=?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_Re:_[WSG]_Re:_University_textbook_or_other_resources??=
Here are two sites that I love: W3Schools - Decent online tutorials: http://www.w3schools.com/ StyleMaster - Excellent CSS Web Site building tool. Like it much better than using Dreamweaver for CSS: http://www.westciv.com/style_master/ Good tutorial on positioning using stylemaster, etc... Alan Trick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/26/2005, 03:34:45 PM: > Since your at a univeristy you might as well take the time to go over > the some of the more theoretical stuff. This is particlularly a good ida > if your talking to CS students who are more interested in that kind of > thing. > > Probably one of most important things is Semantics. Paricularly the > separation of style and content, although semantics covers a lot more > too. Of course don't over do it (join the www-html list on w3.org for > examples :P) but I htink it will give the students a firm foundation for > a lot of the whys behind how things are done. > > As far as server side languages like PHP, JSP, and the other > abominations - I think that probably belongs in another course. Mainly > because there is a lot of stuff that needs to be covered here > (particularly security issues). If the students haven't done at least > some programming you might find that either 1) it ends up becoming a > second Introduction to Programming 101 or 2) the students won't have a > clue as to what they're doing and will get more confused because there > is an extra layer they don't understand. > > Alan Trick > > On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 00:06 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > There are two magazines out of the UK that sometimes offer tutorials > > that you can use in the classrom. One is called WebDesigner and the > > other is called Practical Web Projects > > http://www.paragon.co.uk/wd/index.htm > > http://www.paragon.co.uk/pwp/index.htm > > > > If you want to teach web design from a standards perspective, there are > > three books listed in the right hand column of my blog at > > http://www.netmix.com/wordpress, along with other books that I singled > > out from Amazon that might be useful to you. One is Jeffrey Zeldman's > > "Designing with Web Standards." > > > > I also recommend starting to look into Open Source products, like Typo3, > > Mambo and other Open Source Content Management systems. > > > > Web designers need to learn how to design around open source module > > macros. > > > > For example, Movable Type, Wordpress and other blog systems are all open > > source CMS tools. A web designer is going to need to think about how to > > create templates based on the functionality of these CMS systems. The > > ones I mentioned are php/mySql, but there are other that are Java, ASP > > and JSP as well. > > > > A good resource to get open source CMS tools is opensourcecms.com. > > > > I have yet to find a book that teaches you how to actually think about > > design, fontography and layout, then bring you into HTML production, > > then bring you along into database integration. Since all these methods > > are disparate from each other, but depend on each other, most books > > usually focus on how to's rather than to think creatively. > > > > Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know, but believe me, I've been looking. > > > > In the local Barnes & Noble, there have been many books published that > > you can find in the Graphic Design section, which showcase high end web > > design. That may also be a place to look as well. > > > > Tony Z. > > > > > > > > > > Laura Carlson wrote on 11/26/2005, 01:04:35 AM: > > > > I've been asked if there are useful university-focused > > > > textbooks or other resources suitable for teaching > > > > accessible web design. > > > > > > As Lloyd and Matthew mentioned Joe Clark's "Building Accessible > > > Websites", New Riders Publishing, 2002 is well worth considering. > > > > > > I have been using it for the web accessibility classes that I teach. > > > The Clark book does not assume the reader understands the basics of web > > > accessibility. I specifically chose it because of that and because it > > > goes beyond simply repeating the "party line" from the World Wide Web > > > Consortium (W3C) or Section 508. That is one of the purposes of the > > > classes - to not just read the specifications, but actively engage > > > them. Challenge, dissect, understand, and learn what makes the most > > > sense. Also Joe put the whole book online[1] so if students don't want > > > to purchase it for the class they don't have too. However, the soft > > > cover version of the online book has screen shots and images. The > > > online version does not. > > > > > > The Web Design Reference [2] is a huge online mega-reference (over > > > 3,000 links) of information and articles about web design and > > > development that you might find useful. It has a full section on books > > > [3] as well as online resources (accessibility, CSS, usability, web > > > standards, and many related topics are covered). > > > > > > You m
Re: [WSG] xhtml doctypes and charsets
Alan Trick wrote: On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 10:46 -0400, The Snider's Web wrote: "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";> The meta element is effectively useless in XHTML, assuming you're serving it with the right MIME type. If you're serving it as text/html, then you may as well be using HTML 4. The other thing is that I don't think anybody besides the odd bot ever looks at those meta tags. That information belongs in your http headers. However, for text/html, in the absence of the information in a higher level transport protocol (like HTTP), browsers do look for encoding information within that meta element. Of course, it is preferred that such information occur in the HTTP headers (it is also a trivial exercise to configure your server properly to do that), but that meta element is better than nothing. For XHTML, application/xhtml+xml is the preferred MIME type and it's best to include encoding information within the XML declaration. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] Positioning Image problems
Hi there Kevin, I downloaded your page to take a closer look at it. The waterservices site wasn't available to me at the moment (though I did see it earlier today), but the greenacres site, specifically the page with the photo, was tough to wade through. So, I ran it through the validater (http://validator.w3.org). There were 55 errors on the page! Validating is the first place to start with troubleshooting any page. That tells us that at least the problem isn't with our markup, then we can start looking at the css, browser idiosyncracies or other possible causes. The other thing I noticed was the declaration above the DOCTYPE declaration. Having anything above that will cause IE to render in quirks mode; I've solved quite a few baffling problems by simply removing that statement. Looking at your markup, I also wondered why you used [which in your DOCTYPE should be so often? Using the tag to markup that text would eliminate just about every in your document. After you validate your page, if you're still having problems with that positioning, I'd be happy to take a look at it. Chances are good, though, that it'll 'fix itself' :-) Bill Scheider I have to problems at the moment which have me stumped, both to do with positioning images. Thanks for any help ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)
Title: Dragon Way (Site Check) Hi Ed, I don’t have a Mac so couldn’t look at the site. I did want to offer a comment, though, about point #1 (non-centered text). I viewed it on a variety of browsers on PC. Technically, I guess, the client is correct: the text isn’t centerd. The entire image is centered in the window. Since the logo on the left is a drawing, the actual text – Dragon Way – is visually off to the right. And because of the color difference between logo and text, the text part seems (to me) to be heavier and draws my eye more, so it isn’t ‘centered.’ I’d check that out with the client before pulling much hair out over it :-) Of course, if he means it’s appearing flush left or right, that would be another issue. But as someone else already said, you’d know that. I won’t comment further on the rest of the site since you already said it’s working great in the FF and IE; it is here, too. (And in Op and NS). Generally, I like the site. It’s well built and has a nice fresh feel to it. HTH, Bil Scheider Hello I have developed a site for a client and all seems fine, compliant, etc. works ace in IE and FF. I don’t have a MAC and client is complaining of: 1. Homepage - Text under dolls is not centred 2. Homepage - No logo showing 3. Rest of site - Top bar missing 4. Rest of site - dolls (same as 1.) 5. Slow Can anyone help, take a quick look for me? This is my first post after lurking for a while :-) http://test.dragon-way.com/ Any other comments would be ace. Thank you. Regards Ed Henderson Web Man Walking - web design & usability experts t: 0131 669 8800 m: 0781 253 6964 f: 0797 062 1532 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: web-man-walking.com a: 48 Eastfield, Edinburgh, EH15 2PN "New technology, old fashioned service"
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
On 11/26/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What exactly do you mean by 'making them work the same way the list items > do' ? > > And yes, a screenshot would be nice because I can't see any problem > neither on my PC nor on my mac > > Thanks in advance, > > Marco > Here you go: http://space.rdpdesign.com/typo.jpg This is at 1 step above "larger," though it's noticeable at "larger" too. See, the links in the list are contained, because you didn't specify a height for those list item. But the headers are not, they overflow the container. If you don't specify a height for those headers, and center their background, they'll resize nicely just like the links do, and you will have a robust sidebar. Then you can even have the sidebar resize when the "text-size" buttons at the top are clicked, which is what I think judges and users will expect. Besides, the w3c discourages mixing pixel and font sizes. I know it's a fine detail, but isn't that what we love on this list? -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
What exactly do you mean by 'making them work the same way the list items do' ? And yes, a screenshot would be nice because I can't see any problem neither on my PC nor on my mac Thanks in advance, Marco > On 11/26/05, Marco van Hylckama Vlieg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> It's gotta be pixel sized or it will screw up big time when the >> letters get bigger than the area they're in. >> What's so wrong with pixel size anyway? >> >> Just out of curiosity... >> > > Actually, the list items are fine when I resize them. I could take a > snapshot of it to show you. The headers, however, are not. You could > make the headers more robust by making them work the same way the list > items do, and then you won't need pixels for the text. > > -- > -- > Christian Montoya > christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
On Saturday, November 26, 2005 9:53 PM, Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I could have sworn I got all these e-mails last night, what's going on?!? Ditto. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
I could have sworn I got all these e-mails last night, what's going on?!? -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
On 11/26/05, Marco van Hylckama Vlieg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > It's gotta be pixel sized or it will screw up big time when the > letters get bigger than the area they're in. > What's so wrong with pixel size anyway? > > Just out of curiosity... > Actually, the list items are fine when I resize them. I could take a snapshot of it to show you. The headers, however, are not. You could make the headers more robust by making them work the same way the list items do, and then you won't need pixels for the text. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
> and if you take the overflow out the content just flows right on out over > the bg and right down the page that would beautiful wouldnt it > I could show you a million websites with the background graphic positioned at the bottom of the content. Why not split that background image up and do like the rest of them do? > and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long > pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer > would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or > not. > The page does not fit within my browser. And I'm using one of those very popular widescreen laptops that is very short vertically. So it is not a matter of preference. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
Then I appologize Christian, This is due like today and I'm really growchy but it's what they want and if it needs changed then we change it. I was opposed to the idea just like you are now but it's grown on me and I kinda like it. But you gotta remember we are targettting their main audience which is on 800 x 600. I have a pc xp (puke) set up here set to the specs they gave me, 800 x 600, ie6, ff with med to large fonts and actually it looks pretty good on it. This is the one i did before this one http://www.elkhornflyrods.com/store/index.cfm As you can see (well its not perfect css by any means, had a 2 week deadline) but I took 1 image cut it into 3 parts (header, body, footer) actually u can see my gradiant mistake lol and the header randomly rotates but thats just not how this one wanted it. So I know what you are saying but its just not happening on this one. I wish the menu section was a bit wide but there is no time right now to do it as there are 2 sites due and both have same layout with diff color schemes. From: Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 4:39 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems> And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why> answer?You misunderstand. My reason for telling you this is that there isnothing you can do about your problem with the current layout. If theclient wants it that way, then that's fine, no need to argue. Justkeep in mind that the number of users that are going to use text-sizelarge on the page is about 1 in a thousand, and they probably won'tcare. So I say just leave it like it is.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
csslist wrote: and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or not. So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in order to get to the content. Cute. Seriously, what windows/screens is that design meant to fit on? Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
> And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why > answer? You misunderstand. My reason for telling you this is that there is nothing you can do about your problem with the current layout. If the client wants it that way, then that's fine, no need to argue. Just keep in mind that the number of users that are going to use text-size large on the page is about 1 in a thousand, and they probably won't care. So I say just leave it like it is. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
First of all I appriciate all help I get and I can take critizism fine when I ask for it. Ok, so if we do it your way on your browser (lets just say..) to read the page you will have to scroll the screen down and so when you want a new link you will have to scroll all the way back up to do it, where as how it is now you can scroll the content and when ready to go to new link you simply move the mouse over a tad and there you are, I'm sorry but I agree with them and think that is a much better solution than an entire page scroll, especially for their target audience. And too add to that, their stats say well over 90% of their web site users are using a screen resolution of 800 x 600 so we made it to fit their needs to what their expectations are and we wanted to get away from the way their current site is (which is kinda like yours) where everything is shoved over to the left so on bigger browsers it only takes up half the screen which is fine but at least center the damn thing. And if 6 months from now their stats change and we need to do a new layout then big deal we do a new layout. Again I don't mean to be a jerk but I asked a ? to a menu problem, if I woulda asked you for a site check then your responce would have been warranted but I didn't. You need to make a site to the requirements of the audience not your personal preference. From: Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 4:31 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemsOn 11/25/05, csslist wrote:> its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of> the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine.>This is a 1:1 image of my browser viewport:http://space.rdpdesign.com/reels.jpgNotice the height of the viewport: 536 pixels. That's 64 pixels less than 600.My laptop is a 15" widescreen. The default resolution for readabletext is 1280 x 768 pixels. My browser has the title bar, menu bar,address bar, links bar, one toolbar, tabs, and the status bar at thebottom. Then there's the thick windows bar below it. That accounts forthe 132 pixels of lost screen estate. Considering the popularity ofbrowser toolbars and tabbed browsing (soon to be standard in IE7) aswell as the popularity of widescreen displays (and even standarddisplays at 768 pixels height), I'd say this layout isn't going towork. You can take the feedback as constructive and revisit thedesign, or you can ignore it, but if you choose to ignore it then thisisn't the list for you.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)
On 11/25/05 12:45 AM "Web Man Walking" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent this out: > I don¹t have a MAC I do. And it's "Mac", not "MAC". "Mac" is short for "Macintosh". > 1. Homepage - Text under dolls is not centred Seems okay in Safari. > 2. Homepage - No logo showing If that's the green, phallic sort of thing, seems okay in Safari. > 3. Rest of site - Top bar missing Yeah, there's no top bar in Safari. > 5. Slow Slowness wouldn't be OS dependent. Slowness would be bandwidth or server dependent, or possibly too-big-of-graphics dependent, but those would affect all platforms. You probably know that. :-) I didn't find the site "slow" in Safari on my Mac, fwiw. Hth Rick Faaberg ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
It's gotta be pixel sized or it will screw up big time when the
letters get bigger than the area they're in.
What's so wrong with pixel size anyway?
Just out of curiosity...
- Marco
P.S: fixed the font family thing. You're right that was a messy
definition.
On Nov 26, 2005, at 9:31 PM, Christian Montoya wrote:
.sidebar-node li a {
display: block;
margin: 0;
width: 206px;
background: url(../../images/theme/sidebar_linkbullet.gif) no-
repeat top left;
font-size: 11px;
font-family: "Trebuchet MS";
color: #aaa;
line-height: 18px;
text-decoration: none;
padding: 0 0 0 23px;
}
bah, pixel sizes. But what I wanted to address is that you lack a good
font-family here. You should at least try:
"Trebuchet MS", trebuchet, sans-serif;
--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
.sidebar-node li a {
display: block;
margin: 0;
width: 206px;
background: url(../../images/theme/sidebar_linkbullet.gif) no-repeat top left;
font-size: 11px;
font-family: "Trebuchet MS";
color: #aaa;
line-height: 18px;
text-decoration: none;
padding: 0 0 0 23px;
}
bah, pixel sizes. But what I wanted to address is that you lack a good
font-family here. You should at least try:
"Trebuchet MS", trebuchet, sans-serif;
--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
I just tried FF 1.5RC3 on my mac and I am not experiencing this behaviour so I guess it's indeed some sort of rounding error. It does fix the problem 1.0.7 has with the tags cloud in the sidebar having more right margin than left margin. That looks like it does in Safari and MSIE now, finally ;) - Marco On Nov 26, 2005, at 7:37 PM, Christian Montoya wrote: My question: What do you guys think of the template, Great! do you spot any problems in certain browsers In FF 1.5, when I hover over the links on the right, the "pop out" to the left 1 pixel. When I scroll down and back up, they are fine again. I'm not sure if this is an FF problem or something that can be fixed in the css, it might be a rounding error. Just wanted to mention it in case those judges are really picky. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
Hmm this is funny... There's one person reporting it's blurry while another one calls it jagged. Could this have something to do with font smoothing settings? I do know the jagged look is because of ClearType not being enabled. Win2k doesn't even have it at all which will render any (especially large) text jaggy. Unfortunately there isn't much one can do about that. The lag is even stranger. I'm not experiencing it neither on my mac nor on my XP notebook... Everyone thanks for the feedback so far. I do see I need to check on the javascript error. - Marco On Nov 26, 2005, at 7:50 PM, Bernard Sandberg wrote: Hiya all, My question: What do you guys think of the template, do you spot any problems in certain browsers and is there a way to get it to behave in MSIE 5.2 for mac? My experience is that with Fx 1.0.7, the text seems quite unreadable and "blurry". I don't know if this is intentional, but it sure makes me have to really concentrate on reading! The same issue also applies to IE6. Also, with the links I'm experiencing a sort of a "lag" when hovering over them in IE6, contrary to Fx, where this works just fine! The green category-text above the links also has the blurry look. Except from that, your template is very nice, good colors and a clean, lucid look to it! It's a 5/6 :) ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Re: University textbook or other resources?
Alan Trick wrote:
> As far as server side languages like PHP, JSP, and the other
> abominations - I think that probably belongs in another course.
Being far removed from higher education, I'd kind of skipped this
thread but that caught my eye; the originating comment:
>>For example, Movable Type, Wordpress and other blog systems are all open
>>source CMS tools. A web designer is going to need to think about how to
>>create templates based on the functionality of these CMS systems. The
>>ones I mentioned are php/mySql, but there are other that are Java, ASP
>>and JSP as well.
I think it would help non-programmers to evaluate CMS/framework
software if they were at least aware of the 'MVC' design pattern
(and the concept of Design Patterns in general, for that matter).
The Model-View-Controller pattern represents a separation of data,
presentation, and business logic in the overall system, as current
(X)HTML/CSS is intended to separate data and presentation at the
View level.
Finding a template system with code interwoven through the markup,
or worse yet *generating* markup (when you see something like e.g.
"print 'gack!';"), should tip the developer that it
will be extremely painful to make substantial changes.
OTOH, a template system like e.g. '${exclamation}'
will be much more flexible. Some languages lend themselves to the
latter approach more than others, but that's OT for this forum. :-)
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com
dream. code.
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
Hi Marco, The template looks really great... but why does the text look jagged. I get a javascript error using W2K/FF 1.07 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
Hiya all, My question: What do you guys think of the template, do you spot any problems in certain browsers and is there a way to get it to behave in MSIE 5.2 for mac? My experience is that with Fx 1.0.7, the text seems quite unreadable and "blurry". I don't know if this is intentional, but it sure makes me have to really concentrate on reading! The same issue also applies to IE6. Also, with the links I'm experiencing a sort of a "lag" when hovering over them in IE6, contrary to Fx, where this works just fine! The green category-text above the links also has the blurry look. Except from that, your template is very nice, good colors and a clean, lucid look to it! It's a 5/6 :) ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] site check: theme for Typo
> > My question: What do you guys think of the template, Great! > do you spot any > problems in certain browsers In FF 1.5, when I hover over the links on the right, the "pop out" to the left 1 pixel. When I scroll down and back up, they are fine again. I'm not sure if this is an FF problem or something that can be fixed in the css, it might be a rounding error. Just wanted to mention it in case those judges are really picky. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Re: University textbook or other resources?
>From personal experience I'll add to what Alan said. I took Web Design & Programming 1 here at Cornell. It was very easy for me since I know the stuff already but I saw what other students were dealing with. Such as: - The class was full of people who had no experience with computer programming, and the professors have this crazy idea of teaching PHP at level 1. I mean, associative arrays and form handling. Stuff I don't think is so relevant to level 1. Anyway, a lot of students still don't understand the stuff and I really think the time could have been used to cover more stuff related to CSS or semantics. - Teaching usability was good. The professors made us think of potential users and create entire personas for them, and they made us do user tests for our projects. I think everyone in the class got a good grasp of how to make websites usable. Besides, one of the books we read was "Don't Make Me Think" by Steve Krug. - We did not cover Javascript at all. This was a good thing IMO since most students would have probably ended up using it obtrusively in their websites. - We didn't touch Flash either. Mostly had to do with problems with teaching a proprietary product. - It was very important that the professors declare tables for layout wrong from the beginning. There were definitely a lot of students that went into the course thinking this sort of thing is okay. One even decided to single me out for being such a table-for-layout hater. However, that's a story for another day. Fight the good fight. I definitely think the class should have covered more CSS, and more accessibility. Otherwise it was a good class. Next semester I'll be taking level 2, which is PHP & MySQL. Should be more fun. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]
Chris Kennon wrote: I've adopted the philosophy, drop down menus are a surrogate for detailed Information Architecture. Sub-navigation should be introduced on internal pages to navigate sub-sections. Before passing this along to clients as mantra, I thought seeking the advice of the participants of the list advantageous. Hi, I've used drop down menus on many sites, but in the end I've always wished I hadn't. I no longer use them. They /can/ be useful for return visitors who are familiar with the content of your site because fewer clicks are required to get to specific content, but for first time users or users who are less attentive, they tend to be less productive. Users tend to spend more time searching menus and making guesses, than it would take to simply click through an intuitive top-level navigation. I also prefer a top-level only type navigation because it gives me more opportunities to present content and information to the user. A drop down menu such as the following: Solutions solution 1 solution 2 solution 3 solution 4 is generally less effective and informative than a top level link that leads to a "topic page" that provides a brief overview of each solution. This is a better overall value for the organization, more informative to the user, and more effective for search engine optimization. As for screen clutter, I haven't found drop down menus to very helpful in this regard either. Generally, the links usually contained in the sub-navigation of a drop down are represented on the topic page as contextual navigation, essentially accomplishing the same "clutter control" as a drop down menu might. I can't really think of any good reason to use a drop down menu other than a /possible/ reduction in clicks for the user. Best regards, Michael Wilson ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
Actually, a workaround has been proposed for your specific problem (see earlier in the thread). If I’ve read your post correctly, you have ignored common accessibility and layout standards/conventions to create a static design and then want the standards group list to help you work around the ensuing issues and then you get snotty when people point out that you’re site doesn’t follow standards. Are you posting to the right group?? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslist Sent: 25 November 2005 08:45 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems "I could show you a million websites with the background graphic positioned at the bottom of the content." gee, really??? now wayyy!!! I don't recall asking you for your opinon on it and I didn't ask for a site check and unless you are paying the bill for the site then I will listen to the people that are. "Why not split that background image up and do like the rest of them do?" Because they didnt frickin want that, we didnt want that type of design (which btw~ was the first one i did). We didn't want long scrolling pages, they wanted scrolling within the screen size, is that ok with you master? "The page does not fit within my browser." Well its the way they wanted it too fit, is that ok with you or should i have consulted with you first? Sorry to be an ass but I asked a question for a problem not for you to tell the people what they want. I did want to cut the bg up, i wanted to do a lot of things that i couldn't and unless you know the facts don't dictate how it "should" be done, you aren't paying for it and those "issues" have all been brought up. Your sites are a perfect example of what they didn't want, yours may make sense to you but it doesn't mean you're right. And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why answer? From: Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 2:57 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems > and if you take the overflow out the content just flows right on out over > the bg and right down the page that would beautiful wouldnt it > I could show you a million websites with the background graphic positioned at the bottom of the content. Why not split that background image up and do like the rest of them do? > and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long > pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer > would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or > not. > The page does not fit within my browser. And I'm using one of those very popular widescreen laptops that is very short vertically. So it is not a matter of preference. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
[WSG] site check: theme for Typo
Hiya all, I've been working in my free time for over a month to create the best possible standards compliant theme for the Typo weblog system. It's an entry for the Typo theme contest. My template is valid XHTML 1.0 Strict and should work in a very large amount of browsers. I still have a problem with MSIE 5.2 for Mac. It simply crashes. IE 5.0 on PC is visually fine but throws Javascript errors. There's a sort of ugly but functioning fallback for non-ajax commenting in IE 5.0 because of the non-working javascript. My question: What do you guys think of the template, do you spot any problems in certain browsers and is there a way to get it to behave in MSIE 5.2 for mac? Any advice that may improve standards compatibility is appreciated. It would be really cool if I could MSIE for mac to at least visually function. The address: http://www.w3-labs.com/ Thanks in advance! Marco ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] BOM and charset declaration in CSS
I do use @charset (utf-8); even if it actually serves no purpose: some time ago I've put it in my default CSS template file and never cared about it anymore... You can safely remove the BOM from any utf-8 document, as it serves no purpose: http://www.unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#29. If your Unicode text editor doesn't allow to save your file without it, just open the file in a plain text editor and delete the first two characters: it won't mess the remaining text. djn Gene Falck wrote: Hi Paul and Russ, Paul wrote: And how do you get around the UTF-8 signature or byte order mark (BOM) that some editors add to the document? I see you already have some replies on this BOM bit. For looking over your file format (and also simply deleting the BOM) you might also try a utility like XVI32.exe which displays your file character by character along side the hex values. Anything that your editor puts before the DOCTYPE will put you into quirks mode so the BOM (and anything else the editor inserted at the beginning of the file) can and probably should be deleted. I like XVI32 a lot because I don't have a lot of files to run in batch and I was curious what was happening. Regards, Gene Falck [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** -- Dejan Kozina Dolina 346 (TS) - I-34018 Italy tel./fax: +39 040 228 436 - cell.: +39 348 7355 225 http://www.kozina.com/ - e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
"I could show you a million websites with the background graphic positioned at the bottom of the content."gee, really??? now wayyy!!! I don't recall asking you for your opinon on it and I didn't ask for a site check and unless you are paying the bill for the site then I will listen to the people that are. "Why not split that background image up and do like the rest of them do?" Because they didnt frickin want that, we didnt want that type of design (which btw~ was the first one i did). We didn't want long scrolling pages, they wanted scrolling within the screen size, is that ok with you master? "The page does not fit within my browser." Well its the way they wanted it too fit, is that ok with you or should i have consulted with you first? Sorry to be an ass but I asked a question for a problem not for you to tell the people what they want. I did want to cut the bg up, i wanted to do a lot of things that i couldn't and unless you know the facts don't dictate how it "should" be done, you aren't paying for it and those "issues" have all been brought up. Your sites are a perfect example of what they didn't want, yours may make sense to you but it doesn't mean you're right. And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why answer? From: Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 2:57 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems> and if you take the overflow out the content just flows right on out over> the bg and right down the page that would beautiful wouldnt it>I could show you a million websites with the background graphicpositioned at the bottom of the content. Why not split that backgroundimage up and do like the rest of them do?> and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long> pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer> would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or> not.>The page does not fit within my browser. And I'm using one of thosevery popular widescreen laptops that is very short vertically. So itis not a matter of preference.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
[WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)
Title: Dragon Way (Site Check) Hello I have developed a site for a client and all seems fine, compliant, etc. works ace in IE and FF. I don’t have a MAC and client is complaining of: 1. Homepage - Text under dolls is not centred 2. Homepage - No logo showing 3. Rest of site - Top bar missing 4. Rest of site - dolls (same as 1.) 5. Slow Can anyone help, take a quick look for me? This is my first post after lurking for a while :-) http://test.dragon-way.com/ Any other comments would be ace. Thank you. Regards Ed Henderson Web Man Walking - web design & usability experts t: 0131 669 8800 m: 0781 253 6964 f: 0797 062 1532 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] w: web-man-walking.com a: 48 Eastfield, Edinburgh, EH15 2PN "New technology, old fashioned service"
Re: [WSG] xhtml doctypes and charsets
My personal feeling is that you should be using the HTML 4.01 doctype. Your not going to achive anything by using an XHTML doctype and it's technically invalid. Remember *every User Agent will (and should) treat your code as HTML*. If you put a skirt on a man it won't make him a woman. Weather or not a page is HTML/XTHML is determined entirely by the mime-type. Also there's nothing wrong with using HTML. I think the standards people have gotten a bit confussed on this one. HTML is a W3C recomendation - it's been around for a while and will still be around for a long time - there's not reason to worry about future proof with HTML. The other thing is that I don't think anybody besides the odd bot ever looks at those meta tags. That information belongs in your http headers. Alan Trick On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 10:46 -0400, The Snider's Web wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I am going to delurk to ask a question :) > > I have been using html 4.01 transitional on my sites and have slowly > branched out to xhtml. However, I remember that there has been some > discussion on other lists about the 'dangers' of using xhtml. Here is what > I have seen used, what would be the pluses and minuses of using this combo? > > "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";> > http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";> > > > > I usually use this charset: > > > Any links or advice would be much appreciated. > > Cheers > Lisa > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Re: University textbook or other resources?
Since your at a univeristy you might as well take the time to go over the some of the more theoretical stuff. This is particlularly a good ida if your talking to CS students who are more interested in that kind of thing. Probably one of most important things is Semantics. Paricularly the separation of style and content, although semantics covers a lot more too. Of course don't over do it (join the www-html list on w3.org for examples :P) but I htink it will give the students a firm foundation for a lot of the whys behind how things are done. As far as server side languages like PHP, JSP, and the other abominations - I think that probably belongs in another course. Mainly because there is a lot of stuff that needs to be covered here (particularly security issues). If the students haven't done at least some programming you might find that either 1) it ends up becoming a second Introduction to Programming 101 or 2) the students won't have a clue as to what they're doing and will get more confused because there is an extra layer they don't understand. Alan Trick On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 00:06 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > There are two magazines out of the UK that sometimes offer tutorials > that you can use in the classrom. One is called WebDesigner and the > other is called Practical Web Projects > http://www.paragon.co.uk/wd/index.htm > http://www.paragon.co.uk/pwp/index.htm > > If you want to teach web design from a standards perspective, there are > three books listed in the right hand column of my blog at > http://www.netmix.com/wordpress, along with other books that I singled > out from Amazon that might be useful to you. One is Jeffrey Zeldman's > "Designing with Web Standards." > > I also recommend starting to look into Open Source products, like Typo3, > Mambo and other Open Source Content Management systems. > > Web designers need to learn how to design around open source module > macros. > > For example, Movable Type, Wordpress and other blog systems are all open > source CMS tools. A web designer is going to need to think about how to > create templates based on the functionality of these CMS systems. The > ones I mentioned are php/mySql, but there are other that are Java, ASP > and JSP as well. > > A good resource to get open source CMS tools is opensourcecms.com. > > I have yet to find a book that teaches you how to actually think about > design, fontography and layout, then bring you into HTML production, > then bring you along into database integration. Since all these methods > are disparate from each other, but depend on each other, most books > usually focus on how to's rather than to think creatively. > > Maybe I'm wrong, I don't know, but believe me, I've been looking. > > In the local Barnes & Noble, there have been many books published that > you can find in the Graphic Design section, which showcase high end web > design. That may also be a place to look as well. > > Tony Z. > > > > > Laura Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 11/26/2005, 01:04:35 AM: > > > I've been asked if there are useful university-focused > > > textbooks or other resources suitable for teaching > > > accessible web design. > > > > As Lloyd and Matthew mentioned Joe Clark's "Building Accessible > > Websites", New Riders Publishing, 2002 is well worth considering. > > > > I have been using it for the web accessibility classes that I teach. > > The Clark book does not assume the reader understands the basics of web > > accessibility. I specifically chose it because of that and because it > > goes beyond simply repeating the "party line" from the World Wide Web > > Consortium (W3C) or Section 508. That is one of the purposes of the > > classes - to not just read the specifications, but actively engage > > them. Challenge, dissect, understand, and learn what makes the most > > sense. Also Joe put the whole book online[1] so if students don't want > > to purchase it for the class they don't have too. However, the soft > > cover version of the online book has screen shots and images. The > > online version does not. > > > > The Web Design Reference [2] is a huge online mega-reference (over > > 3,000 links) of information and articles about web design and > > development that you might find useful. It has a full section on books > > [3] as well as online resources (accessibility, CSS, usability, web > > standards, and many related topics are covered). > > > > You might also find the Web Design Update Newsletter [4] helpful. It is > > a plain text email digest that typically goes out once a week as an > > adjunct to the site. > > > > All the Best, > > Laura > > > > [1] http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/serialization/ > > [2] http://www.d.umn.edu/goto/webdesign/ > > [3] http://www.d.umn.edu/goto/books#access > > [4] http://www.d.umn.edu/goto/webdevlist > > > > ___ > > Laura L. Carlson > > Information Technology Systems and Services > > Univers
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
On 11/25/05, csslist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of > the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine. > This is a 1:1 image of my browser viewport: http://space.rdpdesign.com/reels.jpg Notice the height of the viewport: 536 pixels. That's 64 pixels less than 600. My laptop is a 15" widescreen. The default resolution for readable text is 1280 x 768 pixels. My browser has the title bar, menu bar, address bar, links bar, one toolbar, tabs, and the status bar at the bottom. Then there's the thick windows bar below it. That accounts for the 132 pixels of lost screen estate. Considering the popularity of browser toolbars and tabbed browsing (soon to be standard in IE7) as well as the popularity of widescreen displays (and even standard displays at 768 pixels height), I'd say this layout isn't going to work. You can take the feedback as constructive and revisit the design, or you can ignore it, but if you choose to ignore it then this isn't the list for you. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
csslist wrote: Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: "So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in order to get to the content. Cute." Ok smart ass, thats 1 page that has a vertical scroller because I havent resized the flash >form on that 1 FRICKIN page, so there is a scroll bar, geezo Personal insults are not necessary. Gunlaug is correct. At 800x600 you have to scroll vertically and horizontally to even see the whole of your main content div. This is an EXACT 800x600 px screenshot without taking in to account other native elements that will be below / to the site of the browser window: http://gr0w.com/test/img/800x600.jpg (115.84 KB). Even if, as you state, the site is designed to fit within 800x600 screen resolution, it won't. Not only that but every empty href you have will be a dead link with javascript turned off. That's potentially about 10% of your audience. There are simple ways to have them degrade gracefully. Some people are taking the time to make suggestions. Granted you asked about a specific issue however, if you don't like what they have to say feel free to ignore it rather than acting like a child and spitting your dummy out at the list. Nothing that anyone has said so far would stop your client getting more business. In fact, it would do the opposite by making the site better. Perhaps part of all of our jobs is doing what we're asked by clients, but perhaps part of it is advising our clients when what they want is a hindrance to their business. In any event, by reacting so ungraciously to input, I doubt it will encourage further assistance with your problem. Jon Tan www.gr0w.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine. "So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in order to get to the content. Cute." Ok smart ass, thats 1 page that has a vertical scroller because I havent resized the flash form on that 1 FRICKIN page, so there is a scroll bar, geezo From: Gunlaug Sørtun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 2:57 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemscsslist wrote:> and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big> long pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so > your answer would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether> you like it or not.So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in orderto get to the content. Cute.Seriously, what windows/screens is that design meant to fit on? Georg-- http://www.gunlaug.no**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] Re: University textbook or other resources?
"Laura Carlson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've been asked if there are useful university-focused textbooks or other resources suitable for teaching accessible web design. Hi Laura, if you didn't know already, these are superb live resources in addition to books: http://www.accessify.com/ http://www.accessifyforum.com http://www.gawds.org/ Books don't debate best practice like more dynamic sources so I'd be careful how they were used by students. That's not to say they aren't extremely useful though. Perhaps the WCAG would be the place to start along with case studies to demonstrate practical technique - contrary to the myth its pretty easy to read (and even easier with a tutor explaining as you go) http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/. There's also a working draft of the WCAG 2.0 too: http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/. Supplementing that with judicious samples from the sites listed to flesh out the practice of accessible design based around the WCAG etc would top it off nicely. The RNIB has good resources on web practice: http://www.rnib.org/xpedio/groups/public/documents/code/public_rnib003460.hcsp also a useful article on UK law: http://www.thepickards.co.uk/Articles/The_DDA_and_IT.cfm Jon Tan www.gr0w.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
