On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 3:07 AM, Micky Hulse mickyhulse.li...@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder how many folks don't specify the http: part? It sounds like
there are no drawbacks.
Not quite:
http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2010/02/10/5a-missing-schema-double-download/
--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Not quite:
http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2010/02/10/5a-missing-schema-double-download/
Yikes! It all seemed so easy... suspiciously easy! :)
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe:
I will be out of the office on Wednesday, November 10th.
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
On 10 November 2010 19:22, Russ Weakley r...@maxdesign.com.au wrote:
Not quite:
http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2010/02/10/5a-missing-schema-double-download/
Yikes! It all seemed so easy... suspiciously easy! :)
That last post from a Microsoft guy was interesting though. He says
Hi all - this is my first time sending to the list, but was looking for
feedback on marking up forms in HTML5. Granted the spec is still a work in
progress, but I was wondering if there was any current conversation about this
multiple techniques of marking up forms via HTML5.
As stated, the
On 10/11/2010 17:08, Eric Taylor wrote:
From my experience, the best practice, currently, is using Description
lists; however, my concern with this method is the lack of semantic
grouping when using this set of elements.
Another method I have used is using an Unordered list to group each
field
Understandable; however, with the change in HTML5 from Definition Lists to
Description lists, would it not be more semantically valuable to mark forms up
using dt and dd, for labels and inputs, providing the document with a more
solid structure? As stated, my concern with this is the lack of
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Russ Weakley r...@maxdesign.com.au wrote:
Yikes! It all seemed so easy... suspiciously easy! :)
Haha! Too true!
Back to the drawing board I guess. :D
Dang, I am still undecided about weather or not I should adopt this
technique! On one hand, the no-http site
I'm with Patrick on this one. The form, fieldset and label elements
provide all the semantic structure you need. Anything else is noise.
Steve Green
Test Partners Ltd
-Original Message-
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of Eric Taylor
Eric,
There are a ton of ways to do this. At the moment I stick with one of
two formulas:
fieldset
legendMy Legend/legend
div
label for=My FieldMy Label/label
input type=text name=My Field
/div
/fieldset
Or if its a bunch of checkboxes or something:
fieldset
legendMy Legend/legend
div
label
There are a ton of ways to do this. At the moment I stick with one of two
formulas:
fieldset
legendMy Legend/legend
div
label for=My FieldMy Label/label
input type=text name=My Field
/div
/fieldset
I believe the “for” attribute should reference the “id” attribute
Understandable; however, with the change in HTML5 from Definition Lists
to Description lists, would it not be more semantically valuable to
mark forms up using dt and dd, for labels and inputs, providing the
document with a more solid structure? As stated, my concern with this
is the lack of
On 10/11/2010 18:38, Micky Hulse wrote:
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 12:22 AM, Russ Weakleyr...@maxdesign.com.au wrote:
Yikes! It all seemed so easy... suspiciously easy! :)
Haha! Too true!
Back to the drawing board I guess. :D
It really just depends on what you're trying to do though. The
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 11:10 AM, Patrick H. Lauke
re...@splintered.co.uk wrote:
It really just depends on what you're trying to do though. The bug
apparently only affects stylesheets, and the whole reason I'm assuming you'd
...snip...
another domain using the same protocol as the one you're
On 10 November 2010 18:52, Thierry Koblentz thierry.koble...@gmail.comwrote:
I don't think lists should be used for this (there might be a case for a OL
in case of dependant selects, but that would be a stretch). In the case of
DL, I'd say that the relationship between DTs and DDs is no
IE8 and earlier
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Web Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: j...@sitesbyjoe.com
On 11/10/10 3:45 PM, Kevin Rapley wrote:
I would be
On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:10 AM, Patrick H. Lauke
re...@splintered.co.uk wrote:
It really just depends on what you're trying to do though.
Precisely, and the IE hit certainly pales into insignificance compared
to the benefits for us.
We run a lot of sites, an awful lot of pages, and an awful lot
Thank you very much!!
This one works (combination of portriat/landscape fails also).
@media only screen and (max-width: 480px),
only screen and (min-device-width : 768px) and (max-device-width : 1024px)
Maybe it's obvious to others however it was not for me and I can now see
where my
Any thoughts on which we ought to be using, and what information
ought to be up at top of an HTML page, along with !DOCTYPE, etc?
Thank you,
cs
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe:
Any thoughts on which we ought to be using, and what information
ought to be up at top of an HTML page, along with !DOCTYPE, etc?
I'd go with !DOCTYPE html with nothing above that
--
Regards,
Thierry
www.tjkdesign.com | www.ez-css.org | @thierrykoblentz
On 10 Nov 2010, at 22:34, cat soul wrote:
Any thoughts on which we ought to be using
HTML, since it works in IE 9 without having to pretend it is HTML.
4.01, since it is a stable recommendation with mature QA tools (unless you have
a need for features added in HTML5 and are willing to life
Thierry's right. It's time to start making those baby steps into HTML5.
But you'll also need to add your charset and lang definition
!doctype html
html lang=en
head
meta charset=UTF-8
...
ted
-Original Message-
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org
Here is a reasonably good example:
http://www.texaswebdevelopers.com/blog/template_permalink.asp?id=136
http://www.texaswebdevelopers.com/blog/template_permalink.asp?id=136In
particular, the 'dir' and 'lang' attributes - most people just assume that
english is the only language...
regards,
On Wed, 10 Nov 2010, cat soul wrote:
Any thoughts on which we ought to be using, and what information ought to be
up at top of an HTML page, along with !DOCTYPE, etc?
The first line should be a doctype. I recommend either 4.01 strict
or HTML5.
!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 10:34 PM, cat soul cats...@thinkplan.org wrote:
Any thoughts on which we ought to be using,
To cut a _long_ story very short, if you have to ask this question, use HTML.
See also:
http://www.webdevout.net/articles/beware-of-xhtml
On Nov 10, 2010, at 3:14 PM, Ted Drake wrote:
Thierry's right. It's time to start making those baby steps into
HTML5.
But you'll also need to add your charset and lang definition
!doctype html
html lang=en
head
meta charset=UTF-8
Great! Most everyone else is saying HTML5 is 10
Benjamin always has a way of cutting through the fog and giving succent advice.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Sent: Wednesday, November 10, 2010 3:26 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
On 11 Nov 2010, at 00:17, Mathew Robertson wrote:
Here is a reasonably good example:
http://www.texaswebdevelopers.com/blog/template_permalink.asp?id=136
In particular, the 'dir' and 'lang' attributes - most people just assume
that english is the only language…
dir isn’t needed unless
I fully understand the need to reducing extra HTTP requests, however as the
main style sheet gets fatter and fatter with different media queries stuff in
it I am starting to doubt the benefit of reducing HTTP requests in this manner.
Say, in the main style sheet I serve
@media print
@media
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 8:45 PM, Kevin Rapley ke...@digikev.co.uk wrote:
I would be interested to gather your thoughts around this solution, using
progress tags to mark progress through the form.
A possible problem with this is that there is no guarantee that the
user has completed earlier
30 matches
Mail list logo
