Re: [WSG] IE floating bug
Rowan Lewis wrote:
http://www.pixelcarnage.com/development/evolt_lives
See how the input element is pushed down and its surrounding paragraph
element isn't? The input element is down the very bottom.
I think this is the 3px txt jog [1]
The sidebar/panel is a right float
#panel { ...
float: right;
width: 20em;
}
and its hardwired 3px txt jog affects the subsequent elements, but
#content {
border-right: 1px solid rgb(223, 223, 223);
margin: 0pt 20em 0pt 0pt;
min-width: 20em;
}
#content has no layout [2], therefore the 3px txt jog affects its child
elements too:
form p.text input {
...
width: 100%;
}
form p.text textarea {
...
width: 100%;
}
but their width of 100% cause a float drop because there is only room
for 100%-3px text jog next to this float.
This float drop drags the input below the bottom level of the float.
You can see this 3px as there is space between the borders on the right
side.
For a fix, you should let #content gain layout via the holly hack or any
other layout trigger. The whole #content would become boxed by the layout.
As the lenghts are in em, it will be difficult to recalculate to bring
the borders in pair. In principle, the #panel float needs a -3px left
margin and the #content needs a margin right of 20em-3px, which leads to
scripting and rounding errors.
So I think it would be better to omit this double border.
Ingo
[1] http://positioniseverything.net/explorer/threepxtest.html
[2] http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/onhavinglayout.html#nextfloat
--
http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html
**
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] teaching students developing to web standards
Hi all, I need to convince a bunch of K-12 teachers to teach web standards instead of tables-for-layout and FrontPage and Publisher type of thing to their students. Besides W3C, what sites should I point to for teachers who really have no idea with any of this, and won't read umpteen sites to figure all this out? Any lesson plans out there, by chance? :-) Thanks Rick Faaberg ** 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
I really like this: http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/ I think it covers most everything.On 9/11/05, Rick Faaberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all,I need to convince a bunch of K-12 teachers to teach web standards insteadof tables-for-layout and FrontPage and Publisher type of thing to theirstudents.Besides W3C, what sites should I point to for teachers who really have no idea with any of this, and won't read umpteen sites to figure all this out?Any lesson plans out there, by chance? :-)ThanksRick Faaberg** 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] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
On 9/8/05, Chris Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: . they should refuse to parse incorrect code. Hi The issue here is what is incorrect code? -- a web coder can serve up completely valid code, according to the w3c alidator, that is really awful (this, also, is purely subjective). For actual scripting languages the same is true - a coder can serve up code from procedural hell but it runs perfectly. There may be global variables everywhere, a complete lack of business logic and no input checking on user supplied data but it could still do what it is supposed to do 100% of the time. Judging what is bad but 100% W3C valid code is subjective - especially when it comes to presentational markup languages like HTML - there are 100 ways to skin a cat. Parse errors on the other hand are easy to nab, for instance missing an end quote in an HTML attribute or misspelling a method name in a scripting language. The closest we are going to get to a compiler for markup languages is a syntax checker like that provided by the W3C, which is a development tool rather than something for the end user to mull over. HTH James
Re: [WSG] Site Check [BushidoDeep-Validation Complete]
Hi, One meta-tag was open, and some onClick-.onclick issues were resolved. C On Sep 10, 2005, at 9:06 PM, Scott Swabey - Lafinboy Productions wrote: Have you run it through the validators you link to? You are showing errors in the XHTML validator, which stops validation in the CSS validator. You are also showing warnings when run through Tidy. Regards Scott Swabey Lafinboy Productions www.lafinboy.com -Original Message- On Behalf Of Chris Kennon Subject: [WSG] Site Check [BushidoDeep] I've put it through as many hoops (UA's) as I own, let me know how it holds in yours. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Valid Null Value
Hi, Tidy frowns on this tabindex=#. What mark is acceptable as a null value in place of #. C ** 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 Null Value
Chris Kennon wrote: Tidy frowns on this tabindex=#. What mark is acceptable as a null value in place of #. And Tidy is right. As per spec, tabindex needs to be a (natural) number between 0 and 32767 http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#adef-tabindex Why do you want to assign a null value? What are you trying to achieve? Do you want to remove something from the tab order completely? In general, tabindices are not really needed anymore, as you can control the order of tabbing by putting things in the correct order in the markup, but maybe that's just my opinion... -- 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] teaching students developing to web standards
Rick Faaberg wrote: Any lesson plans out there, by chance? :-) what you think is the best way to get the information is your lesson plan. go with what you know and in what order you do it. when you decide to teach, you are taking on a serious responsibility and making your own outline how to disseminate the information in a logical format is the baby you have to birth. good luck in your endeavor. 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 for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Valid Null Value
Hi, I've a default link structure that I use for consistency, sub navigation for this page does not need to be tabbed, as it is in a logical order. I wanted to leave the value blank without removing said attribute/value from each link. I've discovered that leaving the value blank tabindex=does not invalidate the page, or upset tidy. However complete omission, per your suggestion is food for thought, and proving quite substantial. Thanks again for your insightful addition to my inquiry. C On Sep 11, 2005, at 7:50 AM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Chris Kennon wrote: Tidy frowns on this tabindex=#. What mark is acceptable as a null value in place of #. And Tidy is right. As per spec, tabindex needs to be a (natural) number between 0 and 32767 http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#adef-tabindex Why do you want to assign a null value? What are you trying to achieve? Do you want to remove something from the tab order completely? In general, tabindices are not really needed anymore, as you can control the order of tabbing by putting things in the correct order in the markup, but maybe that's just my opinion... -- 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 ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] META tag standards?
Best to use lowercase when you are not sure, but there is not realy a standard for it so far I know.. ;) check also the Meta Tag Analyzer http://www.widexl.com/remote/search-engines/metatag-analyzer.html Its more for keywords and stuff but they have a view tips Also a list of best meta tags to use and taken in by spiders writen by Ben Wiggy: Part1: http://www.benwiggy.com/webdev/metatagtutorial.php Part2: http://www.benwiggy.com/webdev/metatagtutorial_2.php Greetings, Jack Gene Falck wrote: Hi everyone, I've been prowling around in our resources and in Google but I haven't found this. (As usual, I may just not know what to call my question.) I understand about using lower case for tags and attributes in XHTML (leaving content capitalization unspecified to accommodate a wide range of strings) but haven't seen anything on those value items that seem to be relatively frequent and "standard" items. For instance, I see the following variants in the capitalization of values: meta http-equiv="Content-Type" ... meta http-equiv="Content-type" ... meta http-equiv="content-type" ... The Content-Type entry, even though it's a value, certainly looks standard enough to have a right way to write it. Is one of the above a standard or a best practice? Regards, Gene Falck [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] META tag standards?
Gene Falck wrote: I understand about using lower case for tags and attributes in XHTML (leaving content capitalization unspecified to accommodate a wide range of strings) but haven't seen anything on those value items that seem to be relatively frequent and standard items. For instance, I see the following variants in the capitalization of values: meta http-equiv=Content-Type ... meta http-equiv=Content-type ... meta http-equiv=content-type ... The Content-Type entry, even though it's a value, certainly looks standard enough to have a right way to write it. Since 'http-equiv' indicates this represents HTTP header information, you should consult RFC 2616: Hypertext Transfer Protocol -- HTTP/1.1 Specifically, http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec4.html#sec4.2 quote 4.2 Message Headers HTTP header fields, which include general-header (section 4.5), request-header (section 5.3), response-header (section 6.2), and entity-header (section 7.1) fields, follow the same generic format as that given in Section 3.1 of RFC 822 [9]. Each header field consists of a name followed by a colon (:) and the field value. Field names are case-insensitive. /quote So it doesn't matter, but as far as best practice -- dunno, but my personal preference would be 'Content-Type'; I just prefer the way it looks :-) YMMV! HTH, -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com dream. code. ** 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
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 There isn't a complete lesson plan but you can see the syllabus. On 9/11/05, Rick Faaberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hi all,I need to convince a bunch of K-12 teachers to teach web standards instead of tables-for-layout and FrontPage and Publisher type of thing to theirstudents.Besides W3C, what sites should I point to for teachers who really have noidea with any of this, and won't read umpteen sites to figure all this out? Any lesson plans out there, by chance? :-)ThanksRick Faaberg**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] Browsers as copilers (was) Barclays standards redesign
The issue here is what is incorrect code? -- a web coder can serve up completely valid code, according to the w3c alidator, that is really awful (this, also, is purely subjective). For actual scripting languages the same is true - a coder can serve up code from procedural hell but it runs perfectly. There may be global variables everywhere, a complete lack of business logic and no input checking on user supplied data but it could still do what it is supposed to do 100% of the time. That's no different from code in any programming language.
Re: [WSG] teaching students developing to web standards
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 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
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.eduas was brought to my attention not too long ago, if your pages arestrict, then the future life of the pages is shortened with any changesto the xhtml recommendations.the transitional doctype seems to be a better choice because it will last longer than the strict doctype.ithink someone on this list brought this to my attention.dwain--dwain alford[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.alforddesigngroup.comThe 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] teaching students developing to web standards
Wasn't this question asked not long ago? Shouldn't people at least try to check the archives first? R - Original Message - From: Rick Faaberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Sunday, September 11, 2005 5:27 PM Subject: [WSG] teaching students developing to web standards Hi all, I need to convince a bunch of K-12 teachers to teach web standards instead of tables-for-layout and FrontPage and Publisher type of thing to their students. Besides W3C, what sites should I point to for teachers who really have no idea with any of this, and won't read umpteen sites to figure all this out? Any lesson plans out there, by chance? :-) Thanks Rick Faaberg ** 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] 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] Site Check [BushidoDeep]
Chris Kennon wrote: Hi, I've put it through as many hoops (UA's) as I own, let me know how it holds in yours. Overall you're looking good, Chris. Some nit-picking notes-- - a little slow to load - unable to read content if images disabled. - font-size on body okay at 80% better (for me) at 100.01% (see also Opera at 1280). - would delete all the buttons and the validator thing in footer - the yellow-orange/blue link color seems out of character with the rest of the page color. - you have 5-subjects (pages)-- repeating each of the 5-subjects on each of the 5-pages is sort of confusing? - needs a little lead between the bottom of the 1st paragraph and the rule 6 Screen Captures: http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=190115 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 **
Re: [WSG] Site Check [BushidoDeep]
Hi, Very thoughtful and helpful, will implement as many changes as necessary. C On Sep 11, 2005, at 6:42 PM, David Laakso wrote: Chris Kennon wrote: Hi, I've put it through as many hoops (UA's) as I own, let me know how it holds in yours. Overall you're looking good, Chris. Some nit-picking notes-- - a little slow to load - unable to read content if images disabled. - font-size on body okay at 80% better (for me) at 100.01% (see also Opera at 1280). - would delete all the buttons and the validator thing in footer - the yellow-orange/blue link color seems out of character with the rest of the page color. - you have 5-subjects (pages)-- repeating each of the 5-subjects on each of the 5-pages is sort of confusing? - needs a little lead between the bottom of the 1st paragraph and the rule 6 Screen Captures: http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx? proj_id=190115 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 [BushidoDeep]
Chris Kennon wrote:
Hi,
I've put it through as many hoops (UA's) as I own, let me know how it
holds in yours.
Looking good in Opera, Firefox, IE6, Safari iCab.
IE/Mac is lost on width-- spreading everything out.
---
HTML Tidy lists a number of minor errors.
---
div#content-primary div.thumbnail {overflow: hidden;}
and
fieldset div.fm_req {clear: both;}
...would make the layout tolerate some font-resizing.
A 'min-font-size' of 14px that I use in Opera, will nevertheless make
the 'navlist' look a little odd. (I usually test 'min-size' to 30px.)
---
The obvious fact that the form contains no *bold* text if CSS is
inactive, may be an issue since only Fields in strongbold/strong
are required.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
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 [BushidoDeep]
Hi, Is this suggestion a usability or aesthetic decision? On Sep 11, 2005, at 6:42 PM, David Laakso wrote: - would delete all the buttons and the validator thing in footer On Sep 11, 2005, at 6:42 PM, David Laakso wrote: - would delete all the buttons and the validator thing in footer ** 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 [BushidoDeep]
Chris Kennon wrote: Hi, Is this suggestion a usability or aesthetic decision? On Sep 11, 2005, at 6:42 PM, David Laakso wrote: - would delete all the buttons and the validator thing in footer Neither. -- 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 **
Re: [WSG] Site Check [BushidoDeep]
Chris Kennon wrote: What tidy settings are you using. I get one nested span error from the default settings. However, I would like to see your settings and results. I got some 'href lacks value', 'tabindex lacks value' and an 'action lacks value' -- in addition to the 'nested emphasis span'. My tidy (tidy.sourceforge.net) is included in 'tsWebEditor 2.1.2.45' (on win2K-pro) and is at 'default' settings. I only use that editor to check hand-coded pages, so I'm not too familiar with it or the tidy-version. The setting-list is pretty long... Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
