Re: [WSG] Show overflow in overflow:hidden

2008-07-20 Thread Ca Phun Ung
containers boundaries. Ca Phun Ung Web: http://yelotofu.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***

Re: [WSG] transitional vs. strict

2008-04-30 Thread Ca Phun Ung
To throw water into hot oil. Choosing transitional or strict will, in Gecko browser, determine whether your browser activates almost-standards-mode or standards-mode respectively [1]. [1] http://hsivonen.iki.fi/doctype/ -- Ca Phun Ung Web: http://yelotofu.com

Re: [WSG] h1 heading followed by h2 or introductory text?

2008-04-22 Thread Ca Phun Ung
the introductory text be prefaced with an h2? I am thinking of accessibility and do not want to cause problems for screen readers by breaking the outline of the page. Yes. h1 followed by some introductory paragraph text then h2 is totally compliant, accessible and won't cause any problems. -- Ca Phun

Re: [WSG] PNG file sizes

2008-04-16 Thread Ca Phun Ung
PNGGauntlet as an after process to optimize those PNGs. http://brh.numbera.com/software/pnggauntlet/ Unfortunately it only supports Windows. -- Ca Phun Ung Web: http://yelotofu.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org

Re: [WSG] Force landscape on a print style sheet?

2008-01-09 Thread Ca Phun Ung
in landscape just by adding the following clause to the print style sheet: @page {size: landscape;} However, sadly browser support is still lacking. The above does not work in Firefox, IE or Safari. Only Opera seems to like it. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/page.html Ca Phun Ung http

Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations

2008-01-08 Thread Ca Phun Ung
as our secondary point of customer focus.../p /li /ol Note: The h2 here is totally arbitrary, but do use the appropriate heading in your own code. --- Ca Phun Ung http://yelotofu.com *** List Guidelines: http

Re: [WSG] strong v's b , em v's i

2007-04-23 Thread Ca Phun Ung
Hi Robby, As far as I'm aware strong is here to stay. HTML and XHTML both support it. Also the page you're referring to doesn't look credible as it advocates using HTML 4.0 as a rule of thumb. Try this: http://www.w3schools.com/tags/default.asp Or if you want the definitive answer take a

Re: [WSG] strong v's b , em v's i

2007-04-23 Thread Ca Phun Ung
Nice one Patrick, that made me laugh too... lol But on a serious note what could we do about resources like these that publicize incorrect information and advocate bad practice? Patrick Lauke wrote: Robby Jennings wrote: I've found this list of depreciated tags

Re: [WSG] Minimum Height Delimma in IE

2007-04-21 Thread Ca Phun Ung
Hi Cole, Had a look at your page and I think the problem is the overflow:hidden applied to #container (skin.css line 18). You should see the rest of the content if you remove that line. If overflow:hidden is absolutely necessary then you could just remove the height values. IE will expand