Re: [WSG] Question - appearing in scope of another

On 17/02/06, Jamie Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ...I've never been sure what the context of a table cell is which is > following more than one in the same scope. The section on table rendering by non-visual user agents in the HTML specification [1] will shed some light. When a table cell co

Re: [WSG] Unstyling named anchors

On 31/10/05, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thierry Koblentz wrote: > > > "name" is used for old browsers. And I'm pretty sure it validates against a > > Strict DTD (HTML or XHTML 1.0). > > Please correct me if I'm wrong here... > > No, you're indeed correct. Up to XHTML 1.0 Strict i

Re: [WSG] Valid Null Value

Hi Ted, On 12/09/05, Drake, Ted C. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Can you have multiple tabindex="0" in a document? Yes, you can have multiples of any numbers (in the range 0 to 32767). Positive numbers with multiple values are visited in the order they appear in the character stream. Best regards

Re: [WSG] Valid Null Value

On 11/09/05, Chris Kennon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've discovered that leaving the value blank tabindex= " " does not > invalidate the page, or upset tidy. It does invalidate the page, it's just that the validators aren't catching it. The attribute value must be a number in the range 0 to 32

Re: [WSG] attribute selectors question

Hi Ted, On 16/08/05, Drake, Ted C. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have a quick question. I don't seem to be running on all cylinders and I > can't remember how to write the css that would look for a link that has .pdf > in the href. > A [href???.pdf]... Only CSS3 has attribute selectors that wou

Re: [WSG] "window.open" and popup blockers

On 16/08/05, Thierry Koblentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm talking about a simple: > onclick="window.open(this.href,'myPopup'); return false;" > In this particular case, if you consider normal to arbitrary ignore the > "window.open" statement, then why do you consider "outrageous" to ignore > "

Re: [WSG] "window.open" and popup blockers

On 16/08/05, Thierry Koblentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I see one. In that particular case, such behaviour makes sure that the user > still can reach the href value. IMO, it makes sense, > and AFAIK, that's how Opera's blocker works. It ignores *both* statements, > "window.open" *and* "return fa

Re: [WSG] accessibility - opening new windows philosophy

Hi Thierry, > This short script doesn't name the window, so it should spawn multiple > popups. > I'd use: onclick="window.open(this.href,'myPopup'); return false;" > As a side note, some blockers kill these popups. The window.open function returns true if successful, otherwise false. You could us

Re: [WSG] Screen readers, flash, DOM

Hi Jan, On 15/08/05, Jan Brasna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some screen readers sit on top of browsers like IE. If IE has Flash > > embedded in it, and the Flash has been made accessible (see > > ), then it's exposed to the > > screen reader. The reason

Re: [WSG] Screen readers, flash, DOM

Hi Jan, > Maybe strange questions - Do the users of screen readers have flash? (I > have no idea for a reason why they shloud) Some screen readers sit on top of browsers like IE. If IE has Flash embedded in it, and the Flash has been made accessible (see )

Re: [WSG] WCAG 1.0 §10.5

On Apr 4, 2005 5:28 PM, Mordechai Peller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And a "NEW LINE" isn't considered a printed character? A new line isn't considered a printed character. It helps to think in terms of what you can hear. You can't hear a new line. Best regards, Gez __

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:_[WSG]_WCAG_1.0_=A710.5?=

On Wed, 30 Mar 2005 11:17:28 +0200, Piero Fissore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Does anybody know why Bobby doesn't consider this structure valid > (WCAG 1.0 §10.5)? > > >Blog > 01 > 02 > 03 > It's a bug. I vaguely remember someone mentioning this before on a forum somewher

Re: [WSG] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML

On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 08:17:50 +1200, Sigurd Magnusson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Gez; So you're under the opinion, if you're setting attributes, only for > later retrieval (i.e. that the user agent is specifically being asked to > ignore the attributes), that this is poor design? I don't necessar

Re: [WSG] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 08:55:26 -0600, Steve Bryant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > document.getElementById('EmailAddress').setAttribute("required",true); > document.getElementById('EmailAddress').setAttribute("validation","email"); > > > This would be the slightly more difficult implementation that

Re: [WSG] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 03:46:21 +, Gez Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Didn't mean to leave the required attribute in, sorry :-) Cheers, Gez _ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com

Re: [WSG] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML

On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:04:23 +1200, Sigurd Magnusson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Over the past few years, we have built up a library of rather useful > Javascript libraries that we thought were a very elegant solution for adding > behaviour to menu systems and forms. These have been used on dozens

Re: [WSG] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button?

On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:51:33 +1300, Sigurd Magnusson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I could put the label around the image button, or have a blank one, but this > sort of defeats the purpose in my opinion... ideas? Both Patrick and Roger are correct. It's the text field that requires a label in orde

Re: [WSG] within & Screen Readers

On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:32:01 -, Jamie Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > ack, annoyingly you don't get a tooltip in ie for abbr, but do for acronym. The abbr element isn't supported by IE, so isn't present in IE's DOM. I think this is one of the main reasons why a lot of developers use

Re: [WSG] within & Screen Readers

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 14:51:46 -, Jamie Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hey all, > Does anyone know what the output for a Screen Reader would be for example; > > CSS JAWS can be configured to read the title attribute of abbreviations and acronyms, and will read them when they're nested in

Re: [WSG] Quoting Code Snippets

The code tag is the correct element to use to markup code snippets. You could add a rule to your CSS to make it preserve white space: code { white-space: pre; } The obvious problem is that it won't preserve the white space when CSS isn't available. An alternative is to place the code tags bet

Re: [WSG] problems with nodetype

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:23:40 -0500, Alan Trick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm getting undefined instead of DOCUMENT_NODE or 9? I used > if(aNode.tagName){ ...} to achive the required result, but it's a hack > and I want to know what's wrong with nodeType? I suspect it's because you've returned

Re: [WSG] Information about validation logos

Hi Stephen, On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 14:13:28 -, Stevio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I have put together a page using some information from various sites and > adding / changing bits to come up with the following page: > http://www.fit2gether.co.uk/aboutsite.html > > You will see that there is a sm

Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.0, Tables and Firefox

I wrote: > I mention a similar effect when transitional > HTML documents are served as application/xhtml+xml, whcih forces Apologies, that should read XHTML documents, as only the most unstable person would deliver an HTML document as application/xhtml+xml Best regards, Gez

Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.0, Tables and Firefox

> Here in Firefox on Windows I see space below the top row > of images: > http://elmbrook.org/navigation2.html > The border is in there only to show what's going on. In > IE it looks fine. I assume it's user error. Any hints? Thanks. > Jeff It's because Firefox is rendering the document in standar

Re: [WSG] Attribute Values

> What's more "in-spec": > > > > Or > > Both versions are acceptable, although the de-facto standard is to use double-quotes. Best regards, Gez _ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.com ** The discussio

Re: [WSG] To display or not to display validation logos?

Steven wrote: > Also, excuse my slight ignorance here, but just because a page validates as > XHTML and CSS compatible, does that make it accessible? True. It doesn't even necessarily mean that it's semantically correct, as there tends to be a trend in pages that just consist of a load of divs ra