Re: [WSG] page loads in safari and then jumps to the middle
Nice page Rob, I like the scrolling mark-up. On 11/3/06, Rob O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello there, I've been putting my CV together but I don't have a mac for testing,a friend of mine who does said that when the page loads up in safari it immediately jumps to where it says 'Web designer and developer'. I'mstumped as to what might be causing it. The page in question is at http://robert.o-rourke.org Anyone run into a similar problem before? I'm planning to make the cut-out thing smaller, I was developing theconcept and haven't re-done any graphics yet. Cheers,Rob O ***List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmUnsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfmHelp: [EMAIL PROTECTED]*** -- James ***List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmUnsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfmHelp: [EMAIL PROTECTED]***
Re: [WSG] Your email requires verification verify#ClzcCtK3WXzb3aIZxmdB6mR5lyC4TsGV
doh On 11/6/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The message you sent requires that you verify that youare a real live human being and not a spam source. To complete this verification, simply reply to this message and leavethe subject line intact.The headers of the message sent from your address are show below:From wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Tue Nov 07 01:17:50 2006Received: from [63.134.198.25] (helo=mail.webboy.net.au)by krypton.websiteactive.com with esmtp (Exim 4.52)id 1Gh5IK-00063W-A9for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Tue, 07 Nov 2006 01:17:50 +1100From: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: digest for wsg@webstandardsgroup.org MIME-Version: 1.0Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printableDate: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 01:04:03 1100Content-Type: multipart/mixed; charset=iso-8859-1; boundary=SM_c7f40542-dfc0-4b46-9893-e0cdfcf5c82e message-id: [EMAIL PROTECTED]***List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmUnsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]*** -- James ***List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmUnsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfmHelp: [EMAIL PROTECTED]***
Re: [WSG] WebSite Feedback
Everyone should use Gmail, it would solve annoyances 1 to 4. On 11/25/06, Tee G. Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 22, 2006, at 3:36 AM, Luke wrote: I would like to remind you that there is a advertisement in you e-mail signature. Your message implied that the message from Marvin was a disguise and that his true intention was to advertise some service. FIY, webmails like Yahoo, hotmail, MSN and many others auto insert advertisement at the bottom of the email and Marvin was using hotmail - there is nothing he could do about the advertisement accept unsub from hotmail. If it bugs you, you have the following options 1) unsub; 2) make a complaint to WSG admin, have them block members who use yahoo, msn, hotmail and so on - let's pray god that your voice is heard and your existence at WSG is essential to the WSG existence so that it makes certain your compliant be heard and action be taken accordingly by WSG admin; or 3) be tolerate; nobody steps on your toes. And I would like to ask, which one annoys you most: 1) people who use html email with his/her big company logo and listed 20 lines of the service he/she offers 2) people who didn't turn off vacation notice 3) people who don't trim their messages in reply 4) people who uses hotmail or other webmail services and is innocent like Marvin but being accused by you Sincerely, Tee G. Peng *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] WebSite Feedback
It's far better than advertising in your email signature. On 11/25/06, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/25/06, Tee G. Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 4) people who uses hotmail or other webmail services and is innocent like Marvin but being accused by you On 11/25/06, James Crooke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Everyone should use Gmail, it would solve annoyances 1 to 4. Actually, the way to solve annoyance 4 is to change your attitude. Telling someone to change their e-mail client is like telling someone to change their browser, and we all know you can't expect that to work. Besides, Gmail may be fancy but I doubt it is very accessible. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... portfolio.christianmontoya.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Styling Dynamic Text Replacement h#
They can't, the php code is rendering an anti aliased font to a PNG image - that's all. On 11/26/06, CK [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, This technique is most useful, however how can styles override the hard-coded PHP? http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dynatext CK *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Styling Dynamic Text Replacement h#
sifr is a great technique! On 11/26/06, J.D. Welch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Nov 26, 2006, at 06:00 AM, CK wrote: Hi, This technique is most useful, however how can styles override the hard-coded PHP? http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dynatext This is a nifty technique, certainly, but if your users have Flash enabled (which is, what, 98% or something), sIFR (http:// www.mikeindustries.com/sifr/) is much easier and slicker all around. -jd J.D. Welch visual communication user interface designer v 206 412 0420 e [EMAIL PROTECTED] sms [EMAIL PROTECTED] aim/gtalk jaydwelch http://www.jdwelch.net/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Stylesheet problem
Hi Carolyn, This sounds like very strange behaviour. How are you linking to your stylesheet? You should use the following markup to make sure that no matter how deep you are in the sites directory structure, browsers will always look for the CSS file in the virtual path: style type=text/css media=all@import /css/styles.css;/style If your using this: style type=text/css media=all@import css/styles.css;/style or this: style type=text/css media=all@import ../css/styles.css;/style Then you will have problems. Hope this helps James On 12/2/06, Carolyn Diaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a problem with the stylesheet on a huge site. The folders are set up on the site so that sometimes they are 5 levels deep. For example: - Folder1 - Folder 1a - Folder 1b - Folder 1c + Folder 1d All folders use the same stylesheet, but some of the font sizes seem to change depending on how deep you are on the site. (I'm using percentages for font sizes.) The 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th levels seem to be using the stylesheet in the root level as the parent and some font sizes are smaller. Actually, one whole section of level 5 folders have font sizes that are larger than the root level. Has anyone ever had that happen? Will I need to stop using percentages for font sizes? I'm afraid I'm on a closed system, so I cannot send a link. Thanks in advance. Carolyn *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
Silly point. I'm pretty sure Krug would have designed his cover :S We have conducted usability testing on 100's of sites and my argument is that when you hover over a button and nothing happens, users sometimes think oh the button is dead So it's not just my personal preference to have a cursor change to a finger-pointer on a button. On 1/11/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First things first - what makes you think that Steve Krug designed the cover of that book? My father has authored several books, and I can tell you that he has a fairly low regard for the designers that produce his covers, and routinely place items upside down etc. To answer your query, I would suggest that buttons have a different action to hyperlinks (most of the time) so your argument that they should have the same curser does not seem valid to me. Mike -- *From:* listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *James Crooke *Sent:* Wednesday, January 10, 2007 11:26 PM *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links Here's one for you. OK, we are all in agreement that its not a good idea to change the default cursor. But even Krug's Don't Make Me Think has a pointer (the finger cursor) hovering over a button on the front cover of his book - yet in IE and Firefox buttons have the cursor. Personally I think that all buttons should have pointers, the same as hyperlinks. I always apply cursor:pointer to my buttons - partly because my boss tells me too, but I also agree with him (and Krug, it seems) that it helps usability. Who disagrees? On 1/10/07, Anders Nawroth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patrick H. Lauke skrev: Quoting Anders Nawroth [EMAIL PROTECTED] : There are people who have problems to spot the cursor when it's the vertical bar. That would be a reason to use the arrow. Some people have very specific problems, but will have to learn how to adapt their user agent, or themselves, to cope with them. Breaking default functionality in browsers to aid these users is not a sustainable solution...and in an attempt to help these people, you're creating problems for an other section of users who actually rely on the browser's default behaviour. OK, I have now changed the text marker cursor on my own system, much easier to see it now :-) /anders *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
So what does everyone think would suit a clickable button, (default) arrow cursor or finger-pointer cursor? (For now, let's forget the fact that Microsoft invented the convention of a default arrow and that we all tend to give in to the default attributes to prevent breaking conventions.) So they'll get confused on every site that uses a button. You then change it just on one site, which only reinforces their confusion oh, on this site it turns into a hand, so that means I can click it, but on these other sites it's dead. If you have ever conducted a usability test, you will know that users will also voice their opinions on things that effect all websites (like buttons not having state changes). This is where we (as designers) will respond with well err, that's the default so we left it like that. Incidentally, if I flip my Windows XP settings to the XP theme, my default buttons are highlighted on hover (google search button is best example) - whereas before (with Windows Standard theme) they are just grey and have no hover state. Please bear this in mind when talking about breaking the default behaviour. Note: as soon as you change the background color of a button, you have broken the XP themed hover state. Regards James On 1/11/07, Barney Carroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patrick Lauke wrote: James Crooke We have conducted usability testing on 100's of sites and my argument is that when you hover over a button and nothing happens, users sometimes think oh the button is dead A counter argument to that: So they'll get confused on every site that uses a button. You then change it just on one site, which only reinforces their confusion oh, on this site it turns into a hand, so that means I can click it, but on these other sites it's dead. It's about consistency in browser behaviour/UI feedback (which, I'd argue, is different from making design choices for the visual presentation of information per se). This is an interesting philosophy. I personally believe that Microsoft and the awful IT education in this country (UK) have created a terrible culture of people who are so steeped in the logic of Microsoft's very worst user interfaces, that they perceive and value objects akin to these systems ahead of innately intuitive interaction processes. A massive amount of common culture must be used on any document for it to be legible, and in the domain of websites there is also a lot of convention to follow. However an integral part of my job is producing 'outside-of-the-box' solutions that don't depend on a user's knowledge of computer systems convention, and instead rely on innate human psychology. This sounds pretentious but good designers do this (or at least they try) all the time. Another aspect includes 'branding' sites. There are those weirdos who want their site to look exactly like a Windows desktop, but most people want a look and feel and way of doing things that is unique to them and their site, which can then be incorporated into their corporate identity. By the way, I'm not a corporate identity or particularly commercial designer, most of my projects are for government and non-profit organisations. Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
Sorry, I thought Microsoft were the first to come up with the different cursor styles. I thought that when Susan Kare (designer of the cursors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Kare) spent time at Microsoft doing graphic design work she came up with the cursor we all know and love to argue about. I apologise for not knowing my cursor history. I'd rather not argue over an opinion - I have statistics to do that for me. Cheers guys. On 1/11/07, Nick Fitzsimons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11 Jan 2007, at 12:53:59, James Crooke wrote: So what does everyone think would suit a clickable button, (default) arrow cursor or finger-pointer cursor? (For now, let's forget the fact that Microsoft invented the convention of a default arrow and that we all tend to give in to the default attributes to prevent breaking conventions.) What makes you think MS invented it? On my Mac, the cursor remains in the default state (arrow) when over a button. This has been the case since I started using Macs in the early 90s. The behaviour is the same in all applications, and is in accordance with the Apple Human Interface Guidelines [1]. When using a site which turns the cursor to the link-style cursor when hovering over a button, I would tend to assume that it wasn't a button (which causes an action [2]) but a hyperlink (which merely causes navigation) styled to look like a button. Links and buttons aren't the same thing, in terms of the fundamental principles of UI design, which is why they give different feedback. If your buttons are just links that look like buttons, then set the cursor to the link-style cursor; if they are action buttons, then leave them with the default cursor. The conventions were established for a reason. If users are confused as to where or how to click on a site, that would suggest to me that the design has deeper problems than can be fixed by mucking about with the default behaviour of the system. There's no reason that graphic design can't enhance usability, but if it hinders it, it becomes a problem. Regards, Nick. [1] http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/ Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGCursors/chapter_15_section_2.html#// apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002724-TPXREF101 [2] http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/ Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGControls/chapter_18_section_2.html#// apple_ref/doc/uid/TP3359-TPXREF186 -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using cursor:default; on the whole page but links
P.S For those that are interested: http://www.kare.com - it's an interesting site! On 1/11/07, James Crooke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sorry, I thought Microsoft were the first to come up with the different cursor styles. I thought that when Susan Kare (designer of the cursors http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_Kare ) spent time at Microsoft doing graphic design work she came up with the cursor we all know and love to argue about. I apologise for not knowing my cursor history. I'd rather not argue over an opinion - I have statistics to do that for me. Cheers guys. On 1/11/07, Nick Fitzsimons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11 Jan 2007, at 12:53:59, James Crooke wrote: So what does everyone think would suit a clickable button, (default) arrow cursor or finger-pointer cursor? (For now, let's forget the fact that Microsoft invented the convention of a default arrow and that we all tend to give in to the default attributes to prevent breaking conventions.) What makes you think MS invented it? On my Mac, the cursor remains in the default state (arrow) when over a button. This has been the case since I started using Macs in the early 90s. The behaviour is the same in all applications, and is in accordance with the Apple Human Interface Guidelines [1]. When using a site which turns the cursor to the link-style cursor when hovering over a button, I would tend to assume that it wasn't a button (which causes an action [2]) but a hyperlink (which merely causes navigation) styled to look like a button. Links and buttons aren't the same thing, in terms of the fundamental principles of UI design, which is why they give different feedback. If your buttons are just links that look like buttons, then set the cursor to the link-style cursor; if they are action buttons, then leave them with the default cursor. The conventions were established for a reason. If users are confused as to where or how to click on a site, that would suggest to me that the design has deeper problems than can be fixed by mucking about with the default behaviour of the system. There's no reason that graphic design can't enhance usability, but if it hinders it, it becomes a problem. Regards, Nick. [1] http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/ Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGCursors/chapter_15_section_2.html#// apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40002724-TPXREF101 [2] http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/ Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGControls/chapter_18_section_2.html#// apple_ref/doc/uid/TP3359-TPXREF186 -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] OT? - spam in forms
Bob, I'm not sure how hard your Captcha code is to programatically recognise, but make sure that your not relying on sessions like this: if($_SESSION['captcha_code'] == $_POST['user_code']) because a robot spammer won't create a session, so its like comparing to if they enter nothing in the user_code You should do something like this: if($_SESSION['captcha_code'] ($_SESSION['captcha_code'] == $_POST['user_code']) Failing that, try doing this little trick... 1) When the user first loads the form, set a cookie 2) When the form is submitted, check the cookie is there 3) If the cookie isn't there, its a robot (or someone with cookies disabled) James On 2/13/07, Designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I seem to be going through a spate of getting spam in a form on one of my sites (the one in the link, below, actually.) So I tried using PHP to randomly display an image and getting the form user to input what it says. I still get spam! I'm presuming that this is because the spammer will work with javascript turned off, making the js checkform routine useless? Sorry if this is OT - can anyone point me to a solution? Thanks for any help . . . -- Bob www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] OT? - spam in forms
I disagree, Captchas are accessible - providing you supply an audio alternative of course. On 2/15/07, Michael MD [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I seem to be going through a spate of getting spam in a form on one of my sites (the one in the link, below, actually.) So I tried using PHP to randomly display an image and getting the form user to input what it says. I still get spam! I'm presuming that this is because the spammer will work with javascript turned off, making the js checkform routine useless? you appear to be doing the checking with javascript client side... that won't stop spam robots (which ignore javascript) or any browser without javascript, You need to do checking for the correct answer on the server - in the php script. btw it also might be a good idea to include some kind of id (that can related to the ip of the browser) as a hidden field in the form so you can check that the ip of the browser used to submit the form is the same as when the form was loaded in the browser (a lot of spambots use fake ips when posting - so checking that will in itself keep a lot of them out, unfortunately not all of them though) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] OT? - spam in forms
I think it's safe to say that blind AND deaf people surfing with braille devices are a very small minority, and very aware of the limitations of their system. When you target this disabilities group, I guess you have to take the risk of spamming and NOT use CAPTCHA. Again, it comes down to the products/services you are selling. That said, an ever increasing problem that I have found is that spam bots are using email forms to spam other people; either by injecting CC: headers into the form fields - which you can obviously detect - or by simply abusing the form's auto responder - i.e, spamming your form with innocent users' email addresses in the hope that your auto responder will send them a copy of the email sent to you. I had a recent problem where [EMAIL PROTECTED] contacted me threatening to sue me because I sent him an email (auto responder) containing spam. I had to explain to him what happened and in the end, after it happened twice more, I had to go down the CAPTCHA route. It just depends on your situation. You can't please everyone! Not yet, anyway. James On 2/14/07, Dennis Lapcewich [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And if you are deaf, and blind? Dennis listdad@webstandardsgroup.org wrote on 02/14/2007 10:54:35 AM: I disagree, Captchas are accessible - providing you supply an audio alternative of course. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
