Re: [WSG] Web Accessability, SEO, Bookmarking - mod_rewrite
Anders Nawroth wrote: Chris Stratford wrote: just have the header point to: styles/sheet.css Use /styles/sheet.css. In most cases that's probably best. However, another option is to use mod_rewrite to also adjust the CSS location. It's even possible to have only one main file which takes parameters from mod_rewrite, grabs the information either hard coded within itself, from local files, or from a database. In many cases it would do all three. As a general rule, I like my CSS files to be real, same to with images unless it's better to throw them into a db, and all, or at least most of my HTML files to be handled by a single master file. * 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] Melbourne Meeting Frequency
You may recall we conducted a quick poll gauge the feeling of Melbourne members as to how frequently we would like to meet. Well we weren't exactly over run with replies but those that did mostly favoured 4 weeks, though many could live with six. I've discussed this with David, and we feel that if there had been more responses, we'd feel more confident about moving the meetings to a monthly basis. In principle we would like to move to monthly meetings. But what we have decided to do in the meantime is to keep the scheduled meeting on Monday August 23 as is, which is only a month away from today anyway. We would then like to schedule the next meeting for six weeks after that, which I make as October 4, just after Web Essentials. We will leave time at the next meeting to discuss this stuff. If you can't make it, feel free to let us know what you think by replying to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] So have a think about whether you think we can get the numbers as well as sustain speakers for a 4 week turnaround or whether we stick with 6 weeks. To give you some things to think about I'll leave you with some emails we received which made some good points(which other groups may also want to consider)... Lachlan Hardy had some good suggestion which I post here (almost in full): An alternative would be that we wouldn't necessarily have a presentation at every meeting. The discussion and general carry-on is at least as important, so I've been trying to think of some options to increase that Maybe we have a theme for each meeting (that doesn't have a presentation)? I was thinking of something along the lines of Dan Cederholm's SimpleQuiz. We set a typical web standards problem as the topic and folks come along to discuss it. That is the kind of thing that will drag debate from people who would normally stay quiet. If some people had prepared code, they could show it and we could discuss that too. Although I guess that depends on what the proportion of actual coders/designers is to management-style folks (from my one meeting it seems firmly tipped towards the coders and designers), because it could be an interest-killer for managers to sit through that My old man (the other Des) has suggested a bit of a 'Show and Tell'. He thinks that instead of having a formal presentation, you could have a couple of folks designated to jump up briefly and show something that they've worked on recently. You'd have to stress that total lack of formality or expectation (or we'd never get anyone up there). They could indicate any problems they had, even typical ones (perhaps especially typical ones) and how they countered them. See if that sparks a few questions, or a debate on the merits of whatever and then one to the next kid in the class Des also suggested that perhaps you could keep the rotation of formal presentations the same (ie every 8 weeks) in order to allow for conning someone particularly impressive into it, and fill the intervening meetings with other options such as the ones I've suggested above Michael Allan writes: As another suggestion, I was sorry to see the general discussion disappear after the first session - with the meetings devolving to small discussion groups immediately after the presentation, I think we miss out on a good chance to thrash out some of the thornier issues together. I'd suggest a format like this: Informal chat as people arrive Call to order (including invitation to get drinks) Notices and presentation Break Questions to presenter and general discussion Break Informal chat as people leave Finally, Cameron Adams (aka The Man In Blue) suggests I think we should hold a Standards-based bikini contest. cheers dez * 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] Web Accessability, SEO, Bookmarking - mod_rewrite
Lee Roberts wrote: That is what I use. Of course the directories and filenames are different, but you get the idea. I often just use a base tag. http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_base.asp Although, I very rarely see other people use it. Since it has come up, why don't folks use this tag? Cheers, Lachlan * 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] Web Accessability, SEO, Bookmarking - mod_rewrite
Lachlan I use links relative to the root directory everywhere for example: link rel=stylesheet type=text/css media=print href=/print.css/ link rel=shortcut icon href=/favicon.ico / div id=mainnav ul lia href=/Home/a/li lia href=/portfolio.phpPortfolio/a/li lia href=/article/Articles/a/li lia href=/photography/Photography/a/li lia href=/blog/Blog/a/li lia href=/contactus.phpContact Us/a/li /ul /div etc If you use a base tag than you cant run a local mirror of sites for testing. Eg: I run Apache/PHP/MySQL etc on my pc to make sure everything is running fine before I upload to the clients FTP server -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy Mobile: +61 (0)403 8000 27 http://www.bhatt.id.au/blog/ - Ramblings Thoughts http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/neerav Lachlan Hardy wrote: Lee Roberts wrote: That is what I use. Of course the directories and filenames are different, but you get the idea. I often just use a base tag. http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_base.asp Although, I very rarely see other people use it. Since it has come up, why don't folks use this tag? Cheers, Lachlan * 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] CSS Vault
A gallery of CSS websites, useful for noting trends in CSS design http://www.cssvault.com/gallery.php -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy Mobile: +61 (0)403 8000 27 http://www.bhatt.id.au/blog/ - Ramblings Thoughts http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/neerav * 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] Web Accessability, SEO, Bookmarking - mod_rewrite
Neerav wrote: If you use a base tag than you cant run a local mirror of sites for testing. Eg: I run Apache/PHP/MySQL etc on my pc to make sure everything is running fine before I upload to the clients FTP server Sure, you can. I just generate the base tag I was thinking there must be some other reason folks don't use them, but I can see that this is getting off-topic so I'll shut up now * 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] Web Accessability, SEO, Bookmarking - mod_rewrite
Base is a good tag, but in my opinion it has worn out its usefulness. The only reason one might find it good now is if one has their site stolen. Rookies that steal your web site won't know what base is and would therefore end up linking into your site. When we started HTML development years ago, oh that was in 1990, there was no such thing as relative links. So, Mosaic didn't know where to go if you clicked on a link that wasn't absolute or the author didn't include the base tag. These days browsers and assistive technologies understand relative links. Therefore, the use of the base tag has pretty much disappeared. I hope this helps. Lee Roberts http://www.roserockdesign.com http://www.applepiecart.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] Web Accessability, SEO, Bookmarking - mod_rewrite
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004 23:00:59 -0500, Lee Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Base is a good tag, but in my opinion it has worn out its usefulness. I use the base tag for my Fusebox/ColdFusion sites, which use SES (search engine safe) style URLS - ie, the urls are in the format www.example.com/foo/bar/ rather than www.example.com?foo=bar. In this situation, the relative links no longer make sense, which is where the base tag comes into play. -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.smoljak.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] Web Accessability, SEO, Bookmarking - mod_rewrite
Kay Smoljak wrote: I use the base tag for my Fusebox/ColdFusion sites, which use SES (search engine safe) style URLS - ie, the urls are in the format www.example.com/foo/bar/ rather than www.example.com?foo=bar. In this situation, the relative links no longer make sense, which is where the base tag comes into play. That's precisely what I use it for I've never used leading slashes. Maybe it is a web server difference though, seeing as I use IIS - which gives me virtual directories - hence the leading slash won't work on my local machine * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
