Re: [WSG] Re: Use of Fieldsets other than in form?
On 5 Jun 2007, at 19:22, Paul Novitski wrote: The FIELDSET definition could easily have included: (INPUT|SELECT|TEXTAREA|BUTTON)+ or: (%formctrl)+ But it doesn't. And if it did then the fieldset couldn't contain elements that add extra semantic information about the form controls, their labels, and their relationships to each other. The DTD almost always errs towards the liberal, it is expected that documents be written according to the prose of the specification and not just the machine readable components of it. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] WCAG Samurai Errata
On 8 Jun 2007, at 16:22, Thierry Koblentz wrote: The idea is not to parse the tree looking for an element to hide, but rather use document.write() to write CSS declaration(s) that'll hide that element right from the start. http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/toggle_elements.asp Despite the claims of the article, using document.write() will not work in XHTML[1] documents. Browsers don't support it in XHTML mode. [1] XHTML served as text/html doesn't count, and using this technique with such documents is inviting trouble if the document is ever served with the correct content type -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Back to the Future
On 12 Jun 2007, at 17:04, Chris Taylor wrote: I've been asked to write a website that MUST work in Netscape 4.03 and IE 3 for Windows 3.1. When you've stopped laughing I'm afraid I have to say I'm serious, and there's no chance at all that the people connecting to the site will upgrade. So, any tips to do this without reverting all the way back to 1996 tables and spacer gifs? Or am I doomed to non-standards hell? Does 'work' really mean 'look the same'? -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility and "fly out" menus
On 21 Jun 2007, at 07:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was wondering how members here feel about the accessibility of "Fly Out" menus. The type I'm talking about are CSS based, ie no JavaScript but I'd be interested to hear what people think about those that utilise JavaScript. I'm yet to see a JavaScript-free menu that: * Can be used without a pointing device (e.g. by keyboard or breath switch users) * Doesn't vanish the moment that the mouse drifts outside the menu (thus requiring fine motor control that users with, for instance, arthritis are unlikely to have) -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Skip to Content?
On 28 Jun 2007, at 10:34, Frank Palinkas wrote: As you mention, I'm experimenting with moving the "skip to content" link off screen with a margin-left of -em, leaving its markup intact just above the floated global nav div. ... where keyboard users can focus it, but not see it. If you feel you must hide content from users who can see, then please bring it back into view when they point at it. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Robot meta tags
On 4 Jul 2007, at 10:42, Mark Harris wrote: Not to pick on you, James, because Bruce already used it, but the word is "deprecated" not "depreciated". And before someone picks on me for being a spelling-nazi, the words have significantly different meanings, and it's important to use the right one. Well. Meta tags are depreciated too - their value has been reduced from 'some' to 'almost nothing'. ;) -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Shadow validation
On 10 Jul 2007, at 04:20, Dean Matthews wrote: On Jul 9, 2007, at 10:23 PM, Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: Not really, just chose the appropriate options (advanced...) when you try to validate a file. Yes I see, but how do you link a "Valid CSS" icon to an advanced search? Validate it, then copy/paste the URL (don't forget to convert ampersands to entities). Or see http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/html/validation.html#icon -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] an inline element (inside a block element) sibling of another block element
On 26 Jul 2007, at 11:14, Micky Hulse wrote: Rimantas Liubertas wrote: Why not to check it? From HTML 4.01 Strict DTD: .. Woohoo, A is here. Case closed. Well, that went over my head... Mind explaining? http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.3 -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Target 1st item in list
On 27 Jul 2007, at 00:08, Nick Roper wrote: I need to target the 1st item in a list. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#first-child But: http://www.webdevout.net/browser-support-css#css2pseudoclasses -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Auto scaling within a table's background image
On 1 Aug 2007, at 09:34, lisa herrod wrote: On 01/08/07, Stuart Foulstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Web Standards say only use tables for tabular data - not presentation. Stuart, I think you're referring to WGAG 1. Lets look at HTML 4.01 instead, which is somewhat clearer on the subject: Tables should not be used purely as a means to layout document content as this may present problems when rendering to non-visual media. Additionally, when used with graphics, these tables may force users to scroll horizontally to view a table designed on a system with a larger display. To minimize these problems, authors should use style sheets to control layout rather than tables. -- http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/tables.html I'm not at all advocating the use of tables for layout, but where it is absolutely necessary: I don't think I've ever encountered a situation where it was "absolutely necessary" to use tables for layout. It might be the only way to achieve a given presentation, but is that presentation really "absolutely necessary"? -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Auto scaling within a table's background image
On 2 Aug 2007, at 16:10, Kepler Gelotte wrote: One thing to remember is that absolute positioning is from the next higher block element. No. Positioned element, not block element. Doctype?
Re: [WSG] setting fontsize in body
On 7 Aug 2007, at 11:37, Rick Lecoat wrote: However, I always get a nagging doubt whenever this issue is raised. Because whilst the argument for leaving default text sizing at 100% of the browser's default size, and for not making assumptions about the user's settings, is a good one, it does /itself/ make the assumption that the default has been chosen /proactively/ by the user. No, it assumes that the user has either chosen the size they like or isn't sufficiently dissatisfied with the vendor supplied (after much usability testing) default to find out how it can be changed. And I always wonder how many people, particularly the older generation who (without wanting to generalise too much) may not be quite as tech- savvy as their kids, actually have no idea that the default text size can even be adjusted, and possibly look at browser-default text and think "That text looks a bit big and clunking. But I assume that there's nothing I can do about except use the text resizing control in IE." This would be the older generation who tend towards having poor eyesight and needing larger font sizes? I've never seen a designer make body text bigger then the vendor default, only smaller and harder to read. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Internet Explorer and XHTML support (was: (X)HTML Best Practice Sheet goes live - correct link)
On 10 Aug 2007, at 09:48, Dean Edridge wrote: David. "New features added". Really? I don't think I'm asking too much to be able to use features that have been W3C recommendations for 8 years. It would be nice, but I don't think that it should be a priority just because its been a recommendation for a long time. Nor was I suggesting that bug fixing be overlooked as these "new features" be added. Given limited resources, only so much can be done. I think a complete and less buggy implementation of HTML 4.x, CSS 2.x would be more useful then XHTML support. It's not for you or anyone else to decide that XHTML has little benefits and then push for the deprecation of it. I'm not. I just don't think the benefits of it as a target language for authoring web pages are significant when compared to other technologies that support could be improved for, and I'd rather see those worked on first. Pretending that Internet Explorer has not held back the progress of the web is not in the best interest of Web Standards in general. I'm not doing that, though, but IE 6 was pretty good (compared to the competition at the time) when it came out. It fell behind because development work ceased on it for over half a decade. Complaining about that now that work has resumed on it isn't particularly productive. It's 2007, surely people should be able to use XHTML and SVG by now. HTML 4.01 and CSS 2 are older standards then either of those. Surely people should be able to use all their features by now? And aren't there several third party plugins that add support for SVG to IE anyway? -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] (X)HTML Best Practice Sheet goes live - correct link
On 10 Aug 2007, at 09:34, Tee G. Peng wrote: I think bottom posting (is this how it's called?) is equally bad when one needs to scroll all the way down to read a few line of message. The solution to this problem is not top posting (digest users still have to scroll past the entire repeated messages), it is limiting quotes to only relevant material. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] (X)HTML Best Practice Sheet goes live - correct link
On 10 Aug 2007, at 08:53, Dean Edridge wrote: But it's not supposed to work in ie5, 6 or 7. It's a XHTML document. But why? I can't see anything that could not be expressed in HTML in that document. Internet Explorer is rubbish Its improving. does not support Web Standards Nor does anything else, at least not completely. IE might be lagging behind, but its catching up. and has zero support for XHTML. I'd far rather see bugs fixed then new features added. Client side XHTML support would bring benefits to far fewer authors then fixing all the interesting CSS bugs would. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5
On 30 Aug 2007, at 17:51, Designer wrote: If a user is unfortunate enough to have eyesight which dictates that he/she has to use a screenreader, it is unlikey that he/she will get much out of flickr anyway. Even with alt tags, reading that he/she is 'looking' at a picture of 'my cat' or 'my birthday party' would be singularly dull, I'd have thought! On the other hand, if I'm looking at Flickr with images turned off because (a) my service provider charges me per megabyte of data that I use and (b) my connection is very very slow, then its quite useful to be able to tell if a picture is of "my car" or "my birthday party" before telling my browser to load the thumbnail. Lots of people seem to be hung up on the idea that alt text is for blind people, but there are quite a few other use cases for the attribute. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Investigating the proposed alt attribute recommendations in HTML 5
On 9 Sep 2007, at 16:33, Michael Yeaney wrote: I find it interesting that everyone responding to this thread has failed to mention one very important aspect of any design-for-accessibility debate: Until you actually test it with a target audience/persona (i.e., someone who actually **is** blind), People seem to be rather hung up on the idea that alt text is for blind people. Some sighted people do use text browsers. Some sighted people do disable images in their browsers (I'm one of them and my last cellphone bill still had £20 of data charges on it). Then there are search engine indexing bots, and probably a host of other use cases. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Speaking of alt tags . . .
On 11 Sep 2007, at 10:00, Mohamed Jama wrote: First of all isn't ALT an attribute not a TAG? Yes, it is. (but see Part 5 of "NOT the comp.text.sgml FAQ" http:// www.flightlab.com/~joe/sgml/faq-not.txt :) 1. When should one use an empty tag? I don't think you should empty attribute to start with, its all noted down in your DTD if you open it up for example the strict.dtd and search through you'll find this paragraph
Re: [WSG] Accessible - Standard Compliant - Club Membership System
On 13 Sep 2007, at 23:09, S.R. Emerson wrote: Is there a particular reason you have specified XHTML? So it is upgradeable for the future. Well ... HTML 5 is being developed so XHTML is likely not the future, converting from HTML 4.01 to XHTML 1.0 isn't difficult anyway, and Appendix C is something of a pain. I wouldn't look so far to a possible (and increasingly unlikely) future at the expense of the present. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessible - Standard Compliant - Club Membership System
On 14 Sep 2007, at 10:37, David Little wrote: Well ... HTML 5 is being developed so XHTML is likely not the future, I was under the impression that you'll also be able to write HTML 5 in XHTML syntax (as XHTML 5, obviously different from XHTML 2 which is a different concept?). They are still planning this, but the point is that HTML is not dead, (real) XHTML is still badly supported among user agents, and support for other namespaces mixed with XHTML (which is the only major benefit for it on the client side) is even worse. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Encoded mailto links
On 17 Oct 2007, at 13:55, Rick Lecoat wrote: can anyone tell me what is the best accessible way (if any) of encoding a mailto: link? I want to make the email addresses on a site usable to screen reader users, but don't want them harvested by spambots. I, long ago, gave up trying. Methods are either highly ineffective, or block out users you want as well as spam bots. I take the view that email addresses are going to end up on spam lists eventually no matter what I do, and just run spam filtering software. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] POSH article question
On 2 Nov 2007, at 13:29, Rick Lecoat wrote:
Of course, if there was a tag for 'foreign language word' then the
best
choice (for the example above) would be to use that -- but there
isn't.
Not a tag, at least.
Perhaps the most semantic solution in the above example would be to
wrap
the word in a span with a class assigned, like so:
HTML:
We say "yes", but the French say "Oui"
We say "yes", but the French say "Oui"span>
CSS:
.foreignWord {font-style: italic;}
[lang] { font-style: italic; }
[lang=en] { font-style: normal; }
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Input tag - closing tag optional?
On 21 Nov 2007, at 05:12, David Hucklesby wrote: Trying to help a friend with their form markup, I suggested they look up the W3C specifications. Their question was "does the input tag require a closing "". I told them categorically "no" but was embarrassed to see this in the W3C specs[1]: Now, I read that as "closing tag optional." So I am wrong. Or am I? From: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.3 'The hyphen and the following "O" indicate that the end tag can be omitted, but together with the content model "EMPTY", this is strengthened to the rule that the end tag must be omitted.' -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Numbers in HTML 5 Was: Appropriate use of the ABBR tag and Roman Numerals
On 2 Dec 2007, at 13:08, Keryx Web wrote: Consider the following, more common problem: I want to write a big number, say 2345678912.123 How big was it? Hard to see, isn't it? Let's add thousand separators the American way: 2,345,678,912.123 Yea, now I see how big it really is. But in Sweden we would write it like this: 2 345 678 912,123 Bu neither way is good for anyone using a screen reader. I would like the screen reader to actually say: 2 billion 345 million 678 thousand 912 point 123 Not: 2 comma 345 comma 678 comma 912 point 123 Is the information needed to do that not available from the lang attribute? -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Downloading a WAV
On 12 Dec 2007, at 05:39, Hayden's Harness Attachment wrote: I appologize if this is off topic. On a web site I would like to create an accessible link that will download a WAV file to a user's computer to pplay in their own media player. I am only aware of href="" title="">. any help and comments welcome? What is inaccessible about that? -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Downloading a WAV
On 12 Dec 2007, at 09:01, Horst Gutmann wrote: Or is the problem that the WAV-file is automatically played back within the browser and no download dialog appears? In this case you will have to instruct your webserver to assign a different content-type by default to .wav files. For example assign them application/octet-stream or something similar. I'm far from a fan of the "Pretend I don't know what type of data is in this file" approach. If you really want to tell the browser to download it rather then handling it in its default fashion, the please use the Content-Disposition header instead. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Opera files antitrust against MS: standards one part
On 14 Dec 2007, at 14:42, Michael Horowitz wrote: A monopoly is when government gives someone the ability to legally ban competitors. That is a specific type of monopoly (a government-granted monopoly). Other types of monopoly exist. It's not difficult to go to http://www.opera.com/download/ and get the opera browser. If consumers choose not to do this I don't see a role for government. In an environment where consumers have perfect information, then this is fine. The merits of the respective browsers would mean that consumers would choose whatever best suits them. The market does not have perfect information though, very large numbers of consumers are either unaware of alternatives to Internet Explorer exist, or that there are benefits to switching. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] w3c link checker
On 8 Jan 2008, at 01:10, dwain wrote: i have been trying to check the links on my web site. it has 176 pages, but the link checker only checks a maximum of 150 links. who would i contact to ask for a larger number of pages (links)? i went to the w3c web site and have not found a contact link for the link checker. They have limited resources to devote to providing free QA services. You can download the link checker and install it on your own systems, if you do so you can change the cap. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] w3c link checker
On 8 Jan 2008, at 20:22, dwain wrote: http://search.cpan.org/dist/W3C-LinkChecker/ i looked at the downlad file and it's a tar.gz. i run windoze. how would i install it on a windoze box? http://search.cpan.org/src/SCOP/W3C-LinkChecker-4.3/docs/ checklink.html#install (but see http://www.perl.com/download.csp when you hit step one, the link isn't all that useful). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Where did I come from?
On 18 Jan 2008, at 14:24, Simon Cockayne wrote: I am on a webpage...how do I know what page the browser was previously showing. Reliably? You can't. Unreliably? The (optional) HTTP referer header (which is munged by some personal firewall solutions). NOTE: I don't want to use the History object to go back or forward...I just want to know what the previous page was...so I can create a button to go back to it... The user already has several of those. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Where did I come from?
On 18 Jan 2008, at 17:23, Christian Snodgrass wrote: You shouldn't always assume that they are just trying to replace the back button. As assumptions go, when they say "so I can create a button to go back to it...", it is a pretty safe one. And, not everyone knows about the back button. Don't assume... The back button should be one of the very first things people learn about when they are introduced to the web. If you suspect that your users do not, then creating a custom control that works only for your site instead of educating them about the software they use, is doing them a disservice. Additionally, an in page control marked "back" causes confusion since users don't know if it will act in the same way as their back button or go forward to the previous URL (which it is will alter the effect on the normal back button). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Usability for downloading documents
On 28 Jan 2008, at 18:04, Rochester oliveira wrote: Doesn't have a way to force the "don't" download? It is difficult to make a PDF open in a plugin if the user doesn't have that plugin installed. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type
On 28 Jan 2008, at 23:22, Andrew Freedman wrote: I see this warning often when using the W3C validator and figured I must be doing something wrong, but as it is a warning I never bothered looking into it. Now I've seen it on the results from this site so it has roused my curiosity. Can some explain to me why this is occurring and how it is overcome. URLs make things easier to debug, but most likely you are serving a document that: (a) Is XHTML (b) As text/html (c) Is not a version of XHTML that may be served as text/html (i.e. XHTML 1.0) It is generally best to just stick to HTML 4.01. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] This IE8 controversy
On 29 Jan 2008, at 13:48, Dave Woods wrote: Using an HTML5 doctype will remove the need to include the meta tag. What a shame that HTML5 has only just released its first official draft ... which has comments like: 6.3.5.2. Broadcasting over Bluetooth Does anyone know enough about Bluetooth to write this section? It is going to be a long time before claiming conformance to HTML5 is going to be a sane thing to do in production. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] long description and its implementation
On 2 Feb 2008, at 06:26, dwain wrote: i was saddened by the "D" link being deprecated. I'm not; as techniques go, it is ugly and confusing. Unless a user is aware of the convention, they are left wondering what a link labelled "d" means. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] long description and its implementation
On 4 Feb 2008, at 02:08, Susie Gardner-Brown wrote: A further query on the longdesc attribute. Is there any reason why I couldn’t use it on a Flash animation? Because doesn't suck as much as (from a design point of view, browser implementations rather wreck the idea). Detailed alternative content Including multiple paragraphs and alt="images" longdesc="foo.jpeg.html"> Since object is designed to allow rich alternative content, it shouldn't see a longdesc attribute. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Hero Style Presentation
On 5 Feb 2008, at 09:43, Web Man Walking wrote: Hello I remember seeing a few years ago a presentation done (in HTML) about Web Standards. It had a whole load of Super hero / Roy Lichtenstein style graphics. Anyone have a link, I really would appreciate it? Is this what you mean? http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/ -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] display differences firefox ie 7.0
On 7 Feb 2008, at 10:31, Darren Lovelock wrote:
If you place text-align: center; on the body tag in the CSS and
then margin: auto; on the first 'container' divider then the web
page should be centralised in Firefox and IE.
Like this:
body { text-align: center; }
#container { width: 960px; margin: auto; }
If you use that technique, then don't forget to set text-align back
to left on #container.
... but it is pretty pointless today - IE has supported margin: auto
for many years now. Just make sure you aren't in quirks mode.
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] hello
On 15 Feb 2008, at 08:11, Gitanjali wrote: So web2.0 is the mixture of scripts, tools.. etc.. It is a vague and poorly defined buzzword that is of no use in a technical discussion. In a non-technical discussion, it means pretty much whatever you want it to mean. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] form problem
On 25 Feb 2008, at 22:46, Rob Unsworth wrote: <<-- changed from A line break immediately before a paragraph doesn't make sense. You probably should be using a margin instead. A form control and its label don't really qualify as a paragraph, a div is probably a better bet. Comments: <<--Cols now 35 The for attribute of a label refers to the id attribute of a form control, your id attribute is missing. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] multiple css style sheets
On 27 Feb 2008, at 16:55, Michael Horowitz wrote: Just inherited a site and saw pages with multiple style sheets. Is there a reason for that Several - maintenance of different parts of the page by different people (given modular development), different styles for different media, separation of layout from colour schemes, etc. and how does the browser determine what to use if there is a conflict The same was it does when it gets conflicting rules within a single stylesheet - using the specificity rules. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Re: WSG Digest
On 3 Mar 2008, at 11:52, jay wrote: The javascript in the suckerfish menus is there for the sole purpose of providing a hover attribute to the LIs in the navigation in IE: They work just fine in FF and other browsers with it. Providing the user isn't navigating with the keyboard or needs a time delay before the menu vanishes if they are using a mouse. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Safari 3.1 and webkit-border-radius
On 20 Mar 2008, at 19:34, Keryx Web wrote: tee skrev: I thought fieldset (with legend) are used only for form elements, I am curious why you would used it in your right column's content. A. It is valid. You may use it according to the DTD. Many things are valid. The DTD is not expressive of semantics. B. It is being used for grouping of content. So? C. I am not a minimalist in interpreting specs. It was developed for forms, but I have not seen that you SHOULD NOT use it outside of forms, i.e. it is not verboten. From the spec: The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related controls and labels. Grouping controls makes it easier for users to understand their purpose while simultaneously facilitating tabbing navigation for visual user agents and speech navigation for speech-oriented user agents. The proper use of this element makes documents more accessible. Grouping "controls and labels". Not "anything", not "content". Just "controls and labels". D. It works and has no negative effects that I am aware of. It has the same negative effects as using tables for layout. E. I wanted the effect... Effects are the realm of CSS and JS, not markup. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Why is deprecated?
On 27 Mar 2008, at 12:32, IceKat wrote: I do the exact same thing (clicking on underlined text which isn't a link) but it does make it very complicated to create access keys for forms because was used to show which letter was the access key. Messing around with endless spans will discourage them. I'm really sorry there is no alternative as there is with and . Access keys have other problems, and while an underline might be a convention to indicate such things on some systems, it is hardly universal (or useful to blind users). Does anyone know an alternative to ? CDATA markers in XHTML documents (served with the right content type). I know you can use entitiy codes but this one saved the trouble and is now depreciated. Set up a macro in your text editor to do it. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] :: dropdown menus ::
On 27 Mar 2008, at 12:44, Amrinder wrote: I am stuck with dropdown menus. Uh Oh. http://www.message.uk.com/index.php?page=81 They are working fine in IE-7, and firefox and the evil IE6 doesn't render it. Should I use javascript or CSS for this. JavaScript. You can't minimise accessibility problems (such as those involved with tracking the mouse down a narrow column while suffering from arthritis) with CSS alone. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
On 27 Mar 2008, at 15:44, Michael Horowitz wrote: I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml You read wrong. It is not part of Strict (HTML or XHTML), it is part of Transitional. Why not. Opening new windows is behaviour and thus out of scope for a markup language that describes document structure and semantics. I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with javascript. http://weblogtoolscollection.com/archives/2004/01/02/targetblank- xhtml-10-strict-conversion/ Not really - that makes it harder to filter out target="_blank" with a proxy. Sticking to a single window is usually a better idea. http:// diveintoaccessibility.org/day_16_not_opening_new_windows.html -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
On 27 Mar 2008, at 16:31, Hassan Schroeder wrote: Michael Horowitz wrote: I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml It's not part of XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional It is part of Transitional. -- it's part of XHTML 1.0 Frameset. Frameset is for frameSET documents, i.e. those with a instead of a . They aren't suitable for most pages on the web. They include the target attribute because the alternative content section lets you use anything in Transitional. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
On 27 Mar 2008, at 16:09, Rob Kirton wrote: I would recommend that you use target="_new" and then use XHTML transitional DTD Don't do that. _new is not (X)HTML. http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#h-6.16 Paraphrasing: "Except for the reserved names (_blank, _self, _parent, _top), frame target names must begin with an alphabetic character" -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml
On 28 Mar 2008, at 05:48, Jixor - Stephen I wrote: Yes but you choose to do so rather than being forced to do so. Usability tests still show that opening a new window confuses people. They can't work out whey they can't go back and don't seem to be aware of the task bar. I'm not sure how users react to tabbed browsers but in my own limited experience its very much the same, they seem totally unaware of the tab bar. The problem is compounded by systems which show only one item in the taskbar for all the windows for a given application. This saves space on the taskbar, but makes it less obvious when a new window is opened. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] accessible fluid button
On 4 Apr 2008, at 09:39, Matthew Pennell wrote: On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 8:55 AM, Ted Drake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: YUI button from Yahoo http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/button/ How exactly is a button created with JavaScript accessible? Use the "from markup" methods described there. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] SMTP
On 5 Apr 2008, at 00:58, Alexander Uribe wrote: I have just built a website that has a form page with a Submit button. I want to be able to recieve information without Outlook express popping up. Don't use action="mailto:"; - http://www.isolani.co.uk/articles/ mailto.html One of my lecturer's advised me I needed the SMTP number from the host and then add in some code, however i cant find any information of how to set it all up. You need a server side script which is process the request and send the mail. The script, as part of it's configuration, might require you to enter the hostname of an SMTP server that the web server has access to. http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/forms/ is a useful resource. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Centering Elements
On 10 Apr 2008, at 05:19, Spirit Q.9 Gaming wrote: margin: 0 auto; or the margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; just the same for horizonal center. But i think it needs text-align: center for working with IE. Only if you really need to support IE5.5 and earlier, which most people don't do since they have an insignificant market share. http://dorward.me.uk/www/centre/#ie -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Shorthand rule for border?
On 17 Apr 2008, at 14:09, Cole Kuryakin wrote: This is something that I’ve been wondering about for a long time – a shorthand rule for borders. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/box.html#border-shorthand-properties -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] animated scroll
On 24 Apr 2008, at 12:49, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi , You might want to try this. http://www.quidascript.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=59&products_id=125 I got this package it's cheap as chips and has hundreds of javascripts... Given the liberties they take with O'Riley's trademark ( http://www.quidascript.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4&products_id=13 ), the sheer pain of "On the loading of a page, this script changes background colors quickly then returns to normal" and the doesn't-work- in-outside-ieness of "Have your visitors easily bookmark your site into their browser favorites" ... I would avoid this. It might be cheap, but any reward for producing something of that quality would be too much. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] animated scroll
On 24 Apr 2008, at 13:36, Ted Drake wrote: Ah, where's your sense of adventure? Buried under a desire not to see people rewarded for lowering the quality of the WWW :) -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Question on YUI
On 28 Apr 2008, at 11:35, James Jeffery wrote: Call me wrong but from my knowledge relying soley on JavaScript and JSON for a menu is a bad idea when accessibility is concerned. Generally speaking, yes, although there are exceptions. Do they expect the users to create alternatives for users who would not be using Javascipt? Yes. The example that i quickly looked over is: http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/menu/topnavfromjswithanim.html http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/examples/menu/topnavfrommarkupwithanim.html is the same menu built from markup instead of JS. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Image links
On 1 May 2008, at 23:14, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
This should work for you:
img a {
text-decoration : none;
}
No, it shouldn't.
img is an empty element, it can't have any descendants. If it can't
have any, then the selector "An anchor that is a descendant of an
image" can never match anything.
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: R: [WSG] Alternative to align = center?
On 3 May 2008, at 20:30, Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd wrote: There is the old faithful Image Which as far as I'm aware is valid in XHTML strict It isn't. http://dorward.me.uk/www/centre/ explains how to centre various things with CSS. Images are inline, so text-align on the parent element works. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: R: [WSG] Alternative to align = center?
On 4 May 2008, at 12:47, Stuart Foulstone wrote: CSS classes are for presentation. There is no such thing as a "CSS class". CSS is for presentation. HTML has classes. CSS selectors can match against HTML classes. Content is content. True Centering content is presentation. True Class names should not use keywords such as "center". The specification does not forbid this. Keywords are context sensitive. It is generally good coding style to avoid it as it reduces confusion, but good coding style also suggests that HTML class names focus on the WHY not the WHAT - i.e. the reason for the presentation, not what the presentation is. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Firefox skips dropdown and multi-select list with tabbing (?)
On 7 May 2008, at 14:54, Scott Limmer wrote: Using the tabindex attribute on form elements should allow you to specify the tab order. This shouldn't help, and is likely to add confusion if there is anything on the page other than form controls. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Firefox skips dropdown and multi-select list with tabbing (?)
On 4 May 2008, at 12:57, tee wrote: I'd just noticed that Firefox skips the dropdown and multi-select list with tabbing. Anybody knows if there is a workround? I assume you are using a Mac? Go into the OS X System Preferences, then Keyboard & Mouse, then Keyboard and set Full keyboard access to All controls. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 & CSS3 - Is it worth using right now?
On 13 May 2008, at 01:36, Nikita The Spider The Spider wrote: One big impediment to using XHTML 1.1 is that it must be sent with the application/xhtml+xml media type which makes IE6 choke. ... and IE7 and IE8. Adding support for XHTML hasn't been a priority for Microsoft (presumably because more people are going to benefit from better CSS support than from XHTML support). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 & CSS3 - Is it worth using right now?
On 14 May 2008, at 05:26, Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote: Nikita wrote: the META tag would have to end in a /> and then it wouldn't be valid HTML anymore. I encourage you to try that with the W3C validator. You will not get the result you expect. Comes back as valid HTML, as I expected. It usually isn't: http://tinyurl.com/3unkuu Since is (in HTML) the same as >, and character data (including >) is not allowed in the element, then the only way you could get this to be valid would be to use HTML 4.01 Transitional, ommit the optional end tag for the head element and start tag for the body element, and make the meta element the last thing in the head element (thus causing the trailing greater than sign to be the first character of data in the body). The validator did flag "/>" as warnings which it did not a few years back when the example was originally created. A reaction to the number of people using XHTML syntax in HTML without understanding the implications. But W3C's validator warning messages are overly cautious Depending on error recovery features (or bugs) in browsers simply isn't wise. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility for HTML Email
On 15 May 2008, at 15:35, Erickson, Kevin (DOE) wrote: What is the most accessible method to have email links on web pages? Probably: (1) Clearly flag it as an email address (2) Link it (3) Provide the address in easily copy/paste-able format for webmail users So: Email Jon at mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">[EMAIL PROTECTED].p> or possibly mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]">Email Jon at [EMAIL PROTECTED].p> -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility for HTML Email
On 15 May 2008, at 16:13, Krystian - Sunlust wrote: How about the ultimate combo of a voice file with the email spelled out + an image of the email + alt tag on this image ? A lot oh hustle Transcribing an email address is more effect then a lot of people are willing to make. It's a good way to lose useful feedback. but it can't be botted ( AFAIK ) and is ultra accessible. OCR and voice recognition software exists, if the both author can be bothered to use it. It isn't accessible to users who can't handle the image or sound (e.g. braille users without speakers). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility for HTML Email
On 15 May 2008, at 16:32, Krystian - Sunlust wrote: Couldn't an alt tag be read by a braille browser thingie? A what? Do you mean attribute? There isn't much point in concealing the text of the email address in an image if you are going to include it as clear text in an alt attribute! -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] firefox 3 beta5
On 19 May 2008, at 10:37, kevin mcmonagle wrote: Recently it was pointed out to me that a site I built is breaking in firefox 3 beta five. How close is this to release? RC1 just came out Do i need to worry about this? the site works fine in current browsers-firefox and otherwise. I'd be concerned. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Tag for quotes
On 20 May 2008, at 16:13, Rob Enslin wrote: Please could someone help me decide which is the most appropriate tag to use with quotes? These are actual comments made by folk during a show. You are quoting paragraphs, use blockquote. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] NoScript Help Please!
On 21 May 2008, at 07:11, IceKat wrote:
I'm totally hoping that someone can help me with this. I'm trying to
use noscript tags but I CANNOT get my page to validate. Below is the
section which is giving me trouble. Please can someone tell me what
the trouble is.
noscript>
Three issues:
1: A start tag starts an element, an end tag ends an element, and
elements must be contained entirely within other elements.
2: noscript is a very poor means of handling the 'no js case', it
doesn't cope with 'JavaScript supported, but not the functions you are
calling'
3: Links make GET requests, and GET requests shouldn't do anything
significant to the server (like deleting files). People have run into
problems with precaching proxy servers following all the links to get
the content available for users and deleting lots of files as they go.
For changes to the server, use POST.
I would do something like this:
And then:
http://yui.yahooapis.com/2.5.1/build/yahoo-dom-event/yahoo-dom-event.js</a>
</tt><tt>">
function deleteFiles(e, obj) {
</pre><tt>YAHOO.util.Event.preventDefault(e); // Don't submit the form
</tt><tt>normally
</tt><pre style="margin: 0em;">
// And then whatever else you want your JS to do
}
</pre><tt> var elements = YAHOO.util.Dom.getElementsByClassName('delete_file',
</tt><tt>'form');
</tt><pre style="margin: 0em;">
YAHOO.util.Event.addListener(elements, "submit", deleteFiles);
YUI documentation is available from http://developer.yahoo.com/yui/
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Fwd: using fieldsets and legends (outside a form) for adding structural markup
On 22 May 2008, at 05:15, Julián Landerreche wrote: I wasn't convinced at first because: - fieldset/legends are used in forms to group controls. This is common usage/practice, and even more, it's the usage recommended by the W3C, as some of you already remarked on this thread, .ç Yes, that is what fieldset is designed for. I wasn't convinced by counter arguments because: - this isn't a CSS/JS issue. In fact, the idea is to have it as structural labels/markup, that will be probably invisible for sighted users. I'm not trying to achieve something fancy, although I have said that fieldset+legend looks fine, and more important, helpful for users when CSS is "disabled" (browser default CSS) Most of the arguments against it (at least those which haven't been shot down already) were about semantics, not CSS or JS. And also, not convinced because of this other reasoning (hope it's not a fallacy): - if it validates (true) So do layout tables. DTDs can't describe the language in /that/ much detail. Eye halve a spelling chequer It came with my pea sea It plainly marques four my revue Miss steaks eye kin knot sea. and - if the W3C doesn't explicitly says anything about not using fieldset/legend outside forms (¿true?) They don't say you shouldn't use to indicate the start of a new paragraph either. If the spec explicitly listed everything you shouldn't abuse markup for, it would be huge. Tables are an exception due to the widespread abuse they had when the spec was written. then -> it could be used to add semantics or meaning in a new way outside forms. If that meaning is "These controls should be groups, and here is their caption". Let me add other real-world examples of using/combining HTML elements/attributes to create new semantics, all well known by us: - ul > li > a = a navigation menu The semantics there are no new. A navigation menu is a list of links. This is just using the right markup for it. - div + abbr + span + predifined classes = microformats (chunks of HTML with added meaning). As Jason stated above: "s are for separating components/sections of a page and can be semantically very strong, especially when given a meaningful class or id name" Microformats take some markup that is *correct* for a given pattern of content, add some class names and then document the pattern. Probably, at first, nobody though that by combining an unordered list of items with links could be "seen" as a navigation. The table of contents on the HTML 4 spec uses lists. So the idea has been around for a long while. In fact, before the Web Standards mindset change, not too many people were doing nav menus that way. No, they were using tables because the liked the way they rendered in browsers. And that's probably my point: trying to add new semantics and better accessibility with current HTML elements. The closest you can come to adding new semantics is agreed sets of class names, which isn't a very good way, but was about the only option open during the days when HTML wasn't being developed. What you are suggesting is taking old semantics and using them even though they don't fit. Fieldsets group controls and their labels. You can't just throw away all but the first two words of that. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Fwd: using fieldsets and legends (outside a form) for adding structural markup
On 22 May 2008, at 11:12, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: In any case, is this just a case of the browser inserting what it thinks should be there, as with ? With tbody, the DTD says what must be there (and also that the start and end tags for tbody are optional). The DTD allows fieldset pretty much anywhere a block level element is allowed (since forms can contain pretty much any block element, and thus a fieldset needs to be allowed inside them in order to go inside forms properly). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Alt versus Title Attribute
On 28 May 2008, at 09:50, Michael MD wrote: I don't see the point of the null alt strings. A validator is a tool to help you ... its not the be all and end all - you need to interpret the results with a bit of common sense. It seems rather pointless and silly to just try to fool the validator. Null alt strings are not an attempt to fool the validator (well, they don't have to be). They are a way of explicitly saying "There is no alternative for this image, it is just decorative or is repeating information that appears in the main body of text". suggestion: lynx (a free text-only browser) will probably help you a lot more for deciding how and where to use alt text ... This is a good approach. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Marking up company logo
On 30 May 2008, at 15:50, Thierry Koblentz wrote: I'd say when it comes to "news" the source is very important, so imho the publisher is key. Important? Yes. More important then the title? No. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Mixing CSS3 and CSS2
On 30 May 2008, at 23:30, James Jeffery wrote: I want to use CSS3 to create rounded corners but provide CSS2 markup for browsers that don't support it. Whats the best way to go about this? Taking a guess i would say use a CSS3 specific selector, so browsers that understand the selector will understand the code, those that don't won't. No, since support for rounded corners and support for CSS 3 selectors do not come hand in hand. Just use the property as normal, browsers that don't support it will ignore it. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] inline images in p
On 4 Jun 2008, at 15:23, Andrew famiano wrote: What's the best way to display inline images in a ? non, congue, arcu. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] inline images in p
On 4 Jun 2008, at 17:38, Andrew famiano wrote:
the problem is the alignment. how do you align the image centered
with the text?
img { vertical-align: whatever; }
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#propdef-vertical-align
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] a good practise for adding email link (mailto)?
On 16 Jun 2008, at 11:58, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: My 2 cents: I'm one of those "standards freaks". But when my clients became overwhelmed with SPAM from their contact forms I had to bend the rules. And when I say "overwhelmed" I'm talking about several hundred SPAM emails for every one or two legitimate inquiries. I tried many "standards compliant" anti-SPAM techniques but the SPAMmers always found a way around them. Then I used JavaScript. It worked. It's still working. Not one single SPAM has gotten through in over two years. I haven't had a single spam make it through the JS-free forms I have backed with Akismet testing, and no false positives either (as far as I can tell). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] a good practise for adding email link (mailto)?
On 16 Jun 2008, at 14:19, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: Rubbish. I have plenty of experience of commercial-grade spam filters, and when 95% of received mail is spam, you don't have a hope of getting it all, unless you want to block a significant portion of legitimate mail as well. You don't need to get it all. You need to get enough that the remainder is manageable. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Browsers and Zooming
On 3 Jul 2008, at 13:41, James Jeffery wrote: Are all browsers now using zooming to resize pages? The latest version of each of the big four do by default. Happily, it can be turned off in at least some of them. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Validation
On 3 Jul 2008, at 17:01, Fuji kusaka wrote: I have a flash animation in my webpage and this causes a big problem when i have to validate the page. Can someone help me out? http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#faq-flash -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] ADA Compliant Flash
On 7 Jul 2008, at 15:50, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: To answer your question, I think the general feeling is that if you wish to produce an accessible site, then it is far easier to build flashy effects accessibly with CSS etc than to make FLASH accessible. As far as I know, the accessibility features of Flash are not bad (although somewhat Windows-centric), it's just that most authors don't use them. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] [at]font-face confusion
On 14 Jul 2008, at 13:33, Love Web Design wrote: I have been asked by a client to embed a font on their website - this is a custom made truetype font, also something I have not been asked to do before. I have therefore took to my books/research to look it up but am coming across conflicting information. I am finding information on the internet and in the books that says [at]font-face has been deprecated in css2.1 but have found many references to web fonts for css3 using [at]font-face but with reference to little or no browser support! Brief history: * Introduced in CSS 2 * Not well implemented * Removed in CSS 2.1 * Push for it to appear in CSS 3 I believe that some support is there in Opera and Safari. I wonder if anyone has come across this recently, has a working solution or can advise or clarify? If it is body text, forget about it. If it is for small bits of text (headings and the like) then you might consider sFIR (search engines will tell you more). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] AJAX and Clickable Elements
On 18 Jul 2008, at 13:54, James Jeffery wrote: I am developing my first Ajax application. It links in with google maps and will allow users to anonymously plot markers on a map with images. There will be various clickable items such as: "Get All Markers" which will return a list of links to markers plotted in a given area. I am struggling to decide on what element to use for the clickable element. If I use an the href will contain a # Why? Can't you have a sensible fallback (e.g. in case the user middle clicks to open in a new tab). and if I use a button I would need to create a form just to create a button that won't be sending any data, which seems overkill. Why? Buttons don't have to appear in forms. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] S separators and TACG
On 23 Jul 2008, at 13:24, Designer wrote:
I've been examining what happens if you put something inside an end
tag, such as . The validator says:
"name start character invalid: only S separators and TAGC allowed
here."
I googled, found lots of folk failing to add descriptors to a
closing div, but NOBODY explained what those terms mean. ('S
separators' and TAGC). If they are allowed, what are they? :-)
S is "whitespace" separator
[5] s =
SPACE | (32) space
RE | (13) CR
RS | (10) LF
SEPCHAR (9) HT
-- http://xml.coverpages.org/sgmlsyn/sgmlsyn.htm#C6.2.1
TAGC">"
-- http://www.w3.org/TR/sgml.l
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Inline style works but css does not
On 1 Aug 2008, at 16:22, Michael Horowitz wrote:
but this does not
.small {
font-size:8x;
}
"x" isn't a unit.
--
David Dorward
http://dorward.me.uk/
http://blog.dorward.me.uk/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] ARIA
On 9 Aug 2008, at 14:19, James Jeffery wrote: Never really heard of ARIA until I came across it in a Web Development magazine (.net mag). I have just spent a few hours getting my head around it, and whilst I agree it looks useful for screen readers and such, isn't it less semantic? Only if abused. Applying attributes that would currently make your markup invalid is something which I am not happy about. This is why you use a variant of (X)HTML that includes ARIA. Along with that, using to create a checkbox seems less semantic than using form elements. Yes, don't do that. Is ARIA markup only supposed to be used with browsers who have JS enabled or sites that use alot of JS for dynamic content? I haven't looked _too_ closely at it, but I believe it is there to explain what the JS is doing. What about browsers that don't support ARIA markup? Graceful degradation (if the page is well written). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Re: ARIA
On 10 Aug 2008, at 23:09, Hassan Schroeder wrote: David Storey wrote: HTML4 and XHTML1 are the here and now. WAI_ARIA was retrofitted from XHTML2 (I believe) to HTML so that it could be used right away. All major browser vendors support it now, once IE8 comes out. Anyone know when the W3C validator will support it? :-) The only thing that would stop the validator from supporting it would be if you used a Doctype which was: (a) In the validator's local catalogue and (b) Referenced a DTD that had been *changed* to add ARIA features and (c) That DTD hadn't been updated in the local catalogue since that change (Obviously you have to validate against a DTD that includes ARIA features) -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Re: ARIA
On 10 Aug 2008, at 23:49, Hassan Schroeder wrote: David Dorward wrote: (Obviously you have to validate against a DTD that includes ARIA features) Right, and the only thing I could find relating to this was: This is a public identifier that I've never heard of ... "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";> ... but this is the system identifier for plain old, regular XHTML 1.0 Strict. :: which the validator rejects -- hence the question :-) It doesn't really reject it, it just warns you that the combination doesn't make much sense. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Re: ARIA
On 11 Aug 2008, at 15:14, Hassan Schroeder wrote: David Dorward wrote: It doesn't really reject it, it just warns you that the combination doesn't make much sense. Sigh. Semantics. That was one suggested DOCTYPE that I found -- and no, I'm not sure at this point where -- but regardless, do you know the answer to the *original question*: When will the W3C validator support ARIA? As I said "Now". Or, if you believe it already does, what is the appropriate DOCTYPE to use? Umm. What does the spec say? http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/ says: "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-aria-1.dtd "> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en"> ... -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Re: ARIA
On 11 Aug 2008, at 15:47, David Dorward wrote: http://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/ says: "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-aria-1.dtd "> ... except that http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-aria-1.dtd is a 404 error. This is one of the perils of working from a draft rather than a recommendation. You might want to wait for ARIA to be stable. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Re: ARIA
On 11 Aug 2008, at 16:16, Hassan Schroeder wrote: David Dorward wrote: When will the W3C validator support ARIA? As I said "Now". Using your provided DTD, a simple test file results in: 1. Error Line 2, Column 76: could not get "/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml- aria-1.dtd" from "www.w3.org" (reason given was "Not Found"). Yes, see my follow up. There are problems with the draft ARIA specification. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] W3C Validation Question
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 10:02 -0400, Joseph Taylor wrote: > Well for starters you're missing your opening tag... ... which is optional. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
tee wrote: > I really like to see that it magically repairs IE6 broken web, so that > we can forever moving forward and it helps save IE team from > implementing compatibility view in IE8. Hack!, they might just start > thinking why do we wasting our time on IE8. Rumor has circling in > Technorati, MSN, Diggit that the head of IE team was sending his > resumé to google inc. > > As for google, it will win over all big corp that use IE6 for their > intranets. Not likely. A large numbers of them use IE6 because their Intranets were designed for IE6 and not browsers. Since Chrome is WebKit based, it isn't going to render the Intranet pages as desired. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
Naveen Bhaskar wrote: > so one more browser to check for browser compatibility in > future...like other google products this is going to be the popular one. It's Webkit, so rendering issues should be insignificant. Any differences will likely only come out if you're doing complicated JavaScript. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Learning Javascript properly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I've been trying to convince people here at work to use JQuery for > UI, but most are reluctant, because it's a framework. They are reluctant because it has prewritten code to handle a bunch of common tasks that lots of people want to do (and, as a result, is robuster then most homebrew things because it has more eyes spotting problems and fixing bugs)? > Any good arguments of Why it is still OK to use JQuery? "It's a framework" should be a good one. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Looking to source a JAWS version
Thierry Koblentz wrote: > http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_downloads/jaws.asp > > I don't know about the demo version on that page, but they used to offer a > full version that would work for 30 minutes at a time (you needed to reboot > the computer after 30 minutes if you wanted to use it again). > With, I believe, a license that explicitly forbids using it for the purposes of testing websites for screen reader compatibility. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Uppercase Tag Names
Tim Offenstein wrote: > I disagreed (because it makes the source hard to read) but he said you > need to so that you can conform to HTML 4.01. > > I think this a case of someone reading far to deep into the specs. I > didn't really want to argue with him because he assumes I know nothing. > I do know that the source code has become difficult to read using that > method. He probably refers to this: Element names are written in uppercase letters (e.g., BODY). Attribute names are written in lowercase letters (e.g., lang, onsubmit). Recall that in HTML, element and attribute names are case-insensitive; the convention is meant to encourage readability. -- http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/about.html#h-1.2.1 The two important things to note about it are: (1) It explicitly says that element and attribute names ARE case-insensitive and (2) It comes from the section that describes the conventions used in the documentation for the spec, not implementations of the spec. -- David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/> *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Is it a good practice to have 'Back to Top' link?
Robin Shi wrote: > How about the tabs with JS? It visually breaks the page into small parts and > switch by tabs. > So - the visitor comes, they read to the bottom, then they have to scroll to the top and activate the next tab (and repeat). I'm not too keen on this idea. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Is it a good practice to have 'Back to Top' link?
Henrik Madsen wrote: > > Perhaps the solution then is an accordian approach? Perhaps long pages aren't a problem in the first place. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Is it a good practice to have 'Back to Top' link?
Florian Hamberger wrote: > Hi all, > I think especially with netbook computers gaining some market share as tools > for searching, the web 'Back to Top' links are well to be used on every page. > I'd have thought that to be another reason to avoid adding noise to the page. Scrolling past "Back to Top" links at every section is more of a chore on a shorter screen. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
