Re: [WSG] Developing for Mac Browsers
There is no need to style the forms strongly but you can try to explicitly coax the style to be more uniform by applying CSS intelligently. BTW: Buttons should be buttons and not an obscure graphic acting as a link or calling JavaScript. If you keep your head on your shoulders there should be little problem with subtle form styling. Joe On Jan 14, 2008, at 13:42, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With respect to form elements, I believe you will find that what the proper Mac browsers do is perfectly 'legal'. What is more, Windows users don't generally appreciate it when form elements are styled so strongly that they are no longer recognisable, which is why so many usability (and I don't mean accessibility) guru's advice is: don't do it. == Joe Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] When can I start using E4X
He all! I have been searching the net for rumors and facts about E4X implementations. This is what I've found: Mozilla (Spidermonkey and Rhino) support E4X today - and has been doing it for a while! Adobe does too. So does (already/soon?) MbedThis. At least they are 100% committed. Webkit: The E4X standard adds some XML-related features to the JavaScript language. We should consider adding these to the JavaScriptCore engine. http://webkit.org/projects/javascript/index.html My interpretation: Positive attitude, but no commitment. Opera: I can not find an official quote, but rumours on the web says they are committed, as in Only Mozilla and Opera have committed just to E4x http://theopensourcery.com/cssbasics6b.htm I know Opera have E4X in the works at some level http://www.codingforums.com/showpost.php?s=a9dfc400dfd427203a99487bd4ea29d9p=448007postcount=10 KHTML: No info available, AFAIK. If it goes into webkit, I presume a backport would be feasible. (Or perhaps the rumors about merging with Webkit are true...) iCab seems to be on board as well: http://www.snailshell.de/blog/archives/10-01-2005_10-31-2005.html Which in summary says that only MS are clearly unwilling to implement this feature. We may get it through ScreamingMonkey, though. My questions: 1. Are there any clear indications from the developers of these browser engines (or their internal ECMAScript engines) that I've missed? 2. Will E4X on MSIE in fact be facilitated through ScreamingMonkey? 3. When do you predict that we can really start using E4X and expect it to work for most visitors to our websites? Lars Gunther *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Test Plans
Hi All. Im not familiar with test plans for Websites, i have my own way of running tests that usually run of what the client wants i.e: Is the header 320px heigh? and does it expand when the font size is incremented?. I have to do an in depth test plan for an assignment, which i would also use for future jobs. Has anyone got any good resources on test plans? I'd like to see a few government ones if possible and some 'standard' or 'defacto' plans if possible. Im not sure if this topic borderlines on being removed, but i feel its standards related and most the users here work or have worked for companies that use them or they use themselves so i felt i'd get a better response. Cheers guys. I await your replies and thanks for your time. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] When can I start using E4X
In short, if it isn't available in IE7, then not for at least a year at the very least, but more likely about 3+ years. I wouldn't try to right any critical applications with it any time soon. Keryx Web wrote: He all! I have been searching the net for rumors and facts about E4X implementations. This is what I've found: Mozilla (Spidermonkey and Rhino) support E4X today - and has been doing it for a while! Adobe does too. So does (already/soon?) MbedThis. At least they are 100% committed. Webkit: The E4X standard adds some XML-related features to the JavaScript language. We should consider adding these to the JavaScriptCore engine. http://webkit.org/projects/javascript/index.html My interpretation: Positive attitude, but no commitment. Opera: I can not find an official quote, but rumours on the web says they are committed, as in Only Mozilla and Opera have committed just to E4x http://theopensourcery.com/cssbasics6b.htm I know Opera have E4X in the works at some level http://www.codingforums.com/showpost.php?s=a9dfc400dfd427203a99487bd4ea29d9p=448007postcount=10 KHTML: No info available, AFAIK. If it goes into webkit, I presume a backport would be feasible. (Or perhaps the rumors about merging with Webkit are true...) iCab seems to be on board as well: http://www.snailshell.de/blog/archives/10-01-2005_10-31-2005.html Which in summary says that only MS are clearly unwilling to implement this feature. We may get it through ScreamingMonkey, though. My questions: 1. Are there any clear indications from the developers of these browser engines (or their internal ECMAScript engines) that I've missed? 2. Will E4X on MSIE in fact be facilitated through ScreamingMonkey? 3. When do you predict that we can really start using E4X and expect it to work for most visitors to our websites? Lars Gunther *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Christian Snodgrass Azure Ronin Web Design http://www.arwebdesign.net/ http://www.arwebdesign.net Phone: 859.816.7955 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] When can I start using E4X
Keryx Web skrev: He all! Should have been Hi all! Answering (partially) my own question. Webkit: The E4X standard adds some XML-related features to the JavaScript language. We should consider adding these to the JavaScriptCore engine. I found the tracking bug as well: http://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5381 No movement registered whatsoever! I see no tracking bug at http://bugs.kde.org/ Lars Gunther *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Test Plans
When you talk about 'standard' or 'government' test plans, what you mean is documentation as per IEE 829. Unfortunately this is an appallingly bad standard that guarantees inefficient and ineffective testing. However, this is what most test consultants peddle because it's easy to teach and some people are impressed by huge piles of test scripts (you might have guessed I'm not). It also maximises consultants' incomes because everything takes much longer than it needs to. I have run an outsource testing company for 6 years and we never use this type of documentation. I have many other resources that may be useful so I'll contact you off-list. Steve Green www.labscape.co.uk _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of James Jeffery Sent: 15 January 2008 12:09 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Test Plans Hi All. Im not familiar with test plans for Websites, i have my own way of running tests that usually run of what the client wants i.e: Is the header 320px heigh? and does it expand when the font size is incremented?. I have to do an in depth test plan for an assignment, which i would also use for future jobs. Has anyone got any good resources on test plans? I'd like to see a few government ones if possible and some 'standard' or 'defacto' plans if possible. Im not sure if this topic borderlines on being removed, but i feel its standards related and most the users here work or have worked for companies that use them or they use themselves so i felt i'd get a better response. Cheers guys. I await your replies and thanks for your time. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Test Plans
I'd love to see the stuff online. I think this is a very important part of web standards. QA should not be an afterthought but an integral part of the process. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Steve Green wrote: When you talk about 'standard' or 'government' test plans, what you mean is documentation as per IEE 829. Unfortunately this is an appallingly bad standard that guarantees inefficient and ineffective testing. However, this is what most test consultants peddle because it's easy to teach and some people are impressed by huge piles of test scripts (you might have guessed I'm not). It also maximises consultants' incomes because everything takes much longer than it needs to. I have run an outsource testing company for 6 years and we never use this type of documentation. I have many other resources that may be useful so I'll contact you off-list. Steve Green www.labscape.co.uk http://www.labscape.co.uk *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *James Jeffery *Sent:* 15 January 2008 12:09 *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* [WSG] Test Plans Hi All. Im not familiar with test plans for Websites, i have my own way of running tests that usually run of what the client wants i.e: Is the header 320px heigh? and does it expand when the font size is incremented?. I have to do an in depth test plan for an assignment, which i would also use for future jobs. Has anyone got any good resources on test plans? I'd like to see a few government ones if possible and some 'standard' or 'defacto' plans if possible. Im not sure if this topic borderlines on being removed, but i feel its standards related and most the users here work or have worked for companies that use them or they use themselves so i felt i'd get a better response. Cheers guys. I await your replies and thanks for your time. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Developing for Mac Browsers
On 2008/01/15 12:05 (GMT+1000) Tate Johnson apparently typed: From my experience, Konqueror and Safari render pages identically. In addition, now that Safari is available on Windows ... there is virtually no difference between browsers that are available on Windows, OS X and Linux. Essentially, each browser utilises a rendering engine of which there are four popular types. They are Trident (IE), Gecko (Mozilla, Firefox, Camino), KHTML/Webkit (Konqueror, Safari, Shiira) and Preseto (Opera). However, bugs sometime creep in to platform specific versions of these implementations. The differences across platform are commonly enough to discern. The reason is the font rendering engines differ not only across plaforms, but also versions and implementations within the platforms, particularly Linux, where differences between byte code interpretation or not are usually unmistakable. This is true even when the exact same font files are the source the rendering engines use. I spot differences in line-height easily and routinely, even with line-height explicitly specified in the CSS. -- In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. John 1:1 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Test Plans
I've just sent James a heap of sample test plans and stuff, but unfortunately very little of it is online because it's mostly stuff I've collected over the years in case it was ever useful (it wasn't). If you want to learn about how to do bad testing, just Google IEE 829 or ISEB. If you want to learn about good testing, read the following: www.context-driven-testing.com Everything written by Cem Kaner - www.kaner.com Everything written by James Bach - www.satisfice.com Bret Pettichord's four schools of testing - http://www.io.com/~wazmo/papers/four_schools.pdf If anyone wants to know more it's probably best to email me off-list. Steve www.labscape.co.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Horowitz Sent: 15 January 2008 17:54 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Test Plans I'd love to see the stuff online. I think this is a very important part of web standards. QA should not be an afterthought but an integral part of the process. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Steve Green wrote: When you talk about 'standard' or 'government' test plans, what you mean is documentation as per IEE 829. Unfortunately this is an appallingly bad standard that guarantees inefficient and ineffective testing. However, this is what most test consultants peddle because it's easy to teach and some people are impressed by huge piles of test scripts (you might have guessed I'm not). It also maximises consultants' incomes because everything takes much longer than it needs to. I have run an outsource testing company for 6 years and we never use this type of documentation. I have many other resources that may be useful so I'll contact you off-list. Steve Green www.labscape.co.uk http://www.labscape.co.uk -- -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *James Jeffery *Sent:* 15 January 2008 12:09 *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* [WSG] Test Plans Hi All. Im not familiar with test plans for Websites, i have my own way of running tests that usually run of what the client wants i.e: Is the header 320px heigh? and does it expand when the font size is incremented?. I have to do an in depth test plan for an assignment, which i would also use for future jobs. Has anyone got any good resources on test plans? I'd like to see a few government ones if possible and some 'standard' or 'defacto' plans if possible. Im not sure if this topic borderlines on being removed, but i feel its standards related and most the users here work or have worked for companies that use them or they use themselves so i felt i'd get a better response. Cheers guys. I await your replies and thanks for your time. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Ordinal numbers with roman numerals
Hi again!
I do have a lot of questions - at least a few at the moment.
How do you handle ordinal numbers in order to satisfy both the normal
reader as well as screen readers.
a. Today, when a screen reader *might* read both an elements textcontent
and it's title-attribute, it's title attribute instead of the content or
only the content.
b. In a perfect world where screen readers are @media aware and all
browsers support CSS 2.1 fully.
Example:
The Swedish king, Carl span title=the sixteenthXVI/span Gustaf...
The goal is to have people seeing XVI, but not the unnecessary tooltip
the title attribute would produce, have printers and braille terminals
spell XII, but have synthetic speech say the sixteenth.
In my *perfect* world I would detect the media type and turn the tooltip
off with JavaScript, and use the following CSS for speech:
@media speech {
/* Find all elements that has a title attribute that
ends with eenth */
*[title$=eenth] {
content: attr(title);
/* replaces the content with the attribute value */
}
}
(Unicode used below.)
However, I know of no way to detect the media either in JavaScript
today, nor in any proposed standard for the future. Getting rid of the
tooltip is of lesser importance, IMHO, than suppressing /ɛks viː aɪ/
from being spoken.
A totally different approach would be to use the designated Unicode
sequence for Roman numerals[1] and have screen readers know that they
should spell that out as numbers. How the would see the difference
between sixteen or the sixteenth I do not know, though.
This approach also requires authoring tools to force all writers to
actually use the proper Unicode characters, which might be hard. Auto
correction in the background that pops up a question every time it
detects something that might look like a Roman numeral may be very annoying.
In Sweden we say vi when we mean we, so 99.9% of all times that
character sequence is being typed it should not be changed.
Occasionally, though, we might speak about our former king, Gustav VI
Adolf...
Lars Gunther
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals#Unicode
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Acronym element
Ross Bruniges skrev:
the abbr and acronym elements have extra value
in the fact that a screen reader will say
out each letter opposed to trying to pronounce the word.
Here is how I understand the difference between an acronym and other
abbreviations:
Acronyms should *not* be spelled as, but spoken like a word, as in
NATO, AIDS or Benelux.
Initialisms are very similar, except that the individual letters should
be pronounced separately, as in FBI or HTML.
Some abbreviations should be replaced with other words completely when
spoken. Like e.g. = for example or i.e. = that is, or perhaps
ROTFL.
Ergo: Screen readers should not spell out the contents of an *acronym*
element, but should spell out the content of *some* abbreviations.
In an ideal world, screen readers should be programmed to recognize
common abbreviations and speak naturally when they encounter one.
In an ideal world screen readers should know when to apply media types
(screen, tv, projection, speech, braille, etc) and media groups
(contunuos/paged, visual/audio/speech/tactile, interactive/static)
In the real world they do not and we have to compromise. This is a
beautiful(?) vision only:
@media audio {
abbr, acronym {
speak: normal;
}
abbr.replace {
content: attr(title);
}
abbr.initialism {
speak: spell-out;
}
}
Aural, abbr class=replace title=by the wayBTW/abbr, is
abbrCSS/abbr 2.0, not 2.1.
Lars Gunther
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Test Plans
Guys, all i can say is WOW! and thanks alot. I didn't expect many replies and surprisingly everyone kept on topic (which is good). I thank everyone for their replies and thanks a million steve, really appreciate that mate. Ill spend all night tonight on research and as well as meeting the assignment guidelines this will give me an insight into something ive never really looked into much before. Cheers. On Jan 15, 2008 6:58 PM, Steve Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've just sent James a heap of sample test plans and stuff, but unfortunately very little of it is online because it's mostly stuff I've collected over the years in case it was ever useful (it wasn't). If you want to learn about how to do bad testing, just Google IEE 829 or ISEB. If you want to learn about good testing, read the following: www.context-driven-testing.com Everything written by Cem Kaner - www.kaner.com Everything written by James Bach - www.satisfice.com Bret Pettichord's four schools of testing - http://www.io.com/~wazmo/papers/four_schools.pdfhttp://www.io.com/%7Ewazmo/papers/four_schools.pdf If anyone wants to know more it's probably best to email me off-list. Steve www.labscape.co.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Michael Horowitz Sent: 15 January 2008 17:54 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Test Plans I'd love to see the stuff online. I think this is a very important part of web standards. QA should not be an afterthought but an integral part of the process. Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Steve Green wrote: When you talk about 'standard' or 'government' test plans, what you mean is documentation as per IEE 829. Unfortunately this is an appallingly bad standard that guarantees inefficient and ineffective testing. However, this is what most test consultants peddle because it's easy to teach and some people are impressed by huge piles of test scripts (you might have guessed I'm not). It also maximises consultants' incomes because everything takes much longer than it needs to. I have run an outsource testing company for 6 years and we never use this type of documentation. I have many other resources that may be useful so I'll contact you off-list. Steve Green www.labscape.co.uk http://www.labscape.co.uk -- -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *James Jeffery *Sent:* 15 January 2008 12:09 *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* [WSG] Test Plans Hi All. Im not familiar with test plans for Websites, i have my own way of running tests that usually run of what the client wants i.e: Is the header 320px heigh? and does it expand when the font size is incremented?. I have to do an in depth test plan for an assignment, which i would also use for future jobs. Has anyone got any good resources on test plans? I'd like to see a few government ones if possible and some 'standard' or 'defacto' plans if possible. Im not sure if this topic borderlines on being removed, but i feel its standards related and most the users here work or have worked for companies that use them or they use themselves so i felt i'd get a better response. Cheers guys. I await your replies and thanks for your time. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: WSG Digest
Lani is currently on extended leave. Please contact Gillian Foley on 02 6276 6105 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: WSG Digest
I will be out of the office on Wednesday 16 January, 2008. For urgent issues, please contact the Axe Group office on (02) 9966 9336. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
