Re: [WSG] Opera Labs and Opera 9 Preview 2

On Feb 8, 2006, at 4:11 pm, heretic wrote: Maybe the standards community prefer to ride ponies instead of real race-horses? ;-) Must be something to do with keeping nearer the earth. Opera spoils web developers, and makes Internet Explorer (and Firefox, to a lesser extent) that much more

[WSG] Fontography

Hello Listees, Fonts come into an area which confuses me. To begin with, there doesn't seem to be any standardisation amongst the various fonts : 14px Times is smaller than 14px Verdana, for example. (to my simple mind, 14 px is 14 px) The space taken up by a font varies too. This makes it

Re: [WSG] Fontography

Designer wrote: ... has anyone studied this for the common fonts, so that one can say : IF {times} then size=15px else IF {verdana} then size = 14px etc etc. I've googled and got a bunch of stuff about fonts, but not found anything which mentions this. I think 'font-size-adjust'[1] is

Re: [WSG] cool FAQ page [follow up]

Thierry Koblentz said: Is it de facto *the* option because 2 people on this list said so? It's a pretty common design pattern, and no-one challenged it. But discuss vs. mention is a pedantic argument - let's move on. USEIT said clicking a link should have the only effect of loading a new

[WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

Hello Everyone, As I said in the Subject...this maybe a little off topic but I thought I would ask the group since I am having a hard time finding what I am looking for. I am looking for a Search script to put on a website that will have about 35 to 40 web pages in it. Most of the scripts

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

Search scriptfree http://www.google.com/search?q=free+search+engine+script ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

You can always get the google search this site, or you can find free scripts that search html documents, usually in the asp/php flavor. If the content of your site (articles and such) is databased, its very easy to write a search engine for that. Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

try http://www.sofotex.com/TSEP---The-Search-Engine-Project-download_L27025.html2006/2/8, Terrence Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Search scriptfree http://www.google.com/search?q=free+search+engine+script**The discussion list for

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

Thanks Terrance, I'll look thru them and see if I can find one that fits my needs. I looked at the first one and it was for non-commercial. I did a google search before and found lots of them but each one always had something I didn't need, advertisements on it or annual payments. tg

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

No database here. Just looking for a simple script that searches the site without advertisements or annual fee. thanks for the infotg - Original Message - From: Joseph R. B. Taylor To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2006 3:54 PM

[WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Why do we need an HTML 5? Can't we dispose of HTML and just use styled XML in the future? It would be one helluva way to enforce standards, and we wouldn't have all this wrangling over exactly which element to use. HTML in itself is not a good example of an XML doctype because the

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

Fluid Dynamics (http://www.xav.com/scripts/search/) do a very nice Open Source Perl based search engine script, which even has an automated install from their web site. They also have a very nice, basic, site tracking program called AXS, as well as a few other interesting scripts. Regards,

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

Hi Todd This is self promoting but we might have what you're looking for. Please feel free to check our PHP plug-in Grow Search listed here: http://webstandardsgroup.org/go/resourcecat30.cfm or directly here: http://www.gr0w.com/amos/growsearch/ There's also a livesearch version available

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

On Feb 8, 2006, at 4:04 PM, Stephen Stagg wrote: Why do we need an HTML 5? Can't we dispose of HTML and just use styled XML in the future? It would be one helluva way to enforce standards, and we wouldn't have all this wrangling over exactly which element to use. _ Here's a start:

Re: [WSG] Search Engine Script *Little off topic*

If your site meet's the terms of use, you can use Yahoo's API with site:http://yoursite; in the request string On 2/9/06, Jon Tan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Todd This is self promoting but we might have what you're looking for. Please feel free to check our PHP plug-in Grow Search listed

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

On 08/02/06, Stephen Stagg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why do we need an HTML 5? Can't we dispose of HTML and just use styled XML in the future? It would be one helluva way to enforce standards, and we wouldn't have all this wrangling over exactly which element to use. HTML in itself is not a

RE: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Hi Marilyn This is far from a perfect world. Before we can have perfectly lovely xml documents, we need to make sure all of the resources delivering content are also delivering perfectly lovely xml. Or... a broken page. Not everyone has the resources to put this together. So, it's good to have a

[WSG] round corner links

Hello lads, lasses and ponies, Im thinking about making a vertical navigation list with rounded corner(all 4) buttons. I would like to uses two images-for the right and left ends- and a 1px repeater background image running behind. Should i just place two end images on either side of the

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Stephen Stagg wrote: Why do we need an HTML 5? Can't we dispose of HTML and just use styled XML in the future? How could you know what style to apply to meaningless content? Effective styling depends on document semantics. Without semantics, you may as well be using font elements.

Re: [WSG] round corner links

At 02:27 PM 2/8/2006, kvnmcwebn wrote: Im thinking about making a vertical navigation list with rounded corner(all 4) buttons. I would like to uses two images-for the right and left ends- and a 1px repeater background image running behind. Should i just place two end images on either side of

[WSG] Attention STDS Managers / Strategists :: Visual baseline management technique

G'day from australia boys and girls. This ones for the large organisation scale Managers / Strategists among us. I am of course starting with the presumption that we are all using some form of visual baseline to handle the management of our visual assets (imgs, css etc..) within our respective

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

How could you know what style to apply to meaningless content?That's what the style-sheet is for.  We are relying more and more on the display: element of CSS, why not define a well-thought out and extensible set of display types to replace the default behavior of many current tags. Want to

Edit: Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Sorry, it's late in England. I'm gonna go to bed now :)How could you know what style to apply to meaningless content?That's what the style-sheet is for.  We are relying more and more on the display: element of CSS, why not define a well-thought out and extensible set of display types to replace

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Stephen Stagg wrote: How could you know what style to apply to meaningless content? That's what the style-sheet is for. We are relying more and more on the display: element of CSS, why not define a well-thought out and extensible set of display types to replace the default behavior of many

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Lachlan Hunt wrote: Stephen Stagg wrote: flashmovie{ display:flash;} and then your document reads: flashmovie src=file://a.c.v/me.swf / This shows that you have very little understanding of how the display property works; and probably little understanding of CSS in general. That's already

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

On 2/9/06, Stephen Stagg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is not meaningless, It is more readable than HTML, to a human. And when computers start to need to read websites automatically... Humans read content, computers read markup. Humans don't read HTML (excusing, perhaps, the rare breed that

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Joshua Street wrote: It IS meaningless for all intents and purposes. Consider a plain text document: humans make a distinction between types of content, computers do not... hence markup. Admittedly, we also use markup to provide communication cues... but that's ancillary to the core of it.

Re: [WSG] [Please don't flame :)] HTML, XML what's the difference.

Yep... I agree, hence web [...] recommendations are actually about rather than accessibility is actually about. Specs are purpose-agnostic (see pages that validate but are a semantic blight on the face of the web)... ironically, guidelines (human-language, practical documents) are actually more

Re: [WSG] cool FAQ page [follow up]

Terrence Wood wrote: USEIT said clicking a link should have the only effect of loading a new document in the same browser window. News to me, I have never heard of such a recommendation. Googling USEIT doesn't support you on this point either. Links that don't behave as expected undermine

Re: [WSG] cool FAQ page [follow up]

Thierry Koblentz said: A link should be a simple hypertext reference that *replaces the current page* with new content. English is not my native language so I may be missing some subtle nuances here Yes, you have completely missed the point of the recommendation. You are misquoting a

[WSG] word verification

** 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] 3 column layout - centre column forced below side columns in IE at low resolution

I recently launched an overhaul of the interface of www.education.gov.au. Its been a bit of a battle trying to get the client to sacrifice things for the sake of accessibility and standards-compliance, not to mention the state of the legacy content and CMS templates, battles still raging

Re: [WSG] cool FAQ page [follow up]

Terrence Wood wrote: Both of the articles mentionned abobe say that the defining feature is to *replace* the document with another one, *not* to take the user to another part of the same document. Again, you are misquoting the recommendation. Both articles are talking about not opening new

Re: [WSG] cool FAQ page [follow up]

Terrence Wood wrote: Both of the articles mentionned abobe say that the defining feature is to *replace* the document with another one, *not* to take the user to another part of the same document. Again, you are misquoting the recommendation. Both articles are talking about not opening new

Re: [WSG] 3 column layout - centre column forced below side columns in IE at low resolution

What I'm looking for is suggestions of better columnar layout in which rather than the centre column dropping down, columns stay where they should and the browser's horizontal scrollbar appears instead. This problem is due to IE's rendering of content and containers. Other browsers honour