Actually, he has it right. Older versions of IE require that the content you
want centered be 'wrapped' in a another div/block.
On 2/4/07, Andrew Krespanis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, text-align:center will do the trick for old IE, but from the
looks of it you've added text-align:center; to
**
This is a one-way list for WSG Announcements
**
This email covers:
- Links for light reading
- WSG and Industry events
- Web standards related jobs (3 jobs this week)
Jermayn Parker wrote:
It is not that good...
Yes it may load quick but it is a useless uninformative site and apart
from the home page it is ugly and bare as naked bones.
Lets hope that the designer does not win any awards
That's all down to inevitable site content though. The designer has
link?
style @import?
Which do you use, for what, and why?
Regards,
Barney
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL
On Mon, Feb 05, 2007 at 03:19:52PM +, Barney Carroll wrote:
link?
style @import?
Which do you use, for what, and why?
Unless you have need @import's weird support in browsers for some CSS
parser hack, link - since it feels silly to have a stylesheet that
contains nothing but a
I use link with relative path directories, I think it is quicker than
importing a file with a full URL but I have never been sure about this.
A relative URL using link should be quicker, especially when I load
seven stylesheets. Good question, I bet there are better answers.
Tim
On
Barney Carroll wrote:
link?
style @import?
Which do you use, for what, and why?
In document: 'link' with relative path.
I use 'style' for adding page-specific, and often media-dependent,
styles, but do not use @import in documents.
- All browsers understand 'link', and some don't
Barney Carroll wrote:
link?
style @import?
I use style with the @import directive so I can plug document specific
rules or files using the *same* element.
---
Regards,
Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com
***
List Guidelines:
William Mason wrote:
Actually, he has it right. Older versions of IE require that the
content you want centered be 'wrapped' in a another div/block.
I'd use text-align:center on *body* and text-align:left in the main
container (no need for an extra wrapper)
---
Regards,
Thierry |
Barney Carroll wrote:
link?
style @import?
Which do you use, for what, and why?
here's what I do:
!-- import complex style sheet hides from older browsers --
style type=text/css media=screen
@import /styles/layout.css;
/style
!-- begin conditional
Andrew Krespanis wrote:
It's been a while since I've had to include support for IE5 (and how
great that feels),
Before not supporting any browser, you should first ask what will it
take to support it? Even if the number don't otherwise justify
supporting IE5, if the fix is simple enough (and
Hi all,
I am using the code below to embed a .mov file, which is standards
compliant in XHTML 1.0 Strict.
Two questions please:
1. What is the best way to hide the movie from browsers that don't
support quicktime (or from users who don't want to download quicktime)?
2. Is there a different
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
In document: 'link' with relative path.
I use 'style' for adding page-specific, and often media-dependent,
styles, but do not use @import in documents.
- All browsers understand 'link', and some don't understand anything else.
- I do not separate browsers on this level.
On 2/6/07, Sarah Peeke (XERT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Is there a different file format which is more universal?
Quicktime movies can be imported into Flash, which has much higher
browser penetration. And there is lots of information available on
embedding flash in a gracefully degradable
It's been a while since I've had to include support for IE5 (and how
great that feels),
Before not supporting any browser, you should first ask what will it
take to support it? Even if the number don't otherwise justify
supporting IE5, if the fix is simple enough (and adding two or three
1. What is the best way to hide the movie from browsers that don't
support quicktime (or from users who don't want to download quicktime)?
To use an UFO/SWFObject alternative for QT, or Satay-like QT alternative
w/ fallbacks.
2. Is there a different file format which is more universal?
Your explanation makes sense but as a designer who also dabbles in seo,
would not it be your right to 'suggest' and sell the importance of descent
content?? The internet is a place were you find useful or useless
information. It is not primely a gallery of art like this website.
also you look at
It may just be that our customers are not very good designers but many of
the Flash-based multimedia projects we have tested have had problems with
resource utilisation. Often the video will use 2 or 3 times as much CPU and
memory when it is embedded in Flash compared with playing it in a media
Jermayn Parker wrote:
Your explanation makes sense but as a designer who also dabbles in seo,
would not it be your right to 'suggest' and sell the importance of
descent content?? The internet is a place were you find useful or
useless information. It is not primely a gallery of art like this
Photos of what the rooms look like would be one obvious example of what
would make this website a bit more credible.
On 2/6/07, Hassan Schroeder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jermayn Parker wrote:
Your explanation makes sense but as a designer who also dabbles in seo,
would not it be your
Hi Steve
We work for a lot of clever people and they often
revert to a non-Flash solution.
Thanks for your reply (and everyone else too!) - I was concerned about
Flash too.
Have the designers you've tested for found QuickTime to be more
accessible to screen readers, generally?
Otherwise,
Hello all,
Just wanted to let you know we did an Accessites reboot and our feed has
changed to http://accessites.org/site/feed/ (or
http://feeds.feedburner.com/accessites). All inbounds are 301 redirected so
nothing's lost or needs to be changed/updated, but the feeds are worth
mentioning.
Kat wrote:
I'm beginning to think modular css using @imports are actually quite
smart, not just for re-use reasons but also because if you do need to
support really old and dodgy browsers (sometimes it happens to the
best of us) you can create stylesheets for those, and then over-rule
them in
Jermayn Parker wrote:
Photos of what the rooms look like would be one obvious example of what
would make this website a bit more credible.
Wow. Lack of room photos equates to:
a useless uninformative site and apart from the home page it is
ugly and bare as naked bones.
:: not to mention not
Ok I guess your having a dig at me but I will humour you
If your in the hotel business and advertising for a brand new hotel, you
need to sell your business and entice people away from their current 'fav'
hotels to yours. Do you think not having any photos and just a nice flashy
home page will
I have confused myself :)
If the glyph for No. (as outlined in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No.) is used, should this be in an
abbreviation element to explain it? It is an abbreviation, isn't it??
What do screen-readers make of this particular glyph, if anything?
Or should it be
I've found myself wondering just what semantic meaning the hr tag adds
to a document. The typical usage is when you want to separate sections
of a page. The thing is that a hN tag indicates a new section too.
Another issue is that we generally seem to put them in our markup then
hide them
QuickTime to be more accessible to screen readers, generally?
It's generally the same - no one advised you to autostart the playback
etc., so as long as the Flash could receive focus and start the playback
via AT, it's okay.
I am most concerned about usability/accessibility issues with
I love HRs,
I use seven different stylesheets and have a different background image
for each HR which is a very wide thin tiling pattern. Then you can have
different HRs for each style. I also use them to ensure clear breaks on
both sides. Explorer does not seem to support the background
If the glyph for No. (as outlined in Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No.) is used, should this be in an
abbreviation element to explain it? It is an abbreviation, isn't it??
What do screen-readers make of this particular glyph, if anything?
Or should it be kept as No., which is quite
On 2/5/07, Andrew Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've found myself wondering just what semantic meaning the hr tag adds
to a document. The typical usage is when you want to separate sections
of a page. The thing is that a hN tag indicates a new section too.
Another issue is that we generally
On 2/5/07, Sarah Peeke (XERT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Is there a different file format which is more universal?
Quicktime works well with IE browsers, but with other browsers it's
hit and miss. All too often I have seen my browser (FF 2.0) crash as a
result of a Quicktime movie. Flash
Christian Montoya wrote:
On 2/5/07, Andrew Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
one example would be XHTML 2 which has sections to
separate parts of a page. That offers a lot more for semantics than
just having hrs strewn about.
What is the difference between the new section and a div ?
Kat
Jermayn Parker wrote:
If your in the hotel business and advertising for a brand new hotel, you
need to sell your business and entice people away from their current
'fav' hotels to yours. Do you think not having any photos and just a
nice flashy home page will do that? I know for a FACT that
On 06/02/07, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quicktime works well with IE browsers, but with other browsers it's
hit and miss. All too often I have seen my browser (FF 2.0) crash as a
result of a Quicktime movie. Flash never crashes. Regardless of which
consumes more resources (and if
On 06/02/07, Kat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is the difference between the new section and a div ?
Sections are typographical sections, divs are for adding extra
structure. You can see divs as fuzzy semantically distinct content
areas and sections as a textual semantical grouping.
On 2/5/07, Kat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christian Montoya wrote:
On 2/5/07, Andrew Ingram [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
one example would be XHTML 2 which has sections to
separate parts of a page. That offers a lot more for semantics than
just having hrs strewn about.
What is the difference
Well, that's nice. So, I'm curious -- the site has both a photo (jpeg)
of the hotel exterior and a (Flash-embedded) image of one of the rooms,
so what's the problem?
So one flash embedded image and a photo of the hotel exterior is going to
give you a good feel about what the hotel is all
On 2/6/07, Jermayn Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, that's nice. So, I'm curious -- the site has both a photo (jpeg)
of the hotel exterior and a (Flash-embedded) image of one of the rooms,
so what's the problem?
So one flash embedded image and a photo of the hotel exterior is going
39 matches
Mail list logo
