RE: [WSG] Width defaulting to 100%?
Kara, Block elements (like div) always expand to the full width by default. By the sounds of it you're after an inline element, so either: A) use a span instead or B) set display:inline; on the DIV You might find it helpful to read up on the difference between block and inline elements. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Kara O'Halloran - Eduka Sent: Tuesday, 4 October 2005 2:39 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Width defaulting to 100%? Hi guys, I have 2 divs inside a container. 1: a relatively positioned div to contain and position an image 2: another div, absolute position, to contain a submenu. Image on left, menu on right. For some reason, both divs are expanding horizontally to take up all the available space, even when the content inside them is only 20 pixels wide. I'm not specifying any widths because the content is dynamic so I have no way of knowing what the width will be. The only width I have specified is the container width of 60em. Why are they doing this? Shouldn't they only expand horizontally to make room for whatever is contained in them - in this case only a few words? Any help would be appreciated. :) K (ps this happens in both ff and ie.) ** 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] Page templates submitted for review (discard previous mail)
Pat, The New York design shows up like this in a screen reader: Page has twelve links Kraainem dash NewYork dash Mozilla Firefox Summary colon Layout table Table with one column and one row Table end List of six items bullet This page link Home alt plus 1 bullet This page link News bullet This page link Contact alt plus 9 bullet This page link Sitemap alt plus s bullet This page link Skip nav alt plus 2 bullet This page link Help alt plus 0 List end List of six items bullet This page link New York bullet This page link Paris bullet This page link Milan bullet This page link Brussels bullet This page link London bullet This page link Hong Kong List end Theres still some unnecessary stuff that clutters the output. Just because it meets all the validators doesnt mean its correct on the accessiblity front. Also, I just dont see why you need a table here. Nice idea though and I like some of the designs. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Pat Boens Sent: Thursday, 29 September 2005 3:04 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Page templates submitted for review (discard previous mail) Dears, In an attempt to bring a little contribution to the world of web standards we have developed a dozen templates that we would like to submit for your review. These templates are all shared under the terms of the Attribution license of Creative Commons. We would like to obtain your comments in the following areas: 1) XHTML 1.1: quality of code (+ possible improvements) 2) CSS: quality of code (+ possible improvements) 3) WCAG: we tend to create Triple-A templates, how good are we doing? are our templates/pages really accessible? 4) Elegance of design: how good are we doing? Here are the templates: http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/Liquid/Samples/tennis.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/corporate/corporate2.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/motoconcho/motoconcho.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/Liquid/Liquid2.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/Quietude/Quietude.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/senator/senator.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/spagyrum/spagyrum.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/Typografia/Typografia.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/Veritas/Veritas.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/NewYork/NewYork.html http://www.fastwrite.com/dvlonly/web/paradeigma/Furio/Furio.html Thank you for your input. Pat Boens
RE: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility
Stuart, The out of box ASP.NET controls in v1.1 are really quite shocking. The out of box ASP.NET controls in v2 are XHTML compliant. (However this doesn't mean they are semantic.) However, the webforms concept (which uses all these drag n' drop controls) isn't very good when it comes to the separation of concerns approach that you're after. You probably want to look at the MonoRail project - http://www.castleproject.org/ which is basically a .NET version of Ruby on Rails. This is the framework used behind my sites like http://www.viavirtualearth.com/ which are semantic, compliant XHTML sites. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stuart Sherwood Sent: Tuesday, 27 September 2005 10:13 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility I have been lucky enough to work with a very experienced java programmer on the last few sites I have designed. I do all the front end, he does the database, application, CMS, security and e-commerce development. The experience has been very pleasurable because of the degree of separation we have achieved between the front and back ends that allows me to make the sites fully standards compatible. Any dymanic content spits out pure content with the bare minimum of markup necessary. I'm wondering how .net compares as I haven't had the chance yet to build a site with it? Regards, Stuart Sherwood www.re-entity.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: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility
Not true you just need to know how to use it properly instead of Microsoft bashing. If you do want to use the built in controls and still get compliant markup, I can provide you with a really simple article on how to do so. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslist Sent: Tuesday, 27 September 2005 10:34 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: re: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility Have you ever seen anything that microsoft makes that makes anything near compliant code? didnt think so If you are going to use .net and want complient code then you will spend a lot of time going back and tweaking the code to get it to comply. From: Stuart Sherwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:23 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility I have been lucky enough to work with a very experienced java programmer on the last few sites I have designed. I do all the front end, he does the database, application, CMS, security and e-commerce development. The experience has been very pleasurable because of the degree of separation we have achieved between the front and back ends that allows me to make the sites fully standards compatible. Any dymanic content spits out pure content with the bare minimum of markup necessary. I'm wondering how .net compares as I haven't had the chance yet to build a site with it? Regards, Stuart Sherwood www.re-entity.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] teaching students developing to web standards
Christian, I agree with that. The word transitional implies that its about moving to newer standards. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Montoya Sent: Monday, 12 September 2005 8:20 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] teaching students developing to web standards That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Transitional pages are full of deprecated HTML 4.0 tags that are not allowed in XHTML 1.1 or 2.0. Strict pages can usually be validated as XHTML 1.1 without any changes. Just read the XHTML specifications for differences between XHTML 1.0 and 1.1. It's about 3 lines. Strict means the page meets XHTML 1.0 specs completely. Transitional means the page has deprecated tags that are being ignored. It's a very simple difference. Anyone else concur? On 9/11/05, dwain alford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Christian Montoya wrote: Actually, I forgot about this link too. This is a class at Cornell University that teaches XHTML 1.0 Strict. Here's the link: http://cs130.cs.cornell.edu as was brought to my attention not too long ago, if your pages are strict, then the future life of the pages is shortened with any changes to the xhtml recommendations.the transitional doctype seems to be a better choice because it will last longer than the strict doctype.i think someone on this list brought this to my attention. dwain -- dwain alford [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alforddesigngroup.com The Savior replied; There is no such thing as sin;... 'The Gospel of Mary of Magdala' ** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Q: cross browser submit button image replacement
Rex, Safari won't let you style at all. Take a look at what I did on www.whatcanido.com.au for the search fields top-left. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rex Chung Sent: Monday, 15 August 2005 9:16 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Q: cross browser submit button image replacement Hi all, Anyone know what is the best practise for image replacement with rollover states for submit buttons. I tried adding onmouseover class change javascript with: 1. background image for input type=submit / but - doesnt work for safari, value attribute shows up 2. text-indent=-1000em for button type=submit submit/button but onmouseover doesnt seem to work for IE. I haven't found a good solution for cross browser capability with rollover states. Thanks! Rex. ** 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] Spacing Issue
Hi there, I just launched http://www.viavirtualearth.com/ which uses a three column layout + header. Yes - there are like two CSS hacks to make it work - but seriously, get over it... If there's a tradeoff between tables or two hacks I'll take the two hacks. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Webmaster Sent: Friday, 12 August 2005 12:22 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Spacing Issue a div-based header/3-column/footer layout that is accessible. http://www.google.com/search?q=3+column+accessible+css+layout yields some good results... Sadly not. The search for a valid CSS/(X)HTML, hack-free, 3-column CSS layout continues. I'm still accepting offers for a solution. Even one that requires a combination of techniques which incorporate a baseline footer and other goodies. For those who are interested in using a real world example, please feel free to replicate my organisation's soon-to-launch site without tables. Now there's a Web stabdards challenge for you. http://d81314.i50.quadrahosting.com.au/ You can see I didn't try terribly hard. And, yes, I'm aware that TD widths are deprecated. But what's a boy to do, eh? ** 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] Spacing Issue
Brian, I'll ignore the 'get over it' This was directed aimlessly at a lot of people, not personal. ;-) My only real issue with hacks is that they are not future proof. They main requirement for our hacks was to get IE into line. As the website has a largely Microsoft target audience, IE7 is already an issue for us. While we test in IE6 and IE7, we haven't yet had any differences. This may change in Beta 2, but for now it is all fine. Realistically, if you're desigining a site for a few hundred bucks and leaving it for 2 years, future proofing is a bit of an issue, but for most sites it's not that hard to keep ahead of the browser curve. Browsers are only release about every six months to a year at best. Well done. Thanks alot. I see many sites not unlike Virtual Earth hitting the Net very soon. :) I don't understand what you mean here? Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Webmaster Sent: Friday, 12 August 2005 12:53 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Spacing Issue If there's a tradeoff between tables or two hacks I'll take the two hacks. Hi Tatham, Looks good. I'll ignore the 'get over it' and move to accept your suggestion that a couple of hacks are acceptable. My only real issue with hacks is that they are not future proof. I see many sites not unlike Virtual Earth hitting the Net very soon. :) Well done. RIP Brian Grimmer ** 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] Site Check: VVE
All, Just a quick ping to say that we've finished version 0.5 of the site which should include 95% of the feedback I received on the list. http://testdrive.fueladvance.com/vve/ Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) Sent: Tuesday, 2 August 2005 10:58 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: Tom Harvey Subject: [WSG] Site Check: VVE Guys n gals, In light of the Broadleaf discussion/brawl the other week, I have a new proposal for you. In this case, bandwidth was critical due to the existing sites traffic base and formed a major design goal. http://testdrive.fueladvance.com/vve/ There are still some oddities in IE6, however I have posted to CSS-D about this. What I was mostly interested in some feedback on was the mark-up, etc I was just wondering if anybody had any pointers about how to improve it. Thanks in advance! And Ill try not to start a punchup this time. ;-) Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com
[WSG] Editor Controls
Hi all, Im looking for some advice on editor controls (like JS controls) for a CMS type thing Im building. Basically, it needs to be a rich edit control thats simple for users to use. However: Must produce XHTML Must only produce p, ul, ol, li, a, img, code, dl, dt, dd, strong, em, del Must only allow the user to format by bold = strong italics = em strike = del or a selection of classnames that I specify in the configuration Must allow embedding of images Could allow upload of images Any ideas? Most of the controls out there seems to generate crappy HTML4 then hack it across to something thats mostly XHTML. If I cant find one, Ill probably start writing one then make it open source down the track, however I dont really have that much time to wait for it. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com
RE: [WSG] Site Check: VVE
David, Tidy Online will eliminate all the white space on your file. The page is dynamically generated, hence all the weird tabbing that steps in an out. I'll get a server side filter working shortly that does that kind of stuff. Why are you using XHTML 1.1? Why not? Am I missing something newer or cooler? Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.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] Site Check: VVE
David, One of the main advantages of XHTML for us is that we can use XML storage for the CMS, and just plug this straight into the page. The whole thing is XML. :-) Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Laakso Sent: Wednesday, 3 August 2005 4:31 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: VVE Tom Livingston wrote: On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 12:36:39 -0400, David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, this page http://testdrive.fueladvance.com/vve/Dashboard/Default.ashx is not breaking in any of my browsers. Regards, David Laakso So, XHTML 1.1 is bad because? Hi Tom, Tatham has a good -- readable, usable, accessible, content driven-- page going. You might say it is 'cool.' I do not know that XHTML 1.1 is good or bad. I am asking an academic question: what doctype is best for Tatham's 'cool' page? Regards, David Laakso -- David Laakso http://www.dlaakso.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] Site Check: Broadleaf
Mugur, This article only discusses reducing the HTML size which if you take a look at the site is already rather anorexic. Loading an image once, caching it for potentially weeks, and not loading anything other than small HTML pages as they browse the rest of the site seems like the smartest way its going to happen. Basically, unless theres some fancy new way to encode the image, I dont see any point is destroying an otherwise good design that our VCD team has generated for the sake of saving a few seconds once-off. Yes I think 120kb is big (not huge though). If there is a way to make it smaller, feel free to suggest and Ill implement. Otherwise, the speed of an extreme minority of our user base shouldnt restrict how we work. Also, Im not assuming as you suggest we have bandwidth stats from the current broadleaf.com.au site to suggest that narrowband isnt a significant concern. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mugur Padurean Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 3:48 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf Sorry, but quoting Microsoft page as good design example is not a good ideea. No web page that big IS a good ideea. Maybe this will help you: http://www.stopdesign.com/articles/throwing_tables/ The purpose of the article it's slightly different but it's a very good motivator for small size web pages. Also asuming that your clients will not care or will not be affected by a web page size does not sound to me like a good business atitute. I have no intention to annoy you or to start a rant. It's just just that i'm on ADSL connection ... half the planet away. And big pages load slowly, almost as dial-up (or so it feels). On 7/25/05, Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Edward, Thanks for your input, however we didn't really consider this a big issue as: most of the target market will be on office internet connections and ADSL is basically a minimum for such people in Australia the image is only downloaded once, and will be reused in the content pages, just with different column layouts because the image is only downloaded once, only the first page hit will be slow and first page hit occurs because users are after something on your site - they are prepared to wait a bit longer to get it; keeping tight page sizes is more critical when moving around a site in which case we're only about 4k total because the image is loaded through CSS, all of the content will be positioned and usable anyway before the background clogs the connection just that a few seconds later the thing will start to look good as well many larger sites are starting to acknowledge all of these points as well: microsoft.com home page is pushing 140k sxc.hu home page is pushing 107k yahoo.com.au home page is pushing 167k ninemsn.com home page is pushing 136k news.com.au home page is pushing 383k Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Edward Clarke Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 3:08 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf I suspect the 120Kb footprint of the background image is of more concern to most visitors. Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matthew Vanderhorst Sent: 24 July 2005 17:52 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf The design is very nice but the background image of the tree repeats. It is not noticeable until the resolution goes beyond 1024x768. There were some css validation errors as well (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile="">).
RE: [WSG] What not to do for colour blind users
There's a good article here: http://jfly.iam.u-tokyo.ac.jp/color/ which goes through all the variations quite well. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.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] Site Check: Broadleaf
Edward, The full stylesheet is only served for media=screen. For media=print and media=handheld they currently just get the raw page, which due to the mark-up works quite well anyway. Is this what you mean at all? Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Edward Clarke Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 5:08 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf The problem is youre designing for a technology [DSL], not accessibility. May I suggest a handheld stylesheet to alleviate some of the problem with a large media screen footprint? Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom
RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf
Mugur, I hope you are not upset with me. Not at all. J I just fail to understand people who are concerned about pages under 150k. Until about 2 years ago, 50k was my limit. However since then, Ive been happy to add about 50k per year to that limit in line with the uptake of broadband, at least in Australia. Across numerous websites, Ive never actually had a complaint from a user / client, only from lists such as this where people impose limits without thinking about how networks are evolving. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mugur Padurean Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 5:25 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf Your absoutely right when you say our creativy shoud not be restricted by any means. Still, the comment i made was targeted at half of your image that looks to me that coud go safey without affecting your overal design. I'm talking about the part behind the content. No offence but at this point it looks more like a wallpaper to me (in size at least). However this is your choice and in no way am I trying to be critical on that issue, afterall, design it's a subtle thing and i may not read your message right this time. I just expressed a not very well expained opinion, nothing more. I hope you are not upset with me. On 7/25/05, Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mugur, This article only discusses reducing the HTML size which if you take a look at the site is already rather anorexic. Loading an image once, caching it for potentially weeks, and not loading anything other than small HTML pages as they browse the rest of the site seems like the smartest way it's going to happen. Basically, unless there's some fancy new way to encode the image, I don't see any point is destroying an otherwise good design that our VCD team has generated for the sake of saving a few seconds once-off. Yes I think 120kb is big (not huge though). If there is a way to make it smaller, feel free to suggest and I'll implement. Otherwise, the speed of an extreme minority of our user base shouldn't restrict how we work. Also, I'm not 'assuming' as you suggest we have bandwidth stats from the current broadleaf.com.au site to suggest that narrowband isn't a significant concern. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mugur Padurean Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 3:48 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf Sorry, but quoting Microsoft page as good design example is not a good ideea. No web page that big IS a good ideea. Maybe this will help you: http://www.stopdesign.com/articles/throwing_tables/ The purpose of the article it's slightly different but it's a very good motivator for small size web pages. Also asuming that your clients will not care or will not be affected by a web page size does not sound to me like a good business atitute. I have no intention to annoy you or to start a rant. It's just just that i'm on ADSL connection ... half the planet away. And big pages load slowly, almost as dial-up (or so it feels). On 7/25/05, Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Edward, Thanks for your input, however we didn't really consider this a big issue as: most of the target market will be on office internet connections and ADSL is basically a minimum for such people in Australia the image is only downloaded once, and will be reused in the content pages, just with different column layouts because the image is only downloaded once, only the first page hit will be slow and first page hit occurs because users are after something on your site - they are prepared to wait a bit longer to get it; keeping tight page sizes is more critical when moving around a site in which case we're only about 4k total because the image is loaded through CSS, all of the content will be positioned and usable anyway before the background clogs the connection just that a few seconds later the thing will start to look good as well many larger sites are starting to acknowledge all of these points as well: microsoft.com home page is pushing 140k sxc.hu home page is pushing 107k yahoo.com.au home page is pushing 167k ninemsn.com home page is pushing 136k news.com.au home page is pushing 383k Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Edward Clarke Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 3:08 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf I suspect the 120Kb footprint
RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf
Matt, Ive fixed the background, and will reupload shortly. Unfortunately all of our workstations are widescreen laptops, so while we run higher res, were still only 900px high. Thanks for noticing. Regarding the CSS errors they are all IE hacks, and besides having to add extra stylesheet documents I dont see a way to make the validator happy. Im really not interested in the whole conditional comments thing because they declarations get split up and things just get confusing. If you know of a similar hack to _property:value; that achieves the same outcome and validates, please let me know and Ill change it. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Vanderhorst Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 2:52 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf The design is very nice but the background image of the tree repeats. It is not noticeable until the resolution goes beyond 1024x768. There were some css validation errors as well (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile="">). Matthew Vanderhorst Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) wrote: Hi all, Ive just placed the first page of a new site on our test-drive server: http://testdrive.fueladvance.com/Broadleaf/ Which is a redo of: http://www.broadleaf.com.au/ There is also a mock up which shows how it is meant to look: http://fueladvance.com/broadleaf/HomePagePreview.jpg I have tested in IE6 and FF1.0.6PC and it seems to work fine. If a few of you could take a look in other browsers thatd be great. Also, any design / coding suggestions would be greatly appreciated. J Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf
Rowan, Thanks for your feedback. I'd remove all the in each list item and replace this with an image on the item bullet points. Done. Also adding a label and/or legend on the search field (and hiding it with CSS if desired) would increase usability. Done. Personally I'd also 'no-repeat' the bg image as it doesn't look as good on pages with a lot of content. Done. I just noticed that there is something disabling the scroll-bars. Which is not good when the browser window is smaller than the content or the font-size is increased. This makes the site hard to use. In progress. Rowan Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.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] Site Check: Broadleaf
Edward, Thanks for your input, however we didnt really consider this a big issue as: most of the target market will be on office internet connections and ADSL is basically a minimum for such people in Australia the image is only downloaded once, and will be reused in the content pages, just with different column layouts because the image is only downloaded once, only the first page hit will be slow and first page hit occurs because users are after something on your site - they are prepared to wait a bit longer to get it; keeping tight page sizes is more critical when moving around a site in which case were only about 4k total because the image is loaded through CSS, all of the content will be positioned and usable anyway before the background clogs the connection just that a few seconds later the thing will start to look good as well many larger sites are starting to acknowledge all of these points as well: microsoft.com home page is pushing 140k sxc.hu home page is pushing 107k yahoo.com.au home page is pushing 167k ninemsn.com home page is pushing 136k news.com.au home page is pushing 383k Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Edward Clarke Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 3:08 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf I suspect the 120Kb footprint of the background image is of more concern to most visitors. Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Vanderhorst Sent: 24 July 2005 17:52 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf The design is very nice but the background image of the tree repeats. It is not noticeable until the resolution goes beyond 1024x768. There were some css validation errors as well (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile="">).
