[WSG] Article: MIME and Content Negotiation
"Comments, especially error-spotting and general "bravo" very welcome" One minor inaccuracy. The article written by Neil Crosby is based on an article I wrote in October of the previous year. Oddly enough, it was Russ Weakely who badgered me into writing it in the first place. Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/
Re: [WSG] Clearleft.com
Eh? What tables? Do you mean 100% width? Fixed-width layouts are less accessible than fluid-width layouts, although an elastic approach may be better. I have a 21" monitor (running 1280x1024) and I don't find it overwhelming at all. By the way, I absolutely love the two-cube logo design. It even looks pretty call as a favicon. Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/ - Original Message - From: Komal Agrawal To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2005 12:15 PM Subject: RE: [WSG] Clearleft.com Suggestion #2: Why 100% table design? You can't control the way your usersees your site. I have a 21 inch monitor and it stretches all the way acrossand is somewhat overwhelming.
Re: [WSG] Fully compliant sample site
This one is much better: http://j-walk.com/other/todd/aboutme.htm The web designer has a site too: http://j-walk.com/other/myrtle/index.htm Simon :) - Original Message - From: russ - maxdesign To: Web Standards Group Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 8:55 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Fully compliant sample site One of the best fully compliant sites I have seen is:http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbsite/There is a detailed tutorial here:http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail51.html:)Russ
Re: [WSG] browser statistics
I use a variety of sources, which include: The Counter.com Browser News WebSideStory And my own statistics, of course. Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/ - Original Message - From: Roberto Gorjão To: Web Standards Group Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 2:30 PM Subject: [WSG] browser statistics Hi all,Does anyone know, by any chance, a website with reliable statistics on browsers’ use and popularity?
Re: [WSG] Flash Satay method article
The method was never 100% reliable, but many designers have certainly put it to good use. I prefer to use this method: object classid="clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-44455354" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=7,0,19,0"width="400" height="300" param name="movie" value="movie.swf"param name="quality" value="high" param name="bgcolor" value="#FF"!--[if !IE] -- object data="movie.swf" width="400" height="300" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" param name="quality" value="high" param name="bgcolor" value="#FF" param name="pluginurl" value="http://www.macromedia.com/go/getflashplayer"ALTERNATE CONTENT HERE (should not be displayed) /object!-- ![endif]-- /object It allows you having to mess around with using embed, but it does rely on Microsoft's Conditional Comments. Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/ - Original Message - From: Stevio To: Web Standards Group Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 12:07 PM Subject: [WSG] Flash Satay method article Is the Flash Satay method from this article in 2002 still the most up to date and proper way of inserting Flash objects in a valid XHTML way?http://www.alistapart.com/articles/flashsatay/
Re: [WSG] Flash Satay method article
Actually, that won't be where alternate content goes. It should say: (Should not be displayed) My bad. Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/ - Original Message - From: Simon Jessey To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 12:32 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Flash Satay method article ALTERNATE CONTENT HERE (should not be displayed)
Re: [WSG] The mail problem
I'd feel much better having Russ incharge of a nuclear arsenal than George W. Bush, but that's just me. Thank you for taking the appropriate measures. Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/ - Original Message - From: russ - maxdesign To: Web Standards Group And in case you are wondering who suggested shutting down the whole mailserver... You guessed it, that was me. Just don't let me near any nuclearweapons!
Re: [WSG] Popups
Hi, David. Why not use a DIV that contains all the extra information you wish to convey? Conceal the DIV with display:none, and then reveal the DIV when the user hovers over some sort of hotspot (use a lowercase white"i" on a blue circle- the universal symbol for "information").Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/ - Original Message - From: david To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, January 13, 2005 7:50 AM Subject: [WSG] Popups So I was thinking about doing what other sites do... and thats to put a "more info on this field" link, people click on it, and a popup appears with the minimum of browser UI chrome and jumps to the right section in the code Does anyone have any alternatives?
Re: [WSG] using IE7 script
IE7 works very well indeed. The print style sheets problem can be overcome, I believe, but another problem exists - you cannot use a stylesheet switcher because it overrides the CSS that is used to fix IE. Simon Jessey Business Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Personal Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Business Site: http://keystonewebsites.com/ Personal Site: http://jessey.net/ - Original Message - From: Adrian Lynch [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 9:58 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] using IE7 script One problem we have encountered (which should be resolved in the next version) is it causes problems with your print style sheets. ** 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] Serving application/xhtml+xml MIME Type to W3C HTML Validator problem
Hi, Andrey.
This altered version of the script respects the Validator:
?php
/*
This script determines the preferred MIME type of a user agent
and then delivers either application/xhtml+xml or text/html.
Copyright (c) 2003 - 2004 Keystone Websites and Simon Jessey
*/
$charset = utf-8;
$mime = text/html;
function fix_code($buffer) {
return (str_replace( /, , $buffer));
}
if(stristr($_SERVER[HTTP_ACCEPT],application/xhtml+xml)) {
if(preg_match(/application\/xhtml\+xml;q=([01]|0\.\d{1,3}|1\.0)/i,$_SERVER
[HTTP_ACCEPT],$matches)) {
$xhtml_q = $matches[1];
if(preg_match(/text\/html;q=q=([01]|0\.\d{1,3}|1\.0)/i,$_SERVER[HTTP_ACCE
PT],$matches)) {
$html_q = $matches[1];
if((float)$xhtml_q = (float)$html_q) {
$mime = application/xhtml+xml;
}
}
} else {
$mime = application/xhtml+xml;
}
}
if(stristr($_SERVER[HTTP_USER_AGENT],WDG_Validator) ||
stristr($_SERVER[HTTP_USER_AGENT],W3C_Validator)) {
$mime = application/xhtml+xml;
}
if($mime == application/xhtml+xml) {
$doc_head = ?xml version=\1.0\ encoding=\$charset\?\n;
$doc_head = $doc_head.!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC \-//W3C//DTD XHTML
1.1//EN\;
$doc_head = $doc_head.
\http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd\;\n;
$doc_head = $doc_head.html xmlns=\http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml\;
xml:lang=\en\\n\n;
$doc_head = $doc_head. head\n;
} else {
ob_start(fix_code);
$doc_head = !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC \-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01
Transitional//EN\;
$doc_head = $doc_head. \http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd\;\n;
$doc_head = $doc_head.html lang=\en\\n\n;
$doc_head = $doc_head. head\n;
$doc_head = $doc_head.meta http-equiv=\content-type\
content=\$mime;charset=$charset\\n;
}
header(Content-Type: $mime;charset=$charset);
header(Vary: Accept);
print $doc_head;
?
Simon Jessey
--
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web : http://jessey.net/blog/
work: http://keystonewebsites.com/
- Original Message -
From: Andrey V. Stefanenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am try to adapt technic of serving the right MIME Type you may find at
http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php
Partially all fine - at my page i am serving application/xhtml+xml with
XHTML 1.1 Doctype to Mozilla based browsers and text/html with XHTML 1.0
Strict to others.
http://development.it.net.ua/lab/itdevelopment/itdevelopment/validator_mockery.php
Work well - Mozilla get XHTML 1.1, IE6 get XHTML 1.0
But W3C validator determine my source like XHTML 1.0 with text/html
MIME-type
**
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] Ten Questions for Roger Johansson
I'd just like to say that I think this series of Ten Questions is excellent. Each interview gives us the opportunity to learn more about the minds and techniques of influential industry folk, and I've been thoroughly impressed with the results. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: russ - maxdesign [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] Ten Questions for Roger Johansson Roger Johansson talks about web standards, round corners, development mistakes, ampersands and more: http://webstandardsgroup.org/features/roger-johansson.cfm ** 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] Re: It's all in the MIME
Of course, you can still get the original version of the script from here: http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: Alan Milnes [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 11:24 AM Subject: [WSG] Re: It's all in the MIME Thanks to everyone for all the help, suggestions and links. I've amended the code from http://www.workingwith.me.uk/articles/scripting/mimetypes/ to send IE XHTML 1.0 and if anyone wants to borrow it then it can be found at:- http://www.college.gameplan.org.uk/wsg/mimetype.txt ** 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] ultimate noob question.... is table-less layout meaning literally?
Hi, Duncan.
All the sites I design are based on CSS-driven layouts; however, I still use
tables for presenting tabulated data (naturally). Even the most hardcore CSS
junkie will admit that there are some table-based layouts that cannot be
replicated using just CSS. The usual way to get around this problem is to
compromise the layout, but a client may insist on a certain functionality
that can only be achieved with tables at the moment.
Deep nesting is definitely a problem, because it produces a LOT of wasteful,
presentational markup that is hard to immediately comprehend. Deeply-nested
DIVs are just as bad though, so don't fall out of the frying pan into the
fire.
Simon Jessey
--
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
web : http://jessey.net/blog/
work: http://keystonewebsites.com/
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] ultimate noob question is table-less layout meaning
literally?
Thing I have trouble getting my head round is the term table-less
layout. I have started doing entirely CSS based design where I add no
design info to the XHTML, and i've had great success, but I've not been
able to abandon the use of tables entirely. This is primarily because
with
tables the row height is always uniform and lush edges (e.g. shadowing)
can
be easily recreated using empty rows/columns with the correct class.
Also I don't understand where deeply nested tables = too deep. For one
of my sites I have a 3x3 table for the layout. The outer cells make up
the
frame of the site, all done using td{background: and then extra tables in
the middle-left (menu) and middle-center (content) cells again using 3x3s
to give a border (or at least 1x3s with fixed width). Is this bad or is
this acceptable?
**
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] How to insert QuickTime on website and validate like XHTML?
You might find it easier to adapt Ian Hickson's method of inserting Flash to work with Quicktime: http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/flash/001.html Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ In one of websites which I am doing I must put virtual visits done in QuickTime. If I use EMBED to see the visits in not-IE navigators, website will not validated like XHTML. Some solution? I already know the solutions for the Flash like Flash Satay, but I don't know how apply it to a QuickTime. * 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] What Editors do you guys use?
Original Message - From: "helmut" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] What Editors do you guys use? What CSS/XHTML/HTML editors do you guys use for hand coding and testing? I now use UltraEdit-32. Simon Jessey--mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web : http://jessey.net/blog/work: http://keystonewebsites.com/
Re: [WSG] Web safe colours - still relevent ?
I would argue that it depends on your target audience. Suppose you are developing for an audience that mostly uses cellular phones and PDAs. Few of these devices support more than 256 colors, so the web-safe colors are relevant for those devices. If you are aiming for just regular web browsers, however, the full range of colors are just fine. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: Neerav [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: WSG [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 3:12 AM Subject: [WSG] Web safe colours - still relevent ? Is the opinion of list members that only using web safe colours in html/css is still the way to go or not relevant anymore? this article published 6 Sep 2000 http://hotwired.lycos.com/webmonkey/00/37/index2a.html seems to support my suspicions that ive been using web safe colours for much longer than I needed to ... * 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] Web safe colours - still relevent ?
Not all small screen devices need WML. Many support XHTML and rudimentary CSS. Simon Jessey - Original Message - From: theGrafixGuy [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 16, 2004 11:21 AM Subject: RE: [WSG] Web safe colours - still relevent ? I would argue that it depends on your target audience. Suppose you are developing for an audience that mostly uses cellular phones and PDAs. Few of these devices support more than 256 colors, so the web-safe colors are relevant for those devices. But if you are building for those devices, why wouldn't you just build a WAP site??? * 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] Auto-replies
PLEASE turn off those automatic responders if you plan on inhabiting this list. I don't post as much as I'd like to because I get a slew of out of office responses. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] EMBED tag
An interesting point of view. I have used Satay, _javascript_, and Ian Hickson's new method. I prefer the latter because it eliminates the need for an extra SWF, as well as some of the problems detailed in the extensive discussion that followed. Simon Jessey--mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web : http://jessey.net/blog/work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: "James Beattie" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] EMBED tag I still think the Satay method is more elegant (and has far less code clutter) - Original Message - From: "Simon Jessey" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] EMBED tag Mario, Ian Hickson recently came up with a more elegant alternative to the Satay and _javascript_ solutions. Read his post about it here: http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1081798064count=1 And see his example here: http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/flash/001.html
Re: [WSG] EMBED tag
Mario, Ian Hickson recently came up with a more elegant alternative to the Satay and JavaScript solutions. Read his post about it here: http://ln.hixie.ch/?start=1081798064count=1 And see his example here: http://damowmow.com/playground/demos/flash/001.html Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] EMBED tag I've noticed that the EMBED tag doesn't comply with XHTML, but won't display Flash clips in NN, Mozilla, or Firefox if omitted. This poses a real problem because I use small Flash clips in customer sites as banner ads, and if I remove the EMBED tag then the Flash file won't load, and there's a hole in my page. Any suggestions that will help me resolve this problem would be greatly appreciated. * 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: writing-mode / MS runs W3C?
I'm afraid you've misinterpreted what I was trying to say, Chris. What I was trying to say is this: Microsoft's dominant market position creates a condition where browser enhancements and innovation are not very important to Microsoft. I absolutely and completely agree that they are important to designers, developers, and users alike. At least, however, this lack of innovation and the dominant position has given designers and developers a period of stability. Simon Jessey--mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web : http://jessey.net/blog/work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: "Chris Blown" [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "WSG" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 11:15 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS: writing-mode / MS runs W3C? On Sun, 2004-05-02 at 23:55, Simon Jessey wrote: Microsoft's dominant market position creates a condition where browser enhancements and innovation are not very important. Sorry I must disagree. These _are_ important, not just to designers, but to all people who experience web pages on the Internet.
Re: [WSG] CSS: writing-mode / MS runs W3C?
I don't think there will be ANY updates of IE. When "Longhorn" emerges, Internet Explorer will probably be subsumed by the operating system. In fact, I don't think IE will be available on any other platform after 6.0. Simon Jessey--mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web : http://jessey.net/blog/work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: Chris Stratford To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 3:24 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS: writing-mode / MS runs W3C? Another thing is...MS will eventually update IE...
Re: [WSG] CSS: writing-mode / MS runs W3C?
Microsoft is indeed a major contributor to the World Wide Web Consortium, but the W3C is an independent organization. Financial and technical contributions come from a wide variety of industry sources. Microsoft certainly DOESN'T call the shots at the W3C. You should never think of IE as "the worst browser out there". Internet Explorer was one of the first web browsers to include support for Cascading Style Sheets. IE5 for the Mac has revolutionary support. IE6.0/Win is actually an excellent browser, with good support for most of CSS1 and a large proportion of CSS2. Most IE frustration is caused by the need for web designers to support earlier versions of IE (5.0 and 5.5), and the lack of updates to the existing client. Microsoft's dominant market position creates a condition where browser enhancements and innovation are not very important. The need for native PNG alpha transparency support, full support for position:fixed, and other similar things DO frustrate designers; however, we must be thankful that IE6 is as good as it is. Remember, it was not all that long ago that the "worst browser out there" was Netscape Navigator 4.x. For too long, web designers were forced to accomodate this truly awful abomination. Thankfully, its market share now barely registers on the browser stats charts. Simon Jessey--mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web : http://jessey.net/blog/work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: Chris Stratford To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 8:03 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS: writing-mode Ok thanks guys!That cleared up my curiosity for the day!btw another thing...I have been told by someone that the W3C is controlled by MS.Which I thought was total crap since IE is the worst browser out there...I know that MS dontated a lot of tech to W3C... is there any validity to my friends suggestion??
Re: [WSG] MS runs W3C?
But you have to agree that at the moment, the state of IE5 and IE6 is bad... I'm not sure I do really. I have copies of IE5, 5.5, and 6.0 on my PC for development purposes. I find that (within reason) I am able to create cross-browser layouts and designs without much difficulty. It is true that there are times when I must resort to the odd hack or two, but I keep that down to a minimum. IE5.x is a pain, but IE6 is actually pretty darn good for an old timer. The thought of Firefox (my browser of choice) having a dominant market share is somewhat unsettling at the moment, because it is still very much in development. I'll be much happier with that concept once it has had it's 1.0 "stable" release. It is worth noting, by the way, that the excellent work of Dean Edwards* may alleviate your IE5.5/6.0 problems. IE5 support is coming soon. * http://www.dean.edwards.name/IE7/ Simon Jessey--mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web : http://jessey.net/blog/work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: Chris Stratford Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS: writing-mode / MS runs W3C? WowFlamed :)When I said the worst browser.At the moment, in my eyes - IE is the worst thing to happen to webdevelopment.Imagine if FireFox had the margin share...I know IE started a revolution and the browser wars... and it won...I admit - I use IE a lot more than anyother brower.But thats only because 80% of my most frequented websites dont load as expected in FireFox or Netscape...But you have to agree that at the moment, the state of IE5 and IE6 is bad...IE5 doesnt load CSS half as well as you would hope...IE6 is laden with bugs that have plagued webdevs, and forced hacks and work arounds for the last few years!I wish IE would either upgrade...or get out of the majority of marketshare...
Re: [WSG] MS runs W3C?
In an old article* I wrote about trying to recreate frames with CSS, I used IE's conditional comments to get around the problems it has with position: fixed. The article validates: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fjessey.net%2Fsimon%2Farticles%2F007.html * http://jessey.net/simon/articles/007.html Simon Jessey--mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]web : http://jessey.net/blog/work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: Peters Micheal A Contr GSI/SCBN To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 12:12 PM Subject: RE: [WSG] MS runs W3C? Speaking of Dean Edwards work, are conditional comments Valid HTML or just another MS HTML'ism?
Re: [WSG] Web Essentials 04
- Original Message - From: Andy Budd [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] Web Essentials 04 Just wanted to say how cool the Web Essentials 04 conference looks. http://we04.com/ It's defiantly something I'd love to attend. Shame it's on the other side of the world. I second that. I would have loved to attend, but the costs of flying to Oz (and the registration fee) make it impossible for me :( Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Some links for reading...
One of the comments left on the site for that article made me spill Diet Coke everywhere. Too funny: CSS is an arcane, poorly implemented technology that reacts very differently not only on different platforms and different browsers, but also on different versions of the same browser on the same platform. That's analagous to saying: 'This tennis ball is rubbish, it works fine when I hit it with a tennis racquet, but when I try to hit it with this fresh turd, the ball doesn't go anywhere and I get covered in crap. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: russ - maxdesign [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] Some links for reading... Web standards. They¹re big, dumb, and they don¹t work. Yet, they persist. Why? A strange perspective by a 'professional' web developer: http://www.apcmag.com/apc/v3.nsf/0/A569C81864DC4F1BCA256E5F001A59C5 * 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] Looking for a little peer review
Hey, Nelson. I can't see anything wrong with it in IE6/WinXP Pro. I have all the latest updates, etc. Looks very nice, BTW. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: Nelson Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 1:24 PM Subject: [WSG] Looking for a little peer review Anyway, I'd appreciate a quick check with as many browsers as possible just to ensure I haven't missed anything. http://www.nelsonford.net/ * 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] Valid Flash...
I am not a big fan of Macromedia Flash. To me, it will always be a proprietary format with an accessibility problem, despite Macromedia's efforts to promote otherwise; however, it cannot be discounted as a web medium. Until SVG becomes more widely accepted, Flash is King. I chose not to use it for personal work, but I will happily use it if a client requests it. Thus far, I have been forced to use the Satay method to include it in my work. Ian Hickson's solution appears to be sound. Anne van Kesteren rightly points out that it creates more markup, and has to resort to conditional comments, but it does represent a simpler solution to that proposed by A List Apart's twice-cooked method. I will probably use this method, until a better one presents itself. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web : http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - From: scott parsons [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Valid Flash... What I don't understand is why someone would bother... to me flash is not a W3C standard, thus it will not validate... but maybe that is just me. * 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 Shorthand for color
- Original Message - From: Leo J. O'Campo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS Shorthand for color While we are on the topic of color palettes and standard color notation, IMHO using the web safe palette for desktop websites is like coding for Mosaic. In this day and age, just about any color monitor still working, can display better than 8 bit color. ;-) Actually, I would argue that it isn't as simple as that. Lately, I have noticed in my access logs that more and more PDA/cellphone users are hitting my website. Many of these devices are only capable of rendering the so-called browser-safe colors. Indeed, some only have 16 colors. It seems that a sensible philosophy is to consider your target audience. If you are going to have many users accessing with devices of limited color performance, use the web-safe palette. Alternatively, you might consider producing a light version of a site that caters to these devices, by means of an alternate stylesheet. Since few of these devices support the handheld media type, you may need to sniff for them. Another thing to consider is the large number of people who suffer some form of color blindness. This may further limit the palette you have available. Simon Jessey [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jessey.net/blog/ * 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] object z-indexing
- Original Message - From: Phillips, Wendy [EMAIL PROTECTED] Flash will always come to the top as it is an activeX object you can use the wmode parameter but that is not supported in all browsers http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/ts/documents/flash_top_layer.htm Thanks for the tip - it has given me a direction to go with. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] object z-indexing
- Original Message - From: James Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Flash will always come to the top as in the link below although this is not due to the Active-x i-ness of the plugin (Flash is only an ActiveX control for IE for Windows - see the object tag discussion at that xml.com link I posted last week). Have you tried using the object only Satay code (i.e not Embed) - works ok on all modern browsers? I always use the Satay method, but this is the first time I have ever wanted to mess with the z-indexing. As it turns out, I can use the CSS z-index property on two separate Flash objects, and this will achieve the specific effect I am after. Originally, I wanted a PNG floating over a Flash animation, but now I see I can convert the PNG into a Flash object and do it that way. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Shorthand for Borders?
- Original Message - From: Stephen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is there an easier way (i.e. Shorthand) to declare this type of border (for example)?: border-top: 1px solid #555; border-right: 2px solid #666; border-bottom: 3px solid #777; border-left: 4px solid #888; - Nope. That is already in shorthand. Longhand is like this: border-top-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-top-color: #555; and so on. Please see this: http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/box.html#border-properties Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Background PNGs in IE/Win?
I use a piece of software called TweakPNG [ http://entropymine.com/jason/tweakpng/ ] which enables you to create a background color to cope with transparency issues in IE. The background color is only added when necessary, but it means that you have to rework PNGs when you change the color. It has, however, meant that I can use PNGs to good effect in my work. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - I have found problems with the colour displaying correctly in IE, because I want the png to complement the background colour it blends fine in moz but in IE it displays with a different shade and ruins it. Which is the reason I haven't switched to using png (even 8bit) all the time. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] What Causes Selection Problems In IE.
If I remember correctly, you can get it to work by using Quirks Mode, but that is likely to cause other problems. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ - Original Message - Here is a test page to show you. Check it with Win/IE6: http://www.maxdesign.com.au/jobs/css/try-and-highlight-me.htm You can't select the text. Another gotta-love-ie thing :) * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Making my menus work across multiple browsers
I usually do this when I want to feed IE with different values:
selector { rules that work with IE }
parentselector { rules hidden from IE that override the previous rules }
In this case:
selector { left: value; }
parentselector { left: 0; margin-left: value; }
Simon Jessey
--
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
blog: http://jessey.net/blog/
work: http://keystonewebsites.com/
- Original Message -
The problem I am having is that Mozilla seems to need the margin-left
property to position the submenus correctly, while IE seems to prefer the
left property. Is there a good way to make one property invisible to the
browser it doesn't like?
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
RE: [WSG] PHP Question...
Another thing to consider is XML. Some people (myself included) create XML files on a regular basis. The PHP short tag ? can easily be confused by XML parsers, because it is the same as the beginning of a Processing Instruction. For example:?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1" ? The problem doesn't usually arise, because the server strips the page of PHP as it is being served; however, it is better to be safe than sorry, eh? --Simon Jesseybusiness: http://keystonewebsites.com/personal: http://jessey.net/blog/e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message-From: Beau Lebens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: RE: [WSG] PHP Question... ?php is more reliable - you can configure a server to ignore "?" as an opening PHP tag (short_tags i think the directive is from memory). for compatibilities sake, you should always use the ?php tag in your coding, but if short tags are enabled, then technically the 2 are the same (both just define a block of PHP code) -Original Message-From: Chris Stratford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [WSG] PHP Question... Wondering, what is the difference between using: ? /* php code */? as opposed to: ?PHP /* php code */ ?
[WSG] Serving XHTML properly - and respecting the Q rating
Hey, everyone. http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php I have updated my article on serving XHTML properly to take into account the quality (or Q) ratings that may or may not accompany a MIME type string in an Accept header. I would appreciate it if any PHP/programmer gurus could look it over and see if the logic is sound. At the moment, it appears to be successfully serving HTML to Opera 7, which gives text/html a higher Q rating than for application/xhtml+xml. Personally, I think this is probably taking the technique into the realm of the pointless, but I feel obliged to satisfy some ubergeeks. Simon Jessey -- mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] blog: http://jessey.net/blog/ work: http://keystonewebsites.com/ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Simon Jessey on XHTML and mime types
I was forced to edit this article this morning, after getting bitch-slapped about a few things (see http://www.agresticism.org/furrow/2003/10/25/me_me_mime/ for an explanation). - Original Message - From: russ weakley [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [WSG] Simon Jessey on XHTML and mime types Well... true to his word, Simon has written a great article/tutorial on XHTML and mime types (in record time too!): For most websites, authoring in HTML 4.01 is perfectly sufficient. Most of the features available in XHTML are available in good old HTML. However, some sites may wish to take advantage of the extensibility of XML, so delivering in XHTML with the correct MIME may be important. Simon describes a technique that takes advantage of the PHP server-side scripting language. Web pages can be served as either XHTML with application/xhtml+xml, or HTML with text/html. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] How do I redefine in CSS an html tag to...
-Original Message- From: Glenn Slaven [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 12:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] How do I redefine in CSS an html tag to... |As far as I know it can only be done using a client-side script, as target is depreciated. A pain in the neck I know, but I think the rationality was the the target attribute was supposed to only be for frames and the target=_BLANK was actually a hack. That is partly true. The target attribute is indeed part of FRAMES; therefore, it has no place in stricter doctypes like XHTML 1.1, etc. The main reason for excluding it, however, was its unsuitability. It is generally accepted that users must be given the right to make their own choices with regards to opening new instances of browser windows, for reasons of accessibility. Another consideration is the need to expand web authoring to cope with alternative devices, such as PDAs, cellular phones, etc. Few of these have the capability to open seperate browser windows. I can understand the problem. For a long time, it has been drummed into web designers that it is bad to let a customer leave your site by clicking on an external link. Usability studies have shown, however, that users are more internet-savvy than we give them credit for, and they know perfectly well how to get back to a site. I think that opening new windows DOES have a place when it comes to offering online help, but that still gives a problem when trying to cope with those aforemention alternative devices. -- Simon Jessey business: http://keystonewebsites.com/ personal: http://jessey.net/blog/ e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 9/11/2003 * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
