You are right about the links, they shouldn't be side by side, the div
solution is clearly not best.
Rob mentioned that if the page is viewed with CSS off, the images would
stack up and create a rather long page. That's definitely something to
consider, but most likely something worth compromisi
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the primary issue you have here is the assertion that Images,
however artistic they may be, qualify as 'data'. I cannot see that
connection, and therefore cannot agree with the use of a table.
Further, the 'relationship' between two images may change if they are
I think the primary issue you have here is the assertion that Images,
however artistic they may be, qualify as 'data'. I cannot see that
connection, and therefore cannot agree with the use of a table.
Further, the 'relationship' between two images may change if they are
moved, but the 'meaning' of
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Quoting Designer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
A significant number of photographers regard a 'collection of
photographs' as being 'the work', and the way that work is shown (the
relationship between one image and it's adjacent images, and indeed,
to the whole) is of paramount i
Quoting Designer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
A significant number of photographers regard a 'collection of
photographs' as being 'the work', and the way that work is shown (the
relationship between one image and it's adjacent images, and indeed,
to the whole) is of paramount importance. What I'm sayi
John Faulds wrote:
> As I said, I couldn't say for certain what the relationship might be,
but my guess with the example given, as it's a photo gallery site, would
be that the photographer/artist feels like the photos should be in a
certain sequence, perhaps to facilitate the telling of a stor
Quoting John Faulds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I was talking about an ordered list over an unordered list. I never
said anything about using tables.
Ah, yes, I missed how the argument moved on to ordered vs unordered
lists. I was under the impression that this branch of the discussion
(the order
I was talking about an ordered list over an unordered list. I never said
anything about using tables.
On Wed, 23 May 2007 17:00:31 +1000, Patrick H. Lauke
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
John Faulds wrote:
As I said, I couldn't say for certain what the relationship might be,
but my guess wit
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
I'm assuming here that a screen reader imparts the additional
information implied by the distinction between ol and ul, such as
specifying "Three" rather than "Bullet". I haven't checked, but I
believe that is the case from previous tests.
Ah, gotcha...from your origin
John Faulds wrote:
As I said, I couldn't say for certain what the relationship might be,
but my guess with the example given, as it's a photo gallery site, would
be that the photographer/artist feels like the photos should be in a
certain sequence, perhaps to facilitate the telling of a story
sued!
Steve
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Behalf Of Nick Fitzsimons
Sent: 23 May 2007 03:04
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Photo gallery markup & semantics
On 23 May 2007, at 02:15:30, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Nick Fi
> On Behalf Of Jason Robb
> Unless my client needs to show a number with each image, an ordered
> list
> would be my second choice. I still think a DIV will be the right markup
> for the task. Thanks for the input everyone, I really appreciate it.
What's wrong with the UL?
And what about adjacent
I think I agree, as a result of certain ponderings on the context of
this particular gallery being that of a fashion collection, and
therefore having a pretty close relationship to the idea of presenting
goods for sale. I've written about it more in my reply to Patrick
Lauke, and I'm beginnin
d no
'alt' attributes for half the links. And they wonder why they're getting
sued!
Steve
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Nick Fitzsimons
Sent: 23 May 2007 03:04
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Photo gallery m
On 23 May 2007, at 02:19:42, John Faulds wrote:
Does it even have that relationship? Does it matter to anybody
other than some twonk from merchandising whether the blue sweater
comes before the red dress? If a list is to be used (and I don't
disagree with the use of a list in this case) the
On 23 May 2007, at 02:15:30, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
Although it might be important from an accessibility perspective
that an unsighted user be able to say "the third one on that page"
without having to count the preceding list items - hmm, now that's
something to th
Does it even have that relationship? Does it matter to anybody other
than some twonk from merchandising whether the blue sweater comes before
the red dress? If a list is to be used (and I don't disagree with the
use of a list in this case) then it seems to me that an unordered list
should b
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
Does it even have that relationship? Does it matter to anybody other
than some twonk from merchandising whether the blue sweater comes before
the red dress? If a list is to be used (and I don't disagree with the
use of a list in this case) then it seems to me that an uno
On 22 May 2007, at 22:32:06, John Faulds wrote:
I don't really see the relationship between those thumbnails but
your correct choice here is an ordered list, not a table. The
thumbnail in the bottom right corner doesn't have any direct
relationship with the thumbnail in the top right corner
Sometimes a collection images can indeed be tabular. If the relationship
between the images is important (like when you want to group like with
like), moving them around does alter the meaning of the images as a
collection. Sometimes the relationship is very subtle - I have a number
of exam
> On Behalf Of Patrick Lauke
> Can't guarantee how robust this would be in all situations, but I've
> just been playing with word-spacing to override the space without
> having to change the HTML itself. Seems to work ok in IE 6, IE 7,
> Firefox 2.0, Mozilla 1.7, Opera 9.2 on WinXP. Not sure how S
Patrick Lauke wrote:
Andrew Maben
This may be heresy, but I think this might
be a perfectly legitimate use of a (properly
marked-up) table?
Tables are for tabular data (where rows/columns have a
very strictly determined relationship, and moving cells
around changes the meaning of the data)
> Andrew Maben
> This may be heresy, but I think this might
> be a perfectly legitimate use of a (properly
> marked-up) table?
Tables are for tabular data (where rows/columns have a
very strictly determined relationship, and moving cells
around changes the meaning of the data). The data in
this
> Peter Leing
> I think the issue may be with how the browser is handling
> spaces/tabs/carriage returns in the html file. Removing the
> spacing in your page through firebug produced a similar
> affect as the table display.
Can't guarantee how robust this would be in all situations, but I've
You are all awesome.
I'm going with fixed width div row's.
The layout is fixed, so the size of the images is no guess work.
I need to make it very easy for my client to update on their own.
I'm thinking a's and img's in a div, instead of a's and img's inside
li's, will be one step simpler for hi
On 22 May 2007, at 15:35:34, Jason Robb wrote:
The main reason I even considered a table is because the anchors
leave an empty space between the images.
This may be heresy, but I think this might be a perfectly legitimate
use of a (properly marked-up) table?
Andrew
109B SE 4th Av
Gainesv
Jason Robb wrote:
Hello friends,
I'm marking up a group of (maybe 25-50) anchored images.
They need to be held tight to a grid, and I want about 6 or 8 to a row.
Here is the (lazy) table based solution:
http://bws.jasonrobb.com/collections/
I've considered a few different approaches.
I want t
2) Another method with a UL:
It's been pickin' my brain for days.
The main reason I even considered a table is because the anchors leave
an empty space between the images.
I've set up a test page here:
http://bws.jasonrobb.com/content/image-test.html
What do you think is causing that
On 5/22/07, Jason Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What do you think is causing that extra space? How can I avoid/remove it?
The spacing is caused by the white space in the code, line breaks, etc.
Remove those and you remove the space - or float your anchors instead of
display: inline.
I woul
On 22 May 2007, at 15:35:34, Jason Robb wrote:
The main reason I even considered a table is because the anchors
leave an empty space between the images.
I've set up a test page here: http://bws.jasonrobb.com/content/
image-test.html
What do you think is causing that extra space? How can I av
I think the issue may be with how the browser is handling spaces/tabs/carriage
returns in the html file. Removing the spacing in your page through firebug
produced a similar affect as the table display.
Peter Leing
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
31 matches
Mail list logo
