Re: [WSG] Mocking up web interfaces
Well i am designer also knowing the HTML and CSS Stuff. So my duty is to design the template based on client requirements. First of all i do paper work, then incorporate it in to a prototype using Photoshop then show it to client for approval if approved hand over the HTML page with style sheets and possible Jscripts and DHTML to the developers to use it( if website is dynamic ofcoursE) === On 5/25/07, James Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi When I worked in Windows I loved Fireworks for creating web graphics but I always found that writing code was actually more efficient than creating a graphic, as I had the code for later use. For mocking up a site I generally use pencil and paper, then ask my wife about it who has a good layout brain, then build the initial site using my app. framework. To create graphics I use, Inkscape (http://www.inkscape.org) which is also available for Windows, Gimp for photos. I'm trying to get my head around Krita and Karbon14 (both KDE apps). Is there a KDE tool like Fireworks out there? (replies off list thanks) Cheers James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Kind Regards, Hureen Fatima *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] The use of asterisks in forms to indicate required fields
Hello Thierry, What about marking up * used in forms with ABBR elements? In your example you left the text instruction. pFields marked with * (asterisk) are required./p Thus I'd say further treatment is unnecessary. And if you change that by removing the text instruction, there's no guarantee the user will get the expansion. In fact, if what I understand is correct in that most screen reader users don't expland abbreviations, they would only get asterisk spoken to them. They might wonder what its significance is. Then again, and this may be a dangerous assumption on anyone's part, one might argue that an asterisk within a form label means that it is required and that this is a given... that everyone knows it. Or do they? :-/ --- As an aside, if something of this sort was a viable solution, I would lean towards using the defining instance element, DFN, to mark this up. dfn title=Require field*/dfn But the same issue applies to DFN as it pertains to the expansion of titles -- I think. That's my two cents, anyway. I'll be interested in what others have to say about this. Cheers. Mike Cherim http://green-beast.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout
Hi, I don't quite see how you get your possible interpretation. To summarise what it says: 1. for implicit association, enclose the form control in the label. 2. if you use implicit association (i.e. enclose the form control in the label) it can only contain one control element. It is enclosing the form control in the label which makes it implicit (not whether you use for or not). Also, since the purpose is to identify the label with a particular form control, I don't see how introducing another conrol would help in this. On Sat, May 26, 2007 2:24 am, Sander Aarts wrote: Stuart Foulstone schreef: But, in the W3C recomendations for form labels it gives implicit/explicit labels as two distinct methods (one not using the for). (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.9.1 ) On that page it also says To associate a label with another control implicitly, the control element must be within the contents of the LABEL element. In this case, the LABEL may only contain one control element. The label itself may be positioned before or after the associated control. You could read that as if, when you do use the 'for' attribute, you may have more than one control element contained within the LABEL. Does anyone knows something about that? cheers. Sander *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Stuart Foulstone. http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk BigEasy Web Design 69 Flockton Court Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB Tel. 07751 413451 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Detecting Anti-Virus Software
Hi Guys, Firstly I do apologise if this posting is not in line with this list's guidelines. I'm struggling with a problem and hope that you can give me some advice; This is my problem story: My client's website is rather busy with 30,000+ unique visitors each month. There are a few feedback/contact forms, forums, surveys, competitions, etc in use on this php/mySql driven site as well as an on-line shop and numerous (mySql) database generated pages. We have about 12 databases running currently, containing many, many Mb's of data.. Subsequently I'm paranoid regarding the security aspects such as hacking etc Next to the obvious security measures I have added some extra security by encrypting the source code of several pages on the fly using a very handy php include file. Up to recently this has worked beautifully but since several months we are getting complains from McAfee anti-virus users as this software is incorrectly interpreting the source-code encryption as a Trojan(!) on the site. I noticed that also Kaspersky Anti-Virus has this problem however this software offers at least a this site is ok button option. I have contacted McAfee who suggested that I would email them the php include file so that they could patch their software. This is now months ago and nothing has changed. Now they also stopped communicating with me, making me think that the patching of the software is not going to happen.. I do however not want to remove the encryption or do anything else that would mean reducing the level of security on the site. Now my questions to you: a) Is there a way to detect which anti-virus software is used by a site visitor so that I can create a auto-generated message for just McAfee users that they do not need to worry about the false Trojan warning? b) Do you have any suggestions for me as how otherwise to very securely protect/encrypt source code? Greetings, Baz *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Detecting Anti-Virus Software
Your correct its not inline with the guidelines and has nothing to do with Web Standards what so ever. Why did you post it if you knew that it was against the standards? Peter sent out this email last week to everyone, so you have no excuse. http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm If you don't agree to this, please unsubscribe yourself from WSG (delete your membership) and have a nice day. Otherwise, just have a nice day. Play nice kids, and a HUGE thanks to Russ and the Core team that keep WSG running. Peter On 5/26/07, Bas V [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Guys, Firstly I do apologise if this posting is not in line with this list's guidelines. I'm struggling with a problem and hope that you can give me some advice; This is my problem story: My client's website is rather busy with 30,000+ unique visitors each month. There are a few feedback/contact forms, forums, surveys, competitions, etc in use on this php/mySql driven site as well as an on-line shop and numerous (mySql) database generated pages. We have about 12 databases running currently, containing many, many Mb's of data.. Subsequently I'm paranoid regarding the security aspects such as hacking etc Next to the obvious security measures I have added some extra security by encrypting the source code of several pages on the fly using a very handy php include file. Up to recently this has worked beautifully but since several months we are getting complains from McAfee anti-virus users as this software is incorrectly interpreting the source-code encryption as a Trojan(!) on the site. I noticed that also Kaspersky Anti-Virus has this problem however this software offers at least a this site is ok button option. I have contacted McAfee who suggested that I would email them the php include file so that they could patch their software. This is now months ago and nothing has changed. Now they also stopped communicating with me, making me think that the patching of the software is not going to happen.. I do however not want to remove the encryption or do anything else that would mean reducing the level of security on the site. Now my questions to you: a) Is there a way to detect which anti-virus software is used by a site visitor so that I can create a auto-generated message for just McAfee users that they do not need to worry about the false Trojan warning? b) Do you have any suggestions for me as how otherwise to very securely protect/encrypt source code? Greetings, Baz *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
ADMIN THREAD CLOSED Re: [WSG] Detecting Anti-Virus Software
This post is off topic and the thread is now closed. If you would like to help Bas, please email him off list warmly Lea -- Lea de Groot WSG Core Group On Sat, 26 May 2007 16:35:04 +0800, Bas V wrote: Now my questions to you: a) Is there a way to detect which anti-virus software is used by a site visitor so that I can create a auto-generated message for just McAfee users that they do not need to worry about the false Trojan warning? b) Do you have any suggestions for me as how otherwise to very securely protect/encrypt source code? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] The use of asterisks in forms to indicate required fields
On 26 May 2007, at 06:42:08, Thierry Koblentz wrote: Yes, the second title attribute is missing because of a post of yours in the thread Acronym tag usage :) :-) I think however that, if you adopt this approach, this may be one of those cases where it might make sense to expand the abbreviation on every occurrence. (As the number of qualifying modifiers in that sentence probably reveals, I'm not sure.) Cheers, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
OK, thanks for your help, I just thought there may be some kind of HTML tag that adds seperate semantic value to the introductory paragraph, to differentiate it from the strong text in the body, like the big tag for example. I will probably use the strong tag then. Cheers Paul On 25/05/07, Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, If the choice of the colour orange is to add emphasis to this text, the answer to this part is really a no brainer - code it with emphasis (the actual colour/styling is down to the CSS). I would use strong markup for this. On Fri, May 25, 2007 7:56 pm, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 25 May 2007, at 18:03:06, Paul Collins wrote: Hi all, Just marking up a page, the layout seems to require various tags, as far as I can gather, I need seperate tags for: - The intro heading (a H2) - The orange intro text (not sure what tag to add here) - a smaller, bold heading, same size as body text (probably a h3) - a quote (probably a blockquote tag) My question is, what would be the best semantic tags to use here, that will be picked up by assistive technology and validate for XHTML 1.0 Transitional. In particular, I want to know about the Orange intro text and the quote. Any suggestions would be great, I have posted a JPEG here: http://www.method.com.au/storage/sampleText.gif Assuming the page on which this will appear already has an h1: h2.../h2 p class=introduction.../p h3...h3 p.../p blockquotep.../p/blockquote p.../p and then apply things like the different font sizes weights, colours and spacing with CSS. If there will only ever be one introductory paragraph per page, then you could use p id=introduction instead. HTH, Nick, -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Stuart Foulstone. http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk BigEasy Web Design 69 Flockton Court Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB Tel. 07751 413451 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Stay away from Strong. Strong is presentational, same as B, and I. Presentation should be in HTML and content in HTML. use span class=important for text that needs to be emphasised. On 5/26/07, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, thanks for your help, I just thought there may be some kind of HTML tag that adds seperate semantic value to the introductory paragraph, to differentiate it from the strong text in the body, like the big tag for example. I will probably use the strong tag then. Cheers Paul On 25/05/07, Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, If the choice of the colour orange is to add emphasis to this text, the answer to this part is really a no brainer - code it with emphasis (the actual colour/styling is down to the CSS). I would use strong markup for this. On Fri, May 25, 2007 7:56 pm, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 25 May 2007, at 18:03:06, Paul Collins wrote: Hi all, Just marking up a page, the layout seems to require various tags, as far as I can gather, I need seperate tags for: - The intro heading (a H2) - The orange intro text (not sure what tag to add here) - a smaller, bold heading, same size as body text (probably a h3) - a quote (probably a blockquote tag) My question is, what would be the best semantic tags to use here, that will be picked up by assistive technology and validate for XHTML 1.0 Transitional. In particular, I want to know about the Orange intro text and the quote. Any suggestions would be great, I have posted a JPEG here: http://www.method.com.au/storage/sampleText.gif Assuming the page on which this will appear already has an h1: h2.../h2 p class=introduction.../p h3...h3 p.../p blockquotep.../p/blockquote p.../p and then apply things like the different font sizes weights, colours and spacing with CSS. If there will only ever be one introductory paragraph per page, then you could use p id=introduction instead. HTH, Nick, -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Stuart Foulstone. http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk BigEasy Web Design 69 Flockton Court Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB Tel. 07751 413451 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
TYPO ALERT! Presentation should be in CSS and Content in HTML. God knows what made me type HTML twice. On 5/26/07, Jamie Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stay away from Strong. Strong is presentational, same as B, and I. Presentation should be in HTML and content in HTML. use span class=important for text that needs to be emphasised. On 5/26/07, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, thanks for your help, I just thought there may be some kind of HTML tag that adds seperate semantic value to the introductory paragraph, to differentiate it from the strong text in the body, like the big tag for example. I will probably use the strong tag then. Cheers Paul On 25/05/07, Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, If the choice of the colour orange is to add emphasis to this text, the answer to this part is really a no brainer - code it with emphasis (the actual colour/styling is down to the CSS). I would use strong markup for this. On Fri, May 25, 2007 7:56 pm, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 25 May 2007, at 18:03:06, Paul Collins wrote: Hi all, Just marking up a page, the layout seems to require various tags, as far as I can gather, I need seperate tags for: - The intro heading (a H2) - The orange intro text (not sure what tag to add here) - a smaller, bold heading, same size as body text (probably a h3) - a quote (probably a blockquote tag) My question is, what would be the best semantic tags to use here, that will be picked up by assistive technology and validate for XHTML 1.0 Transitional. In particular, I want to know about the Orange intro text and the quote. Any suggestions would be great, I have posted a JPEG here: http://www.method.com.au/storage/sampleText.gif Assuming the page on which this will appear already has an h1: h2.../h2 p class=introduction.../p h3...h3 p.../p blockquotep.../p/blockquote p.../p and then apply things like the different font sizes weights, colours and spacing with CSS. If there will only ever be one introductory paragraph per page, then you could use p id=introduction instead. HTH, Nick, -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Stuart Foulstone. http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk BigEasy Web Design 69 Flockton Court Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB Tel. 07751 413451 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Stay away from Strong. Strong is presentational, same as B, and I. Presentation should be in HTML and content in HTML. use span class=important for text that needs to be emphasised. I would argue to the contrary. Strong has much more meaning than a span class. The word /tag itself implies strength of content rather than a default appearance in a bowser, cf with the address tag which indicates an address, even though browser default appearance is italicised. strong and span class=important could both be made to look the same by means of the CSS presentational layer; however only one for them could ever infer meaning to a bot, if it had been programmed to look for specific tags and attempt to infer meaning. That is the strong tag. The class important means nothing other than a nine letter identifier of a class. Web semantics are a case of providing an aid to text retrieval tools to establish original authors meaning rather than provide meaning to a web developer who may need to maintain a class library. -- Regards - Rob Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk Linking in with others: http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton On 26/05/07, Jamie Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TYPO ALERT! Presentation should be in CSS and Content in HTML. God knows what made me type HTML twice. On 5/26/07, Jamie Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stay away from Strong. Strong is presentational, same as B, and I. Presentation should be in HTML and content in HTML. use span class=important for text that needs to be emphasised. On 5/26/07, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OK, thanks for your help, I just thought there may be some kind of HTML tag that adds seperate semantic value to the introductory paragraph, to differentiate it from the strong text in the body, like the big tag for example. I will probably use the strong tag then. Cheers Paul On 25/05/07, Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, If the choice of the colour orange is to add emphasis to this text, the answer to this part is really a no brainer - code it with emphasis (the actual colour/styling is down to the CSS). I would use strong markup for this. On Fri, May 25, 2007 7:56 pm, Nick Fitzsimons wrote: On 25 May 2007, at 18:03:06, Paul Collins wrote: Hi all, Just marking up a page, the layout seems to require various tags, as far as I can gather, I need seperate tags for: - The intro heading (a H2) - The orange intro text (not sure what tag to add here) - a smaller, bold heading, same size as body text (probably a h3) - a quote (probably a blockquote tag) My question is, what would be the best semantic tags to use here, that will be picked up by assistive technology and validate for XHTML 1.0 Transitional. In particular, I want to know about the Orange intro text and the quote. Any suggestions would be great, I have posted a JPEG here: http://www.method.com.au/storage/sampleText.gif Assuming the page on which this will appear already has an h1: h2.../h2 p class=introduction.../p h3...h3 p.../p blockquotep.../p/blockquote p.../p and then apply things like the different font sizes weights, colours and spacing with CSS. If there will only ever be one introductory paragraph per page, then you could use p id=introduction instead. HTH, Nick, -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Stuart Foulstone. http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk BigEasy Web Design 69 Flockton Court Rockingham Street Sheffield S1 4EB Tel. 07751 413451 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Jamie Collins wrote: Stay away from Strong. Strong is presentational, same as B, and I. Aeh...excuse me? Since when? Presentation should be in CSS and content in HTML. use span class=important for text that needs to be emphasised. Sorry, but that's rubbish. If text *needs to be emphasised* you cannot recommend using a semantically neutral element (span) and relying on a class + css. The emphasis needs to be marked up in the actual content, with elements that semantically signify that emphasis. Emphasis changes the meaning of content, so cannot be divorced from content and split out into an optional presentational component like CSS. Now, we could debate whether it should be em or strong (as the difference between the two is minimal, at least in the current HTML spec), but claiming that they're presentational is wrong. P -- 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 __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Patrick, It all depends on the person using it. I have seen alot of people use strong to bold general peices of text. There is a big difference in making text bold and empasising its meaning. If the use for stong is a valid use, then i wont disagree. I must have read the first post wrong, i thought thats what he was trying to do. On 5/26/07, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Jamie Collins wrote: Stay away from Strong. Strong is presentational, same as B, and I. Aeh...excuse me? Since when? Presentation should be in CSS and content in HTML. use span class=important for text that needs to be emphasised. Sorry, but that's rubbish. If text *needs to be emphasised* you cannot recommend using a semantically neutral element (span) and relying on a class + css. The emphasis needs to be marked up in the actual content, with elements that semantically signify that emphasis. Emphasis changes the meaning of content, so cannot be divorced from content and split out into an optional presentational component like CSS. Now, we could debate whether it should be em or strong (as the difference between the two is minimal, at least in the current HTML spec), but claiming that they're presentational is wrong. P -- 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 __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Stay away from Strong. Strong is presentational, same as B, and I. Presentation should be in HTML and content in HTML. use span class=important for text that needs to be emphasised. I would argue to the contrary. Strong has much more meaning than a span class. The word /tag itself implies strength of content rather than a default appearance in a bowser, cf with the address tag which indicates an address, even though browser default appearance is italicised. I would also add that I believe assistive technologies such as screen readers interpret strong where as they would ignore a span. Therefore use of the HTML element strong has semantic meaning which should not be dismissed. -Tim -- Tim Offenstein *** College of Applied Health Sciences *** (217) 244-2700 CITES Departmental Services Web Specialist *** www.uiuc.edu/goto/offenstein *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
At 5/26/2007 05:59 AM, Paul Collins wrote: OK, thanks for your help, I just thought there may be some kind of HTML tag that adds seperate semantic value to the introductory paragraph, to differentiate it from the strong text in the body, like the big tag for example. I will probably use the strong tag then. I think the problem with using strong to demarcate your introduction isn't that strong is presentational (it's not) but rather that it does nothing to express what's different semantically about an introduction. You may wish to present the introductory paragraph in a stronger font than the body of the article, but that's of course a matter of presentation and doesn't belong in the markup. The introductory text itself isn't strongstronger/strong than the article body, is it? It's just the introduction. Since HTML doesn't contain an element that expresses the introductory nature of a text block, I second the motion to use p class=introduction. It correctly marks up the introductory paragraph(s) as paragraphs, identifies them for styling purposes, and indicates to anyone or anything peering under the hood at the HTML what's different about this part of the article. If any more explicit demarcation is felt necessary, I suggest using a subhead hnIntroduction/hn to indicate the nature of the block to follow. Regards, Paul __ Paul Novitski Juniper Webcraft Ltd. http://juniperwebcraft.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Paul Novitski wrote: I think the problem with using strong to demarcate your introduction isn't that strong is presentational (it's not) but rather that it does nothing to express what's different semantically about an introduction. You may wish to present the introductory paragraph in a stronger font than the body of the article, but that's of course a matter of presentation and doesn't belong in the markup. The introductory text itself isn't strongstronger/strong than the article body, is it? It's just the introduction. Since HTML doesn't contain an element that expresses the introductory nature of a text block, I second the motion to use p class=introduction. It correctly marks up the introductory paragraph(s) as paragraphs, identifies them for styling purposes, and indicates to anyone or anything peering under the hood at the HTML what's different about this part of the article. If any more explicit demarcation is felt necessary, I suggest using a subhead hnIntroduction/hn to indicate the nature of the block to follow. Regards, Paul __ Presumably, p title=introduction and p id=introduction would do the trick also? My own preference would be for the latter. Of course, if you are referring to a GROUP of paragraphs constituting the introduction, then Paul's class would have to be used. -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout
Hi Stuart, Stuart Foulstone schreef: I don't quite see how you get your possible interpretation. To summarise what it says: 1. for implicit association, enclose the form control in the label. 2. if you use implicit association (i.e. enclose the form control in the label) it can only contain one control element. It is enclosing the form control in the label which makes it implicit (not whether you use for or not). You're right. It was because of the In this case... may only contain one... which I thought suggested that in other cases more than one control element could be contained within the element. Although I do admit that, reading it again today, that suggestion is not that clear anymore, I still think you can interprete it like that. I guess the fact that English is not my native language adds to my misinterpretation though. Also, since the purpose is to identify the label with a particular form control, I don't see how introducing another conrol would help in this. Me neither, that's why I asked ;-) cheers Sander *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
On 26 May 2007, at 18:04:38, Designer wrote: Presumably, p title=introduction and p id=introduction would do the trick also? Using the title attribute means pointing-device-users would get a tooltip saying introduction obscuring the text if they happened to have the cursor hovering over that region. Not good usability, IMHO. I occasionally come across sites that make extensive use of title, and 99 times out of 100 it's more of an impediment than a help. Even the supposed accessibility advantages are open to question: http://juicystudio.com/article/using-title-attribute.php I'd still vote for using a class, or an id if you can be certain it will only appear once a page. If the visual distinction in the required design actually does represent a semantically meaningful distinction between that paragraph and the others, rather than just being window dressing, then a pem... would probably be justifiable; I don't think that going all the way to strong is necessary. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Totally agree. Applying 'title' attributes to block level elements is a nightmare for users of screen magnifiers because they can't figure out how to get rid of the tooltip whilst keeping the content in view. You would be surprised how much of the screen is obscured by a tooltip at magnification levels as low as 4x, given that magnifier users also tend to use 800x600 resolution. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Fitzsimons Sent: 26 May 2007 18:53 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text On 26 May 2007, at 18:04:38, Designer wrote: Presumably, p title=introduction and p id=introduction would do the trick also? Using the title attribute means pointing-device-users would get a tooltip saying introduction obscuring the text if they happened to have the cursor hovering over that region. Not good usability, IMHO. I occasionally come across sites that make extensive use of title, and 99 times out of 100 it's more of an impediment than a help. Even the supposed accessibility advantages are open to question: http://juicystudio.com/article/using-title-attribute.php I'd still vote for using a class, or an id if you can be certain it will only appear once a page. If the visual distinction in the required design actually does represent a semantically meaningful distinction between that paragraph and the others, rather than just being window dressing, then a pem... would probably be justifiable; I don't think that going all the way to strong is necessary. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
Steve Green wrote: Totally agree. Applying 'title' attributes to block level elements is a nightmare for users of screen magnifiers because they can't figure out how to get rid of the tooltip whilst keeping the content in view. You would be surprised how much of the screen is obscured by a tooltip at magnification levels as low as 4x, given that magnifier users also tend to use 800x600 resolution. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Fitzsimons Sent: 26 May 2007 18:53 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text On 26 May 2007, at 18:04:38, Designer wrote: Presumably, p title=introduction and p id=introduction would do the trick also? Using the title attribute means pointing-device-users would get a tooltip saying introduction obscuring the text if they happened to have the cursor hovering over that region. Not good usability, IMHO. I occasionally come across sites that make extensive use of title, and 99 times out of 100 it's more of an impediment than a help. Even the supposed accessibility advantages are open to question: http://juicystudio.com/article/using-title-attribute.php I'd still vote for using a class, or an id if you can be certain it will only appear once a page. If the visual distinction in the required design actually does represent a semantically meaningful distinction between that paragraph and the others, rather than just being window dressing, then a pem... would probably be justifiable; I don't think that going all the way to strong is necessary. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ Thanks, Yep, fair points. Noted! :-) -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] dl v table for form layout
On Behalf Of Sander Aarts ... English is not my native language adds to my misinterpretation though. Welcome to the club ;) --- Regards, Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] The use of asterisks in forms to indicate required fields
On Behalf Of Mike at Green-Beast.com What about marking up * used in forms with ABBR elements? In your example you left the text instruction. pFields marked with * (asterisk) are required./p Thus I'd say further treatment is unnecessary. And if you change that by removing the text instruction, there's no guarantee the user will get the expansion. In fact, if what I understand is correct in that most screen reader users don't expland abbreviations, they would only get asterisk spoken to them. They might wonder what its significance is. Hi Mike, That's not what I understood from a recent discussion, I think they'd have to listen to every expansion. Also, if I left the instruction and provide expansion at the same time it is because a user could get to the form control through an accesskey, thus skipping that paragraph. And if I went with the expansion using title only (no plain text) then sighted keyboard users would get nothing. As a side note, I still do *not* understand why it is not *required* to do the expansion in plain text... As a side note #2, I listened to Joe Clark yesterday and I believe he said we should not even bother! As an aside, if something of this sort was a viable solution, I would lean towards using the defining instance element, DFN, to mark this up. dfn title=Require field*/dfn But the same issue applies to DFN as it pertains to the expansion of titles -- I think. That's my two cents, anyway. I'll be interested in what others have to say about this. I don't think that would work. The specs say: The dfn element contains the defining instance of the enclosed term. http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-text.html#sec_9.4. So you could not mark it up like this, it would have to be within the text that defines it. At least that's how I understand it. --- Regards, Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic HTML for intro text
At 5/26/2007 10:04 AM, Designer wrote: Presumably, p title=introduction and p id=introduction would do the trick also? My own preference would be for the latter. Of course, if you are referring to a GROUP of paragraphs constituting the introduction, then Paul's class would have to be used. Yes, either an introduction consisting of multiple paragraphs or multiple introductions on the same page. Since we don't really know the present and future architecture of the site in question, either of those possibilities seems so likely to occur, particularly the former, that painting oneself into a corner with id seems to beg for the busywork of modifying markup stylesheet down the road. Regards, Paul __ Paul Novitski Juniper Webcraft Ltd. http://juniperwebcraft.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] The use of asterisks in forms to indicate required fields
most screen reader users don't expand abbreviations, they would only get asterisk spoken to them. They might wonder what its significance is. Any user might wonder what an asterisk is for without instructional text. How about just including (required) on the end of each label, or grouping the required fields in a 'Required' fieldset? kind regards Terrence Wood. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] The use of asterisks in forms to indicate required fields
On Behalf Of Terrence Wood most screen reader users don't expand abbreviations, they would only get asterisk spoken to them. They might wonder what its significance is. Interesting. I used to think the same thing, but someone in a recent thread told me: On the other hand, screen-readers are generally configured by default to always read out the expansion of text marked up as an abbreviation (that is, the contents of the title attribute), so using abbr (or the non-standard acronym) repeatedly will force users of such assistive technologies to listen to the full version on every occurrence in the page. From what I've heard, this gets irritating pretty quickly, and could be seen as diminishing the accessibility of the page. So what's the real deal? Any user might wonder what an asterisk is for without instructional text. I'd think the expansion in plain text *and* in the first occurrence of the ABBR should be enough no? How about just including (required) on the end of each label, Some clients do not want this at all, they think it pollutes the visual. But an easy way to make every body happy is to go with: * span(required field)/span and shoot the span off screen. or grouping the required fields in a 'Required' fieldset? As long as the grouping makes sense, I think it's a good approach. --- Regards, Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
