Re: [WSG] Float-less layouts
i have dont dynamic calender for my site in javascript where i have written styles also.but it is not suporting ie 6. the calender frame is not properly visible on combo box in ie6. please help me out with this problem. On Jan 8, 2008 8:35 AM, Geoff Pack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Al Sparber wrote: The problem is with the standard. If one gets too hung up on semantic markup then there is the risk of bending the logical or implied semantics of an element to suit ones project. I submit that in the absence of a perfectly specific semantically correct element for a given task, a DIV becomes, by default, the logical choice. It's not by default at all - it's by design: a DIV is exactly the correct element to use when you want to divide a document into divisions or sections. The world, and everything in it, is a list. Ordered or unordered? I guess it depends on your faith or lack of it. Maybe a definition list for the platonists out there. (And I though it was all waves and particles :) James Pickering wrote: Also see the W3C HTML 4.01 Specification: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/global.html#edef-DIV I've read it - see the last link in my last post, where I pointed out the progression of the DIV element in the various HTML specs: 3.2: used to structure HTML documents as a hierarchy of divisions 4.01: a generic mechanism for adding structure to documents 5 (draft): The div element represents nothing at all Geoff *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Gitanjali, Web Designer, Ekspertech. 9849784829. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
Geoff Pack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thierry wrote (in the linked article, not his post): DIVs are meaningless and cannot represent the structure of a document Really? According to the HTML 3.2 spec, where they first appear: DIV elements can be used to structure HTML documents as a hierarchy of divisions. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html32#div Also see the W3C HTML 4.01 Specification: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/global.html#edef-DIV Great find! Did you *check* the given *example*? They are using DIVs and Tables where a Definition List (imho) would be more appropriate :-) And what about the P in there and the SPAN and CLASS? Please check that example and let me know if DIVs are a good fit: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/global.html#edef-DIV -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
Thierry wrote (in the linked article, not his post): DIVs are meaningless and cannot represent the structure of a document Really? According to the HTML 3.2 spec, where they first appear: DIV elements can be used to structure HTML documents as a hierarchy of divisions. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html32#div Hi Geoff, When using DIV, what translate that hierarchy? Take this page for example: http://tjkdesign.com/articles/css-layout/how-to/step-1.asp Using Lists, you get this: http://tjkdesign.com/articles/css-layout/how-to/step-2.asp Forget the visual display, just look at the fact that UAs do not treat DIVs in any special way. Something they do with lists, be it Visual Browsers or Screen Readers. This may not make Lists better for construct, but it should show that the div element represents nothing at all (as it says in one of the 2 links you posted). Because if we are talking hierarchy and semantics, I think something should reveal the relationship between these elements. In the above example, what are the 2 DIVs used as wrappers (instead of the OLs) if they are not just structural hacks? And what about: div class=clearIt/a How semantic is that? At least with the list construct the wrappers *are* semantic. Anyway, as I said in my article, using OLs instead of DIVs started almost as a joke (and if you've read that article you've noted that I do not advocate their use for construct), but the arguments I hear about DIVs being more semantics than Lists to hold the main sections of a web page let me think that the whole thing may be not that crazy :-) -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
I'd appreciate any comment that would help me improve this article: http://tjkdesign.com/articles/float-less_css_layouts.asp Demo: http://tjkdesign.com/articles/css-layout/ no_div_no_float_no_clear_no_hack_no _joke.asp Nice write-up. One of the issues with this technique: you can't use the 'columns' as a containing block for absolute positioned elements. Another issue: width on a 'table-cell' is more like 'min-width' than 'width'. The cell can expand in width if it contains e.g. long unbreakable text strings (or strings of text with white-space:pre). This can eventually be controlled by wrapping such content in a 'overflow:auto' wrapper, but not always. Hi Philippe, I'm using pre elements in the step-by-step pages and as the last one shows, columns do not expand. http://tjkdesign.com/articles/css-layout/how-to/float-less_fluid_layout_with _min-max_width.asp -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
Al Sparber wrote: The problem is with the standard. If one gets too hung up on semantic markup then there is the risk of bending the logical or implied semantics of an element to suit ones project. I submit that in the absence of a perfectly specific semantically correct element for a given task, a DIV becomes, by default, the logical choice. It's not by default at all - it's by design: a DIV is exactly the correct element to use when you want to divide a document into divisions or sections. I agree with this, but not because it is semantically correct, only because we don't have anything better. Actually, I'd say it is the lack of semantics that makes DIVs the tool of choice for construct. -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Float-less layouts
When using DIV, what translate that hierarchy? div id=level1 div id=level2 div id=level3I am down the hierarchy :(/div /div /div This may not make Lists better for construct, but it should show that the div element represents nothing at all (as it says in one of the 2 links you posted). I thought DIV represents division, some structural group, some _generic_ container. Because if we are talking hierarchy and semantics, I think something should reveal the relationship between these elements. something — like being in the same DIV? In the above example, what are the 2 DIVs used as wrappers (instead of the OLs) if they are not just structural hacks? Since when using element for the purpose it was created is a hack? At least with the list construct the wrappers *are* semantic. And how many semantic wrappers/containers/whatever are you going to have in the standard? No matter the number there will always be need for the generic one — which DIV is. ... Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
When using DIV, what translate that hierarchy? div id=level1 div id=level2 div id=level3I am down the hierarchy :(/div /div /div The indentation in the markup? Is whitespace required to make sense of DIVs? The IDs? If we need to use attributes to make sense of it, then it'd appear that DIVs are not that semantic after all. The nesting? See my comment below about this. This may not make Lists better for construct, but it should show that the div element represents nothing at all (as it says in one of the 2 links you posted). I thought DIV represents division, some structural group, some _generic_ container. DIVs are used for this, but do they *mean* this? If yes, then why does the following validate? div class=clearIt/div Because if we are talking hierarchy and semantics, I think something should reveal the relationship between these elements. something — like being in the same DIV? And that's enough? Because in this case the element itself does not translate anything. It is the context in which it is found that conveys the information. With a list I think the markup does a better job at translating hierarchy and relationship since when nesting occurs, the element used *is* different . In the above example, what are the 2 DIVs used as wrappers (instead of the OLs) if they are not just structural hacks? Since when using element for the purpose it was created is a hack? Why would we need to group containers together if it is not for styling purpose? Do we use a wrapper because it brings more meanings to the document or because it let us center our layout, create faux columns etc.? At least with the list construct the wrappers *are* semantic. And how many semantic wrappers/containers/whatever are you going to have in the standard? No matter the number there will always be need for the generic one — which DIV is. Once again, I do not say we should *not* use DIVs, I'm only saying we should not try to make them look for what they are not. -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
Thierry and all, I am interested in the excellent and well thought out work you have done with lists here. Intriguing! However (and it's a serious question), in what way do you think that using lists is 'better' than using a simple 2 or 3 -celled table (+ a bit of CSS to style it, naturally). I really don't want to start a war and I'd be interested in sensible answers only! :-) I ask because in one sense they could both be described as semantic 'misuse' : lists for lists, tables for data and all that. 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] w3c link checker
http://search.cpan.org/dist/W3C-LinkChecker/ i looked at the downlad file and it's a tar.gz. i run windoze. how would i install it on a windoze box? dwain There's a free program for unzipping that type of file. Once the link checker is unzipped it'll also work on windows http://www.gzip.org/ -- Susan R. Grossman [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
Hi Bob, I am interested in the excellent and well thought out work you have done with lists here. Intriguing! Thanks However (and it's a serious question), in what way do you think that using lists is 'better' than using a simple 2 or 3 -celled table (+ a bit of CSS to style it, naturally). I really don't want to start a war and I'd be interested in sensible answers only! :-) I ask because in one sense they could both be described as semantic 'misuse' : lists for lists, tables for data and all that. Just 2/3 cells for the columns using basic markup (no TH, no caption, no summary, etc.)? Personally, I would not go this route, but I don't think it would be that bad. If it saves people from DIVitis and prevent their web site to fall apart in most browsers out there, then why not? I guess I'm going to get hammered for saying this :-) So let me add the following: If I would not go this route, it is because for me it breaks the most important law of all: the separation of the three layers. Using table markup for layout won't let you switch* columns for example. Not that it is something I like to do (as said earlier), but at least *not* using table for markup leaves me that option. * as Georg mentioned one can cheat with rtl/ltr, but that only reverts the sequence. -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Float-less layouts
Thierry Koblentz wrote: DIVs are used for this, but do they *mean* this? If yes, then why does the following validate? div class=clearIt/div For the same reason that li class=foo/li also validates. Because if we are talking hierarchy and semantics, I think something should reveal the relationship between these elements. something — like being in the same DIV? And that's enough? Yes, since the DOM that's constructed is unequivocal about the structure. It is the context in which it is found that conveys the information. It's the overall document structure and the DOM that results from it. not context. With a list I think the markup does a better job at translating hierarchy and relationship since when nesting occurs, the element used *is* different . From the DOM's perspective, the hierarchy/relationship is clear in just as clear in both cases. Why would we need to group containers together if it is not for styling purpose? Because we're saying that anything in the container belongs together (thematically, content-wise, logically, etc). Do we use a wrapper because it brings more meanings to the document or because it let us center our layout, create faux columns etc.? To create meaning, of course. Once again, I do not say we should *not* use DIVs, I'm only saying we should not try to make them look for what they are not. You'be been trying to make lists fit your view of what a document is 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] w3c link checker
On 1/7/08, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: how about you download, install, and run it yourself? http://search.cpan.org/dist/W3C-LinkChecker/ i looked at the downlad file and it's a tar.gz. i run windoze. how would i install it on a windoze box? dwain -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] w3c link checker
i have a program to unzip the file. i assume that it doesn't matter where i unzip it to (C:\) but then how do i run it, from the command line and if so what command do i use to run it? i read the read me file and it wasn't much help. dwain On 1/8/08, Susan Grossman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://search.cpan.org/dist/W3C-LinkChecker/ i looked at the downlad file and it's a tar.gz. i run windoze. how would i install it on a windoze box? dwain There's a free program for unzipping that type of file. Once the link checker is unzipped it'll also work on windows http://www.gzip.org/ -- Susan R. Grossman [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] w3c link checker
dwain wrote: http://search.cpan.org/dist/W3C-LinkChecker/ i looked at the downlad file and it's a tar.gz. i run windoze. how would i install it on a windoze box? Uh, extract the contents of that file and read the directions? :-) -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] w3c link checker
winrar will open .tar and .gz files on windows: http://www.rarlab.com/ :) Paul *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] w3c link checker
On 8 Jan 2008, at 20:22, dwain wrote: http://search.cpan.org/dist/W3C-LinkChecker/ i looked at the downlad file and it's a tar.gz. i run windoze. how would i install it on a windoze box? http://search.cpan.org/src/SCOP/W3C-LinkChecker-4.3/docs/ checklink.html#install (but see http://www.perl.com/download.csp when you hit step one, the link isn't all that useful). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Float-less layouts
Thierry Koblentz wrote: DIVs are used for this, but do they *mean* this? If yes, then why does the following validate? div class=clearIt/div For the same reason that li class=foo/li also validates. You didn't quote an important part of my reply to Rimantas, who was saying: I thought DIV represents division, some structural group, some _generic_ container. Hence my remark about being allowed to use *empty* DIVs. If their purpose is to be used as containers, then we should use them to contain something. Your LI example is a different matter since being a container is not the *basic* definition of a list item... Because if we are talking hierarchy and semantics, I think something should reveal the relationship between these elements. something — like being in the same DIV? And that's enough? Yes, since the DOM that's constructed is unequivocal about the structure. It is the context in which it is found that conveys the information. It's the overall document structure and the DOM that results from it. not context. The DOM? But we're talking about *reading the source code* and the meaning of DIVs in the markup. For the DOM, it doesn't matter if I use DIVs or LIs. The structure would be the same. Or am I missing your point? With a list I think the markup does a better job at translating hierarchy and relationship since when nesting occurs, the element used *is* different . From the DOM's perspective, the hierarchy/relationship is clear in just as clear in both cases. ok, then I must be missing your point, because we agree that it'd make no difference. So why bringing the DOM into the picture then? Does it prove that DIVs carry more semantics? Why would we need to group containers together if it is not for styling purpose? Because we're saying that anything in the container belongs together (thematically, content-wise, logically, etc). You're saying that a wrapper is needed to enclose all other elements in a document to give it more meaning? What about *body*? If that wrapper is the only child of body I don't see what it brings to the table in term of semantics. You're saying it is important to enclose three sections inside a DIV (i.e. columns) to convey the fact that they belong together (thematically, content-wise, logically, etc)? Sounds like a list construct to me ;) Do we use a wrapper because it brings more meanings to the document or because it let us center our layout, create faux columns etc.? To create meaning, of course. As I say above, what is the meaning of a wrapper over body? Doesn't body implicitly says that anything in there belongs together? -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Replace JPG, PNG and GIF for HTML Tables, Really.
Take a look to this post, Forget the JPG, PNG and GIF. A new way to use the tables... http://www.blogcreativo.com.ar/olvidate-de-los-jpg-png-y-gif/ _ Tecnología, moda, motor, viajes,…suscríbete a nuestros boletines para estar siempre a la última http://newsletters.msn.com/hm/maintenanceeses.asp?L=ESC=ESP=WCMaintenanceBrand=WLRU=http%3a%2f%2fmail.live.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] w3c link checker
thanks to all who have responded to my cry for help. i think i have all the information i need to install the link checker. best, dwain -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Alison AWO67 Woodage is out of the office.
I will be out of the office starting 09/01/2008 and will not return until 22/01/2008. I will respond to your message when I return. ** PLEASE CONSIDER OUR ENVIRONMENT BEFORE PRINTING * *** Confidentiality and Privilege Notice *** This e-mail is intended only to be read or used by the addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally privileged information. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message (or responsible for delivery of the message to such person), you may not copy or deliver this message to anyone, and you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply e-mail. Confidentiality and legal privilege are not waived or lost by reason of mistaken delivery to you. Qantas Airways Limited ABN 16 009 661 901 Visit Qantas online at http://qantas.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] semantic list with explanations
Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. What is the best way to semantically mark this up? My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don't really allow for it. A definition list doesn't seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. Any thoughts? Thanks, Tim *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Definition List? On Jan 9, 2008 2:48 PM, Tim MacKay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus…blah blah blah…. 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus…blah blah blah…. What is the best way to semantically mark this up? My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don't really allow for it. A definition list doesn't seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. Any thoughts? Thanks, Tim *** 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 list with explanations
Definition List for sure. E. Michael Brandt www.divahtml.com www.divahtml.com/products/scripts_dreamweaver_extensions.php Standards-compliant scripts and Dreamweaver Extensions www.valleywebdesigns.com/vwd_Vdw.asp JustSo PictureWindow JustSo PhotoAlbum, et alia -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Tim MacKay wrote: Hello all, My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don’t really allow for it. Why? A definition list doesn’t seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. I don't think theres any rules about the length of definitions? If the list has a specific order, as you've shown, then I would say use an ordered list, if not a definition list -- Chris Knowles *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
I think that definition lists would be appropriate semantically but in the real world I don't know of any user agent that does anything useful with a definition list or any user group that derives any benefit from them. Certainly they make no sense when read with a screen reader because you cannot differentiate one list item from the next. I would therefore use heading and paragraphs. As ever, your decision depends on your motivation. If you care only about semantic purity and don't care about the user experience, go ahead and use a definition list. If you do care about the user experience, use headings. Steve _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim MacKay Sent: 09 January 2008 03:49 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] semantic list with explanations Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. What is the best way to semantically mark this up? My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don't really allow for it. A definition list doesn't seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. Any thoughts? Thanks, Tim *** 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] ***
[WSG] Acronym element
Hi all. I have a quick question re: practical use of the acronym element. If I have a piece of text that defines the word, then includes the acronym immediately after in brackets, I assume there's no need/point in using acronym for the text in brackets? e.g. Web Standards Group (WSG) the WSG wouldn't benefit from the acronym element. TIA. Grant *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Steve Green wrote: I think that definition lists would be appropriate semantically but in the real world I don't know of any user agent that does anything useful with a definition list or any user group that derives any benefit from them. Certainly they make no sense when read with a screen reader because you cannot differentiate one list item from the next. I would therefore use heading and paragraphs. As ever, your decision depends on your motivation. If you care only about semantic purity and don't care about the user experience, go ahead and use a definition list. If you do care about the user experience, use headings. or if it has a specific order, use headings and paragraphs inside an ordered list -- Chris Knowles *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Tim, a definition list is called for. You can set it to be numbered in the CSS. You could also use headings and paragraphs (semantically it is the same as we have a set of name-value pairs). You could also use a two column table (name-value pairs). cheers Paul Paul MInty Director mintleaf studio We design create stylish websites Post: Box 6 108 Flinders Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Level 2 108 Flinders Street Melbourne T. 03 9662 9344 F. 03 9662 9255 M. 0418 307 475 [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] www.mintleafstudio.com.au http://www.mintleafstudio.com.au/ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim MacKay Sent: Wednesday, 9 January 2008 3:01 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] semantic list with explanations Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus...blah blah blah 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus...blah blah blah What is the best way to semantically mark this up? My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don't really allow for it. A definition list doesn't seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. Any thoughts? Thanks, Tim *** 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] Acronym element
e.g. Web Standards Group (WSG) the WSG wouldn't benefit from the acronym element. No, I believe you only then need to use the acronym or abbr tag for the first instance of it following where it appears in brackets on any one page (ie at the start of a new page, you'd expand the acronym/abbreviation again). -- Regards John --- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678 590 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Hi Steve, Isn't the responsibility of screen reader manufacturers to treat DLs for what they are? Following this logic, we should be using basic table markup for layout to give people using old visual browsers a better experience. If we cheat with the markup to please user agents what's the incentive for SR manufacturers to take care of the problem? -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Green Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 8:19 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations I think that definition lists would be appropriate semantically but in the real world I don't know of any user agent that does anything useful with a definition list or any user group that derives any benefit from them. Certainly they make no sense when read with a screen reader because you cannot differentiate one list item from the next. I would therefore use heading and paragraphs. As ever, your decision depends on your motivation. If you care only about semantic purity and don't care about the user experience, go ahead and use a definition list. If you do care about the user experience, use headings. Steve _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim MacKay Sent: 09 January 2008 03:49 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] semantic list with explanations Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. What is the best way to semantically mark this up? My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don't really allow for it. A definition list doesn't seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. Any thoughts? Thanks, Tim *** 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 list with explanations
Unless order is important, I'd vote for a Definition List too -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim MacKay Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 7:49 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] semantic list with explanations Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. What is the best way to semantically mark this up? My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don't really allow for it. A definition list doesn't seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. Any thoughts? Thanks, Tim *** 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] ***
[WSG] Force landscape on a print style sheet?
I'm doing a print style sheet for a reporting system, and I'm trying to figure out if it's possible to force a printer to print in landscape orientation using CSS. I know there are postscript and PCL commands to switch the printer to landscape, but I'm not sure if you can add PCL Commands to the print stream from the browser. Can you? Anyone know how that would be done? Alternatively, how would you force the page to print in landscape? At the moment I have a workaround, in that the user calls up the report to the browser, then goes to print preview and selects print preferences to print in landscape, then sends the job to print. But I'd like to make it automatic if I can. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia Adobe Certified Advanced ColdFusion Developer AFP Webworks Pty Ltd http://afpwebworks.com Full Scale ColdFusion hosting from A$15/month *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
I don't think theres any rules about the length of definitions? You are correct sir. A definition list implies to me the expansion of a term through definition. If anything that means the more text the better! I just noticed that Tim's list includes numbering... This means there could be some kind of ordering involved. Also, the quotes around his definitions imply some kind of citation. Perhaps something more like this: ul li dl dtPursuit of customer satisfaction/dt ddqQuote/q/dd /dl /li ... /ul But that is a lot of extra guff. Perhaps it could be as simple as: ul li h2Pursuit of customer satisfaction/h2 qQuote.../q /li ... /ul Like Steve says, each list item would not be read out (I believe even the numbering) by a screenreader. Use of headers would probably be more useful. Karl *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Thierry Koblentz wrote: Isn't the responsibility of screen reader manufacturers to treat DLs for what they are? Following this logic, we should be using basic table markup for layout to give people using old visual browsers a better experience. If we cheat with the markup to please user agents what's the incentive for SR manufacturers to take care of the problem? If I hear you right, you're saying we should write code that may disadvantage our users in the hope that it will influence how screen reader manufacturers build their software? I would have thought take care of your users first and foremost and then lobby the vendors is a better approach. -- Chris Knowles *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Absolutely it is. I'm rather surprised at how badly they handle DLs, but almost zero percent of web developers use them even now (remember that standards-compliant designers represent perhaps 1% of the industry). Go back just a few years and no one at all was using them. Is it not also the responsibility of designers to design for the user agents that actually exist rather than utopian user agents that do not exist? After all, the WCAG make several references to Until user agents... which explicitly acknowledges that user agents don't yet have all the functionality that users need. In fact they never will because expectations will change over time. In another document that I can't currently find, the W3C state that it is necessary for designers, user agent vendors and the standards themselves to all move together. There's no use one of these going off in their own direction at their own pace. It's never going to be possible for all of them to be exactly in sync but that's what we need to aim for while making progress in an agreed direction. I don't think that using headings in this example is cheating at all. It's perfectly valid as other people have suggested. Remember that the purpose of semantics is to convey information effectively. There is no point in using them if they do not achieve that goal. If you care about the users you will provide semantics that 'are' useful to them, not semantics that 'should' be useful. Could you stand in front of your customer a justify your viewpoint to them? I don't suppose they would be terribly impressed because they want the best user experience for their customers. How can you intentionally deny them that? Steve _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thierry Koblentz Sent: 09 January 2008 05:21 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations Hi Steve, Isn't the responsibility of screen reader manufacturers to treat DLs for what they are? Following this logic, we should be using basic table markup for layout to give people using old visual browsers a better experience. If we cheat with the markup to please user agents what's the incentive for SR manufacturers to take care of the problem? -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Green Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 8:19 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations I think that definition lists would be appropriate semantically but in the real world I don't know of any user agent that does anything useful with a definition list or any user group that derives any benefit from them. Certainly they make no sense when read with a screen reader because you cannot differentiate one list item from the next. I would therefore use heading and paragraphs. As ever, your decision depends on your motivation. If you care only about semantic purity and don't care about the user experience, go ahead and use a definition list. If you do care about the user experience, use headings. Steve _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim MacKay Sent: 09 January 2008 03:49 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] semantic list with explanations Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus.blah blah blah.. What is the best way to semantically mark this up? My first guess would be an ordered list but the definitions underneath don't really allow for it. A definition list doesn't seem very appropriate either because of the wordiness of the explanations; to me a true definition list would only be a few words. Any thoughts? Thanks, Tim *** 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 list with explanations
Thierry Koblentz wrote: Isn't the responsibility of screen reader manufacturers to treat DLs for what they are? Following this logic, we should be using basic table markup for layout to give people using old visual browsers a better experience. If we cheat with the markup to please user agents what's the incentive for SR manufacturers to take care of the problem? If I hear you right, you're saying we should write code that may disadvantage our users in the hope that it will influence how screen reader manufacturers build their software? No, what I'm saying is that we should write semantic markup and hope that SR manufacturers fix their product asap. JAWS, to name one product, is a very expensive software. Freedomscientific should take care of its customers, it is not to the authors to lower the quality of their documents to give SR users a better experience. Because like I said, following this logic why not using table markup to give users of other UAs (old visual browsers like IE 5 Mac, NN6, etc) a better experience too? Why just SR users? We have seen the same issue with acronym and abbr. Most authors are using acronym *instead* of abbr for the only reason that IE is ABBR-challenged, *not* because acronym is the proper element to use. I would have thought take care of your users first and foremost and then lobby the vendors is a better approach. May be a better approach would be to use something like this: http://tjkdesign.com/articles/best_practice/IamAScreenReaderUser.asp It takes care of the issue without cheating with the markup. -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Absolutely it is. I'm rather surprised at how badly they handle DLs, but almost zero percent of web developers use them even now (remember that standards-compliant designers represent perhaps 1% of the industry). Go back just a few years and no one at all was using them. Is it not also the responsibility of designers to design for the user agents that actually exist rather than utopian user agents that do not exist? After all, the WCAG make several references to Until user agents... which explicitly acknowledges that user agents don't yet have all the functionality that users need. In fact they never will because expectations will change over time. In another document that I can't currently find, the W3C state that it is necessary for designers, user agent vendors and the standards themselves to all move together. There's no use one of these going off in their own direction at their own pace. It's never going to be possible for all of them to be exactly in sync but that's what we need to aim for while making progress in an agreed direction. I don't think that using headings in this example is cheating at all. It's perfectly valid as other people have suggested. IMHO, the markup you suggested would be valid *only* if this succession of name/value pairs was *not* considered as a list. If it is a list, then the only proper markup is a list (imho). Remember that the purpose of semantics is to convey information effectively. There is no point in using them if they do not achieve that goal. If you care about the users you will provide semantics that 'are' useful to them, not semantics that 'should' be useful. I think a DL is the element that would convey the information the more effectively. And I guess that's why most of the posters who replied to the OP before you did, told him to use a definition lists. Because for all these posters it is the element they think would be the most semantic in regard to that content; best proof (imho) that it should be the markup of choice. Could you stand in front of your customer a justify your viewpoint to them? I don't suppose they would be terribly impressed because they want the best user experience for their customers. How can you intentionally deny them that? The same way I tell them we should not use table for layout to please people using old browsers. To me, it makes absolutely no difference. I think there should be no double standards when it comes to UAs. If you think it is important to not really follow the rules by using headings/paragraphs instead of a DL to give SR users a better experience then let's say bravo to table markup used for layout when it is done to increase user experience! -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Help me please
Unexpectedly there will be such things, Help make reference to this credible? A href=http://www.firebirdblog.com/blog.html;http://www.firebirdblog.com/blog.html/A *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Thierry Koblentz wrote: No, what I'm saying is that we should write semantic markup and hope that SR manufacturers fix their product asap. JAWS, to name one product, is a very expensive software. Freedomscientific should take care of its customers, it is not to the authors to lower the quality of their documents to give SR users a better experience. but I would call them your customers first, JAWS customers second - if you can make their life easier, do it, then lobby the vendor and even notify the JAWS user of the issue so they can too Because like I said, following this logic why not using table markup to give users of other UAs (old visual browsers like IE 5 Mac, NN6, etc) a better experience too? Why just SR users? because thats a different issue. Its an issue of the user not upgrading to software thats available and thats better. The issue we speak of is the user unable to do anything about the situation themselves because there is no better software, so we should look after them if we can. We have seen the same issue with acronym and abbr. Most authors are using acronym *instead* of abbr for the only reason that IE is ABBR-challenged, *not* because acronym is the proper element to use. sure, but IE is challenged in many areas so there are many ways we do things so they work in IE to make sure the end user is looked after. Are you saying we should not use any workarounds in the hope Microsoft will fix IE? I would have thought take care of your users first and foremost and then lobby the vendors is a better approach. May be a better approach would be to use something like this: http://tjkdesign.com/articles/best_practice/IamAScreenReaderUser.asp It takes care of the issue without cheating with the markup. thats true and that solution is fine, but looking at the code, it seems to me you've gone to a hell of a lot of trouble - personally I would have just used different markup. But seeing as you've already written it, then it's a good solution. -- Chris Knowles *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
Tim MacKay wrote: Hello all, Just looking for a little help. I'm creating a sort of 'point form' list that goes a bit like this: 1. Pursuit of customer satisfaction We promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus...blah blah blah 2. Pursuit of customer loyalty We promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus...blah blah blah The critical detail here is point-form. If we were to take away the bullet points what's left are standard headings and paragraphs. Hence, a definition list is not appropriate. The way to mark this up would be: ol li h2Pursuit of customer satisfaction/h2 pWe promise to pursue customer satisfaction as our main point of customer focus.../p /li li h2Pursuit of customer loyalty/h2 pWe promise to pursue customer loyalty as our secondary point of customer focus.../p /li /ol Note: The h2 here is totally arbitrary, but do use the appropriate heading in your own code. --- Ca Phun Ung http://yelotofu.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
