Re: [WSG] images in html or css
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 14:48:13 -0700, Ben Curtis wrote: On Sep 16, 2005, at 1:43 PM, kvnmcwebn wrote: browsers do not cache the images linked from the stylesheet so caching is a little more work wow, thats news to me. I believe that's actually browser, singular. Who else, but IE? Hi Ben - [quote cite=http://www.ryanbrill.com/archives/form_highlighting_redux/;] to tell all browsers to cache the images, you can use apache's .htaccess put this in a .htaccess file in your images folder. this will cause ALL files/images in that folder to be cached for 2 months. ExpiresActive On ExpiresDefault access plus 2 months [/quote] See comment #13 in the cited article. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 9/17/2005 http://www.hucklesby.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] images in html or css
browsers do not cache the images linked from the stylesheet so caching is a little more work wow, thats news to me. I might have to rethink my tactics. So even if a sitewide image was placed in one page as an img and on subsequent pages as a css background it would still reload? thanks kvnmcwebn ** 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] images in html or css
On Sep 16, 2005, at 1:43 PM, kvnmcwebn wrote: browsers do not cache the images linked from the stylesheet so caching is a little more work wow, thats news to me. I believe that's actually browser, singular. Who else, but IE? IE's problem will crop up (I believe -- someone who uses Windows, please correct me) when anything changes a layout property of the box the background is applied to, such as javascript or css rollovers. Then, the browser will check the server to see if the file has changed (I'm not sure it actually automatically downloads). Actually, although I think the statement is wrong, I don't know enough of the right stuff to argue. Anyone? Anyone? Beuller? More, from The Great Google: http://tinyurl.com/cr44n -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** 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] images in html or css
hello, Just Wondering- Is the img tag still widly used among list members. Should we put as many of the images we can in the css as backgrounds etc. Right now i put most sitewide images in the css and the page by page content in with the img tag. ** 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] images in html or css
G'day Is the img tag still widly used among list members. Should we put as many of the images we can in the css as backgrounds etc. Right now i put most sitewide images in the css and the page by page content in with the img tag. My approach is (generally) that purely decorative images should ideally go in the css as backgrounds. Images with meaning (e.g. photos of products, mugshots of staff, graphs, etc) should be placed in the (x)html via the img element, with appropriate alt attribute. But I am only speaking for myself - others may have a different approach/opinion. Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading, user-friendly websites ** 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] images in html or css
kvnmcwebn wrote: hello, Just Wondering- Is the img tag still widly used among list members. Should we put as many of the images we can in the css as backgrounds etc. Right now i put most sitewide images in the css and the page by page content in with the img tag. IMG elements should always be used when the image is actual content. Fluff images (flowery borders, an abstract little mood image, etc) should go in the CSS. Don't go overboard in abolishing IMG...just as with tables (for tabular data), there is still a need for them. -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] images in html or css
I agree with Bert! Regards, -- Cláudio Diashttp://www.mundonu.com
Re: [WSG] images in html or css
On Thu, 2005-09-15 at 16:03 +0100, kvnmcwebn wrote: Is the img tag still widly used among list members. Should we put as many of the images we can in the css as backgrounds etc. Right now i put most sitewide images in the css and the page by page content in with the img tag. I don't think that it should be based on whether it's page-by-page or sitewide, but on whether it's content or decoration. If it's content it should be an img tag, and decoration goes in the CSS. I think it's a faddy thing to put a lot of images in CSS, especially things like site logos like plone.org does, or common icons. It's using CSS like an includes file, to save updating multiple img tags across a site, which I think is a misuse of CSS. Keeping img for content and CSS for style is especially important as techniques like FIR of hiding foreground text and putting images in CSS have problems in accessibility software: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fir/ .Matthew Cruickshank http://holloway.co.nz/ ** 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] images in html or css
techniques like FIR of hiding foreground text and putting images in CSS have problems in accessibility software So the designer should use a smart IR solution. -- Jan Brasna aka JohnyB :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.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] images in html or css
Is the img tag still widly used among list members. Should we put as many of the images we can in the css as backgrounds etc. Right now i put most sitewide images in the css and the page by page content in with the img tag. Content goes in the html. Presentation guides for content go in the css. One way to tell if an image is content is to ask yourself these two questions: - With images off, would the user miss it? (yes = it's content) - Will this change if we redesign? (yes = presentation) -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** 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] images in html or css
I find that centralizing images in css is useful for maintainability. However, if page load time is an issue, it's a good idea to stress test the site with both images in html and css. when they're in html, the height and width tells the browser how big the image is which helps it load a little faster and you can use preload scripts that you can't use for background-images. Of course you can get fancy with squid or some other caching engine, but even though browsers cache the stylesheet, they do not cache the images linked from the stylesheet so caching is a little more work. ymmv -chris ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
