Get. A. Life.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of mike bailey
Sent: Wednesday, 24 November 2004 3:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] 88x31 WSG Buttons?
Aloha,
Has anybody thought about making some 88x31 resolution Web Standards
Bug Report
The Bug Report system is entirely dedicated to finding mending and
publishing CSS and JavaScript browse bugs:
http://www.quirksmode.org/bugreports/
Growing up with web standards:
http://www.boxofchocolates.ca/archives/2004/11/22/growing-up-with-web-standa
rds
Scalable round edges:
Don't know if anyones got time to offer me a lil' assistance...? working on
a new project, Funkdub, at the moment.
Would welcome any insight as to why WordPress is screwing up my pages in
Mozilla:
http://www.funkdub.info/wp/
...seems to work fine in IE. Its controled by 2 sepereate CSS (because
Wow - thats not a nice comment...
He just asked for some more buttons :S
Peter Tilbrook wrote:
Get. A. Life.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of mike bailey
Sent: Wednesday, 24 November 2004 3:08 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] 88x31
I'm not sure, but maybe: give color:#000 to the #content too...
I've a similar stylesheet and no problems...
greetings
johannes
- Original Message -
From: Sam Hutchinson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, November 24, 2004 12:03 PM
Subject: [WSG] WP CSS
Interesting, between IE6 and FF the image behind the menu is different
-Original Message-
From: Web Usability [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 2004 3:00 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [WSG] why oh why
A friend of mine came across this site yesterday and when he
Does anyone know of any superior tutorial sites for CSS.
You might want to try the list at:
http://www.d.umn.edu/goto/css
Laura
___
Laura L. Carlson
Information Technology Systems and Services
University of Minnesota Duluth
Duluth, MN, U.S.A. 55812-3009
Even works on FF 1.0 on Win98SE
- Clayton
On Wed, 24 Nov 2004 05:24:55 -0800, GALLAGHER Kevin S
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Interesting, between IE6 and FF the image behind the menu is different
-Original Message-
From: Web Usability [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday,
Hi All,
I have designed a form as part of an ongoing upgrade to a site I manage, and
the form works fine in IE6, IE5.5, Firefox, Mozilla, but NOT in Opera 7.0,
where the formatting just falls apart.
It doesn't look like a box model problem, but I can't see what's wrong. You
can see the very
I'm guessing it may have something to do with browser default styles,
unfortunately I haven't got time to test it thoroughly.
something like the following may fix it:
fieldset
{
padding: 0 0 3% 0;
}
input, textarea, label
{
margin:auto;
width: 94%;
display:block;
clear:both;
}
Make sure you
On 25 Nov 2004, at 12:24 AM, GALLAGHER Kevin S wrote:
Interesting, between IE6 and FF the image behind the menu is different
It's random. Reload the page and see...
N
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
Hi Clayton
I think we have assertained that the issue is not present in Firefox
1. This thread has now been closed - please do not respond further.
--
Mark Stanton
Gruden Pty Ltd
http://www.gruden.com
**
The discussion list for
Peter Tilbrook wrote:
[request for a 88x31px WSG button]
Get. A. Life.
I always find it funny that people who post such replies do not seem to
grasp the inherent reciprocal nature of them. Make my day! :-)
For Mike: if no button in that particular size exists, you could do a
proposal based on
I was talking to a blind friend over the weekend, and since
he uses Jaws screen reading software, the subject of web sites came up. I was
observing as how we in the profession were trying to make things easier for
people using other devices than a browser to use the web.
For example,
'skip to content' versus 'skip to content of this page'?
Hmm, I'm not so sure, sounds pretty obvious to me. Skip links should be
as short as possible, because they get consistently read when a user
visits a page with screen reading software. I believe as more sites take
this approach on board, it
Hill, Tim wrote:
I believe as more sites take
this approach on board, it will become more prevalent to these users of
what the links do.
I'd agree with that. Additional two points:
- even if the user doesn't understand what they are, and decides to skip
them (no pun intended), it doesn't
In one
of the accessibility forums that I attended, it was suggested we use skip to
main content instead of content. Some screen readers will read content with the
inflection that it will bring you happiness and a sense of content rather than
give you content.
I do
like your idea of
Title: Message
Hey
all,
I'm still fairly new
to CSS and wanted to validate my CSS before asking some advice from this group,
but I keep getting weird errors ONLY when I validate the online CSS file. I'm
using the W3C CSS Validation Service: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
I
Ted Drake wrote:
Here's something else I noticed, I use teh [s} to signify the access
key. It looks stupid in fangs, openbracket s close bracket which is what
Jaws would do. So, I think I'm going to change it to Access Key = S
Don't forget that a lot of JAWS' output depends on the user's chosen
To further that in a speech reader article passed on By Steven Faulkner
([WSG] Observing Users Who Work With Screen Readers ):
http://www.redish.net/content/papers/InteractionsPaperAuthorsVer.pdf
It says:
6. Many want to skip the navigation but do not do so.
Many Web sites include a Skip
My company was
recently looking for a XHTML/CSS coder who practices web standards development.
We were looking for someone with strong CSS skills, who could implement complex
designs in table-less css, practiced standards based semantic markup, and was
fluent in accessible XHTML. No
In discussion's I've been involved in, the best link text describes the
link's destination, not the action it takes -- this is pretty much how
most other navigation works.
So
skip to content = main content
main content is preferred because it gets pronounced properly by
screen readers.
I
We've become a little more cynical... we don't expect to find new
employees with web standards experience already (although we did find
and employ one in the last year). Usually we ask have they heard of
web standards, how much do they use css, and try to guage if they are
going to be open to the
On 25 Nov 2004 11:25:56 +1100, Andrew Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as companies adopting a forward-thinking view, I hate to sound
cynical, but that's still a while in coming. I find the knowledge of web
standards among management remains close to zero. I always pitch an ROI for
Granted, it's weird. What happens if you separate the media
declarations? I say that because I noticed a long list of warnings
half way down related to a particular media type (not sure which
one). It might be that the validator is balking at some styles even
though they are valid for the
I'm on the opposite side of things over here. I, at least in my
opinion, have a great understanding and ability as far as both valid
and elegant markup go, and am above average w/ using CSS to make
things look like I want, but I've had very little to cut my teeth on
other than problem solving
I still use the 'skip' so as to convey that the link is within the
page. Similar logic applies to 'Back/Return to top'. Is my logic
flawed in this regard? What do usability gurus out there think?
Damian
In discussion's I've been involved in, the best link text describes
the link's destination,
Well, I noticed a wee thing, maybe it doesn't matter and maybe it does:
html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=en *lang=em*
Maybe by tweaking that to read lang=en will fix something?
hope it helps,
Leslie Riggs
Hey all,
I'm still fairly new to CSS and wanted to validate my CSS before
Since navigation presents a jargon problem, perhaps menu or another
less techie term might work:
Skip past menu
Jump over menu
What's an appropriate metaphor for a navigation menu if you're not a
programmer and if your interaction with the menu is functional auditory
and not
Belive it or not, I propose, here in Quebec, my experience as web standard
designer ( XHTML table-less, CSS, DOM, Javascript) and no companies were
interested. It seems I was talking a foreign langage. I believe, in
general, that companies are not open minded for new ways of working. If
there
This is an interesting point and a good example of where usability
evaluations and user-centred design can complement good design and technical
skill.
Paul said:
Since navigation presents a jargon problem, perhaps menu or another
less techie term might work
And
What's an appropriate metaphor
I think a concise menu is the way to go and I have been experimenting
with this concept recently. As it stands I've got something like this:
main content
page summary
site menu
accessibility features
search this site
(The page summary is an abstract of the page - a bit like a meta header
but
Hi everyone,
I am a newbie, both to the list and to XHTML/CSS Layouts.
I am working on a layout where all of the content is contained within
a fixed width box, centered horizontally, the height varies depending
on the content.
I would like to put a drop shadow around this container, to lift it
Admin cleanup:
Peter Tilbrook wrote:
[request for a 88x31px WSG button]
Get. A. Life.
This user has been removed. Do not do this on the list.
--
Hi
WSG mini icons designed by Ben Bishop (and many other resources) are found at
http://webstandardsgroup.org/icon/
This thread has now
On Thu, 25 Nov 2004 10:47:16 +1100, Paul Hempsall wrote:
Here's the relevant addresses:
http://www.lakemac.com.au/new/default.htm
http://www.lakemac.com.au/new/css/screen_home.css
I can only suggest that perhaps some of the white space is actually
funny characters? So , eg on the first error,
On 25 Nov 2004, at 1:51 PM, Matt McCallum wrote:
I have a visual example of what I am trying to achieve here:
http://220.233.11.63/Misc/Drop-Shadow-Wireframe.png
I just wondered if any of you could steer me in the right direction
with this. Its probably a very simple solution that I am missing!
Hi Matt
The approach I've used in the past is very similar to Dan Cederholm's
Faux Columns approach (http://www.alistapart.com/articles/fauxcolumns).
In this approach, where you know the width of the element that you want
to shadow but don't know the height, you simply create a 1px high
Nick Gleitzman wrote:
Matt, create 3 bg images for your shadow - one for the header, which
is the top (altho you don't really have a top) and a bit of the RHS,
one for the main body (and this is the key) which is the RHS but only
needs to be 5 or 10px high - and set it to repeat vertically -
Title: Message
Thanks
all for your help.
I
removed all the media types, except for "screen", from my CSS link - this worked
a treat.
Ifixed my language to "en" not "em" while I was at it...
thanks.
Best
Regards,
Paul Hempsall Web Developer
Lake Macquarie City
CouncilTel: (02) 4921
I don't know if this is what you're looking for, but ATT has an online style guide here:
http://www.att.com/style/
I haven't thoroughly investigated it, but it was recommended at an accessibility showcase I attended recently, as an example of how to ensure that standards (accessibility in that
Ryan Nichols wrote:
It seems like as more and more companies adopt a forward thinking view
of web development, this skillset will be a hot commodity.
My hunch is that the door leading to mass adoption of Web standards will
be labeled Accessibility. There have already been at least three cases
While Web Standards and Accessibility are often practiced together,
they are not entirely the same speciallty.
Having a good understanding of both is excellent, but I think
Accessibillity will get picked up faster, due to the fines you
mention.
Of course, working within Web Standards greatly
Why cant you just say read content and leave the skip bit out altogether
jackie
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Hill, Tim wrote:
I believe as more sites take
this approach on board, it will become more prevalent to these users of
what the links do.
I'd agree with that. Additional two points:
- even if
As the only proper way to test to to actually run the software (screen
shots don't help much with JavaScript), and while any standards based
code which works properly in Firefox stands a good chance of also
working in Safari, IE, on the other hand (surprise, surprise) isn't
quite such a sure
Natalie Buxton wrote:
While Web Standards and Accessibility are often practiced together,
they are not entirely the same speciallty.
While that's technically true, it's not a coincidence that those
interested in Standards are also interested in accessibility: the two
complements each other
They might see that that as a link to an external source I think.
Tim Hill
Computer Associates
Graphic Artist
tel: +612 9937 0792
fax: +612 9937 0546
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Jackie Reid
Sent: Thursday, 25
Hi
Looking forward, some members might be interested to read about the new
proposed recommendations [1] on voice enabled web technology.
I have had some experience with vxml [2] in relation to IP telephony and
IVR ( interactive voice response ) systems. These are powerful xml
languages and will
47 matches
Mail list logo
