Joe Ortenzi wrote:
standards compliance should not be confused with WCAG conformance.
HTML is a standard WCAG is a guidance that people use as if it were a
"standard", which could easily be a standard but is effectively not one.
However, complying with WCAG confers added benefits which standar
On Dec 3, 2008, at 8:19 AM, Stuart Foulstone wrote:
Accessibility is an extension of usability to include non-standard
ways of
browsing the web.
Complying with WCAG is step towards accessibility. Careful
consideration
has to be given how one applies WCAG meaningfully.
Research has shown t
I was not using the term "standards" in the sense of a standards to be met
then everything is OK, but as a collective of best practices.
Web standards in the sense that I meant it, means designing with usability
and accessibility in mind.
Valid code is a pre-requisite to this.
Usability is the n
standards compliance should not be confused with WCAG conformance.
HTML is a standard WCAG is a guidance that people use as if it were a
"standard", which could easily be a standard but is effectively not
one. However, complying with WCAG confers added benefits which
standards compliance cr
It may validate, but valid code is just a pre-requisite to achieving
standards compliance.
On Fri, November 28, 2008 8:43 pm, Dave Hall wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 13:07 +, Stuart Foulstone wrote:
>> Blinking text is against standards in itself, so how can you do it in a
>> standards compl
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Dave Hall
Sent: 28 November 2008 20:44
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] the Name attribute
On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 13:07 +, Stuart Foulstone wrote:
> Blinking text is against standards in
On Fri, 2008-11-28 at 13:07 +, Stuart Foulstone wrote:
> Blinking text is against standards in itself, so how can you do it in a
> standards compliant way?
Using the sample I posted - see below. That validates.
Cheers
Dave
>
> On Fri, November 28, 2008 10:45 am, Dave Hall wrote:
> >>
Blinking text is against standards in itself, so how can you do it in a
standards compliant way?
On Fri, November 28, 2008 10:45 am, Dave Hall wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 23:11 -0600, Brett Patterson wrote:
>> What Dave?
>
> I was simply illustrating how to make text blink in a standards
> com
On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 23:11 -0600, Brett Patterson wrote:
> What Dave?
I was simply illustrating how to make text blink in a standards
compliant way. You never know someone might find such information
useful one day. The example I provided would allow them to avoid using
the ugly non standard
What Dave?
On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 6:04 AM, Dave Hall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 10:18 +, David Dorward wrote:
> > Brett Patterson wrote:
> > > Where could I find a good information site about the
> > > document.images.imageId script line, please?
> >
> >
> http://www.
On Thu, 2008-11-27 at 10:18 +, David Dorward wrote:
> Brett Patterson wrote:
> > Where could I find a good information site about the
> > document.images.imageId script line, please?
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/level-one-html.html#ID-26809268
>
> > And if you are tr
Brett Patterson wrote:
> Where could I find a good information site about the
> document.images.imageId script line, please?
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/level-one-html.html#ID-26809268
> And if you are trying to code using codes such as
> http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthr
Where could I find a good information site about the document.images.imageId
script line, please? And if you are trying to code using codes such as
http://www.kirupa.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217502
Just an example. A quick search to find.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 12:52 PM, David Dorward <[EMAIL P
Brett Patterson wrote:
> So I thought. But why, when using JavaScript can you not target the ID
> of an element such as an image?
You can.
> You can target the name, but not the ID,
Incorrect.
> not without document.getElementById
Why would you want to do it without document.getElementById?
E
So I thought. But why, when using JavaScript can you not target the ID of an
element such as an image? You can target the name, but not the ID, not
without document.getElementById-blah blah blah, so how can it duplicate
it? It seems then, that is does not.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:32 PM, Davi
Brett Patterson wrote:
> I don't why, but XHTML (I am using Strict 1.0 in the below examples),
> has deprecated the use of the name attribute. That being said, my
> question is, "Why was the name attribute deprecated?".
Because (on the elements upon which it was deprecated) it did nothing
except d
That is strange, the examples didn't show. Any idea as to why?
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 12:56 PM, Brett Patterson <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't why, but XHTML (I am using Strict 1.0 in the below examples), has
> deprecated the use of the name attribute. That being said, my question is,
> "
17 matches
Mail list logo
