http://www.nornix.com/testsidor/faq
This one has very clean HTML markup.
/AndersN
SunUp skrev:
Does anyone know of a method which will toggle the visibility of the
FAQ answers while still displaying everything properly without
javascript, and that adheres to current best practise for
Joshua Street wrote:
Yeah, I'm not a huge fan of the URI structure either. It's running on
a Zeus web server, which has some weird-ass mod_rewrite equivalent,
but I'm not comfortable enough with it to use it. As for why 301
redirects, I explicitly asked for that after carefully explaining that
On 1/30/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joshua Street wrote:
I'm assured it's not going to move!
I wouldn't believe that. In fact, here's a perfect example of why 301
shouldn't have been used. On Today Tonight (another 7 network program,
for those of you not in Australia), the
At 05:44 PM 1/29/2006, SunUp wrote:
Does anyone know of a method which will toggle the visibility of the
FAQ answers while still displaying everything properly without
javascript, and that adheres to current best practise for javascript?
Hmm. The text-toggling examples folks have posted on
I have a simple CSS vertical menu, nothing fancy, no graphic used for
background. Client wants to add extra pages in one of the menu tab, I
have PV II MM2 but really prefer not to use it as it requires me to
change all menu tabs and turn the css background color to graphic (unless
I am
Joshua Street wrote:
Still keen to hear anyone's suggestions as to the Firefox 1.0.x render
problem... :)
http://sunrisefamily.com.au/current/content/meet/
No problems seen using Firefox 1.07 on XP Pro.
Regards
Jason
**
The discussion list
On 1/30/06, Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still keen to hear anyone's suggestions as to the Firefox 1.0.x render
problem... :)
Josh
Hi Josh,
While on the topic of rendering bugs I just thought I would mention
that in Opera 9 beta there is some funky stuff happening with the
Many thanks. I'd only tested Opera in 8.5x (because, IMO, it's
reasonable to assume if people are using Opera they're probably going
to be people who bother upgrading their software!), so I'll be sure to
take a look :-)
On 1/30/06, Justin Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/30/06, Joshua Street
Hi
All,
Another Monday, but
this time two articles for the price of one. This week I've took a look at the
head
element and the title
element. The latterturned out to be more interesting than I
thought it might be, especially considering the accessibility angle. It'll be
interesting to see
Dear co-members,
we would kindly appreciate if you could have a look and give us a
feedback on our web site redesign template, which may be viewed here:
http://www.webnauts.net/redesign/
Especially we are concerned about:
1. Markup and Semantic issues;
2. OS/Browser/Screen Resolution
Im not sure how to post to the CMS list so this may be in the wrong place.
Id like to know if there are any WSG members using Xaraya, and if your
willing to answer a few beginers questions etc - I have been looking a
documentation but would like to find out peoples opinions on the
systems and
Two quick things. Your primary navigation list doesn't need to use
pipe separators. It'd be much better to just use borders with CSS to
achieve this. Also, maybe consider a skip to login as well as your
skip to main content link. It makes things faster than tabbing
through all the links between
On 1/30/06, Anders Nawroth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does the toggle function have to be connected to a a element, or do
JS-enabled screen readers recognize onClick events attached to other
elements?
To add to this question, what happens where screen readers with
JavaScript result in an
SunUp wrote:
Hi folks,
I'm doing an FAQ page, and want to make it so only the questions
appear on page load, then when selected, the answers appear below
them. A toggle effect. You know.
I've found a couple of methods:
http://www.netlobo.com/div_hiding.html
Hello all,Please can you review and give comment on the following:http://ta.rt-ms.net/2/properties.html
http://ta.rt-ms.net/2/propertydetails.htmlThanks in advanceDarren
Anders Nawroth
Does the toggle function have to be connected to a a element, or do
JS-enabled screen readers recognize onClick events attached to other
elements?
The function needs to be attached to an element that receives focus, i.e.
an element that users can tab to via the keyboard.
Looks like some good work has gone into this! The source is easy to read,
which is handy. However, especially for accessibility, some quick things you
could improve are:
1. dont use: span class=boldExternal Quality Web Sites/span - use
headings instead. i.e. h3External Quality Web Sites/h3
Darren,
on Monday, January 30, 2006 at 12:26 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
http://ta.rt-ms.net/2/properties.html
http://ta.rt-ms.net/2/propertydetails.html
You've got some problems in your HTML:
1. with/height attributes of img tags don't accept units.
2. the inputs need name attributes
Title: Re: [WSG] Site Review
No title?
Using Team makes no sense to me but maybe because its early. Join Team screams for a The in middle.
Find property is above the header. I can understand accessibility options being above but Find Property?
Maybe list the items (each sale block)
Check the
Hi Darren,
The markup look pretty slick! My only comment would
be around your use of the strong element. For example:
pProperty strong3/strong of
strong500/strong found/p
Have you ever heard a screen reader when it hits
strong elements? For this reason I suggest just using a span and
Thanks Nathan,I have removed the strong elements and replaced them with a class for the price, I will have a think regarding the H3 as the context is already set and their is no other monetary data on screen.
Do you have a recommended screen reader for testing?DazOn 30/01/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thanks Martin,I have sorted all issues highlighted apart from the DL for the address as only one item will ever appear - would DL still be appropriate? and microformats leave with me.Daz
On 30/01/06, Martin Heiden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Darren,on Monday, January 30, 2006 at 12:26
From: tee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Greetings,
I have a simple CSS vertical menu, nothing fancy, no graphic used
for background. Client wants to add extra pages in one of the menu
tab, I have PV II MM2 but really prefer not to use it as it
requires me to change all menu tabs and turn the css
Hello all
I recall reading somewhere a while back that UK law
states you can't have a check box ticked on a form
EG- "untick this box if you don't want to
receive emails" would beillegal for a UK site.
Could anyone tell me if I'm right or wrong and if
possible give me some credible links
On 1/30/06, John S. Britsios [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Especially we are concerned about:
4. Usability.
I really like the liquid layout but to make it usable, I recommend a
max-width. Test different max width options and find one that gives an
optimal line-length for the main content text. Use
Hi,
This my first website using CSS. I've gotten most of the bugs out of
it except for one on the home page. For some reason the copyright
caption is forcing the last 2 letters below the colored background
box. Not sure why. I've messed around with the CSS, but nothing
corrects it. It
Should an agent's address really be a definition list??
If you want that sort of semantic pedantry, the markup should be:
block tag
hxAcme Estate Agents/hx
dl
dtAddress/dt
dd
The...Housebr/
Lodge Roa...4DD/dd
dtTelephone/dt
dd0208
How about the list of class 'properties', should that be an un-ordered list?DazOn 30/01/06, Stephen Stagg
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Should an agent's address really be a definition list??
If you want that sort of semantic pedantry, the markup should be:block taghxAcme Estate
Paul,
I
think you are way off topic here. If you want to contact me directly I'd be
happy to help
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On
Behalf Of Paul CollinsSent: 30 January 2006 15:33To:
Stephen,
on Monday, January 30, 2006 at 17:01 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
Should an agent's address really be a definition list??
I only wrote that I would do it that way.
If you want that sort of semantic pedantry, the markup should be:
block tag
hxAcme Estate Agents/hx
dl
I've solved the problem... The flash movie had the same id than its div
container: I misused the flash object script from Geoff Stearns, and the
CSS got mixed up. I should know better, sorry.
Roberto
-
Roberto Gorjão wrote:
Olá a todos,
In this page -
From: Paul Novitski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hmm. The text-toggling examples folks have posted on this topic
use {display: none} to hide text. I'm under the impression that
some screen readers will not speak text that's been hidden with
{display: none}.
At 05:04 AM 1/30/2006, Al Sparber wrote:
Surprise!
I am having a problem with IE6 on an internal Intranet page (hense no URL)
Here's my HTML:
p class=sectionstrongPRINTING/strong/p
p style=background-color:#f5f6f8;a href=# target=_blankGlobal
Interprint/a/p
pa href=# target=_blankInternational Printers Network/a/p
CSS:
div#main
Maybe give #169; a shot instead of copy; ... not certain, but it may
help. Love the design, by the way.
On 1/31/06, Kara Spellman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
This my first website using CSS. I've gotten most of the bugs out of
it except for one on the home page. For some reason the copyright
Tom Livingston wrote:
p style=background-color:#f5f6f8;a href=# target=_blankGlobal
Interprint/a/p
There aren't any div#main or div.links ANYWHERE in the html you pasted.
I'm assuming they are outer containers.
Add the !important declaration to the inline style. That should
over-ride
This is the only time I've ever seen a form inside a fieldset, instead
of the other way around. I can't even find an example of it that way
at w3.org. I know it's valid, but are there any drawbacks to doing it
this way?
**
The discussion list
Thanks for both the compliment and #169; suggestion Joshua. However,
changing copy; to #169; didn't work. It's the weirdest thing.
Kara
On Jan 30, 2006, at 3:54 PM, Joshua Street wrote:
Maybe give #169; a shot instead of copy; ... not certain, but it may
help. Love the design, by the way.
On 1/30/06 4:02 PM, Brian Cummiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have no suggestions for this. I despise and avoid flash as much as
possible :)
OK. Thanks. I think the Flash nav's life is about to end...
;-)
--
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com
I like the design as well, but I think you're missing a bit of css
potential. Instead of putting the fade onto your images, use a background
image with alpha transparent png that sits on top of the image. The image
would be solid on the outside, transparent square in the middle and have the
fade
On 1/30/06, Paul Novitski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:44 PM 1/29/2006, SunUp wrote:
Does anyone know of a method which will toggle the visibility of the
FAQ answers while still displaying everything properly without
javascript, and that adheres to current best practise for javascript?
A form inside a fieldset? [EMAIL PROTECTED]@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Come on everyone, where's the outrage?
I remember trying to use a fieldset outside a form and had to don the
asbestos fire suit.
Seriously, I don't see any benefit to putting the fieldset outside a form. I
would assume it's just
On 1/30/06 4:02 PM, Brian Cummiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Add the !important declaration to the inline style. That should
over-ride the stylesheet:
Adding !important had no effect. Still on the hunt...
--
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com
Kara Spellman wrote:
For some reason the copyright caption is forcing the last 2 letters
below the colored background box.
http://www.stevenmaslach.com/home.htm (home page)
Remove this comment ( just above div id=content ) from source-code...
!-- InstanceEndEditable --
...and the
From: Paul Novitski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sorry, but aren't these apples oranges? The triggering event is
one thing, the disappearing technique another. What I'm reading (or
perhaps misreading) is that even screen readers that respond to the
onclick method might not present text that's
Thanks Georg!
That did the trick.
Kara
On Jan 30, 2006, at 4:27 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Kara Spellman wrote:
For some reason the copyright caption is forcing the last 2
letters below the colored background box.
http://www.stevenmaslach.com/home.htm (home page)
Remove this comment (
In the AustralianIT there is an article about the new redesign of the
Sunbeam website (www.sunbeam.com.au). I looked it up and it seems to fit
Joe Clark's description of a Failed Redesign.
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,17957834%5E24169%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html
My question is:
Kat wrote:
In the AustralianIT there is an article about the new redesign of the
Sunbeam website (www.sunbeam.com.au). I looked it up and it seems to fit
Joe Clark's description of a Failed Redesign.
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,17957834%5E24169%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html
Yes,
Hi guys,
I'm using the Equal Height Columns technique from PIE's 'One True
Layout', along with the Any Order Columns technique from the same. It
works fine in Firefox, and used to work fine in IE, too. That was when
I was using the Jello Mold technique to size the site. Now, however,
the word
I believe this question would fall within the scope of this group.
Anyway I would be very interested to know the answer to this, with a
link to the related legislation.
Giles Clark wrote:
Paul,
I think you are way off topic here. If you want to contact me directly
I'd be happy to help
On 31 Jan 2006, at 12:33 am, Paul Collins wrote:
I recall reading somewhere a while back that UK law states you
can't have a check box ticked on a form
EG - untick this box if you don't want to receive emails would be
illegal for a UK site.
That would be European Community law, not only
Just out of curiosity, what about Tick this box if you don't want to
receive massive amounts of spam? Is it really anti-checked box, or
anti-default-opt-in? Seems pretty... open to abuse and/or
re-interpretation, unless it's the latter.
On 1/31/06, Philippe Wittenbergh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Richard Czeiger wrote:
I agree - I think the areas of Web Standards and Best Practices
should go side by side.
If one country has decided to actually legislate on something then it's
at least worth discussing.
I fail to see how the UK's anti-spam law is relevant to web
standards...but
Hello all!
I re-did my website (http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/) a while back in an effort to update its look and improve the quality of the coding behind it.
Right now, it looks perfect, just like I want it to. But, I need
to improve/clean up the XHTML coding behind it - eg, properly
Paul Collins wrote:
Could anyone tell me if I'm right or wrong and if possible give me some
credible links to back this up?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/01/26/prior_consent_does_not_mean/
Kind of right, kind of wrong :)
**
The
Hi,
It appears that a bid may be lost due to a client insisting on FLASH
being used for navigation. The concern from this end is if FLASH is
not installed or broken the entire site is DOA (Dead On Arrival).
With the use of the object tag is it possible to include an alternate
ul
To quickly follow up, before the thread gets presumably closed for being
way off topic:
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
The Directive on Privacy and Electronic Communications (2002/58/EC)
http://www.dti.gov.uk/industries/ecommunications/directive_on_privacy_electronic_communications_200258ec.html
My question is: is web-standards really considered a part of the
professionalism of web people considering that even the IT media
(AustralianIT) ignores this aspect?
Well, yes. The IT Media really haven't caught on to standards. That
doesn't mean web professionals haven't, or shouldn't.
I'd
Hi Patrick,
This requires further research, but many issues may have been
resolved in the Accessibility Panel within FLASH.
Return True,
Christopher Kennon
Principal/Designer/Programmer -Bushidodeep
http://bushidodeep.com/
__
Knowing is not enough, you must
Have a look at the Clear Blue Day site with flash disabled:
http://www.richardson.co.nz/cbd.gif
That's some quality web designing there alright!
heretic wrote:
My question is: is web-standards really considered a part of the
professionalism of web people considering that even the IT media
Mmm, just had a look in latest Opera 9 beta and concluded that it's
most definitely beta software for a reason ;-) On another page,
overflow:auto doesn't work because there are floating form elements,
which the engine doesn't seem to want to let layout push down
(because, obviously, things are
Kat wrote:
Maybe there is a member of Clear Blue Day here on this list and can
explain why they have chosen what they have?
I sent an email with questions about two of their decisions : why
table-based layout and why not include character encoding?
Their answer was that they used the
On 31/01/06, Kat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kat wrote:
Their answer was that they used the table-based layout because they did
not like the way style sheets render in IE, and that encoding is not
utilised for search engine reasons.
Wow. Those guys *really* have some catching up to do.
Is there any way to
specify in CSS that a certain area is to have no style at
all.
Let's say I have my
global style sheet where I style my ph1 etc. but on one page I
have a div with id #editableArea
I want that div to
have no style applied that is defined in the style sheet, is that
On 1/31/06, Kat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I sent an email with questions about two of their decisions : why
table-based layout and why not include character encoding?
Their answer was that they used the table-based layout because they did
not like the way style sheets render in IE, and that
Christian Montoya wrote:
Please send Clear Blue Day another e-mail and ask them if they have
any dinosaurs in their office.
This is not intended as an attack on Christian, nor anyone else. Not at
all. I'm dead serious on that
However, the comment above has reminded me of an attitude I see
65 matches
Mail list logo
