Title: Out of Office AutoReply: digest for wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
I will be out of the office the week of July 13 and returning on Monday July 18
Ben Wrighton - StraightForward wrote:
Works in IE and Opera but in all the Mozilla browsers I've tested in
(Netscape, Firefox and Mozilla) the container doesn't wrap around the divs.
I know it's something to do with all the divs in the container div being
floated. If anyone can tell me how to
On 15 Jul 2005, at 4:34 AM, Chris Kennon wrote:
Has anyone a sliding panel solution, such as
this(http://www.siteexperts.com/tips/techniques), that is
cross-browser and standards compliant ?
Your sample: Directory Listing Denied. This Virtual Directory does not
allow contents to be listed.
Hi,
The following shows the correct request:
(http://www.siteexperts.com/tips/techniques/panels/page1.asp)
The example works in Safari and IE but fails in FF.
Many Pardons and Thanks,
C
On Jul 14, 2005, at 3:14 PM, Nick Gleitzman wrote:
On 15 Jul 2005, at 4:34 AM, Chris Kennon wrote:
Has
Has anyone checked out the JavaScript Prototype framework?
http://prototype.conio.net/
Are there any good resources around that explain how it works?
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Hello folks,
I was reading the June 2005 issue of APC (Australian Personal
Computer) magazine which has a cover story on unique features built
into the long-awaited Windows Longhorn OS including the Avalon
presentation system/user interface. This section really got me
thinking:
The most
The most important difference between Avalon and the current Windows
display architecture is that Avalon is vector based. The vector
structure allows scalable graphics (windows, fonts icons), meaning
designers can specify shapes and objects onscreen instead of mapping
elements using pixels and
On 15 Jul 2005, at 9:54 am, Paul Ross wrote:
The most important difference between Avalon and the current Windows
display architecture is that Avalon is vector based. The vector
structure allows scalable graphics (windows, fonts icons), meaning
designers can specify shapes and objects
But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a specific platform.. :)
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here, but current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web content are running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE
On 15/07/2005, at 11:40 AM, David Pietersen wrote:
But, if you're in the business of building web apps that target a
specific platform.. :)
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here,
but current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web
content
hmmmI smell Troll...
You don't work for Microsoft do you David?
:)
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Pietersen
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2005 1:41 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here, but
current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web content
are running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE on it.
Really, are we mad to develop for anything else? Discuss.
Bluntly, if you
Really, are we mad to develop for anything else?
Um, yes?
Bridges are also built for conditions that don't occur most of the year.
I mean - you should not 'develop' for a platform, but in compliance with
some guidelines and compatibility in mind.
--
Jan Brasna aka JohnyB ::
Hi all
Please try and keep this conversation on topic. We're not in the
business of getting into a mine's better than yours conversation here
(take them off list if you wish).
The topic of web standards and how they complement proprietary techs
like XUL, XAML , Flash etc is quite interesting,
HA HA HA Not exactly, I work for the Government.
I don't think the statistic is that hard to believe really.My website gets 30,000 unique visitors a day, and the number of those using a non-windows OS is not even worth counting.
I love Firefox, but playing Devil's advocate, how can we justify to
Now cut that out (smile or no smile)!
I use Windows machines exclusively and prefer to browse using IE as that's
what my main audience uses. I pick up many things that Russ on his non
Win/IE combination misses (not that he doesn't check but they are not his
defaults and things do slip through).
On 7/15/05, David Pietersen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here, but
current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web content are
running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE on it. Really, are
we mad to
I work for the Government.
So, that's sad. You shlould have DDA/WCAG in mind. Accessible page must
be universal as far as posible.
30,000 unique visitors a day, and the number of those using a
non-windows OS is not even worth counting.
I love Firefox, but playing Devil's advocate, how
We all do, really. I am at home, and don't have the research here,
but current statistics show that 97.4% of all devices accessing web
content are running on Windows. Every one of these machines has IE
on it. Really, are we mad to develop for anything else? Discuss.
I realise you said
I dont think XAML needs to be hosted inside IE?
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Justin Carter
Sent: Fri 15/07/2005 02:19
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards?
I dont think Avalon and XAML will
20 matches
Mail list logo
