Re: [WSG] Web standards planet
I think someone should now come in to Jad's defense, anyone? No... Ok fine, I will. If you happen to really read Jad's post, the first word in the first paragraph is 'Yesterday'! Jad has constructed this site in less than a day, on a weekend of all days and I think he has done a marvelous job. The fact that there is no content is entirely irrelevant, he has put in effort and that (in my opinion) should be applauded. I think the concept is brilliant, and could one day become a great resource; tieing in all the best resources and tutorials all in the one place sounds like the best idea I have heard for a while. I do happen to agree with Peter on w3 standing for World Wide Web but that is something that could be changed for the sake of conformity because the Web is more than just about standards. Keep up the great work Jad. Marc ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Browsing without images
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: just checked the various IR methods. your best bet looks like Gilder/Levin and/or the Shea enhancement http://www.mezzoblue.com/tests/revised-image-replacement/ Hmmm... I like the Gilder/Levin method... Oh and sorry I haven't been keeping up with the old image replacement disscussion lately, I was taking a shower. Thanks, Marc. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Browsing without images
I just realised there is a problem with using css to insert images such as styling a h1 element to show a logo. Many rural users browse with images off to conserve bandwidth, however it's (in my assumption) not likely that css will be turned off too. If this is the case nothing will show and the user may not be able to determine the subject of the page or the website. My question is what (in an accessibility point of view) would be the best solution. Is there a way you can determine if images are turned off and therefor render a different stylesheet, is there a hack that can be used or should one just provide a text only version, that still uses stylesheets but doesn't insert images? Marc. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PHP is stopping my page validating as xhtml 1.0 Strict
Hi Steven, Firstly XHTML DOES support the name attribute for input elements, there is no other way to parse form data. It appears the problem lies elsewhere, not in the PHP code either. I do recommend removing the PHPSESSID it can cause problems, there is plenty of info to remove the url rewriting that is used to ensure a session id is parsed when cookies are not available. Obviously using a login form you need the session id so I recommend using p3p to ensure cookies are employable on default browser settings. There is no other alternative if the user switches off cookies altogether though, if a user is going to be suborn and turn cookies off, they shouldn't be logging into sites anyway. Marc. Steven Clark wrote: I've got a page with a small logon form, nothing major. It has a couple of small hurdles for validating as XHTML 1.0 strict though. The first is that XHTML doesn't support the name attribute, so of course my php that processes this login feature won't work with id instead of name. Is there something in PHP that I don't know about? Well in JavaScript I'd just have used the id attribute and then getElementById() in the script. But does PHP have this ability? Or am I just in a pickle of having to put up with it because its the way it is. What is the alternative to using name if you want to use PHP? Secondly, the page won't validate as XHTML 1.0 strict because of something in the said php code. Mmmm. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Job Posting
I know it's not common for this list to hold job postings although we are really desperate to find someone here. From: http://jobs.careerone.com.au/search/dsp_show_job.cfm?AD_ID=1235550 Shock Media Studios, (www.shockmedia.com.au) an Advertising and Information Technology based company, is seeking a qualified full-time Programmer with a high level of commitment to provision of consistently high standards of client service to join our Brisbane studio. The Candidate. The successful candidate will plan and develop websites, intranet, content management (CMS), eCommerce and data management systems, maintain and expand a number of established corporate websites and provide in-house information technology expertise. To be successful in this position you need to meet the following minimum criteria; * 2+ years demonstrated experience in developing browser-based applications using PHP technology, MySql, JavaScript, CSS HTML/XHTML; * Fundamental understanding of database design and administration; * Ability to think logically and communicate clearly; * Understanding and practice of W3C XHTML compliant code and accessibility standards; * A strong work ethic and previous exposure to corporate clients; * Knowledge of ActionScript programming is required, but not essential. The Application. Via Email. Email your resume and cover letter to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Via Phone. Shock Media Studios (07) 3254 0955 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Accessible image rotators
You could use a database, but if you just want a low maintainance method make a tab deliminated text file eg; image1.jpgThis is the first image image2.jpgThis is the second image image3.jpgThis is the thrid image Now of course the image names will reflect the images in your rotate directory and you will want your php to look a little like this ?php $altMap = file(altmap.txt); // read the file into an array $randID = rand(0,count($altMap)-1); // minus one cause the array begins with 0 $useImage = explode(\t,$altMap[$randID]); echo img src=\.$useImage[0].\ alt=\.$useImage[1].\ / ? I haven't tested it but im pretty sure that should work, give it a go. Marc. PS the paths also assume all the files are in the one directory. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 3:40 PM Subject: [WSG] Accessible image rotators hello, i am using a image rotator php script in the home page of the site. The problem will image rotator scripts either in PHP or Javascript is that, they rotate the images from a particular folder randomly. But when you validate, the image will not have alt tag or a title tag to make it accessible. How do i make that. any ideas. narain R.L. Narayan +91-98401 08007 * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] CSS Opacity
Joe Leech wrote: I know this really isn't strictly *standard* but... I am using the css level 3 opacity property (and using the alpha filter for IE) for various content boxes to show the background image. However, I have just placed an image in the opaque block and it is opaque - but I don't want it to be. Is there a way to turn off the opacity of top image? The opacity property applies to the parent element so anything inside the parent element will also be transparent. I sugest taking the image element out of the translucent element and apply position:absolute to it and align it in the correct place. Marc. * 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] entities bug in camino
It's already a known bug listed many times W3 also know it http://www.w3.org/People/mimasa/test/xhtml/entities/ It's a problem for us (WSG Members) because current standards suggest we present the content type application/xhtml+xml instead of text/html. It is just something to be aware of. Marc - Original Message - From: James Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2004 10:23 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] entities bug in camino Marc Camino, like Firefox, is a beta release so it's going to have bugs in it. You should lodge these bugs at http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/, rather than here and you'll get noticed by the Camino development team. HTH James Marc Greenstock wrote: Hi all, I hope this isn't too OT but I have discovered a bug in camino and doczilla. * 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] IE5 Mac-friendly drop down menus
I'm working on an accesssable version of the YPslideOutMenu. You can view it at www.v2.shockmedia.com.au, I have feed back that it doesn't work that well in IE5 (Mac) and Safari, however it is my intention to make it work. It works perfectly in pretty much all the windows compatable browsers but I'm finding it difficult to test for Mac cause I don't have one. You are welcome to use the script as you please with one condition: fix it for Mac and send me the fix :) The JS file is at http://www.v2.shockmedia.com.au/_js/func.slideMenu.js and it works in hand with the css file @ http://www.v2.shockmedia.com.au/_css/nav.css If you need help with getting your way around the script, let me know. (I know there arn't too many helpfull comments, but the principle is based on the YPslideOutMenu) Marc. - Original Message - From: Kay Smoljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 28, 2004 12:46 PM Subject: [WSG] IE5 Mac-friendly drop down menus Hi, We've got a client who uses Macs exclusively. Our fave dropdown menu of the moment, Son of Suckersfish, does not work in IE5 Mac. The client is also maintaining the site using Contribute, and our old-school brute force JavaScript dropdowns (CoolMenus) don't play nicely with Contribute. The original Suckerfish menus *do* work in IE5 Mac, but we need to have a solution where the top level stays highlighted while the submenus are being rolled over. We can do this with ugly old-school JavaScript mouseovers, but it's an ugly bloated solution and I'd really prefer something a bit cleaner. Anyone have any other ideas? -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.smoljak.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Standards Compliant Websites Directory
Great Idea, For the categories you may want to download the dmoz RDF dump from http://rdf.dmoz.org/. Get the structure.rdf.u8.gz. That should give you a pretty good comprehensive category listing. Dmoz has put a lot of time planing their categories so it's bound to be the best available. Just a thought on validation, are you going to automatically validate submissions? If so you may want to build your own validator. You can get a good idea from the w3c validator or WDG's validator their both free for download. Depending on how large your directory becomes, your server may get a bit flooded though. Marc. - Original Message - From: Razvan Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 2004 4:13 PM Subject: [WSG] Standards Compliant Websites Directory Hello. I've started to build a Standards Compliant Websites Directory. A Web Directory where only Valid W3C sites will be accepted. The URL is: http://compliant-websites.seoed.com Please feel free to submit sites, only VALID sites. You can also mail me the info and I will submit them. Also, if you have ideas of news categories please mail me. Kindest regards, Razvan Pop * 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] OT - Standards Compliant Websites Directory
Andy Budd wrote: A directory is a good idea, however there are quite a few sites doing similar things these days. Somebody could write a bot that validates as it crawls. Then you could have a standards compliant SE. Andy Budd http://www.message.uk.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 * I've written a validator bot before in Python, it's a bit outdated but if Razvan is interested in making this a community project, I would be more than happy to build a better one. Marc. * 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] Mac testers please
Hi all, I was wondering if anyone could be so kind as to test my site using IE for Mac 5+ and Safari http://www.v2.shockmedia.com.au Thanks. * 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] Must Read
This method uses GD, which unfortunately is the only bundled graphics library available in php. GD is fine for most purposes, it can be a little memory intensive at times though. The problem here is that the function imagegettfbbox() is sometimes unpredictable and may not get the correct height and width for the specified text, especially with overhanging letters like 'y','p' and 'q'. It is probably best to actually save the images out after the first load so the images are permanently as part of the file system. In the event that you need to change the text simply delete the images and let them reload. Marc. - Original Message - From: Kay Smoljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 2:15 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Must Read Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: Dynamic Text Replacement http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dynatext/ The php image stuff is fair enough, but I've not been impressed with JavaScript Image Replacement as a technique - when I was evaluating it, I seemed to get the unstyled version a lot of the time in both Firefox and IE. Refreshing the page fixed the problem only some of the time. Overall, seemed a bit flaky for commercial use. -- Kay Smoljak http://developer.perthweb.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 * * 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] Interesting reading
A friend of mine sent me this link; http://www.decloak.com/Dev/CSSTables/CSS_Tables_05.aspx He loves to play devils advocate so he just refuses to adopt current standards, it's ok though cause he's the competition. Happy reading :) * 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] Interesting reading
Hahaha, I knew this would ruffle a few feathers. Marc. - Original Message - From: Mordechai Peller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 8:43 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Interesting reading Marie wrote: I can't believe y'all are taking this guy seriously enough to even comment I can. I'm guessing that the reason so many have commented is that they are so blown away by the nonsensical idiocy put to HTML. Often in situations, such as this one, where one is overwhelmed by the conflict between what their senses tell them (in this case through reading) and what they know to be true, almost as a reflex they are compelled to comment. I myself would probably have commented too, were it not that by reading what others had to say my own need to shout THIS ISN'T TRUE! was largely satisfied. (That, and sneaking a few comments into my meta-comment.) he's trolling I'm not so sure; I get the feeling that he actually believes his own drivel--sad as that may be. * 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] file extensions
James Ellis wrote: Hi The portability of URI's is an important point here: as discussed, if a web developer wants to move from X to Y server side language yet retain the URL stucture then this is the way to go, in Apache it's just a simple matter of telling it how to handle certain extension-less files. That said, you should be able to set up a server to handle PHP scripts with .cfm extensions via the PHP interpreter and vice versa (as an example). I wrote an article over at the Sydney PHP Group on doing this with Apache, shared hosting or otherwise, questions welcome offlist or post to that group. http://sydney.ug.php.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=61 I agree, portability of URI's are important and an extension for an image is not doesn't necessarily qualify for an exclusion to this rule. I quite commonly render an image dynamically by setting the MIME type of a php file to the appropriate type and displaying the image I require. But I believe this is beyond the point with this article in question; The article suggests removing file extensions in the html document, eg the file logo.gif would be written in the html as img src=/images/logo /. this has no relevance to portability of URI's because it is not a direct link. Doing that with a .html document may be relevant but definitely not images. Apache has a module called mod_spell, it's not turned on by default but it helps when a site has been ported from an IIS server to apache. It solves the case sensitivity issue. The trouble is using the external modules can increase server load, a lot. Consider that you have 20 images included on a page all with their extensions removed, that means the server has to scan the specified directory for all those files rather than retrieving the specific files. That can cause a huge overload on the server, especially if there are a lot of requests at any one time. Secondly the article also referred to removing comments from javascript as if they were unnecessary garbage, but doesn't this contradict everything we have learned about good, clean code? The purpose of comments is to remember what you did six months down the track when you need to do something to it. Removing comments will undoubtably clear a few bytes from a page download, but the result will be extremely mimimal. * 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] file extensions
Christopher Kennon wrote: Hi, Below is the url and excerpt from the passage in question. I've tried it and it works. The images are displayed, but someone looking over the code commented that it appeared that an image was used, but the extension was missing. Thus the question was inspired. Chris */ http://www.sitepoint.com/article/effective-website-acceleration/2 /* Sorry but what a load of crap, what are they trying to save here? Four bytes that that represent a file extension? Big whoop. The whole concept of cleaning up your links, using mod_rewrite/mod_spell/mod_regoation, removing comments from javascript??? so your page contains a few less bytes is frivolous let alone dangerous. Marc * 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] applying styles to legend
It's a shame that IE doesn't come to the party with this one. legend is a stubborn mule that doesn't want to budge, I've really never come across such a problem with any other tags. I know what your talking about with the fieldset tag as well, that too was a pain in the butt, I had to wrap a seperate div around it and a span inside it to get it to do what I want. Marc - Original Message - From: James Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 2004 5:26 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] applying styles to legend Heh.. I banged my head against the wall about this for while, then gave up and went with the flow which got the application into production sooner. Is an IE user going to be simultaneously viewing the same page in Firefox or Mozilla or Opera? Bet you it's only web developers. Wait till you see what IE does with the fieldset tag... hint: put a top border on it and a background image in :D This is the thing: don't worry about pixel perfectness, it doesn't exist. Cheers James. Marc Greenstock wrote: Hi all, I can't figure it out, Internet Explorer puts a 10px margin to the left of the legend, setting padding and margin to 0px removes about 3px but that still leaves about 7px that I don't want. * 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] meta http-equiv
Alan Milnes wrote: The correct content type or MIME type for an XHTML document is application/xhtml+xml. Although I might add internet explorer doesn't understand it so you need to determine if the users browser accepts it.You can do this in PHP by writing: : SNIP: The suggested method doesn't work when you go to validate your pages, see the discussion at: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/03/19/dive-into-xml.html Alan * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help * That is because w3c doesn't send the server it's accepted MIME types. You can fix this by: ?php if(strstr($_SERVER['HTTP_ACCEPT'],application/xhtml+xml) || strstr($_SERVER['HTTP_USER_AGENT'],W3C_Validator)) header(Content-type: application/xhtml+xml); else header(Content-type: text/html); echo ?xml version=\1.0\ encoding=\iso-8859-1\?.\n; ? * 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] Rant about Bobby
Don't mind me I just want to rant about Automatic Accessibility checkers such as bobby. Bobbycontradicts it's self all the way through the WAI test, failing everything it THINKS is wrong. Let me give youa few examples... Problem: Do not use the same link phrase more than once when the links point to different URLS. Contradiction 1: Is there a site map or table of contents... Contradiction 2: Is there a clear, consistent navigation structure? Ok this seems straight forward right, don't have "read more" links all over the page, keep every thing concise as to explain what the user will be clicking on. Sure works well in principle, but what about when you want a site map? If you follow checkpoint 13.4 then you should keep a navigation all through out the site, right? Well Bobby doesn't think so... Bobby doesn't like links named the same, even though those links that are named the same go to the same place. Bobby kicks and screams all the way down the site map. Now I know I can quick to point blame, but I'm not sure if this is a fault of Bobby or an oversight with the WCAG. My initial thought would be Bobby is to blame, but then again it's just following orders, doing explicitly what WCAG says and not bothering to read in-between the lines. Anyway thanks for putting up with my rant. Have a nice day ;)
Re: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability
Haha, I love your rant! It's very true. The question most asked by a client is How much does a website cost?, this reflects immediately on the client as having less than half a clue. Some (not all) of my clients I have dealt with have this mentality, they don't have a clue what a website is or does, their only concern is how much? and when?. To these people I don't mention anything about accessibility, standards or the like, I have grown to pay attention to my standards, and always make sure all the site is 100% xhml compliant regardless if requested by the client or not. With regards to accessibility on the other hand that is a different story all together, I am learning it at the moment, trying to apply the content from design separation method with CSS, and I am progressing quite well. It's a matter of unlearning everything I knew about layouts with tables and learning a whole new method. I think that once I am comfortable with building sites in this manner I will be able to produce sites in the same time frame as a site with tables for layouts. To sum this up and try to answer your question, don't tell your client everything, if their the kind of client who asks how much? and when, don't tell them about standards and accessibility, just do it anyway. I know it may take a little longer, but sooner or later it will become trendy to sue inaccessible websites, and the developers who are savvy with accessibility and standards will be the ones who come out on top. The developers who don't care are going to suffer. Just my two cents ;) - Original Message - From: Lachlan Hardy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 5:57 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] legal requirements for accessability What about all the redesigns that I don't get because I insist on at least attempting to increase accessibility? What about all the bidding wars I lose because I'm going to take that little bit longer? My clients expect total revision of a page according to some obscence specs to take 20 minutes flat. They struggle when I tell them it'll take a few hours or a day (or whatever). If I tell them that what they want is inaccessible, they'll simply find someone who doesn't care I don't know what kind of world the rest of you live in, but my clients are NOT interested in the website as a specific form of media that has its own rules and regulations. They've never even heard of websites like that. They get a website so they can tell people that they have one. They don't expect anyone to actually use it, and anything which adds to the cost, time or hassle of dealing with someone to organise their public statement of being an important enough business to have a website is something to be discarded and dismissed So, please, folks, while we're here : How do you get your clients to care about accessibility? Are you dealing with folks large enough that they actually consider the chance that they might be sued, or do they actually care if people can use their site? The same goes for standards, actually. I understand the concept of just doing it. And that's what I do. Until the client asks about such and such and I let slip either of those cursed words : 'standards' or 'accessibility'. Whoa. Reign in there, fella! Who told you to go around doing things like this? How much is that costing me? Every time I have quoted for a job by mentioning standards or accessibility, my quote has been rejected. If I don't mention it in the quote and it comes up later, I'm royally stuffed I may be drifting off the thread here. Hell, I may have cut it! But I feel the point is pertinent : my clients don't care about the legalities, and if I try to push the point, they are no longer my client So, how do the rest of you deal with this? - Original Message - From: Lea de Groot I don't get it - who's ignoring them? You design the page to be accessible and if the client asks for changes that would make it inaccessible (and you really, really cant think of a way to do them 'properly') explain to him why its illegal for you to do that. But I think it would be pretty rare to get something like that. * 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] strange white flash on mouseover
Unfortunately images called in through CSS don't cache at least with IE. Go to IE Menu Tools Internet Options Temporary Internet Files Settings Turn Check for newer versions of stored pages to Automatically. The problem will go away in your browser but anyone else who doesn't have the default value set will see the problem your having. Alternatively don't use images as the background of a navigation button. Marc. BTW this is my first post. - Original Message - From: Jason Turnbull [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2004 2:04 PM Subject: RE: [WSG] strange white flash on mouseover Neerav wrote: Anyone have an idea why the menu at left of http://www.h27.info/ works fine in Firefox 0.8, Opera 7 and IE 5.5 but in IE 6 when you mouseover the links they change from the image background into a white background until you mouseout ? Neerav, I'm not seeing this behaviour in updated IE6/XP pro Regards Jason * 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 *
