Because the title attribute is part of Standards, screenreaders have been
designed with a knowledge it, it's what they expect and it's what they
use.
So, no there is no better way.
--
Stuart Foulstone.
http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk
BigEasy Web Design
69 Flockton Court
Rockingham Street
Sheffield
Hello All -
While I know that one should use improve accessibility of form eloements, it
is also a common (best practice) to use a title attribute inside a link
anchor like this:
a href=home.htm title=Navigate Back to the Home Pagehome/a
If there's a better way, or if I'm completely incorrect
Quoting Cole Kuryakin [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello All -
While I know that one should use improve accessibility of form eloements, it
is also a common (best practice) to use a title attribute inside a link
anchor like this:
a href=home.htm title=Navigate Back to the Home Pagehome/a
If there's a
Quoting Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Because the title attribute is part of Standards, screenreaders have been
designed with a knowledge it, it's what they expect and it's what they
use.
Depending on user settings. Many screenreaders don't actually read
title by default.
So, no
Tee G. Peng wrote:
I got an impression that setting 100.1% fontsize in body tag is a
better approach and have been doing so for many sites. Also, with the
100.1% in the body, I usually declare .85em (.95 for my site as I
love big fontsize :) ) for paragraph and lists. I also find that I
get a
On Fri, August 3, 2007 11:36 am, Rick Lecoat wrote:
At 10:13 (London time), on 3/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Client sent me this link, kind of suggesting that 62.5% is the better
approach because his client isn't happy that now the heading texts
are too small and the paragraph texts are too big
Ya, it's colliding with another script i have but i'll figure it out.
Thanks Again.
On 8/3/07, Robert O'Rourke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ryan Moore wrote:
page cannot be displayed...???
On 8/2/07, *Robert O'Rourke* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 12:41 (London time), on 3/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Note also that it doesn't actually work
.../ snip /
IE ignores fractional components of percentages - or, as another way of
looking at it, only uses the first two decimal places of em based sizes -
which means that any subsequent use of
At 10:13 (London time), on 3/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I got an impression that setting 100.1% fontsize in body tag is a
better approach and have been doing so for many sites. Also, with the
100.1% in the body, I usually declare .85em (.95 for my site as I
love big fontsize :) ) for
Hi,
I got an impression that setting 100.1% fontsize in body tag is a
better approach and have been doing so for many sites. Also, with the
100.1% in the body, I usually declare .85em (.95 for my site as I
love big fontsize :) ) for paragraph and lists. I also find that I
get a more
Ryan Moore wrote:
page cannot be displayed...???
On 8/2/07, *Robert O'Rourke* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://webrocket.ulmb.com/ability/
http://webrocket.ulmb.com/ability/
Strange, works for me...
The alistapart article someone sent you looks like a
I will be out of the office starting 03/08/2007 and will not return until
08/08/2007.
I am attending a conference and will respond to your message when I return.
If you require an urgent response, please leave a message on my mobile
0422917755.
On 3 Aug 2007, at 16:08:55, Rick Lecoat wrote:
At 12:41 (London time), on 3/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Note also that it doesn't actually work
.../ snip /
IE ignores fractional components of percentages - or, as another
way of
looking at it, only uses the first two decimal places of
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
On 3 Aug 2007, at 16:08:55, Rick Lecoat wrote:
When dealing with this the other year, I came up with this solution
requiring an additional div, which happened to be there anyway:
body {
font-size: 125%; /* bump it up to 20px, assuming browser starts at
16px */
}
On 2007/08/03 21:14 (GMT+0100) Patrick H. Lauke apparently typed:
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
On 3 Aug 2007, at 16:08:55, Rick Lecoat wrote:
When dealing with this the other year, I came up with this solution
requiring an additional div, which happened to be there anyway:
body {
At 20:14 (London time), on 3/8/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
(Still falls foul of a minimum font-size set in the browser preferences,
though.)
I wouldn't say it falls foul. If a user has set a minimum size, then a
page should heed that. It still *respects* minimum font-size settings.
Well,
On 2007/08/03 16:16 (GMT-0400) Rick Lecoat apparently typed:
So, in calculating your 'readable' text size as a proportion of the
(admittedly overlarge) default size, you make yourself vulnerable should
the user have already made their own compensation for the overly large
default size.
The
Hi Thanks for all the insightful feedback.
I have a very limited freedom on this particular project. A previous
version was done quite messy and it seemed time were waste quite a
lot, so I was brought in to fix, clean up the code, but the end-
client wanted the fontsize stays the same. The
Felix Miata wrote:
(Still falls foul of a minimum font-size set in the browser preferences,
though.)
I wouldn't say it falls foul. If a user has set a minimum size, then a
page should heed that. It still *respects* minimum font-size settings.
http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/Clagnut/eonsSS.html
Good morning
http://www.colouru.com.au/contactus.html
On this particular page in IE only, the #footer seems to be taking its
width from the form. I have cleared everything I can think of but
cannot find the problem.
Thanks
Lyn
www.westernwebdesign.com.au
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Ah, a misunderstanding of terminology. I thought minimum font-size
settings referred to things like Firefox's preference setting for
disallowing fonts, even when resized by the user, to fall below a
certain fixed size...while in this case y'all seem to mean the default
On Aug 4, 2007, at 10:45 AM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Back to Tee's problem with 'body {font-size: 62.5%}' etc in Opera/
Mac. It may be caused by the preset value for 'minimum font size'
in that browser/OS.
If someone can check the preset value for 'minimum font size' in an
unaltered
Lyn Patterson wrote:
Good morning
http://www.colouru.com.au/contactus.html
On this particular page in IE only, the #footer seems to be taking its
width from the form. I have cleared everything I can think of but
cannot find the problem.
Hi Lyn
You have a typo in your clearfooter div:
Hello All -
After tearing my hair out for over 4 hours I come to you guys/gals for a
fresh eye and perhaps a solution.
I've got a simple class name (.active) attached to an a tag. This class is
programmatically activated when a link is chosen and the page loads.
When the chosen page loads, the
Scott Swabey wrote:
Lyn Patterson wrote:
http://www.colouru.com.au/contactus.html
On this particular page in IE only, the #footer seems to be taking
its width from the form. I have cleared everything I can think of
but cannot find the problem.
You have a typo in your clearfooter div:
FWIW seems to work in IE7 - dont have IE6 setup at the moment.
On 8/4/07, Cole Kuryakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All -
After tearing my hair out for over 4 hours I come to you guys/gals for a
fresh eye and perhaps a solution.
I've got a simple class name (.active) attached to an a
you could try adding !IMPORTANT after the colour declaration just to see if
it is an inheritance issue
On 8/4/07, James Gollan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW seems to work in IE7 - dont have IE6 setup at the moment.
On 8/4/07, Cole Kuryakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello All -
After
Good morning
http://www.colouru.com.au/contactus.html
On this particular page in IE only, the #footer seems to be taking its
width from the form. I have cleared everything I can think of but
cannot find the problem.
Hi Lyn
You have a typo in your clearfooter div:
xdiv
When the chosen page loads, the chosen link turns deep red.
The declaration for this is as follows:
/*ACTIVE LINKS ONLY*/
ul#navTopSimpleUL li a.active
{
color: #CC0033;
cursor: default;
text-decoration: none;
}
Hi Cole,,
You may want to also set focus on the element
http://www.colouru.com.au/contactus.html
On this particular page in IE only, the #footer seems to be taking its
width from the form. I have cleared everything I can think of but
cannot find the problem.
Another thing I find odd is that you are using an empty tag for your form
the given rule is not using a pseudo selector (:) - it is a simple class
definition. This should be consistent across browsers.
On 8/4/07, Kepler Gelotte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When the chosen page loads, the chosen link turns deep red.
The declaration for this is as follows:
/*ACTIVE
James and Kepler -
Thank you both for your input; I tried suffixing the color and text
declaration with !important and that solves the problem.
So this, I guess, is an issue of IE's built-in proprietary styles
over-riding user styles??? I've never run into that one before. Irritating.
Aside
On Aug 3, 2007, at 8:19 PM, Philippe Wittenbergh wrote:
On Aug 4, 2007, at 10:45 AM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Back to Tee's problem with 'body {font-size: 62.5%}' etc in Opera/
Mac. It may be caused by the preset value for 'minimum font size'
in that browser/OS.
If someone can check the
33 matches
Mail list logo
