UFO.create(FO, "ythomemedia");



The wmode is just an attribute you plug in to the js. 

UFO: http://www.bobbyvandersluis.com/ufo/

Thanks guys. I didn't expect a cure over the weekend.

Ted


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Peter Ottery
Sent: Saturday, February 18, 2006 5:20 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] flash z-index conflict

Ted wrote:
-- > my lovely flash movie thinks it's the coolest thing on the planet
and wants to sit on top of my lovely dropdown box.

in the html code that calls your  flash movie, add this:

let us know how you go
pete ottery
**
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] [CSS Question] Single Vs Multiple.

[Andrew Brown]

Thanks Christian,

Thank you for your help.


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Christian Montoya
Sent: February 18, 2006 8:56 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] [CSS Question] Single Vs Multiple.

On 2/18/06, Andrew Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello WSG,
>
> I first have something to share and as well I have a question.
>
> Firstly I have been franticly book marking and today my professor found
the
> ultimate bookmark. Some may have already come across it but thought I'd
show
> just in case.
>
> Go here and say WOW.
> http://www.alvit.de/handbook/

Eh, dated.

> I have created a CSS for the layout of my website.
> There will probably be a considerable amount of content on each page that
> will use CSSs.
> Would it be wiser to have separate CSSs to manage the content on each
> separate page or have it all bunched into one CSS?

You should definitely go with the same CSS for all pages. CSS gets
cached by the browser, so even if you have 100 pages, the stylesheet
only gets downloaded once. If it really does get heavy, you can break
it up into 2 or 3 files, but the point is to reuse the file from page
to page.

--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] [CSS Question] Single Vs Multiple.

[Christian Montoya]

On 2/18/06, Andrew Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello WSG,
>
> I first have something to share and as well I have a question.
>
> Firstly I have been franticly book marking and today my professor found the
> ultimate bookmark. Some may have already come across it but thought I'd show
> just in case.
>
> Go here and say WOW.
> http://www.alvit.de/handbook/

Eh, dated.

> I have created a CSS for the layout of my website.
> There will probably be a considerable amount of content on each page that
> will use CSSs.
> Would it be wiser to have separate CSSs to manage the content on each
> separate page or have it all bunched into one CSS?

You should definitely go with the same CSS for all pages. CSS gets
cached by the browser, so even if you have 100 pages, the stylesheet
only gets downloaded once. If it really does get heavy, you can break
it up into 2 or 3 files, but the point is to reuse the file from page
to page.

--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] flash z-index conflict

[Sam Sherlock]

I came across this the other day also . Since flash was colliding with 
my use of sweet titles.


I was advised to set wmode to transparent, I works I am not begruding 
that but is there
any logic to this. Surley wmode would just allow you to see through the 
flash object if set
to transparent. Are there any draw backs to using wmode=transparent?  I 
thought flash
was displayed above the browser via the system and this was why flash 
content was always

displayed above other content.

is this just one of those odd things sent to  try us??

Peter Ottery wrote:


Ted wrote:
-- > my lovely flash movie thinks it's the coolest thing on the planet
and wants to sit on top of my lovely dropdown box.

in the html code that calls your  flash movie, add this:

let us know how you go
pete ottery
**
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] [CSS Question] Single Vs Multiple.

[Andrew Brown]

Hello WSG, 

I first have something to share and as well I have a question.

Firstly I have been franticly book marking and today my professor found the
ultimate bookmark. Some may have already come across it but thought I'd show
just in case.


Go here and say WOW.
http://www.alvit.de/handbook/

I have created a CSS for the layout of my website. 
There will probably be a considerable amount of content on each page that
will use CSSs. 
Would it be wiser to have separate CSSs to manage the content on each
separate page or have it all bunched into one 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
**

Re: [WSG] flash z-index conflict

[Peter Ottery]

Ted wrote:
-- > my lovely flash movie thinks it's the coolest thing on the planet
and wants to sit on top of my lovely dropdown box.

in the html code that calls your  flash movie, add this:

let us know how you go
pete ottery
**
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] Overflow and inheritance problems with a 2-column layout

[Steve Olive]

On 18/02/2006, at 4:09 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:Just a question: is it "xhtml 1.0 which may be served as xhtml and/orhtml" or "html with an xhtml DTD, lowercase and slashes, and served ashtml" you are recommending?I have no problems with the former since I use it all the time, but thelatter is what is found on most sites, and that's "no good" and shouldnot be recommended to anyone.The basics of what I have to say on the matter can be found here......and that page is duplicated in several versions - valid and not -working and not - just to clarify what that is all about.The first, of course ;-)There's no such thing as 'XHTML 1.1 Strict', BTW.It is just 'XHTML 1.1', and it doesn't work in IE/win since that browserdoesn't understand what xhtml is all about, and 'XHTML 1.1' shall not beserved as 'html'.Sorry, I went back over my text and changed the 1.0 to 1.1 without taking the strict out :-$The problem with IE is that the XHTML MIME Type is "application/xhtml+xml" which no Microsoft products support properly. Until this is fixed I don't think we can move beyond XHTML 1.0. :-) pony belowI guess it's just a matter of trying to keep up the good ideals and getting more designers on board with XHTML served as XHTML & HTML. I'm actually surprised how many tutorials I see that use HTML 4.01 in computer magazines in 2006. If we can't convince these people to code to XHTML 1.0 Transitional standards we have real problems.Regards,Steve

[WSG] flash z-index conflict

[Ted Drake]

Hi All

 

I’ve got a lovely flash container on the page that is
conflicting with my lovely dropdown category box.  I’d like my lovely
dropdown category box (dhtml with clean semantic code and fallback link –
so its all good!) to sit on top of my lovely flash movie (inserted with UFO - 
so it’s all peachy!). However, my lovely flash movie thinks it’s
the coolest thing on the planet and wants to sit on top of my lovely dropdown
box.  

 

As you can imagine, I don’t like be the referee in
this battle of the divas.  Does anyone have a good cure for handling this one
upmanship?

 

I’ve applied a super-fantastic z-index of 2000 to the
dropdown and a humbling z-index of 10 to the flash container.

 

thanks

 

Ted Drake

Front-end
Engineer

Yahoo! Tech

 

Re: [WSG] Site Check Please (Citinet Lending)

[standards]

Thank you Justin! I've begun the process of fixing those errors.

Respectfully,
Mario

> Mario,
>
> Some of your CSS does not validate.
>
> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2&warning=2&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdev5.headclerk.net%2F
>
> My only major issue with the design is the "Upcoming Training"
> background. There is not enough contrast between the type and the
> background for someone of low vision.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Justin
> **
> 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] Site Check Please (Citinet Lending)

[kvnmcwebn]

sorry please disregard that last observation i made about your footer 
breaking. i had another style sheet loaded into the page by accident 
looks good 



**
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] Site Check Please (Citinet Lending)

[kvnmcwebn]

did you test it in firefox yet?
In ff your footer seems to break way out of the wrapper.
-best 
kvnmcwebn


**
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] Site Check Please (Citinet Lending)

[Justin Owens]

Mario,

Some of your CSS does not validate.

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2&warning=2&uri=http%3A%2F%2Fdev5.headclerk.net%2F

My only major issue with the design is the "Upcoming Training"
background. There is not enough contrast between the type and the
background for someone of low vision.

Cheers,

Justin
**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[David Hucklesby]

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:21:36 -0800, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
>
> To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults
> and minimal resizing capability is to abdicate your responsibilities
> as a Designer.

Hassan,
With all due respect, I find that IE's default settings are just fine for
me. I am using a laptop with a 15" screen at 1440 x 1050. I don't use it
on my lap as I find that too close for comfort.

Not to belabor the point, I suggest that the trend seems to be towards
smaller screens at ever higher definition. My own site was designed three
years ago, when 800 x 600 was the norm. It uses reduced font sizes -- now
I wish that I hadn't done so, and am redesigning it.

I agree with you about having to know your audience. But your audience
changes daily, hopefully.

Cordially,
David
--
David Hucklesby, on 2/18/2006

--



**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Patrick H. Lauke]

Felix Miata wrote:


Nobody seems to want to take the first step on this. I doubt M$ will, so
it's probably up to open source contributors to make the first move, but
from what incentive? If you know any you can convince, here are two
places to start: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24846
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198450


Half related, but: at the time when text resize widgets were starting to 
get more and more popular, I quickly put together my little text size 
toolbar for FF


https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefox&id=472

This it the sort of thing that needs to be installed and visible by 
default. So, trying to do my bit on the browser front :)


--
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
__
Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
__
**
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] Site Check Please (Citinet Lending)

[standards]

Good afternoon,

I'm currently in the process of designing a site that resides in a dev
environment: http://dev5.headclerk.net/

It's CSS-driven and XHTML compliant. I make every effort to ensure that
I use valid, well-formed semantically correct markup, but often I'm too
close to the project to detect any flaws in the code.

This is the reason I'm asking the WSG members to take a quick look and
provide their expert feedback.

Thanks in advance for your time,
Mario S. Cisneros



**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Designer]

Christian Montoya wrote:

[snip]



How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side
option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and
CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really... how about
if these sites had a link to a page that explained how to increase
font-sizes in various browsers, use zoom options, etc? This is a lot
better, because then your users know how to use your site better as
well as all the other sites they encounter. Basically, they're fed for
a lifetime.

Ah yes, but would you put the explanation in a new window? :-)

Sorry Christian, I couldn't resist that!

--
Best Regards,

Bob McClelland

Cornwall (UK)
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Felix Miata]

Patrick H. Lauke wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:00:21 +:
 
> But is it our job as web *content* developers to teach our users how to
> use their browsers? The onus is on the browser developers to make their
> tools more intuitive and user friendly, and to expose that functionality
> to users in a much more sensible and direct way...

Nobody seems to want to take the first step on this. I doubt M$ will, so
it's probably up to open source contributors to make the first move, but
from what incentive? If you know any you can convince, here are two
places to start: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24846
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198450
-- 
"Love your neighbor as yourself."Mark 12:31 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth

**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Patrick H. Lauke]

Christian Montoya wrote:


How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side
option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and
CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really...


Completely agree.


how about
if these sites had a link to a page that explained how to increase
font-sizes in various browsers, use zoom options, etc? This is a lot
better, because then your users know how to use your site better as
well as all the other sites they encounter. Basically, they're fed for
a lifetime.


But is it our job as web *content* developers to teach our users how to 
use their browsers? The onus is on the browser developers to make their 
tools more intuitive and user friendly, and to expose that functionality 
to users in a much more sensible and direct way...


--
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
__
Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
__
**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Christian Montoya]

On 2/18/06, Vincent Hasselgård <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My argument:
> Newspapers comes out with fixed font-size, but people who's got low vision
> may very easily use a spyglass to read easier. People in need of a spyglass
> gets themselves one. The same thing applies to web and computers, it's just
> that not all people are aware of the invention of digital spyglasses.
> Solution: Spread the word of this invention.

Give a man (or woman) a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to
fish, and he'll be fed for a lifetime.

How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side
option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and
CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really... how about
if these sites had a link to a page that explained how to increase
font-sizes in various browsers, use zoom options, etc? This is a lot
better, because then your users know how to use your site better as
well as all the other sites they encounter. Basically, they're fed for
a lifetime.

As an aside, I think it's useful for sites to have options to change
the colors or fonts of the layout, but not just to increase font size.
Many of them only increase the font size by a very small amount
anyway.

--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] site check: FONT sizes

[Bert Doorn]

Hassan Schroeder wrote:

Felix Miata wrote:


The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS
or any applications -- from the supplied defaults.


Where is the data that backs up this assertion?  


That assertion is based on my experience working here in Silicon
Valley since the mid-80s, *doing usability testing* among other
things (including teaching people to use the Web and write HTML,
"back in the day" when it was just coming into widespread use).

You may choose to believe otherwise, but that doesn't change the
behavior I've observed, and continue to observe.


And what we conclude from that observed behaviour seems to be 
what all the arguing is about.


Some conclude the default is too big and ugly so they take it 
upon themselves to change it for everybody.


Others conclude that if people are not changing the defaults, 
they are probably comfortable with those defaults and therefore 
we should not mess with it.


You can't please everybody all the time, but perhaps there's a 
middle ground somewhere.  If you're going to change font sizes, 
do it in moderation.


Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites

**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Hassan Schroeder]

Felix Miata wrote:

>>The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
>>here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS
>>or any applications -- from the supplied defaults.
> 
> Where is the data that backs up this assertion?  

That assertion is based on my experience working here in Silicon
Valley since the mid-80s, *doing usability testing* among other
things (including teaching people to use the Web and write HTML,
"back in the day" when it was just coming into widespread use).

You may choose to believe otherwise, but that doesn't change the
behavior I've observed, and continue to observe.

-- 
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design ===  (+1) 408-938-0567   === http://webtuitive.com
opinion: webtuitive.blogspot.com

  dream.  code.


**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Felix Miata]

Hassan Schroeder wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:21:36 -0800:

> The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
> here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS
> or any applications -- from the supplied defaults.

Where is the data that backs up this assertion?  Why is it OK to "help"
some unknown quantity of users who don't at the expense of all those who
do?

> To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults

This is not a fact. This is your opinion. Some people change the
defaults by making things bigger rather than smaller. One man's poison
is another man's pleasure.
-- 
"Love your neighbor as yourself."Mark 12:31 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth

**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Hassan Schroeder]

Bert Doorn wrote:

> To use similarly strong wording, I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton
> that the designer knows best what suits people they have never met. 

A Designer gets paid to understand their audience.

The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms
here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS
or any applications -- from the supplied defaults.

Imagining that the situation is different for browsers is simply
delusional.

To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults
and minimal resizing capability is to abdicate your responsibilities
as a Designer.

-- 
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design ===  (+1) 408-938-0567   === http://webtuitive.com
opinion: webtuitive.blogspot.com

  dream.  code.


**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Felix Miata]

Designer wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:06:36 +:
 
> Bert Doorn wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 00:22:22 +0800:

> > I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best
> > what suits people they have never met.

> Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do?  The 'consumers' then
> decide if they like the design and whether they want it or not.   There
> is little point in anyone paying for a 'designer' if they are going to
> do it themselves!

Good designers know who and what they're designing for, the nature of
the medium they're dealing with. CSS is a language of suggestion, not
control. Those trying to control this uncontrollable don't understand
the unique nature of the web.

http://css.nu/articles/font-analogy.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/essence.html
-- 
"Love your neighbor as yourself."Mark 12:31 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth

**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

Designer wrote:
Maybe 'provider' is a better term than designer. Or Georg's term : 
'Web carpenter' is more to the point here.


Depends on what you put into that term... :-)

A good carpenter should know how to do his/her job in order to make a
building functional for inhabitants and visitors, as well as look
somewhat aesthetically pleasing. A good carpenter often knows more about
how things work than an architect.

The same goes for a 'web carpenter', which is why I use that term. One
should at least know how browsers work, and a lot about human needs -
regardless of what term is used.

Browsers are generally not very well designed for human needs outside
the mainstream. However, what little they provide should be taken into
account by the web designer. It is strange to see web structures that
have no or very low built-in functionality in that they break when
visitors apply their small wishes for a readability-oriented font size.
Not much aesthetics left then either, so I sometimes wonder what to call
those behind such products.

I don't think web pages/sites need any built-in font resizing
functionality/widgets. They just need to be well designed so they can
take a reasonable amount of user-options - included font resizing. The
rest should be left to those who design user-agents.

Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Designer]

Vincent Hasselgård wrote:
When it comes to font-sizes I'd really like to blame the browsers. I 
don't think it's up to us to provide tools for enlarging or shrinking 
fonts, just like it's not up to newspapers to provide a spyglass with 
every paper. Both Windows and MacOS are shipped with different tools 
to help people with special needs. Among those tools there's a 
zoom-tool. In addition browsers like Opera also has a zoom-tool and as 
I've heard IE7 will also come with a zoom-tool. The problem with IE6 
and FireFox is that the function to increase or decrease font-size is 
"well hidden" and they are also very easy for users to change without 
themselves knowing it.


My argument:
Newspapers comes out with fixed font-size, but people who's got low 
vision may very easily use a spyglass to read easier. People in need 
of a spyglass gets themselves one. The same thing applies to web and 
computers, it's just that not all people are aware of the invention of 
digital spyglasses. Solution: Spread the word of this invention.


I'm of course also willing to listen to your arguments, you might have 
thought of something I've never thought of!



Best regards
Vincent



Hi Vincent,

I couldn't agree more. Your point about the library shows clearly that 
cooperation between designer and user is paramount as a starting point 
in discussions.  It's all a question of balance - consideration for the 
user (and proper knowledge of his/her needs) and consideration of the 
usability of the 'components' of the product.   How far the designer can 
impose his own 'design' is (must be) a function of the usability. With a 
table-lamp it doesn't matter (you have the choice to buy a different 
lamp), with a light-switch in a public place it's crucial.  It's all 
about the balance between the amount of freedom the designer has in the 
relationship between his 'product' (be it a lamp or a web site) and his 
'audience'.


But blaming the designer for shortcomings in the tools used to 'employ' 
the product is approaching the problem from the wrong end. It's still 
important, but it isn't where the main action should be directed.


Big topic this - and a difficult one.

--
Best Regards,

Bob McClelland

Cornwall (UK)
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] site check: FONT sizes

[Vincent Hasselgård]

About 4-5 months ago they built a new national library here in Norway, the architects worked alot with making the place accesible for users with different disabilites. Essentially they did everything wrong. The biggest mistake was of course not to talk with anyone blind or in a wheelchair. There was some high-contrast art on the floor which seemed like a trail to follow to someone visually impaired, they'd just end up in a wall. There was switches installed that would open doors for people in wheelchairs or with crutches, but it was placed about 1 meter away from the door and those who were blind couldn't find the switch in addition to that it was a real struggle for people in wheelchairs because the door closed too fast. These architects actually really tried to make the life easier for people with different disabilites, but they didn't know anything about how these people expected things to work. Now they have to rebuild the whole thing. Don't make assumptions, they might turn out expensive.
When it comes to font-sizes I'd really like to blame the browsers. I don't think it's up to us to provide tools for enlarging or shrinking fonts, just like it's not up to newspapers to provide a spyglass with every paper. Both Windows and MacOS are shipped with different tools to help people with special needs. Among those tools there's a zoom-tool. In addition browsers like Opera also has a zoom-tool and as I've heard IE7 will also come with a zoom-tool. The problem with IE6 and FireFox is that the function to increase or decrease font-size is "well hidden" and they are also very easy for users to change without themselves knowing it.
My argument:Newspapers comes out with fixed font-size, but people who's got low vision may very easily use a spyglass to read easier. People in need of a spyglass gets themselves one. The same thing applies to web and computers, it's just that not all people are aware of the invention of digital spyglasses. Solution: Spread the word of this invention.
I'm of course also willing to listen to your arguments, you might have thought of something I've never thought of!Best regardsVincentOn 2/18/06, 
Designer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Bert Doorn wrote:> I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best> what suits people they have never met.Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do?  The 'consumers' thendecide if they like the design and whether they want it or not.   There
is little point in anyone paying for a 'designer' if they are going todo it themselves!Maybe 'provider' is a better term than designer. Or Georg's term : 'Webcarpenter' is more to the point here.
--Best Regards,Bob McClellandCornwall (UK)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] site check: FONT sizes

[Designer]

Bert Doorn wrote:
I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best 
what suits people they have never met. 
Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do?  The 'consumers' then 
decide if they like the design and whether they want it or not.   There 
is little point in anyone paying for a 'designer' if they are going to 
do it themselves!


Maybe 'provider' is a better term than designer. Or Georg's term : 'Web 
carpenter' is more to the point here.


--
Best Regards,

Bob McClelland

Cornwall (UK)
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] Overflow and inheritance problems with a 2-column layout

[John Latter]

Thanks Georg - not least for the idea of blaming my keyboard!

It's only the code that is for Google, the content is for humans but I'm 
interested in such an unpopular are of evolution that getting the 
css/html code right is quite important (cos I need all the help I can get).


I'm offline in a few minutes but tomorrow I'll try the div#sidebar 
changes first and then take some time out to look at the W3C site and 
read up on css.


John

Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:

John Latter wrote:
You've just started? Crikey - I must have the IQ odf a banana then! 
:) (see? I can't even spell "off"!)


No apparent IQ problems at your end ;-)
(must be the keyboard's fault...)

Call me a slow starter... :-) ...as I've been handling bits and bytes
and code since before they launched the first microprocessor. Haven't
spent all that many years in web development though, so I'm still just a
beginner in this field. It shows...

FWIW: I started off by dissecting the W3C site and picked out the parts
I needed. Took a while, but it gave me a pretty stable platform for
further investigations. You may be surprised to see how much chaos one
can create with pure standards. It'll even work at times ;-)

"Taking your time" is good advice for me. I'm trying to do several 
things at once while I'm on the net and I tend to think 
"OMG-if-this-cc-isn't-right-Google-won't-index-me!". Google, of 
course, couldn't care less.


I've never marked up anything for Google. I launch something for humans
at times, and some humans may occasionally pick up a piece of mine or
something I've worked on through Google or otherwise. That'll have to do.

If Google-indexing is of major concern to you, then read the following...

...and then forget Google ever existed and keep your work close to W3C
standards. That'll usually work out just fine with regards to Google and
other search engines.
Visitors may also be quite happy with it if you give them something they
are interested in, and present it well. That's the hard part - they 
say ;-)


although it does appear obvious, I would just like to make sure that 
deleting div#sideBar{width:100%;} and then adding 
div#sideBar{display: table;zoom:1;} will be ok?


Yes. Delete the width, and add the other stuff. Sidebar will then
self-adjust in width and form a "block". You may put a temporary border
around it so you can see how it behaves and lines up alongside the float.

regards
Georg

--

*Model of an Internal Evolutionary Mechanism* (based on an extension to 
homeostasis) linking Adaptive Mutations to the Baldwin Effect:

http://members.aol.com/jorolat/index.html

*Evolution: Where Darwin meets Lamarck?* Discussion Forum:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evomech

**
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] Overflow and inheritance problems with a 2-column layout

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

John Latter wrote:
You've just started? Crikey - I must have the IQ odf a banana then! 
:) (see? I can't even spell "off"!)


No apparent IQ problems at your end ;-)
(must be the keyboard's fault...)

Call me a slow starter... :-) ...as I've been handling bits and bytes
and code since before they launched the first microprocessor. Haven't
spent all that many years in web development though, so I'm still just a
beginner in this field. It shows...

FWIW: I started off by dissecting the W3C site and picked out the parts
I needed. Took a while, but it gave me a pretty stable platform for
further investigations. You may be surprised to see how much chaos one
can create with pure standards. It'll even work at times ;-)

"Taking your time" is good advice for me. I'm trying to do several 
things at once while I'm on the net and I tend to think 
"OMG-if-this-cc-isn't-right-Google-won't-index-me!". Google, of 
course, couldn't care less.


I've never marked up anything for Google. I launch something for humans
at times, and some humans may occasionally pick up a piece of mine or
something I've worked on through Google or otherwise. That'll have to do.

If Google-indexing is of major concern to you, then read the following...

...and then forget Google ever existed and keep your work close to W3C
standards. That'll usually work out just fine with regards to Google and
other search engines.
Visitors may also be quite happy with it if you give them something they
are interested in, and present it well. That's the hard part - they say ;-)

although it does appear obvious, I would just like to make sure that 
deleting div#sideBar{width:100%;} and then adding 
div#sideBar{display: table;zoom:1;} will be ok?


Yes. Delete the width, and add the other stuff. Sidebar will then
self-adjust in width and form a "block". You may put a temporary border
around it so you can see how it behaves and lines up alongside the float.

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
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] site check

[Joshua Street]

On 2/18/06, Paul Sturgess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Joshua Street <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The BIGGEST thing I can see wrong with this site is the image map.
> > Obviously the link areas aren't regular shapes, so even if you were to
> > use a UL (navigation list) with positioned LI elements you couldn't
> > achieve the same effect...
>
> May I point you in the direction of
> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/sprites An old article but the
> technique is excellent.

Yes, aware of this. I was referring to non-standard shape links
achievable only with Flash and/or imagemap co-ordinates (i.e. links
that aren't box-shaped!)

Josh
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

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