Hey Jonathan,
Thanks for the links. I also signed up for the forum.
Cheers,
Elle
On 16/01/2007, at 6:32 PM, cms@webstandardsgroup.org
cms@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
From: Jonathan Rez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 01:02:55 +1100
Subject: Re: digest for cms@webstandardsgroup.org
A nice tool for checking (possible) errors in JavaScript is JSLint
from Douglas Crockford.
There are a couple of options available how strict the tool works.
http://www.jslint.com/lint.html
Cheers,
jens
--
Jens Brueckmann
http://www.yalf.de
I swear we just had this thread last week, but can't find it in the
back-catalog. Must be getting my lists confused.
Mihael, I share your view that h1img//h1 is a bit ugly. I'm aware
from extensive debate that the following idea is pretty unpopular, but I
like to assign an id to my h1 and
The problem with shrinking text in that fashion is that Google may well
penalize you as it things you are keyword stuffing (like those sites that
have small text at the bottom of the page that is the same colour as the
background). I would strongly recommend not minimizing text in this
fashion.
First of all I make the text size minuscule and indistinguishable from
the rest of the page [...]
The arguments against this are first of all that the above technique for
hiding text isn't perfect in a lot of browsers, and that even if it does
work, any user agent that has disabled images will
Benjamin
I slightly surprised that google can automatically both access CSS,
ascertain it's meaning and then pass judgement on what is too small in terms
of text size. For example CSS could reduce the text size by a number of
steps including by means of inheritence and applying different
**
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)
On 1/16/07, John Faulds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It was my understanding that Google only reads inline styles anyway, not
those in external stylesheets.
Some people who monitor these kinds of things have been reporting for
a while that the googlebot is making CSS file requests. This post by
Google:
It is the oldest trick in the standardista's book, when lacking in
citations, to say that the technique impinges on SEO. Shame on you!
Hehe. Not seriously suggesting malice. I also believe Google puts my
site ahead of everything else based on my excellent CSS management. Hehehe.
I'm not sure if it's been mentioned but you could always do something
like:
html:
h1spanCompany Name/span/h1
css:
h1 span { display:none }
h1 {
width:100px
height:100px;
background: transparent url(/images/logo.png) no-repeat;
}
That way it's text to a screen
Jeffrey Sambells wrote:
html:
h1spanCompany Name/span/h1
css:
h1 span { display:none }
h1 {
width:100px
height:100px;
background: transparent url(/images/logo.png) no-repeat;
}
That's a great notion, and one I'd agree with - but sadly the consensus
in the user agent development community
unfortunately not
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=ScreenreaderVisibility
display none means not displayed (read) by screen readers.
--
Regards
- Rob
Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk
Linking in with others : http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton
On 16/01/07, Jeffrey
Couldn't we use media rules to make things visible to screen readers?
@media aural, braille, embossed { h1 span { display:inline; } }
- Andy
unfortunately not
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=ScreenreaderVisibility
display none means not displayed (read) by screen readers.
--
Andrew
Sounds like it should be a valid approach, however I *think* that with
screen readers support media type aural is spotty and that they all take
output designated for screeen and render this albeit it in a different
manner.
--
Regards
- Rob
Raising web standards :
On 1/16/07 10:45 AM, Barney Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jeffrey Sambells wrote:
html:
h1spanCompany Name/span/h1
css:
h1 span { display:none }
h1 {
width:100px
height:100px;
background: transparent url(/images/logo.png) no-repeat;
}
h1 span {margin-left:-px;}
--
Tom
Andrew Ingram wrote:
Couldn't we use media rules to make things visible to screen readers?
@media aural, braille, embossed { h1 span { display:inline; } }
Again, that'd be wonderful, but as it stands nothing actually supports
those to the best of my knowledge.
The tragedy is that the
I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational rather
than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up with
examples of when they would be used.
The only situation I can think of when there is an established visual
standard for certain things that don't really
Maybe one of these could solve you h1 problem...
http://tjkdesign.com/articles/tip.asp or
http://tjkdesign.com/articles/a_perfect_Image_Replacement_technique.asp
Kim
Barney Carroll skrev:
Andrew Ingram wrote:
Couldn't we use media rules to make things visible to screen readers?
@media
A very similar example would be bibliographic citations, though I
believe there are as many variations in common use as it is possible to
have!
Mike
-Original Message-
From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Ingram
Sent: Tuesday, January
I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational rather
than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up with
examples of when they would be used.
Same here.
The only situation I can think of when there is an established visual
standard for certain things that
Tom Livingston wrote:
h1 span {margin-left:-px;}
Or...
h1 span {
position : absolute;
top : -9000px;
left : -9000px;
}
...would do it.
Respectfully,
Mike Cherim
***
List Guidelines:
Hello Andrew,
Does anyone know of any other
legitimate uses of these tags?
For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the b element.
If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus strong
should be used. Otherwise it should be made bold in the CSS. For the i
On 1/16/07, Barney Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I swear we just had this thread last week, but can't find it in the
back-catalog. Must be getting my lists confused.
Mihael, I share your view that h1img//h1 is a bit ugly. I'm aware
from extensive debate that the following idea is pretty
At 1/16/2007 08:55 AM, Andrew Ingram wrote:
I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational
rather than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up
with examples of when they would be used.
The only situation I can think of when there is an established
visual
I do not agree.
The VISUAL impact or VISUAL meaning should be added by CSS. If you need
italicized text, you´ll be probally trying to add some emphasis or
differentiation in the page. Why should we hide this from our NON-VISUAL
friends?
Legitimate i , it´s the same of legitimate font. It´s the
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
Hello Andrew,
Does anyone know of any other
legitimate uses of these tags?
For the life of me I cannot think of one legitimate use for the b element.
If it's bold then the reason is probably strong emphasis thus strong
should be used. Otherwise it
Just one more thing:
For language purposes, there is always the lang attribute. It can be added
to a meaningless element, like span. The W3C recommends this kind of
approach.
Ok, ok. So, the browsers don´t understand that yet. But it´s always better
to use EM over I and STRONG over B.
--
Hello Raphael,
Just because something is visual doesn't mean that it doesn't have meaning.
I have long been a member of the scientific community and I write Latin
arthropod binomials. This is a visual thing, but it's something I want --
and feel necessary -- to convey whether CSS is supported
Hello Bob,
So, in your view, is it OK to write:
One bedroom has an em lang=fren-suite/em
bathroom and a single bed with . . .
I'm not sure if italicizing something like en suite is an accepted
practice or a conventional method as it is with Latin binomials. I'm
guessing it is not. I
Raphael Martins wrote:
For language purposes, there is always the lang attribute.
It can be added to a meaningless element, like span.
Absoluetly. I agree. This is also a WCAG requirement.
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT-TECHS/#tech-identify-changes
But it´s always better
to use EM over
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A very similar example would be bibliographic citations
What's wrong with cite then?
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
__
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
Just because something is visual doesn't mean that it doesn't have meaning.
Of course. But HTML has far more sophisticated ways to convey meaning
behind the scenes than printed material, which intrinsically has to
convey the extra meaning in a visual way. What
I feel your pain ;)
You could try the following JavaScript-based solution:
http://www.ajaxprogrammer.com/?p=6
and the example
http://www.ajaxprogrammer.com/examples/post_6.php
Regards,
JJ
On 1/15/07, Bojana Lalic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all
Setting the width on the select element of
Andrew Ingram wrote:
I know these tags are only supposed to be used for presentational rather
than semantic emphasis, but i've been struggling to come up with
examples of when they would be used.
The recently written definitions of b and i in HTML5 should be of
some use to you.
34 matches
Mail list logo
