Re: [WSG] PNG in IE6
Why not just use http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/ as the plugin to display your
PNG? That way, if people are using IE6 with Javascript enabled, you can add
png functionality, advanced CSS support, etc. I know Eric Meyer personally
endorses this method (well at least he did at An Event Apart) and I've used
it before with much success.
Tim
AIM: TymArtist
http://www.timpalac.com
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 4:07 AM, Amrinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Hi
>
> I looked for the working of .png image in internet explorer and found two
> articles.
> http://webfx.eae.net/dhtml/pngbehavior/pngbehavior.html
> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/pngopacity
> I tried using *'filter' *according to both these articles but can't got a
> way.
> Following is the HTML code:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The css code for #extradiv1 is:
>
> #extradiv1 {
> background-image: url(../images/logo.gif);
> background-attachment: scroll;
> background-repeat: no-repeat;
> background-position: center top;
> position:relative;
> height: 129px;
> width: 120px;
> filter:
> progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader(src='../image/logo.png',
> sizingMethod='scale');
> margin: 0 auto;
> }
>
> Please help.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Amrinder www.awayback.com
>
> ***
> List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
> Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Testing emails for Outlook 2007
Paul, You might also check out Campaign Monitor - they have a new service where, for 10 bucks, they'll show you where your email fails to pass spam filters and also gives you screenshots of what it looks like in all the various email programs including Outlook 2007. Enjoy! Tim http://www.timpalac.com/blog/ IM: TymArtist On Nov 6, 2007 11:18 AM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Just wondering if anyone has found a clever way of testing your HTML > emails for Outlook 2007? I don't have Vista and can't see myself > buying it just yet! I thought there may be some kind of online > rendering engine setup by now, but couldn't find anything in a search. > > Cheers > Paul > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** > > *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Web Standards In Colleges and Universities
The way my school approached it was interesting. My major was in a combination of Interactivity, Video, and Animation under the label of Time Arts. It was definitely different than what I hear you describing here, so I think it depends on the university. For the interactive/web end of things, we had a Director class, Flash class, and Web development class. The Director class had nothing to do with the web, and the Flash class was never about making websites. In fact, we used to make small flash applications which could theoretically be used on websites, and it was easy to see how you could potentially make a website in Flash. I think our teacher was against it, though - interestingly enough, his portfolio site used to be all Flash - I just took a look and he redid it with XHTML/CSS (granted, frames too, but you can't expect miracles). The Web Design class was actually a really awesome basis, and more schools should have a Web course like this. The teacher was from the Graphic Design area of the school, and he taught a few classes to our major as well. He took us through the conceptual approach to developing for th web - our first site was based off architecture, the second off redesigning an existing site, and the third off an abstract concept. It gave us quite the realm to work with. While the layout was done using tables and some CSS for styling, it gave us a great foundation for moving forward and I was able to easily learn the remainder of CSS a short while after. I guess it depends on the major and what people are focusing on, too - for this class, not a lot of people would eventually become Web Developers (in fact, I'm one of the only few) so the lack of focus on code wasn't a big deal (we did code a lot in the Flash course). For those of us who wanted to expand there, it gave a great foundation just like all the other courses in that major. /End rant. Tim Palac http://www.timpalac.com AIM: TymArtist On 10/22/07, Christian Snodgrass <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am actually having a similar problem. I was able to skip the Web > Development class, so I didn't have to sit through it, but I am sure it > is similar to how yours is. We have a Javascript class and the HTML that > is taught in there is hideous. Also, my teacher in my Multimedia class > is wanting us to create a Flash-only website, which I've told him is not > right. > > I'm actually planning on talking to them one-on-one to help them get up > to today's standards. Also, I work for a group who's primary duty is to > maintain the residential network, but also does things such as > computer-related websites. I'm planning on putting together one for > today's website standards as well as for accessibility and invite pretty > much every computer and technology related teacher to it so I can help > try and open some eyes. > > I think it is such a shame when the schools turn out sub-par web > developers, who later become more roadblocks to acceptable standards > usage. > > But, like others have already said, don't be confrontational, be > informative. I am in my 5th semester so I know many of the teachers in > quite well already, so I can talk to them without them getting > defensive. You have to be helpful or else they'll just plug their ears > and refuse to listen. > > Good luck with your school, > Christian Snodgrass > > James Jeffery wrote: > > Good Morning! > > > > Here is my problem. Im at college this year, preparing for University > > (Hopefully Birmingham) to > > study Software Engineering. At college we have a class on a Thursday > > called "Web Development" > > and the guy thats teaching the class in an absolute joke, no > > seriously, he is. > > > > He is teaching students how to create web pages using Dreamweaver in > > "Design" view, and then > > telling students if they can do this, they are Web Designers. > > > > I was angry, i instantly replied and questioned his knowledge on HTML > > and asked the age old question: > > "What are tables in HTML used for?", he replied "To lay out web pages > > and for tabled data", i replied with > > "wrong", he laughed and told me he knows what he is talking about. > > > > I seriously want to raise a huge issue at the college, but im not sure > > how to do it. This guy is on 22k+ > > a year, and cannot even teach people correctly, he may have been a pro > > back in the days when tables > > were acceptable to lay out web pages, but in todays world he is a fool. > > > > Its half term now, we have an assignment to complete using > > Dreamweaver, and he said i have to use > > tables, its not a problem, i will
Re: [WSG] Usability & Accessibility Over Design?
You've got an interesting point, Steve. Transitioning from non-accessible websites to accessible websites seems like it would require some sacrifice in look and feel. In fact, I was prone to thinking the same thing, but check out http://www.zeldman.com. You see that he's using images in the navigation, but when you disabled the styles these turn into text links. I haven't ever used this technique, but doesn't that achieve what you're talking about? Even if this whole text link with CSS images is too complex, it seems like the web is going away from graphical representations of text in general. What you lose in graphics, you gain back in SEO and accessibility - that's an easy way to pitch it to a client. Besides, CSS can do some stunning things with text. A good example is http://www.particletree.com - the only images on that page are with a specific purpose, and not to replace text. Also, I'd question you in saying that continuous movement, audio that loads automatically, and "whizzy stuff" is enhancing to the user experience. Honestly, I'm more prone to turn off a site with these features, especially the audio that plays automatically - when you reload the site, it reloads the audio, and that's just annoying :) Have you gotten feedback that this is positive, or is it just what the client wants? -Tim www.timpalac.com On 8/14/07, Steve Green <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I would like to agree with you Joe but I currently have a battle with > several design agencies who work for a multinational client of ours. > Historically they have produced websites that are predominantly > Flash-based > or sliced and diced from PhotoShop. Our client wants to achieve WCAG AA > and > the agencies are saying it will affect the visuals, which I can't disagree > with. > > Graphical representations of text are used throughout because virtually > all > the text is in fonts that browsers don't support and has visual effects > that > cannot be achieved using CSS (sIFR is not an option for this quantity of > text). The colour contrast is subtle (i.e. low). There is continuous > movement, audio that plays immediately on page loading and all kinds of > whizzy stuff. > > The overall effect is fantastic for most users but it simply isn't > possible > to achieve the level of accessibility the client wants without making > compromises. I so wish it was otherwise because this is a battle I don't > want to have. > > Steve > > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Joseph Taylor > Sent: 14 August 2007 15:33 > To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org > Subject: Re: [WSG] Usability & Accessibility Over Design? > > There's no reason to have to sacrifice on either end of the scale. > > Every document should start as a plain, accessible HTML document. If the > information on the document is well organized and logical, its already > usable. > > At this point, progressive enhancements on all ends can be used to > integrate > higher level interaction. Your first level of enhancements come in the > way > of the visual design, color choices, basic styles. > > The second level is where CSS is taken a step further and used to perform > image replacement, hide things, etc. > > The third level is where javascript manipulates objects in the document, > or > adds things in that are not part of the original HTML document, like flash > movies, etc... > > You can keep adding in this directionmaking a page as rich and > interactive as you want. > > Usability...thats not guaranteed anymore than a good visual design, but it > is certainly a result of all things coming together with the same goal in > mind. > > Joseph R. B. Taylor > > Sites by Joe, LLC > http://sitesbyjoe.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > John Faulds wrote: > >> Web Standards, Accessibility and Usability needs to be put right at > >> the top of the list, way before design. > > > > I won't argue with that but all of those things are generally a harder > > sell to a client than the more superficial aspects of a project like > > the graphic design. > > > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** > > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > *** > > *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *
Re: [WSG] Best practice embedding a Quicktime/Flash video
I use conditional code on my site - seems the best way to go if you want to follow standards. Personally I just never had the patience to dive into those A List Apart Flash Satay and other methods. The general issue is that IE and all other browsers render Flash differently. I've tested this in Firefox, Opera, Safari, and IE. Anyway, it's something like this: On 6/27/07, David Little <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi, I'm looking for some advice on best practice methods of embedding a QT/Flash movie in a page in a standards compliant way, so any ideas would be very gratefully received! At the moment my page embeds a video using the standards compliant method for QT videos as described by Elizabeth Castro in her A List Apart article "Bye Bye Embed": http://www.alistapart.com/articles/byebyeembed I then use some unobstrusive javascript to add a show/hide control and to hide the video on load. This means that non-Javascript-enabled browsers will simply get the video without the show / hide controls. This is all fine until you try it in a browser without Quicktime (we may opt for Flash in the end, but the principles I guess will be the same). Then, in IE you get the rather unhelpful "Security warning" / install software message (well at least that's what you get on the IE6 install running on my virtual PC). Obviously this is not so bad in Firefox where you get the "Install missing plugins message". Using a detection script would probably by-pass these issues, but that would then not be in the spirit of progressive enhancement I'm going for. I'd be interested to know how others have approached this kind of issue. As usual I may be missing something blindingly obvious -- this is one of the areas in which my experience is a little limited! Many thanks, David -- David Little *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari now on Windows
Downloaded this even though the others at my office were scared to. Did some testing and seems to function very well, no crashing. Enjoy having the extra Apple feel on my PC :) Worth noting that Gmail ran about 5 times faster when loading emails than Firefox or IE, my guess is that the Ajax and Javascript support for this browser tops that of most others. Nice! Tim www.timpalac.com/blog/ AIM: TymArtist On 6/11/07, Geoff Pack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This will be interesting... Safari 3 Public Beta: http://www.apple.com/safari/ == The information contained in this email and any attachment is confidential and may contain legally privileged or copyright material. It is intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you are not permitted to disseminate, distribute or copy this email or any attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system. The ABC does not represent or warrant that this transmission is secure or virus free. Before opening any attachment you should check for viruses. The ABC's liability is limited to resupplying any email and attachments == *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
