ssage-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael MD
Sent: Friday, 20 July 2007 12:58 p.m.
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: please avoid forcing people to open pdf in browser! was Re: [WSG]
To target or not
> I'm all about "web conventions."
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 11:23:44AM +1000, Webb, KerryA wrote:
> If that's an efficient and effective way to publish a document,
> let them do it - providing the PDF is properly marked up.
Is there an organisation that systematically produces well marked up
accessible PDFs? I train people in how
Designer wrote:
> Can we just step back a moment, and consider what we are doing. As I
> write this reply, I am typing the content of this mail IN A NEW
> WINDOW.[]
> Do those who proclaim annoyance at having 'new windows forced on them'
> apply the same thinking to mail, Dreamweaver (and all
On 2007/07/20 20:14 (GMT+1000) Steve Olive apparently typed:
> There are valid cases for opening content from the same site in a new window.
> The most obvious is when logging into secure sections of web sites, like
> online banking. By forcing a new window that then generates the secure
> sess
If your banking site relies on a new window for its security, then it is
time to get a new bank!
In this day and age when every major browser has tabbed browsing, there
is little that is more infuriating than have a new browser window
spawned for no reason - worst of all is when I 'middle-click' t
On Friday 20 July 2007 07:44, Dave Lane wrote:
> If I click on a link on their site I expect it to open in my current
> window - if it insists on opening a new window, it pisses me off,
> because that's not how I work. I see that approach as indicating a
> designer still in a very IE5.5-6 mindset:
Can we just step back a moment, and consider what we are doing. As I
write this reply, I am typing the content of this mail IN A NEW WINDOW.
When I send the mail, the window disappears and I'm left with a large
window, with folders in a FRAME down the left. As I read the new mails,
I move fr
Maybe you should try Foxit Reader 2.0 http://www.foxitsoftware.com/pdf/rd_intro.php
PDF's won't be going away anytime soon, particularly from Government websites.
There is also zero chance of having all PDF's done as HTML due to staffing and time constraints. The best you'll get is a link to an
I think the problem is that the links are not easily reconised that it
is a pdf document you are opening
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 20/07/2007 9:23:44 am >>>
Jermayn wrote:
>
> I work at one of the those government places that has those horrible
> pdfs scattered through out all their horrible pa
Bruce wrote:
Personally and from a usability I feel pdf's belong in the office, not
on the web. As a definite download link and have a choice between
viewing it as html or a pdf download. I hate seeing pdf becoming more
popular.
i think that offering a substantial amount of information, like
Michael MD wrote:
I'm all about "web conventions." I didn't realize having a blank target
didn't follow web standards. Is that documented somewhere?
- at least give them the option to right-click and download it for
offline viewing!
the option is already there if you know about it. how do y
Jermayn wrote:
>
> I work at one of the those government places that has those horrible
> pdfs scattered through out all their horrible pages. I couldnt agree
> more.
>
And I work with people who build such sites, and I don't have a problem
with PDFs per se.
If that's an efficient and effective
I work at one of the those government places that has those horrible
pdfs scattered through out all their horrible pages. I couldnt agree
more.
I used to believe that you only "open in new window" for pdfs but now
only just realise that maybe its not best practise and could be thought
about more.
D" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2007 8:57 PM
Subject: please avoid forcing people to open pdf in browser! was Re: [WSG]
To target or not
I'm all about "web conventions." I didn't realize having a blank target
didn't follow web standards. I
I'm all about "web conventions." I didn't realize having a blank target
didn't follow web standards. Is that documented somewhere?
This one still bothers me ...
The alternatives I've seen invariably require javascript and some of those
javascript methods give the user less choice and are al
We as web designers provide a service to our customers and clients of
the website etc
so in doing that we need to provide a service that allows the user to
browse the website the way *he/ she* prefers and we cannot "force" the
user to browse the way 'we' like it. This means that you do not open a
IN wcag 2, a draft of 17th May of 2007 you can see:
ยป http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/#consistent-behavior
Guideline 3.2 Make Web pages appear and operate in predictable ways
3.2.1 On Focus: When any component receives focus, it does not
initiate a change of context. (Level A)
#ch
Thursday, July 19, 2007 4:45 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] To target or not
My suggestion is simple: let it be the content and presentation that
keeps people on your site, not gimmickry. Most smart web surfers use
Firefox or Opera or a lesser browser that is nonetheless ta
yce Evans
> Niche Marketing
> www.nichemktghouston.com
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Matthew Ohlman
> Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:21 PM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: [WSG] To target or not
> -Original Message-
> Since W3C doesn't allow the target attribute in XHTML Strict, which do
> you think is better? Having the window opening up with JavaScript or
> just keeping the page in the same window like W3C wants.
>
> I assume the reason for not allowing the target attribute
19, 2007 4:45 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] To target or not
My suggestion is simple: let it be the content and presentation that
keeps people on your site, not gimmickry. Most smart web surfers use
Firefox or Opera or a lesser browser that is nonetheless tabbed. If I
want
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
> I've done usability tests where users *preferred* off-site links to
> open in another window.
I find that surprising. I am sure you are right, however, that it is all
about context. Certainly if you sat down in a room full of 20- to
25-year-olds today you would not find
Joyce Evans wrote:
> I always thought it was a good idea to open links to other websites
> in a separate window, so you don't lose the visitor. [...]
I think that the weight of public opinion has been steadily turning against
this view over the past 10 years or so. I would be interested in knowin
Dave Lane wrote:
I find it oh-so-frustrating to have a site designer decide how my
browsing should work, breaking web conventions
Opening new windows *is* a web convention, of long standing, your
lack of approval notwithstanding. :-)
... if it insists on opening a new window, it pisses me
ur website, where you want him to be.
Joyce Evans
Niche Marketing
www.nichemktghouston.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matthew Ohlman
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:21 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] To target or not
He
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Matthew Ohlman
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 9:21 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] To target or not
Hello List,
I was curious what others opinions were on this issue...
Since W3C doesn't allow the target attribute in XHTML Strict, which do
Hi
Joyce Evans:
I always thought it was a good idea to open links to other websites in a
separate window, so you don't lose the visitor. If the visitor clicks on
a
link on your website and it does not open into a separate window, the
visitor may stay in the other website for awhile, going to,
oup.org
Subject: [WSG] To target or not
Hello List,
I was curious what others opinions were on this issue...
Since W3C doesn't allow the target attribute in XHTML Strict, which do
you think is better? Having the window opening up with JavaScript or
just keeping the page in the same window
Hi,
Gaspar:
But all this examples doesnt still force the users to open a new window!?!
Not all, WindowedLinks doesn't force user, but let the user to choose by a
common function on the page.
So i not use target="blank", it's the somethink, or i have turn off
javascript to be forced to open
But all this examples doesnt still force the users to open a new window!?!
So i not use target="blank", it's the somethink, or i have turn off
javascript to be forced to open in a new Window!?
I many times think in this, and think in a way of using a class="" or
rel="" to a , this activate a java
> On Behalf Of Diego La Monica
> Yes is the only extramarkup, but you don't need really to add it:
> in the head of the script there is a configuration block that allow
> you to choose in which element (identified by its "id") you would
> put the "control for the user to open in same/new window th
On 15/07/07, Thierry Koblentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Behalf Of Diego La Monica
> What i've said is:
> to use windowed Links in it's base configuration you need only to insert
> into the head block of your page the script element and any element in
your
> html structure identified (id)
> On Behalf Of Diego La Monica
> What i've said is:
> to use windowed Links in it's base configuration you need only to insert
> into the head block of your page the script element and any element in
your
> html structure identified (id) as "windowedLinks". That's all.
But applying this ID to s
Thierry,
i'm sorry because i haven't jet translated the tutorial and the
presentation page, but sure! It is on my ToDo list. :-)
What i've said is:
to use windowed Links in it's base configuration you need only to insert
into the head block of your page the script element and any element in your
> On Behalf Of Diego La Monica
>> I wrote an article about this, this solution does not require extra
markup.
>> http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/popup_window_with_no_extra_markup.asp
> Exactly, i wrote the mentioned script in this thread that identify by
itself
> the external links and leave
> http://www.accessify.com/features/tutorials/the-perfect-popup/
I wrote an article about this, this solution does not require extra
markup.
http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/popup_window_with_no_extra_markup.asp
As a side note, I believe it is better to apply a simple class name to the
links ra
> On Behalf Of tales.ebner
> i think there is a good way to do this, and is still accessible.
> ian lloyd teaches how to do it.
> if js is enable. it opens in a new window, if it's disabled it opens in
> same window.
> http://www.accessify.com/features/tutorials/the-perfect-popup/
I wrote an arti
That's a good point.
In an age where we have windows, tabs, screen readers, kiosks, and who
knows how many different client configurations, it's probably easier to
let the user decide what they want to do with the link.
Of course, it depends who your audience is. I'd imagine there would be a
few
i think there is a good way to do this, and is still accessible.
ian lloyd teaches how to do it.
if js is enable. it opens in a new window, if it's disabled it opens in
same window.
http://www.accessify.com/features/tutorials/the-perfect-popup/
thanks
tales ebner
talesebner.com [unfinished]
*
TECTED] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, 13 July, 2007 10:30 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] To target or not
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Jeffery
Sent: Friday, July 13, 20
2007 8:32 AM
*To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
*Subject:* Re: [WSG] To target or not
Id say dont use pop-ups, nobody likes them w!
:P
I agree - in this day and age it makes far more sense to show and hide a
div (or whatever) on your page than to throw a whole new page unless you
have reams of
I wrote for a solution few monts ago, that takes interests in some peoples
in Italy.
I've developed a javascript solution that grant accessibility and leave the
user to choose to open all external links (or the ones marked as external)
both in a new window and in the same window.
Actually the pa
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Jeffery
Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 8:32 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] To target or not
Id say dont use pop-ups, nobody likes them
Id say dont use pop-ups, nobody likes them w!
:P
On 7/13/07, Maria Solange Siebra Borges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
tomorrow see you!! bye solange
2007/7/12, Matthew Ohlman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Hello List,
>
> I was curious what others opinions were on this issue...
>
> Since W3C doe
tomorrow see you!! bye solange
2007/7/12, Matthew Ohlman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Hello List,
I was curious what others opinions were on this issue...
Since W3C doesn't allow the target attribute in XHTML Strict, which do
you think is better? Having the window opening up with JavaScript or
just
ew Ohlman
Sent: Friday, 13 July, 2007 4:21 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] To target or not
Hello List,
I was curious what others opinions were on this issue...
Since W3C doesn't allow the target attribute in XHTML Strict, which do
you think is better? Having the window opening
personally i say keep it in the same window
if your interested I wrote an article about it recently after reading a
few other articles about things similar
http://germworks.net/blog/2007/07/02/usability-and-accessibility-the-foreign-legion-of-web-design/
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 13/07/2007 10:21:2
Hello List,
I was curious what others opinions were on this issue...
Since W3C doesn't allow the target attribute in XHTML Strict, which do
you think is better? Having the window opening up with JavaScript or
just keeping the page in the same window like W3C wants.
I assume the reason for n
48 matches
Mail list logo
