Re: [WSG] Accessibility changer
If the link is from the same domain as the email of the poster, Then I'm glad I didn't tread in it.. I'm calling Barker's Eggs. Chris Sent from my iPhone On 26/04/2012, at 11:59 AM, James Litten ja...@insydney.com.au wrote: Hello Steve, Google glass are attached to a frame like specticles without the lense part of frame. They go from near the wearers right ear to just above and in front of their right eye. Users look through a prism to see a computer image set against what they would normally see without the Google glass. Their is a link at the bottom of the page to contact Google with questions. Please click on http://insydney.com.au/information/GoogleProjectGlass.htm James. On 25/04/2012 4:52 PM, steve paultan wrote: Hello, Sir. What is? Could you explain it more clearly? Thanks, With best regards, Steve On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:15 AM, James ja...@insydney.com.au wrote: Thanks Russ and all those involved with last nights meeting :) One set of technologies that will change our ability to access information. http://insydney.com.au/information/GoogleProjectGlass.htm Should be able to realtime change our vision and hearing. We may have to think realtime accessibility standards? James. * *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Table borders
Russ,
It's the Friday evening of a long weekend - and you take the time to
give code examples??
And you still can't see why everyone here thinks you are both a *Web
Standards* and *Nice Guy* Superhero?!?
Have a great weekend Russ.
I admire your dedication.
And so should all of us!!
;-)
Chris
Sent from my iPhone
On 30/09/2011, at 7:32 PM, Russ Weakley r...@maxdesign.com.au wrote:
Hey Grant,
Try something like the code below:
1. The table markup is more accessible - th elements are very
important for screen readers
2. There are no presentational attributes (every time we include
presentational attributes, a fairy dies!)
!DOCTYPE html
html lang=en
head
meta charset=utf-8
titleGrant Bailey/title
style type=text/css media=screen
.Table_Text
{
border-collapse: collapse;
width: 600px;
}
th, td
{
border: 1px solid #000;
padding: 1em 2em;
vertical-align: top;
text-align: left;
}
.no-border { border: none; }
/style
/head
body
table class=Table_Text
thead
tr
td class=no-border/td
thColumn 1 Title/th
thColumn 2 Title/th
/tr
/thead
tbody
tr
thRow 1 Title/th
tdCol 1 Row 1/td
tdCol 2 Row 1/td
/tr
tr
thRow 2 Title/th
tdCol 1 Row 2/td
tdCol 2 Row 2/td
/tr
/tbody
/table
/body
/html
On 30/09/2011, at 7:01 PM, Grant Bailey wrote:
Hello,
I'd be grateful for some help on this problem.
I need to display a table. No problem except that it is one of
those tables that have header columns on the left and right, which
means that the top left-hand cell should not appear (i.e. have no
border). Like this (please see attachment if the picture does not
appear below):
feegfdfj.jpg
Here is my coding:
table class=Table_Text width=92.2% border=1 align=center
cellspacing=0
tr style=font-weight: bold;
td style=border:none;br //td
td style=text-align: center; Column 1 Title/td
td style=text-align: center; Column 2 Title/td/tr
tr
td style=font-weight: bold; Row 1 Title/td
tdCol 1 Row 1/td
tdCol 2 Row 1/td/tr
tr
td style=font-weight: bold; Row 2 Title/td
tdCol 1 Row 2/td
tdCol 2 Row 2/td/tr
/table
Unfortunately, all of the major browsers show the top-left cell
with a border (a bit fainter, but you can still see it), despite my
efforts (shown in code above) to render it invisible.
If someone could advise me how to make the cell truly invisible I
would be most grateful.
Thank you and kind regards,
Grant Bailey
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
Re: [WSG] Drawing Tool For the Blind Is Here At Last
Marvin, that is great. Thank you for sharing. Sincerely. Chris Sent from my iPhone On 23/09/2011, at 10:32 AM, Marvin Hunkin startrekc...@gmail.com wrote: hi. if you visit http://www.dickbaldwin.com, got this program link from the top tid bits from http://top.enterprises.com and it is a accessible java based drawing tool for the blind. he is a university student. and so it is fully accessible. it comes in a zip file. and you need the latest or a recent java jre or sdk, and java access bridge. cool, i have always wanted to create data flow diagrams, flow charts, for my help desk course, and computer programming. and also to design a story board for my blindness related site, for my website development course. well i was able to start a new drawing, and able to create a line control. real cool. check it out. Marvin. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Re: WSG Digest
We all go through this every holiday season Nick. Look at the big picture. Russ provides us with a great resource. For free. 1st auto responder message, and you are gone. Guilty until proven guilty. Just look at the first line, or header, then delete. That's the deal. And Russ could charge. He doesn't. Thanks Russ. You are Legend. Oh, and By the way. Lazy listers who reply or forward without truncating the previous 47 or so other lister's reponses are FAR more annoying. And waste far too much bandwidth Think about that Nick. Then look at your email. IMHO, Love and peace to you all, thanks Russ, and Merry Christmas Sincerely. Chris Sent from my iPhone On 19/12/2010, at 6:20 PM, Nicholas Bower n...@petangent.net wrote: Hi Mods can you possibly drop emails from list and digest with subject containing out of office or autoreply?? 20-50% (at times) of emails I get from this list are a digest wholly consisting of ringing out of office responses. Pretty standard list filter to apply. And for the people doing this many thanks for the escalation points perhaps I'll try one over the break. :) On 19/12/2010, at 12:58 AM, wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Fonts in MS Publisher compared to online
Sorry for asking, but does any one else think this thread is a webstandards topic? I.e. How a font in Microsoft Publisher displays? I'm having issues with IE7 crashing. Is that a web standards issue list topic too??? Just a long day, a bit jaded, and not happy wading through a pile of display is not what I wanted type emails, especially ones based around a Microsoft product. It's the web. This is a web standards list. It's not the magazine typography list. Just annoyed. And tired. Chris Sent from my iPhone On 14/09/2010, at 7:18 PM, Lyn Smith l...@westernwebdesign.com.au wrote: I have a client who is very precise in what he wants. He sent me a draft in Publisher which I transformed into a website. The font for the header text (site title) is Times New Roman. The problem is that it looks completely different online to what it does in Publisher. Publisher renders it very narrow. Online it looks chunkier even though it is just normal weight, not bold. It is 2.5ems - I tried reducing the size but it did not reduce the chunkiness. According to Publisher, the style is Normal, 10pt, Main(Black), Kerning 14pt,Left, Line Spacing 1sp. As far as I can see, there is nothing wrong with the way it looks online at all - but it is not what he wants. He wants narrow. Is there a way of making the font narrower - short of making it an image - or is there an explanation I can give him of why it looks different online? Thanks. -- Lyn Smith www.westernwebdesign.com.au Affordable website design Perth WA *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Accessible websites (was: accessible free web hosting account)
I'll just address one you raised Jens. Google does not currently parse external Javascript files. So unless Fairfax uses simple inline Javascript, and exposes spiderable URLS, that's probably good enough for most of us to use progressive enhancement methodology . Ask Lucas. When he gets back from SG Chris http://www.cogentis.com.au Is there any other strong arguments for making pages available, without javascript enabled? I'd like to know too. On the Sydney Morning Herald in June less than 0.5% of users had JS disabled. Maybe we should drop that support? Anyone willing to share their numbers/reasons? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] OT: Dominos Pizza - Looking for someone who's worked there
I think the answer is... Yes, technically, there probably is more fibre nutrition in the cardboard box :) Sent from my iPhone On 16/06/2009, at 10:51 AM, Mike Kear w...@afpwebworks.com wrote: This is off-topic for this list so please respond direct to me rather than the list ... I'm looking to have a quick chat to someone who's worked at Dominos Pizza some time in the last 5 years - not necessarily in the IT area - even someone who's delivered pizzas would do. But if you've worked there or know something of how they operate, I'd be grateful if you could contact me. (Just being a customer isn't enough - I am too) I need to ask a fairly basic question about an aspect of their operations - I wont be asking you to break any confidences and its not for any competing project. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia 0422 985 585 02-4577-4898 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: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] SEO vs. Accessibility
We can flag text that appears to be hidden using CSS at Google. To date we have not algorithmically removed sites for doing that. We try hard to avoid throwing babies out with bathwater. MattCutts at Oct 21 2005 - 02:09 That was nearly 4 years ago - One of the issues is that sometimes, Google does use automated scaleable' processes for spam control (as is their stated aim) - and sometimes it just rains babies. My point? Any CSS 'hiding' method can be detected algorithmically. And while it might be for accessibility/ usability/ whatever - it could get you in trouble. Mostly it won't, if a human checks it, and there is a accessibility/ usability/ rather than spam intent. But algorithms on their own can't detect 'intent'.. Chris http://www.cogentis.com.au/ On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:25 AM, David Dixon da...@terrainferno.net wrote: The thing to remember is that while its doubtful google will spot it through an automatic spider, google do manually check pages (either randomly, or when the spider, or even a person, flag something up). Its that manual detection that will spot this kind of fraud, and will likely result in an immediate ban. regards, David Dixon e: da...@temperedvision.com w: www.temperedvision.com On 26/5/09 17:26, Spellacy, Michael wrote: Hello list! I have a quick question for any accessibility and SEO mavens out there. It was recently brought to my attention that a few elements I have placed on a site that have text indented px to the left for accessibility might be viewed as a form of cloaking by some search engines. Is my colleague correct in this assessment? If so, is there a middle ground that can be met to make search engines and visually impaired folks happy? Thanks in advance! Regards, Spell *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] SEO and headers order
Hi guys, Just to clarify. Google reads the sourcecode. In the order the sourcecode is presented. Of course you can reposition with css. That doesn't change the order of the sourcecode. Google doesn't generally request the CSS file (check your logs) - unless other flags are indicated (e.g positioning text off page, display: none etc) so it had no idea of column display rendering. Web Standards is Content= X/HTML; presentation = CSS; behaviour etc I've done the SEO on some of the biggest publisher/ ecommerce sites in Australia, over the past 8 years, and have never seen a Google issue with css repositioning in a 2 or 3 column layout. Check most newspaper etc sites. Here's a really old example - my personal hobby site. Google: Austin Healey 3000 and view the cache of the site http://www.myaustinhealey.com. Then look at the 'text only version' in the Google cache. It's a really old 3 column css layout from 2002. Centre column first in the source. I'd post the cache links, but I'm sending this from an iPhone, and I'm still waiting for 'cut and paste' functionality Sigh. Chris www.cogentis.com.au On 15/04/2009, at 7:10 PM, Jason Grant ja...@flexewebs.com wrote: All these things are 'within reason'. I have seen SEO agencies advise putting the main content immediately after body and then repositioning everything else with CSS into right places. This is likely not to be possible on some designs and Google is smart enough to sift through the initial junk on the page to get through to the main content also. There's another argument that says that your main navigation help Google index other pages on the site, so if you are putting that after the main content you are making deeper indexing of your site a little harder for Google, as it has to do more work to follow the links. Hence nothing is black and white here. Perhaps you should try both solutions for a while and see if it makes a difference. If you can't be bothered, I would go with 'regular source order', whatever that is for your site. Thanks, Jason PS: Also, if you need more SEO advice let me know. On Wed, Apr 15, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Rob Enslin robens...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Caleb, I might be wrong but anecdotal evidence suggests order is not an 'issue' for bots scanning your site. I'm other words by in large so long as your code is structured correctly your h1, h2 etc will be indexed appropriately. The only caveat/exception is non-valid code. Also, long, heavy and bloated code where important tag info is burried way down the page, can impact on indexability - stuff that's simply not best practice. -- rob // Rob Enslin // twitter.com/robenslin On 15 Apr 2009, at 06:21, Caleb Wong carbon.ca...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, I have a SEO question regarding how search engines scans a website. Say for example if I have a site where it has a 3 column layout. Column left and column right appears before the middle column area, and within column left, right there are h2, h3 tags; within the middle column there is a h1 tag. The source code goes something like this... column_right h2 /column_right column_left h2 /column_left column_middle h1 /column_middle So would search engines pick up on the h1 header that appears at the bottom of the page, or picks up on the first header (regardless its weight) it sees. Cheers Caleb *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** -- Jason Grant BSc, MSc CEO, Flexewebs Ltd. www.flexewebs.com ja...@flexewebs.com +44 (0)7748 591 770 Company no.: 5587469 www.twitter.com/flexewebs www.linkedin.com/in/flexewebs *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] DHTML Menus
Q. What is the percentage of population that does not have javascript enabled? A. 100% of search engine spiders. So if you don't want your site fully spidered. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
[WSG] Federal Court hearing re Virgin Blue website accessiblity
Did anyone else see this?? will be seeking orders from the Federal Court forcing Virgin Blue to make their websites accessible to the disabled as required under the Federal Disability Discrimination Act or to take those websites off-line. http://www.propellerglobal.com/news/News/128/virgin-blue-to-court-again-for-discrimination ..is taking budget airline Virgin Blue to court over claims its website unfairly discriminates against people with visual impairments. ..case against Virgin Blue case will be heard in the Federal Magistrates Court in Brisbane on January 28. http://www.theage.com.au/travel/virgin-blue-in-court-over-website-20090119-7kc1.html Been a while since SOCOG.. Best Chris http://www.cogentis.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] SEO and Flash
I still think this guidance is good advice... Try to use Flash only where it is needed. Many rich media sites such as Google's YouTube use Flash for rich media but rely on HTML for content and navigation. You can too, by limiting Flash to on-page accents and rich media, not content and navigation. In addition to making your site Googlebot-friendly, this makes you site accessible to a larger audience, including, for example, blind people using screen readers, users of old or non-standard browsers, and those on limited low-bandwidth connections such as on a cell phone or PDA. As a bonus, your visitors can use bookmarks effectively, and can email links to your pages to their friends. Mark Berghausen, Search Quality Team, Google. Reference: http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2007/07/best-uses-of-flash.html Best Chris http://www.cogentis.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] Re: Title attribute
Hi Elle,
title attributes do help SEO and google does find them,
Elle - my specific example showed that your statement above just isn't
true, as I'll explain again below.
if the word
appears only once in the page (and especially not in the main text), it is
quite logical that that page will not come up first on search results.
Yes, that is a factually correct statement, but isn't relevent to the
specific example I gave using Google specific search operators.
I did not do a 'ranking' query. I did a site query looking for two
specific words.
i.e. as Google says:
site: If you include [site:] in your query, Google will restrict the
results to those websites in the given domain.
I.e. by asking site:cogentis.com.au Australian DDA I am asking to see
all pages from the domain cogentis.com.au which include the words
Australian DDA.
One page on the domain includes those keywords on the page in p -
the other page (the home page) only includes them in the title
attribute.
Google can't find the words in the title attribute. Why not? Because
it doesn't index words in the title attribute.
Feel free to show me an example using the same methodology, where
Google does index words which only appear in a title attribute.
Also google does index the keywords and description metatags -- but because
they have been abused by black hat SEO, google does not give them as much
importance in its algorithm anymore.
Ok - no issue with Meta description tag - but again, not true for the
meta Keywords tag in Google.
Again, lets try testing...
Do a Google search for the made up word pnogiwaz
It appears only in the meta keywords tag on http://www.cogentis.com.au/
But Cogentis doesn't appear in the results?
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=pnogiwazhl=enfilter=0
Only pages that have copied/ scraped my content, and included the
contents of my meta keywords in a p on their version of my page -
appear in the results.
Alternatively, search using the site operator
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=enq=pnogiwaz+site%3Acogentis.com.aubtnG=Searchmeta=
No result.
Again - feel free to give me an example using the same methodology
where a word which only appears in the meta keywords field, and no
where else on the page, is indexed in Google.
In order to show the difference - Yahoo does index meta keywords.
e.g
http://au.search.yahoo.com/search?p=pnogiwazfr=yfp-t-501ei=UTF-8
Best
Chris
The example I gave
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 7:35 AM, Elle Meredith
li...@designbyelle.com.au wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 14:51:52, Chris Dimmock wrote:
Actually, using the 'title' attribute in a link does NOT add a little
bit of SEO. Title element ('Page Title') - yes for SEO - but title
attribute - no.
Try it yourself. Put a few words in a title attribute - words which
don't otherwise appear on your page. The once Google has re-indexed
the page, (look at the date in the Google cache); then search your
sitein Google for the words you included in the title attribute.
snip
Google won't find them, because it doesn't index them; just like
Google doesn't index the content of e.g. meta name =keywords field.
title attributes do help SEO and google does find them, but... if the word
appears only once in the page (and especially not in the main text), it is
quite logical that that page will not come up first on search results.
As far as I know, google looks at the whole page and tries to understand the
theme of the page. This is done by looking at the content and finding what
the theme is according to everything on the page and how each element is
related to that theme. Google gives more importance to keywords that appear
in the page title and top headings but it also looks at the rest of the page
including images alt text, title attributes, link naming, links, etc...
Also google does index the keywords and description metatags -- but because
they have been abused by black hat SEO, google does not give them as much
importance in its algorithm anymore.
FWIW,
Elle
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
Re: [WSG] Title attribute
Hi Jens
Actually, using the 'title' attribute in a link does NOT add a little
bit of SEO. Title element ('Page Title') - yes for SEO - but title
attribute - no.
Try it yourself. Put a few words in a title attribute - words which
don't otherwise appear on your page. The once Google has re-indexed
the page, (look at the date in the Google cache); then search your
sitein Google for the words you included in the title attribute.
Here's an example. The words Australian DDA appear in a title
element of a link on http://www.cogentis.com.au/ but no where else on
that page, i.e. only here:
a href=website-accessibility-issues.html title=More information on
the Australian DDA and web accessibility issuesWeb accessibility
issues/a
But a search in Google will not return this page.
http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=enq=site%3Acogentis.com.au+Australian+DDAbtnG=Google+Searchmeta=cr%3DcountryAU
It only returns another page on the site which does have those words
on the page.
Google won't find them, because it doesn't index them; just like
Google doesn't index the content of e.g. meta name =keywords field.
Chris
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:00 AM, Jens-Uwe Korff
jko...@fairfaxdigital.com.au wrote:
I was wondering how valuable the Title attribute is
Use the 'title' attribute when the link text needs to be short and
doesn't convey all a user needs to know, eg. a href=... title=Latest
News from InTheSticksLocal news/a. In this case you also add a bit
of SEO.
I found that, contrary to what I believed previously, this is not
required for assistive technologies, ie. screenreaders. They usually
pick up the anchor text well.
Cheers,
Jens
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
Re: [WSG] Fw: The Great Firewall of Australia
Thanks for the detailed précis of the iinet situation. Next time I get booked for speeding on the Sydney - Newcastle freeway, I think I'll sue the RTA. Well, after all, they provided me with the road ;-) Or maybe if you do speed, and don't get caught, then you can sue the Police for failing to enforce their terms of service. The IIA has been lobbying against filtering for yonks. See www.iia.net.au Chris Sent from my iPhone On 27/11/2008, at 11:50 PM, Jelina Korhecz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree with Dave--a letter to Senator Conroy is the best approach. The website previously mentioned (http://nocleanfeed.com/) is also a good place to start if you want to take action. I'm extremely concerned about this plan (and have been since I heard about it a months ago) because at first it seemed like everyone in a position of power thought it was a good idea... despite the fact that their filtering trials clearly showed that a mandatory filter wasn't feasible with the technology currently available. Luckily (and I apologise if this has already been mentioned in a previous email), iiNet--an Australian ISP--has signed up to the live testing that is due to begin mid-December. They have said that they will take part in this test to demonstrate to the government how ineffective an ISP level filter is at the present time. You can check out what they have to say about it on their website: http://www.iinet.net.au/about/news/internet_filtering.html Unfortunately, iiNet have received bad press lately because of a lawsuit brought upon them by the AFACT (Australian Federation Against Copyright Theft--see http://www.lawfont.com/2008/11/21/the-case-against-iinet/ for more info). However, some are saying that this case and iiNet's position on the mandatory filtering scheme are connected (which is why the AFACT went after iiNet and not a larger ISP like Telstra Bigpond), but I'll let you make your own mind up about the link between the two. (See http://defendingscoundrels.com/2008/11/iinet-lawsuit-no-coincidence.html for more.) Don't get me wrong--anything that can stop something that is as horrible as child porn I support. But I honestly do not think this has any chance of working. Please do what you can to help stop this filter going ahead. Otherwise I might need to move countries :( My 2c :) On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 10:42 PM, IceKat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wouldn't have sent this to the group if I'd had even the slightest idea it was spam. Getup.org.au is a genuinely good site. IceKat. Brett Patterson wrote: 1) That, I do believe is a crock of shit! 2) If he does anything like that, he will be dead!!! --and-- 3) Anyone who believes in those ideas are fucked up, stupid, and this I can promise, will NOT make it in this world, dead or alive! 4) Like I said, I think this a crock of shit, and possibly spam. On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 9:56 PM, IceKat [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Usually I'm suspicious of this stuff but I happen to know that Get Up is legit and thought the Aussie members of this list might like to know about this. IceKat. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Thought you might be interested Love Mum - Original Message - http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet?dc=564,324731,1 Dear Helen, Imagine a government proposing an internet censorship system that went further than any other democracy - one that made the internet up to 87% slower, more expensive, accidentally blocked up to one in 12 legitimate sites, and missed the vast majority of inappropriate content. This is not China, Saudi Arabia or Iran - this is the vision of Senator Stephen Conroy for Australia. *Testing has already begun.* The community must now move to stop this plan. *Click here to save the net:* *www.getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet* http://www.getup.org.au/campaign/SaveTheNet?dc=564,324731,1 The system that Senator Conroy wants is *a mandatory filter of all internet traffic*, with the government of the day able to add any unwanted site to a secret blacklist. Already, the wrangling has begun for the inclusion of material relating to anorexia, euthanasia and gambling. It isn't difficult to see *the scheme is open to abuse*. Even when it comes to preventing child p-rnography, the filter will not prevent peer-to-peer sharing and is very simple to sidestep. *The protection of our children is vitally important* - that's why we can't afford to waste funds on this deeply flawed system. We should be concentrating on solutions that are more effective and won't undermine our digital economy or
Re: [WSG] Google HTML Check
And congratulations to John Allsopp for having his earlier research cited by Google! Did anyone else notice that Google finally put paid to the rubbish urban legend metadata meta name=revisit-after ? Chris Dimmock http://www.cogentis.com.au/ On 1/26/06, Lea de Groot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Interestingly, Google has run a check on the use of HTML elements http://code.google.com/webstats/index.html I haven't finished reading it, but I am depressed already. Missing alt tags, pervasive table tags... the indicators of poor structure go on. tries to look on the bright side Well, at least it means lots of work for us, fixing the world's problems! :( Lea -- Lea de Groot Brisbane, Australia ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards
Michael Cordover's comments were the correct answer. :)Here is an excerpt from an Interview with Matt Cutts, Google engineer, just last month:Q: In more general terms, what do you think is the relationship between Google and the W3C? Do you think it would be important for Google to e.g. be concerned about valid HTML?A: I like the W3C a lot; if they didn't exist, someone would have to invent them. :) People sometimes ask whether Google should boost (or penalize) for valid (or invalid) HTML. There are plenty of clean, perfectly validating sites, but also lots of good information on sloppy, hand-coded pages that don't validate. Google's home page doesn't validate and that's mostly by design to save precious bytes. Will the world end because Google doesn't put quotes around color attributes? No, and it makes the page load faster. :) Eric Brewer wrote a page while at Inktomi that claimed 40% of HTML pages had syntax errors. We can't throw out 40% of the web on the principle that sites should validate; we have to take the web as it is and try to make it useful to searchers, so Google's index parsing is pretty forgiving. http://blog.outer-court.com/archive/2005-11-17-n52.htmlI suppose the real issue now is - can someone build the Google page so that it does work in all browsers; so that it validates; and so that the resultant code is 'ligher' and saves more bandwidth? After all - Google are saying there is a commercial benefit to their invalid codebase - the only way they'd consider achange - in my opinion - is for a greater commercial benefit.
Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards
I wonder how many visits Google gets in a day...? Brian - I'm not sure how many visits Google gets in a day,but Danny Sullivan reported on the Nielsen netratings numbers back in Julythat Google has 46.2%market share of 4.5 billion searches/ month http://searchenginewatch.com/reports/article.php/2156451 ...percentage of online searches done by US home and work web surfers in July 2005 that were performed at a particular search engine. Internal site searches, such as those to find material within a particular web site, are not counted in these totals. The activity at more than 60 search sites makes up the total search volume upon which percentages are based -- 4.5 billion searches in this month. So - using these numbers - 46.2% (Google's market share) x 4.5 billion searches/ mth= 2.079 billion/ month. I'm reading this as 'US home work web surfers' - not a global number of searches. Also, Alexa says that the average Google session is 6.2 pageviews http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=url="" Another numberI read once was that there were approximately 320 - 350 million searches per day on the web. I can't quote you a source on that. But taken in context of Google's market share - its a huge amount of bandwidth. Either way - small coding issues (and vaildation/ use of semantic code etc) are going to meana lot of bandwidth when looked at in light of that kind of volume... Best Chris a href="" href="http://www.cogentis.com.au/">http://www.cogentis.com.au/Cogentis Internet Marketing/a
Re: [WSG] The Age (and smh) redesign
The SMH redesign is now live - just noticed :) I like the layout - but they've dropped the ball with over 200 validation errors... Chris www.cogentis.com.au On 10/30/05, John Allsopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, last week http;//theage.com.au launched a redesign, and early next week, it appears http://smh.com.au will also get a fairly similar makeover. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Do Web Standrads vand best practices get rewarded by Search Engines?
So do the most popular Search Engines reward valid design?If so is there any proof or statements issued by search engines to confirm this? Semantic code is generally rewarded by ranking (i.e. relevance) Accessible code is generally rewarded by spidering. Valid code is generally rewarded by SE's indexing your full content(e.g. leave off a /p and see what gets indexed). But 'validation' in itself is not rewarded per se. Try validating www.google.com Its a bit hard to explain in 2 or 3 sentences - but you'll actually find that many Web Standards Supporters are SEO's. As far as 'Proof' - Google recommends: Check for broken links and correct HTML Make sure that your TITLE and ALT tags are descriptive and accurate Use a text browser such as Lynx to examine your site, because most search engine spiders see your site much as Lynx would. If fancy features such as _javascript_, cookies, session IDs, frames, DHTML, or Flash keep you from seeing all of your site in a text browser, then search engine spiders may have trouble crawling your site. http://www.google.com/intl/en/webmasters/guidelines.html By the way, if you ever have a client who takes an SEO company's wordover yours, you can always refer them to this: http://www.dashes.com/anil/2004/07/27/optimizing_sear That has nothing at all to do with web standards - but yes, that is a perfect example of ablogger who used a blog link anchor text strategy so much more effectively than a pile of 'non A list bloggers' did. That's the other piece of the ranking puzzle - brute force text links - which cuts to the core of the Google PageRank algorithm - which is very effective - just like the bloggers who link bombed President George W Bush with 'miserable failure' (typemiserable failurein Google). Best Chris www.cogentis.com.au
Re: [WSG] Meta Keywords?
Just wanted to clarify this area with some references. Meta keywords - no - no search engine publically acknowdges that they refer to them. Meta descriptions - yes - see below - but DMoz is often a factor as well Meta robots - yes - see below 1. you can use robots.txt OR meta robots: [quote]Use a robots.txt file or meta tags to control how MSNBot and other web crawlers index your site. The robots.txt file tells web crawlers which files and folders it is not allowed to crawl. The Web Robots Pages provide detailed information on the robots.txt Robots Exclusion standard. This site may be available in English only.[/quote] http://search.msn.com/docs/siteowner.aspx?t=SEARCH_WEBMASTER_REF_GuidelinesforOptimizingSite.htmFORM=WGDD Yahoo: [quote] create a robots.txt file on your web site to prevent our crawler from indexing your site add a noindex meta tag to your documents [/quote] http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/ysearch/indexing/indexing-13.html Google: [quote] robots.txt is a standard document that can tell Googlebot not to download some or all information from your web server... ..To keep Googlebot from following links on your pages to other pages or documents, you'd place the following meta tag in the head of your HTML document: META NAME=Googlebot CONTENT=nofollow [/quote] http://www.google.com/intl/en/webmasters/bot.html 2. As far as metadescriptionis concerned - Meta Description is still important to MSN and Yahoo!: [quote]As the MSN Search web crawler MSNBot crawls your website, it analyzes the content on indexed web pages and generates keywords to associate with each we page. Then MSNBot extracts web page content that is highly relevant to the keywords (often sentence segments that contain keywords or information in the description meta tag) and constructs the website description displayed in search results. [/quote] http://search.msn.com/docs/siteowner.aspx?t=SEARCH_WEBMASTER_CONC_AboutYourSiteDescription.htm [quote]Pages Yahoo! Wants Included in its index:snipMetadata (including title and description) that accurately describes the contents of a web page[/quote] http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/ysearch/indexing/indexing-14.html 3. Also - Google often also often uses the ODP Dmoz description rather than the Meta Description: E.g. search Google for w3c http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=w3c W3C - The World Wide Web ConsortiumThe W3C was founded in October 1994 to lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure ... Check the Dmoz listing: http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Policy/ W3C - The World Wide Web Consortium - The World Wide Web Consortium was created to lead the World Wide Web to its full potential by developing common protocols that promote its evolution and ensure its interoperability. Now look at the meta description at http://www.w3.org/ meta name=description content=W3C's nearly 400 member organizations lead the World Wide Web to its full potential. Founded by Tim Berners-Lee, the Web's inventor. The W3C Web site hosts specifications, guidelines, software and tools. Public participation is welcome. W3C supports universal access, the semantic Web, trust, interoperability, evolvability, decentralization, and cooler multimedia. / Best Chris Cogentis Search Engine marketing Optimisation http://www.cogentis.com.au
Re: [WSG] WE05 - who's going?
Ok - just so I've got this right We hold up your middle 3 fingers in a 'W' shape and touch tips as a secret handshake, whilst saying youve been on this list *how* long and your site still uses tables?Got it. I think Dean's classic W3C comment from WE04would make a goodpassword Most people have said that they would rtfm if there was an fm to fr :)This is me http://www.cogentis.com.au No pics. Chris Dimmock
[WSG] World Usability Day November 3, 2005
World Usability Day, on November 3, 2005 is designed to promote the fields of usability engineering and user-centered design. More info: http://www.worldusabilityday.net/about Chris Dimmock Cogentis Internet Marketing www.cogentis.com.au ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Re: [WSG Announce] Web Essentials 05 Launched
Web Essentials 04 was great - but wasn't there feedback last year regarding a session addressing the commercial benefits of web standards? How will the web standards movement grow if people don't know how to sell the benefits of web standards internally to management and externally to clients? Will the conference be niched as the converted preaching to the congregation? Maybe a specific topic addressing the commercial benefits of Web Standards at WE05 could have been included. Its sort of like - 'great cart - but why do I need a horse'? :) I mean this in a most constructive way. I think Peter, John, Russ et al are doing a great job. Anyone else see a need for a manager level session to provide a range of commercial justifications for adopting webstandards? Chris Dimmock Cogentis Internet Marketing Strategies http://www.cogentis.com.au/ On 5/4/05, Peter Firminger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is a one-way list for WSG Announcements Building on the success of WE04, Web Essentials returns this September 29 and 30 even bigger and better. Featuring 7 industry leaders in * standards based web design and development * user experience * accessibility * workflow and strategy WE05 will instruct and educate and like no other conference this year. With 22 sessions in two streams over two big days we've got 50% more content than last year, and more than twice the number of international speakers. Most importantly we're totally focussed on practical hands on instruction in XHTML, CSS, AJAX, accessibility, user experience, semantics, microformats and more. http://we05.com/program.cfm The lineup includes * Molly Holszchlag * Eric Meyer * Jeffrey Veen * Tantek Celik * Kelly Goto * Derek Featherstone * Doug Bowman ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Hidden Content
Tom Livingston wrote: Flash actually is searchable. There's even a search SDK for search engines. It's also accessible, with tab order/indexing, etc. Search SDK was designed as a tool for search engines themselves to extract data from Flash (up to V6) files - the key issue, as outlined below, is When a search engine deploys this SDK. It was lauched back in 2002. The Macromedia Flash Search Engine SDK 1.0 provides search engines with the means to search and index Macromedia Flash (SWF) movies. The swf2html utility used by the SDK extracts text and links from a Macromedia Flash SWF file, and outputs it to stdout or to an HTML document. When a search engine deploys this SDK, users can locate relevant Flash content when searching by keyword or file type. Only one SE I know of ever deployed SDK - back in 2002. And that search engine got gobbled up by one of the larger ones. The Macromedia Flash Search Engine SDK is designed for search engine application engineering teams. Users of the SDK can add Flash file decompression, parsing, and indexing features to their server-based search applications. http://www.macromedia.com/macromedia/accessibility/features/flash/player.html Macromedia's perception of accessibility is slightly different to many other peoples.. Make movies and put them on the internet if you want - but don't kid yourself that a text based indexing spider is interested in indexing or ranking them - unless you have substantial inbound links - and even then you'll only get ranked for one or two search phrases. Chris http://www.cogentis.com.au On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:17:31 +0100, Kornel Lesinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:35:50 +0100, Tom Livingston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not flaming you - but have you seen this: Why Google's indexing of swfs is worthless http://www.quasimondo.com/archives/000404.php Same old same old. If you read the comments, one person states that he has a Flash-based forum that is entirely indexed by Google. Have you seen it? It's not Flash that gets indexed. He outputs all content as HTML and puts Flash on top of it. -- regards, Kornel Lesiski ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Search Engines and CSS
It is my understanding that Google doesn't parse or index .css files, let alone test the whether the css modifies to HTML in a manner designed to manipulate rankings. Try it yourself. Try and find your own websites .css file indexed in Google by searching on the full filename of the .css file. However, as Andrew mentioned - the biggest risk of detection is human detection and reporting. Your competitors are the threat. Whether Google acts on specific spam reports - that's the risk you can take. Feeling Lucky? :) Best regards Chris Dimmock Cogentis Search Engine Marketing http://www.cogentis.com.au/ On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 01:28:43 -, Mike Pepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Take a look at some fought over keyphrases like 'website development' in Google UK. You'll find many sites spamming with irrelevant noscript, off-screen absolute positioned text, minute text, hidden layers, even some cretins with WOW (white-on-white) text. And you know what? Google doesn't do a damn thing about it. They're far too concerned with AdWords and AdSense. Hot markets are awash with spammed keyphrases and whole swathes of junk keyword-littered text. Which suggests either they don't or can't factor CSS into the spam algos or they simply aren't bothered. Draw your own conclusions. Cheers all, Mike Pepper Accessible Web Developer Internet SEO and Marketing Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.visidigm.com Administrator Guild of Accessible Web Designers [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gawds.org ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] New music site barring non IE browsers
I think its important to actually note that it is a ninemsn content partner - not ninemsn itself - whose site is causing the problem. Note the redirection http://sib1.od2.com Its a branded content partner site. Chris On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:50:26 -0700, Shane Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep. When has Microsoft showed any real concerns for Web Standards. On Nov 30, 2004, at 9:35 PM, Matt wrote: I would guess the reason for this has been well planned, and is probably not to do with the website itself, - nineMSN is (as the name suggests) part of the Microsoft Network. The music you download from this site is in Windows Media format, and uses their licensing model, this is very big business for them, and they probably want to force potential buyers into using their proprietary format, which will impact the iPod / iTunes market. PS I am not anti Microsoft, so MS fans don't yell at me!... I am just stating why I think they have done this... business is business, but this goes against every grain of the web standards ethos. Matt On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 21:25:31 -0700, Shane Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Unbelievable! On Nov 30, 2004, at 9:08 PM, Dave Rayner wrote: I went to check out http://hmv.ninemsn.com.au using Firefox and it gave me this: The site you have tried to enter requires Internet Explorer 6 (or better) with Windows Media Player 7 (or better) on Windows XP, 2000, Me or 98. Click Here to use our Doctor Download application to help you check your configuration alternatively Email Dr Download. Please try again. Just when i was feeling confident about the web's progression, i see that. It goes against a few really big things that web standards and the WSG is fighting for. I sent an email the 'doctor' just to show how disappointed i was. That'll teach 'em. dave rayner freshweb www.freshweb.com.au m. 0409 037 250 p. +61 2 89202344 f. +61 2 89203008 This message is confidential, and may contain proprietary or legally privileged information. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete it immediately. Internet communications are not secure. You should scan this message and any attachments for viruses. Under no circumstances do we accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from your receipt of this message or any attachments. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG]
Hi, Taco asked: Are there currently any laws in Australia that dictate a website should be accessible to vision impaired people etc.? Answer: Yes - The legislation is the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. I wrote an overview of the (specifically) Australian situation a while back, with links that give you much more information: http://www.cogentis.com.au/website-accessibility-issues.html Hope it helps. Best regrds Chris - Original Message - From: Ted Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 25 May 2004 15:16:57 -0700 Subject: RE: [WSG] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is an old article. The sydney games lawsuit was the shot that rang around the world. As far as I know, he won the suit and governments around the world have begun requiring compliance wtih disabilities acts. In the United States, it is section 508 of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Any company that does business with the government must have an accessible web site. England has just begun requiring accessible web sites. I spoke with a man from Italy that says they are also required to pass the minimum level of Bobby tests. The new Olympic web site for the games in Greece are supposed to be fully accessible. It's not difficult to program a site to be accessible, you just need to be aware of what is needed. A standards compliant web site is almost always an accessible web site. Just make sure you use your alt tags and title tags and you are 75% there. If you haven't downloaded and installed the web developers tool bar for mozilla, go to http://www.chrispederick.com/work/firefox/webdeveloper/ and get it. It will give you accessibility testing and lots more for free. Ted www.superiorpixels.com -Original Message- From: Taco Fleur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 2:51 PM To: Web Standards Group (E-mail) Subject: [WSG] Are there currently any laws in Australia that dictate a website should be accessible to vision impaired people etc.? If so, to what websites does it apply and has anyone taken any websites to court over not being accessible? What I could find so far only the following: - http://www.sportslawnews.com/archive/Articles%202000/SportsBriefs904.htm Are there any links to what standards certain websites need to apply? I believe this has been asked before however a quick scan though my mailbox did not return anything. Thanks Register now for the 3rd National Conference on Tourism Futures, being held in Townsville, North Queensland 4-6 August - www.tq.com.au/tfconf * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Pre-Site Launch Input
Will, Your new site looks fine to me. My only constructive comment is that you should rethink your 'ahem' comments - as search engine spiders are effectively text based browsers. Telling Googlebot etc Our site should still be completely usable to you, it just won't look as good as it could because you are using an old web browse that does not support web standards. Please consider upgrading your browser to take advantage of this site and many others. won't actually change Googlebot!! It will also potentially look out of place on the search engine results page when indexed. Best regrds Chris www.cogentis.com.au On Thu, 29 Apr 2004 12:44:47 -0400, Chatham, Will [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Before I launch our new, standards-compliant web site, I would like to get some feedback from the folks on this list. (Because you guys rock ;) ) I was hired a couple of months ago to remake our current site: http://www.ingles-markets.com . This site is a prime example of 1990's era coding. The new site is here: http://www.ingles-markets.com/~will Sorry to be a pain, but it will require a username and password: User: wsg Pass: wsg As you can see I'm trying to move the company into the 21st century. I am interested in comments about the look/layout/code/usability, etc. I am particularly interested in anyone checking it out who has dialup. Is it too slow? No one at our company knows anything about web standards, and when I tried explaining it to them, I got blank stares. I was told that as long as I made it look better and have the features they wanted, they didn't care how I made it. This 'blank check' allowed me to do some experimenting, for which I am grateful. Thanks in advance for your input, Will Chatham Webmaster Ingles Markets ooOo-o 828.669.2941 - ext.534 www.ingles-markets.com -- www.willchatham.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
