Re: [WSG] Input File Format

[Roger Johansson]

On 7 okt 2004, at 20.42, Genau Junior wrote:
I´m having some dificulty to set the size of [input=file] form element.
I can set the width through CSS on Mozzila, but IE cant set the size 
that i formated on CSS file.

Anyone can help me how i set a size on INPUT FILE on both browsers?
Styling form elements to look the same across browsers and platforms is 
generally not possible, at least not with CSS only. To show how 
different form controls are in different browsers and operating 
systems, I've made a bunch of screen shots of several different form 
controls and how they react to different CSS rules. For each form 
control, there are screen shots from a whole lot (well, eleven right 
now) of different browsers and operating systems:

< http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200409/styling_form_controls/ >
/Roger
--
http://www.456bereastreet.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] Is XHTML harmful?

[Dean Jackson]

On 7 Oct 2004, at 02:09, Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
Hi Kim,
Ian Hickson is _not_ saying XHTML is harmful, he is saying that 
serving up XHTML with the wrong MIME type is bad.
That's right. It's probably not the best title for the
document, but my feeling is that people using the "... considered
harmful" approach are typically looking more for attention than
for examination.
Nevertheless, it's still an interesting read.
Today, the real benefits of XHTML are on the production side. Say your 
CMS has 1000 documents and you need to change the "class" name of a 
 tag in all 1000 documents. If your content is in XHTML, you can 
use XML related technologies like DOM or XSLT to process all 1000 
documents quickly and accurately because XHTML can be processed by XML 
parsers.
I agree.
Using XHTML over HTML brings some benefits that are hard to measure.
The way I think of it is that XHTML allows more people to use your
content in ways that you didn't originally expect. For example, at
W3C we extract a lot of semantic info from our XHTML pages: building
calendars, issue lists, relationships between pages, etc. This could
all be done using HTML, but XHTML makes it easier (much wider range
of tools in the XML world). The same goes for modifying pages. I have
a huge range of tools available to do a site wide change with XHTML,
and these tools are interoperable because they conform to the XML
specification. If my Web guy gets hit by a truck, then I can
call up another developer and assume that her XML skills will be
enough to do the job (even though she may not be familiar with the
tools).
Then there is the whole Web Applications trend. Again, HTML and
XHTML are pretty much the same in functionality here, but if I'm
using an application on the Web then I want to make sure it is
well-formed and well-structured. I don't want a typo by a web
developer (such as leaving off an end tag) to cause my credit
card to be debited twice. That's an extreme example, but in the
general case, would you really run an application on your desktop
that you were not sure was compiled correctly (or had millions
of compiler warnings)? Allowing sloppy markup in applications
is a security risk IMHO.
On the design front, if you are thumping your head against a
wall trying to wonder why the page is off by three pixels, wouldn't
you like to rule out as much as possible in order to reduce the
number of places you look for the bug? In most cases, this is
easier with XHTML - you can check the document and then focus
on the CSS.
While the existing browsers are parsing and rendering HTML faster
than XHTML, then you can serve XHTML 1.0 as HTML. I'm not sure
exactly why HTML parsing/rendering is faster than XHTML, since in
general it is much easier to right a high-performance parser for
a strict language than a less strict one (and HTML also carries
years and years of quirks to handle). Maybe it is just that the
HTML code has been around for so long that it is highly optimized.
Let's hope the desktop browsers will move into 2001 soon ;)
To ask the question the other way around, what are the real
benefits of using HTML over XHTML? I'm interested to hear the
reasons (and I'm sure they are valid).
Dean
From: "Kim Kruse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 10:53 AM
Subject: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?

Hi,
First of all... I'm sorry if this is off topic.
I've been telling people (the few who asked me and through my website)
to use (valid) xhtml because it a W3C recommendation, it's  device
independent, (valid) xhtml can be processed by an XML parser, better
accessibility, less code, faster processing of code in modern 
browsers,
forward compatibility etc. I guess that's the standard opinion on 
xhtml
or am I completely of track here?

After I participated in a discussion over at the Project Seven 
newsgroup
I'm having doubts! The reason is some very well put arguments from 
among
others, Al Sparber. One of the arguments was less code. Not even close
to html 4.01 (See sample 1 below), html 4.01 is also device 
independent
AFAIK. Xhtml is not being processed faster than html 4. Actually there
should be no real reason to use xhtml unless you're using xml.

_Sample 1 - html:_

"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";>



Untitled Document


Hello World.




_Sample 1 -  xhtml:_

"http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd";>
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml";>


Untitled Document


Hello World.




Now what really worries me is this article
http://hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml where xhtml is being considered
"harmfull". Is it harmful ?
Now I would like to know what your arguments would be for using xhtml.
Not that I can't think for myself... but I'm in doubt if  I'm going in
the right direction.
I would really like to hear your opinions on this matter.
Kim
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 

Re: [WSG] Help. 2 extra words breaks the page

[Alex Kouzemtchenko]

On Fri, 8 Oct 2004 14:07:21 +1100, Jay Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 18:00:49 -0700, Paul Burchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I'm trying to create a "sidebar" for web pages at work to allow an
> > author a spot to place notes or other quick thoughts.
> >
> > What I've found is that the amount of text in the sidebar paragraph can
> > break the page. At some point an extra t words causes all of the text
> > on the page to go beyond the right hand boundary of the page.
> >
> > It's easier to see than explain.
> >
> > A version that works can be found at:
> > http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/fits.html
> >
> > And a version that doesn't work can be seen at:
> > http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/bad.html
> >
> > The only difference is the addition of the words "justo nec" to the
> > sodebar paragraph.
> >
> > Can anyone help me figure out what I'm doing wrong?
> >
> > If it helps, the CSS I'm using is at:
> > http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/css/asto_0404.css
> 
> What browser are you using? In IE6 and Firefox 1.0 on WinXP everything
> appears fine.
> 
> Jay
> 
> 
> **
> The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> 
>  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>  for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> **
> 
> 

I don't see a problem either it seems to play nice with all of my
browseres: Firefox 1.0, Firebird 0.7, IE6,  Netscape 7.1 and Opera 7
on Windows XP


-- 
http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates&id=15461&t=85";>http://www.spreadfirefox.com/community/images/affiliates/Buttons/80x15/firefox_80x15.png"/> Get
Firefox
**
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] Help. 2 extra words breaks the page

[Jay Smith]

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 18:00:49 -0700, Paul Burchfield <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm trying to create a "sidebar" for web pages at work to allow an
> author a spot to place notes or other quick thoughts.
> 
> What I've found is that the amount of text in the sidebar paragraph can
> break the page. At some point an extra t words causes all of the text
> on the page to go beyond the right hand boundary of the page.
> 
> It's easier to see than explain.
> 
> A version that works can be found at:
> http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/fits.html
> 
> And a version that doesn't work can be seen at:
> http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/bad.html
> 
> The only difference is the addition of the words "justo nec" to the
> sodebar paragraph.
> 
> Can anyone help me figure out what I'm doing wrong?
> 
> If it helps, the CSS I'm using is at:
> http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/css/asto_0404.css

What browser are you using? In IE6 and Firefox 1.0 on WinXP everything
appears fine.

Jay
**
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] Help. 2 extra words breaks the page

[Lea de Groot]

On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 18:00:49 -0700, Paul Burchfield wrote:
> What I've found is that the amount of text in the sidebar paragraph 
> can break the page. At some point an extra t words causes all of the 
> text on the page to go beyond the right hand boundary of the page

Well, you'll be happy to know it looked fine in Safari for me :)
Screenshot coming offlist

Lea
-- 
Lea de Groot
Elysian Systems - I Understand the Internet 
Search Engine Optimisation, Usability, Information Architecture, Web 
Design
Brisbane, Australia
**
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] Help. 2 extra words breaks the page

[Paul Burchfield]

I'm trying to create a "sidebar" for web pages at work to allow an 
author a spot to place notes or other quick thoughts.

What I've found is that the amount of text in the sidebar paragraph can 
break the page. At some point an extra t words causes all of the text 
on the page to go beyond the right hand boundary of the page.

It's easier to see than explain.
A version that works can be found at:
http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/fits.html
And a version that doesn't work can be seen at:
http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/bad.html
The only difference is the addition of the words "justo nec" to the 
sodebar paragraph.

Can anyone help me figure out what I'm doing wrong?
If it helps, the CSS I'm using is at:
http://www.love2tap.com/sidebar/css/asto_0404.css
Thanks.
->Paul B.
**
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] hidden list background issues, etc.

[Kevin Futter]

Unfortunately in the Mac world, if you run Jaguar and want to use Safari, it
has to be v1.0, as anything newer requires Panther (very Microsoft of Apple
there, IMHO). Of course, that doesn't prevent people from running Camino,
Firefox et al on Jaguar, but you can't expect a non-technical audience to
know or understand that. So, I'd say that most average Jaguar users will
still be using either IE5 or Safari 1.0, and the proportion of Mac users
lumbered with Safari 1.0 could well be more than 'microscopic'. (There are
many older Macs out there that can run OS X to Jaguar level, but not
beyond).

But you're right, it shouldn't even exist ...

Cheers,
Kevin Futter

On 8/10/04 1:07 AM, "Tom Livingston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Safari 1.0 has got to be a unbelievably microscopic audience, if it
> exists at all. That version should never have seen the light of day
> (like NS6), and IMHO not worried about.
> 
> FWIW
> 
> 
> Tom Livingston
> Senior Multimedia Artist
> mlinc.com
> 
> Get FireFox >  http://spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=1
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 7, 2004, at 10:28 AM, Nick Gleitzman wrote:
> 
>>  js dropdowns in Safari 1.0 render in the wrong place - relative to
>> 0,0 (I think) - in any case, unusable.
> 
> **
> 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] Ooh, Pretty Green!!!

[Wayne Godfrey]

Wow, they changed the color?

I always got the shakes when it seemed like it was taking too long...I'd get
this big lump in my throat and immediately start thinking about what could
possibly be wrong! At least to this point, my biggest problems have been my
really lousy typing...ok, so myh spelink stinks 2.


On 10/7/04 7:33 PM, "Shane Helm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Ooh, Pretty Green!!!
> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
> 
> The red validation always made my subconscious think something was
> wrong; although it said "Congratulations!".  The aqua green is much
> nicer!
> 
> Sorry.  Just had to comment on it.  This was my first time to see the
> green "Congratulations!" in the CSS Validator.
> 
> 
> 
> Best,
> Shane Helm
> { sonzeDesignStudio
> 
> **
> 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] Ooh, Pretty Green!!!

[Daniel Low]

#007cbb  is not green (124), it's more blue (187) but it's pretty.
Congratulations!
--
Daniel Low


On Thu, 7 Oct 2004 17:33:18 -0600, Shane Helm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> Ooh, Pretty Green!!!
> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
> 
> The red validation always made my subconscious think something was
> wrong; although it said "Congratulations!".  The aqua green is much
> nicer!
> 
> Sorry.  Just had to comment on it.  This was my first time to see the
> green "Congratulations!" in the CSS Validator.
> 
> Best,
> Shane Helm
> { sonzeDesignStudio
> 
> **
> 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
**

[WSG] Ooh, Pretty Green!!!

[Shane Helm]

Ooh, Pretty Green!!!
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
The red validation always made my subconscious think something was 
wrong; although it said "Congratulations!".  The aqua green is much 
nicer!

Sorry.  Just had to comment on it.  This was my first time to see the 
green "Congratulations!" in the CSS Validator.


Best,
Shane Helm
{ sonzeDesignStudio
**
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] Input File Format

[Nick Gleitzman]

On Friday, Oct 8, 2004, at 04:42 Australia/Sydney, Genau Junior wrote:
I´m having some dificulty to set the size of [input=file] form element.
 
I can set the width through CSS on Mozzila, but IE cant set the size 
that i formated on CSS file.
 
Anyone can help me how i set a size on INPUT FILE on both browsers?

Form elements are notoriouously difficult to format with CSS, because 
they're system level widgets, and their appearance is set by the 
operating system - which varies enormously. Some browsers will render 
CSS styling set for form elements, some ignore it, and some give you 
partial support.

I usually try and design to use unstyled form elements - or at least to 
design so the layout doesn't break if the browser won't support my CSS. 
It means you have to design a little 'looser', but it's all part of 
being aware of 'graceful degradation'.

N
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.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] hidden list background issues, etc.

[Nick Gleitzman]

On Friday, Oct 8, 2004, at 01:07 Australia/Sydney, Tom Livingston wrote:
Safari 1.0 has got to be a unbelievably microscopic audience, if it 
exists at all. That version should never have seen the light of day 
(like NS6), and IMHO not worried about.

FWIW
Yes, probably about the same proportion as Netscape 4.x, say - or 
visually impaired visitors. There's not many - so let's not worry about 
them... Sorry, that's just absurd. Ignoring *any* minority is bad 
design, as well as being discourteous. I believe it's our job as 
developers to deliver sites to *anyone* - in some form where the info 
is acessible, if not pretty. 

As I said in my original post, it was late - so I apologise for lack of 
clarity... I meant to point out that because the dropdowns are broken, 
it's impossible to navigate into the site, unless the top level links 
of the dropdowns are themselves actually linked to L2 pages.

N
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.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] thoughts of external links in new window?

[Patrick H. Lauke]

Terrence Wood wrote:
Having said all that Chris's solution of having extended and published 
the DTD is perfectly acceptable.
Yes, sorry...I wasn't questioning the validity of Chris' solution per 
se. I was just taking a step back to look at the bigger picture, beyond 
mere validation, to what it actually means to create your own DTD and 
how any effect is still dependent on legacy (well, if you consider xhtml 
1.0 transitional and before as legacy) behaviour hardcoded into the UA 
so that it can cope with older code.
Extending a DTD to allow for deprecated elements/attributes is a working 
solution today, but is more akin, in my humble opinion, to those methods 
that rely on javascript to pepper a document with legacy code onload so 
that it passes validation but then - after the DOM has been manipulated 
- in effect turns into invalid code.
Not passing judgement, merely observing that if there were a strict 
browser out there, even a hand-rolled DTD allowing target="_blank" would 
not actually mean that the UA would understand your intentions...

Patrick
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.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] Help about negative positioning

[Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media]]

Negative values always give pretty bad results. Instead of moving it up, why
don't you float the heading to the right of your logo and then just movie it
a bit down and a bit left (by giving margin-top and margin-right)? That
should give you the result you want, without using negative numbers.



> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Befree
> Sent: Friday, 8 October 2004 12:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [WSG] Help about negative positioning
>
>
> Hi,
> I have some problem using negative positioning; it works well on IE,
> Mozilla Firefox, Mozilla but not with Opera, Konqueror and Safari.
> The H1 Title on the  top right goes too high in the last 3 browsers, how
> can I place my H1 Title in the same position without using this ugly
> trick...?
> The links below will explain better the problem:
>
> http://n1k0.no-ip.info/pablo/
>
> http://n1k0.no-ip.info/pablo/skins/sinorca/nes_pablo.css
>
> Thanks all for helping me!
>
>
> bye.
> vince.
>
>
> **
> 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
**

[WSG] the height of an unordered list in ie

[Ted Drake]

I've been having some trouble with our topnav.  It's a simple unordered list with 
nested unordered lists to represent the subnav.  The top nav is horizontal and in the 
tab-like format.  The subnav sits below it.  In firefox and most browsers, there is a 
1 pixel line below the topnav and above the subnav and the selected tab covers this 
with a bottom border and padding.

In IE, the background of the topnav seems to spread below the top and subnav.  I'm 
wondering if the background on the unordered list is trying to share itself with the 
nested unordered lists within it. Thus, putting a blue background down under the 
subnav and filling in that nice 1px white line.  

Does this make sense?

Here's a sample page:
http://v4.csatravelprotection.com/csa/tips-vacation-insurance.do

I have a hack in the css right now to fill in the space, ideally I would like to get 
the white border back.

I'd appreciate any comments on the theory.
Ted
**
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] thoughts of external links in new window?

[Terrence Wood]

I think you are correct in your assessment that opening a new window is 
a behavior of the UA, and therefore (arguably) should not be included in 
the DTD that describes the structure of a document.

Having said all that Chris's solution of having extended and published 
the DTD is perfectly acceptable.

I personally think opening windows should be handled via javascript 
where it is possible to test for the existence of such behavior. A good 
UA will then determine what cause of action to take based on it's own 
configuration - such as we have with Firefox.

In this case it is perfectly acceptable to mark up your document with 
something along the lines of:

 or  or 

and attach a  behavior script to open a new window for links marked up 
with the rel attribute. This approach to markup is valid with the W3C 
published DTD's, although the values "external" and "supplementary" for 
the rel attribute are not described.

./tdw


On 8/10/04 9:53 AM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Chris Stratford wrote:
I use XHTML Strict, and have modded the DTD to accept New Window code.

What always makes me wonder about these solutions is that, in effect, 
they are still reliant on the fact that current browsers have the 
built-in understanding and capability of reacting a certain way (i.e. 
popping up a new window) when they encounter something like 
target="_blank". It's not the DTD that automatically causes this 
behaviour, it only tells the browser that "it's ok" to have those 
attributes in the code. If (I know, unlikely in the foreseeable future) 
a browser came out that only understood anything from xhtml 1.0 strict 
onwards, I wonder how this type of functionality could be forced. 
Surely, beyond modifying a DTD, there must be some additional piece of 
behavioural code that will have to be passed on to the user agent? Or am 
I just misunderstanding the whole eXtensible nature of XHTML here?

Hypothetically speaking, anyway...
Patrick
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.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] thoughts of external links in new window?

[Chris Stratford]

The browser will understand the target="_blank" no matter what the DTD is.
I think it would just assume HTML, and therefore _blank = new window.
The DTD I forged with the help of a tutorial - will allow you the 
VALIDATE XHTML 1.0 Strict code.
That is all - I should have mentioned that earlier.
And sorry - my messsage was 2 days late.
It was in my outbox - uni  have blocked port 25 so I cannot email from 
my neester account - only my UTS account, which isnt registered to the 
list...
and things would jsut get confusing then... so i thought i would just 
post it when I am at home.
:)

Sorry - lol.
Cheers,
*Chris Stratford*
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Chris Stratford wrote:
I use XHTML Strict, and have modded the DTD to accept New Window code.

What always makes me wonder about these solutions is that, in effect, 
they are still reliant on the fact that current browsers have the 
built-in understanding and capability of reacting a certain way (i.e. 
popping up a new window) when they encounter something like 
target="_blank". It's not the DTD that automatically causes this 
behaviour, it only tells the browser that "it's ok" to have those 
attributes in the code. If (I know, unlikely in the foreseeable 
future) a browser came out that only understood anything from xhtml 
1.0 strict onwards, I wonder how this type of functionality could be 
forced. Surely, beyond modifying a DTD, there must be some additional 
piece of behavioural code that will have to be passed on to the user 
agent? Or am I just misunderstanding the whole eXtensible nature of 
XHTML here?

Hypothetically speaking, anyway...
Patrick
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.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
**



--

Chris Stratford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neester.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] thoughts of external links in new window?

[Patrick H. Lauke]

Chris Stratford wrote:
I use XHTML Strict, and have modded the DTD to accept New Window code.
What always makes me wonder about these solutions is that, in effect, 
they are still reliant on the fact that current browsers have the 
built-in understanding and capability of reacting a certain way (i.e. 
popping up a new window) when they encounter something like 
target="_blank". It's not the DTD that automatically causes this 
behaviour, it only tells the browser that "it's ok" to have those 
attributes in the code. If (I know, unlikely in the foreseeable future) 
a browser came out that only understood anything from xhtml 1.0 strict 
onwards, I wonder how this type of functionality could be forced. 
Surely, beyond modifying a DTD, there must be some additional piece of 
behavioural code that will have to be passed on to the user agent? Or am 
I just misunderstanding the whole eXtensible nature of XHTML here?

Hypothetically speaking, anyway...
Patrick
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.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] thoughts of external links in new window?

[Chris Stratford]

I use XHTML Strict, and have modded the DTD to accept New Window code.
If you would like you can use my version:
http://www.neester.com/DTD/xhtml-target.dtd";>
I dubbed it XHTML 1.01 Strict...
I know incorrectly named 1.01 - but I thought it was cute at the time...
john wrote:
Some of my usability team are telling me that they prefer to have 
external links going into a new browser window.  I can see why some 
would like that, but I can also see why others would frown on it.

Is there a "standard answer" for Web standards, or what are your 
points of view on this?

If you were to do it, what's your preferred method?
Thanks.

--

Chris Stratford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neester.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] Input File Format

[Genau Junior]

Hello folks!
 
 
I´m having some dificulty to set the size of 
[input=file] form element.
 
I can set the width through CSS on Mozzila, but IE 
cant set the size that i formated on CSS file.
 
Anyone can help me how i set a size on INPUT FILE 
on both browsers?
 
 
besides follows the hiperlink
http://www.meucarronovo.com.br/xhtml/anuncie2.php
 
Please, is needed make the test on IE and Mozzila 
to view the differences?
 
 
Here the format of my css to set this form style...
 
 select[type=text], input[type=reset], input[type=button],button 
{ background-color: #006699; color: 
#FF; text-align: right; }
 
 
input { margin-top: 3px; margin-left: 
5px; width: 102px; border: 1px solid 
#85ADD6; font-size: 9px;}
 
 
 
Best regards,
 
 
Genau Lopes 
JúniorWebDesigner¬¬¬http://www.meucarronovo.com.br

Re: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?

[Vlad Alexander \(XStandard\)]

Hi Tom,

Yes - the markup will validate as HTML. Here is an example:

http://xstandard.com/html4.htm

Validate it using:

http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fxstandard.com%2Fhtml4.htm

Check out an article I wrote about this a while back:

http://www.4guysfromrolla.com/webtech/120303-1.shtml


Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com


- Original Message - 
From: "Tom Livingston" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2004 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?


> Please forgive any ignorance on my part...
> 
> So I can copy the guts of an XHTML document in all it's splendor with 
> s et all and paste it into an HTML document and all is dandy?
> 
> 
> 
> Tom Livingston
> Senior Multimedia Artist
> mlinc.com
> 
> Get FireFox >  http://spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=1
> 
> 
> 
> On Oct 6, 2004, at 11:25 PM, Chris Bentley wrote:
> 
> > There is no difference between the semantics or the accessibility of 
> > HTML4.1 and XHTML1.0.
> 
> **
> 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] hidden list background issues, etc.

[Tom Livingston]

Safari 1.0 has got to be a unbelievably microscopic audience, if it 
exists at all. That version should never have seen the light of day 
(like NS6), and IMHO not worried about.

FWIW

Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
mlinc.com
Get FireFox >  http://spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=1

On Oct 7, 2004, at 10:28 AM, Nick Gleitzman wrote:
 js dropdowns in Safari 1.0 render in the wrong place - relative to 
0,0 (I think) - in any case, unusable.
**
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] Is XHTML harmful?

[Geoff Deering]

Chris Bentley wrote:
> > Are there any parsers out there you explicitly trust to get it right
> > every
> > time?  I don't.
> I know of one, http://validator.w3.org/.  Are you say though that User
> Agents are generally better/fast at parsing/rendering valid XHTML than
> they are valid HTML?

No, that is not what I meant at all.  I'm talking about the parser and
rendering engine in user agents.  No, you are missing the point.  Maybe you
need to go back and study parser logic rendering markup a bit more.


> > They may well do, but they are still guessing if there are
> > no end tags.  I'm much more happy to explicitly declare my design than
> > have
> > parsers guessing at what I've designed, the performance trade off is
> > not so
> > great.
> >
> I like to write valid markup too, and if your HTML is valid (written
> against the DTD) then the parser doesn't have to guess anything,  I
> don't see your point as to why valid XHTML is technically better than
> than valid HTML.

I am talking about CSS applied to HTML and the rendering of the CSS as
applied to the parsing of the document.  But still, strictly speaking, an
XML based document is bound to be more semantically correct because it is
well formed.  This means that the CSS can be applied without fear of the
parser misunderstanding where a declaration could have finished.  There is
no possibility of any guess work in xhtml as it is well formed.

This may or may not be an obvious problem.  But I would not be surprised to
see complex designs misrendered when transformed from xhtml to html4 with
all optional ending tags taken out.

What I am saying is that with XHTML the designers knows this won't happen,
given the correctness of the parser.


> > Now go into the area of accessibility, how are you going to tell all
> > sorts
> > of user agents and devices the full semantic meaning of the markup.
> > What
> > about when aural.css becomes mature?  Will complex document in HTML4
> > be as
> > exact as those following XML syntax?
> >
> Yes, if you write it against the DTD and follow accessibility
> guidelines. There is no difference between the semantics or the
> accessibility of HTML4.1 and XHTML1.0.

You may be right, but I don't agree.  It's only a small difference, but it
is there.

> >  In my view, you cannot fully mark up
> > documents with a trusted explicit semantic fullness without and XML
> > definition.  The border here might be small, but it's small enough for
> > one
> > definition to allow for best of interpretation and the other an
> > explicit
> > interpretation.
>
> Well-formedness has nothing to do with semantics.
>

You're missing the point.  Closing tags is being completely accurate with
punctuation, where markup is the punctuation.  Not closing tags CAN lead to
ambiguity.  In XHTML there is no syntax ambiguity, in HTML4 there are
possibilities.  It may not happen when validating against the doctype.  That
is not the problem.  The problem is the CSS container, it's boundaries are
often not certain.


> Except for the reasons give by Peter Ottrey the only technical reason
> for using XHTML is that you need the XML (this being the only technical
> difference between HTML4.1 and XHTML 1.0 ). Any other reason simply
> comes done to a matter of personal preference.
>

I don't agree with that.

-
Geoff

**
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] hidden list background issues, etc.

[Nick Gleitzman]

Lorenzo wrote:
URL: http://196.36.166.35/tower
CSS: http://196.36.166.35/tower/s/tower.css
CSS: http://196.36.166.35/tower/s/navDropdown.css
1. In IE6, the border/background of the top list in the #steps layer 
appears
hidden. Is there a way to fix this?

2. There's also a major gap on the left of the list that I can't seem 
to get
rid of - any suggestions there would be much appreciated.

3. In Opera7, the dropdown menu is showing some nasty vertical spaces 
- any
idea why and how I would go about removing them?
4. Layout in IE5/Mac is horribly broken - horiz navbar renders as 
vertical, and your floats are breaking the layout.

5. js dropdowns in Safari 1.0 render in the wrong place - relative to 
0,0 (I think) - in any case, unusable.

Sorry, it's late and I'm too shattered to figure fixes for so many 
problems. Suggest you try Phillipe's IE bug resource at 
 for the Mac issues, and Big John's 
 for the IE6...

Oh, apart from this quick one: for the space to the left of the list, 
try {padding:0}.

FYI and HTH
Nick
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.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] Is XHTML harmful?

[Tom Livingston]

Please forgive any ignorance on my part...
So I can copy the guts of an XHTML document in all it's splendor with 
s et all and paste it into an HTML document and all is dandy?


Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
mlinc.com
Get FireFox >  http://spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=1

On Oct 6, 2004, at 11:25 PM, Chris Bentley wrote:
There is no difference between the semantics or the accessibility of 
HTML4.1 and XHTML1.0.
**
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] Help about negative positioning

[Befree]

Hi,
I have some problem using negative positioning; it works well on IE,
Mozilla Firefox, Mozilla but not with Opera, Konqueror and Safari.
The H1 Title on the  top right goes too high in the last 3 browsers, how
can I place my H1 Title in the same position without using this ugly
trick...?
The links below will explain better the problem:
http://n1k0.no-ip.info/pablo/
http://n1k0.no-ip.info/pablo/skins/sinorca/nes_pablo.css
Thanks all for helping me!
bye.
vince.
**
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 Design Scene in Christchurch

[Andy Budd]

A friends partner has just been given a job offer in Christchurch but 
it would depend on them being able to find work while they were over 
there.

Just wondering what the scene was like and if there were any well 
respected names in Christchurch they could try.

Darren Wood wrote:
There is a little one, as far as I know...why Chch?
Andy Budd
http://www.message.uk.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] PDF to HTML conversions

[Nancy Johnson]

As I said earlier, some .pdf's can be made accessible in the later versions of Acrobat Standard and Professional under Tools and Accessibility.  
 
For those type of documents you can also open your .pdf document and do a "save as" and save it as a .doc or .rtf.
 
It will tell you if you cannot save it as a .doc or .rtf.  It depends on how the .pdf was originally created.
 
Nancy Johnson
Web Usability <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,Sorry I am a bit late on this. While I haven't got a direct answer, I wrotean article about PDFs and Accessibility which might provide you with someuseful information.http://www.usability.com.au/resources/pdf.cfmI know some large organisations (at least one bank) use tools toautomatically convert PDFs to RTF - however, they have to then translate theinformation contained in things like graphs and flow charts by hand.Roger-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Behalf Of CHAUDHRY, BhuvneshSent: Tuesday, 5 October 2004 8:37 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [WSG] PDF to HTML conversionsHi,The WE04 was great but unfortunately none of the speakers discussed theissue of making PDF files accessible. I am currently facing
 thisproblem.Does anyone have ideas about the tools in market to convert PDF intoHTML or any other ways to make the PDF files accessible.Any thoughts would be welcome.ThanksBhuvnesh Chaudhry*This e-mail message (along with any attachments) is intended only for thenamed addressee and could contain information that is confidential orprivileged. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that anydissemination, copying or use of any of the information is prohibited.Please notify us immediately by return e-mail if you are not the intendedrecipient and delete all copies of the original message and attachments.This footnote also confirms that this message has been checked for
 computerviruses.***The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list & getting helpThe discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
		Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.

[WSG] hidden list background issues, etc.

[Lorenzo Gabba]

URL: http://196.36.166.35/tower
CSS: http://196.36.166.35/tower/s/tower.css
CSS: http://196.36.166.35/tower/s/navDropdown.css

1. In IE6, the border/background of the top list in the #steps layer appears 
hidden. Is there a way to fix this?

2. There's also a major gap on the left of the list that I can't seem to get 
rid of - any suggestions there would be much appreciated.

3. In Opera7, the dropdown menu is showing some nasty vertical spaces - any 
idea why and how I would go about removing them?

Thanks!
Lorenzo

**
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] Another proper use of 's question

[Nick Lo]

Thanks all for the replies.
A thought that also occurred to me whilst working on it was if you lay 
out a bunch of links in this style...


	 http://www.google.com";  title="Google, a big and useful 
search engine">Google
	A big and useful search engine


...,as you might on a "resources" page, is the link title made 
redundant by the ? It looks like the  essentially does the job 
of the title attribute but I'm wondering how the various screen/text 
readers/etc might interpret this.

Nick
The W3 says that s "generally consist of a series of 
term/definition pairs (although definition lists may have other 
applications)."  As an example, "another application of ... is for 
marking up dialogues, with each  naming a speaker, and each  
containing his or her words." 
(http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/lists.html)

Based on this, I personally think that s can be used for nearly 
any situation where you need to show a sort of parent/child 
relationship within a list of items, while still being semantically 
sound. It's also a lot quicker than doing something like:



 Cow jumps over 
moon
 An unnamed cow has been seen jumping over the moon say 
residents...


 Dish runs away with spoon
 The mystery continues as crockery takes to the streets...



And also quite a bit more elegant, IMO.
Cheers,
Cam
Nick Lo wrote:
Pondering over this one:
I'm presuming a list of links with their short intros like e.g. news 
articles:


   Cow jumps over 
moon
   An unnamed cow has been seen jumping over the moon say 
residents...
   Dish runs away with 
spoon
   The mystery continues as crockery takes to the streets...


Works as a definition list in a semantically comforting way? Am I 
wrong?
**
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] anchors within a page

[Neerav]

sure an id for  is valid. it can be used in several ways eg 
http://www.hicksdesign.co.uk/journal/271/highlighting-current-page-with-css

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
john wrote:
An ID in the body?  Now, why didn't I think of that? :)  Is that valid? 
 I'll try it!  Thanks!

~john
_
Dr. Zeus Web Development
http://www.DrZeus.net
"content without clutter"

Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Two ideas spring to mind:
- wrap the entire page content in a div with a specific ID, and change 
the link to point to that




...



- taking it one step further (and admittedly a bit crazy, but seems to 
work fine in FF, IE and Opera from my really quick testing) add an ID 
to the body element itself and link to that

...

,,,


Patrick
john wrote:
Hello, group.
I want to put a "top of page" link in the footer of one of my sites, 
so instead of using the  tag, I  to one of my 
ID's. The problem is, I've used "z-index" in the CSS so that the 
header and nav stay put when scrolling...but it doesn't work in IE.  
The result is that, in IE, when you hit the "to the top" link, it 
doesn't take you all the to the top of the page (where you can see 
the header and nav).

What I need is better solution.  It's probably very obvious and I 
just can't formulate it at the moment.  Any suggestions?  You can see 
an example at http://www.drzeus.net/redesign/cslewis/faq/

Thanks!


**
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] anchors within a page

[john]

That's good to know, Tom.  I'm mostly concerned with IE for this problem.
~john
_
Dr. Zeus Web Development
http://www.DrZeus.net
"content without clutter"

Tom Livingston wrote:
Works as intended in Safari 1.2.3 OS X 10.3.5. "to the top" takes me all 
the way back to the top.



Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
mlinc.com
Get FireFox >  http://spreadfirefox.com/community/?q=affiliates&id=0&t=1

On Oct 6, 2004, at 3:05 PM, john wrote:
Hello, group.
I want to put a "top of page" link in the footer of one of my sites, 
so instead of using the  tag, I  to one of my 
ID's. The problem is, I've used "z-index" in the CSS so that the 
header and nav stay put when scrolling...but it doesn't work in IE.  
The result is that, in IE, when you hit the "to the top" link, it 
doesn't take you all the to the top of the page (where you can see the 
header and nav).

What I need is better solution.  It's probably very obvious and I just 
can't formulate it at the moment.  Any suggestions?  You can see an 
example at http://www.drzeus.net/redesign/cslewis/faq/

Thanks!
--
~john
_
Dr. Zeus Web Development
http://www.DrZeus.net
"content without clutter"

**
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
**


**
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] anchors within a page

[john]

An ID in the body?  Now, why didn't I think of that? :)  Is that valid? 
 I'll try it!  Thanks!

~john
_
Dr. Zeus Web Development
http://www.DrZeus.net
"content without clutter"

Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Two ideas spring to mind:
- wrap the entire page content in a div with a specific ID, and change 
the link to point to that




...



- taking it one step further (and admittedly a bit crazy, but seems to 
work fine in FF, IE and Opera from my really quick testing) add an ID to 
the body element itself and link to that

...

,,,


Patrick
john wrote:
Hello, group.
I want to put a "top of page" link in the footer of one of my sites, 
so instead of using the  tag, I  to one of my 
ID's. The problem is, I've used "z-index" in the CSS so that the 
header and nav stay put when scrolling...but it doesn't work in IE.  
The result is that, in IE, when you hit the "to the top" link, it 
doesn't take you all the to the top of the page (where you can see the 
header and nav).

What I need is better solution.  It's probably very obvious and I just 
can't formulate it at the moment.  Any suggestions?  You can see an 
example at http://www.drzeus.net/redesign/cslewis/faq/

Thanks!

**
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] anchors within a page

[john]

> Why not just put  at the top of the page?
Because I don't consider that to be a modern solution, and since I'm 
"relearning" how to code, I want some choices. ;)

~john
_
Dr. Zeus Web Development
http://www.DrZeus.net
"content without clutter"

**
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] Another proper use of 's question

[Cam Pegg]

The W3 says that s "generally consist of a series of term/definition 
pairs (although definition lists may have other applications)."  As an 
example, "another application of ... is for marking up dialogues, 
with each  naming a speaker, and each  containing his or her 
words." (http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/lists.html)

Based on this, I personally think that s can be used for nearly any 
situation where you need to show a sort of parent/child relationship 
within a list of items, while still being semantically sound. It's also 
a lot quicker than doing something like:



 Cow jumps over moon
 An unnamed cow has been seen jumping over the moon say residents...


 Dish runs away with spoon
 The mystery continues as crockery takes to the streets...


And also quite a bit more elegant, IMO.
Cheers,
Cam
Nick Lo wrote:
Pondering over this one:
I'm presuming a list of links with their short intros like e.g. news 
articles:


   Cow jumps over 
moon
   An unnamed cow has been seen jumping over the moon say 
residents...
   Dish runs away with spoon
   The mystery continues as crockery takes to the streets...


Works as a definition list in a semantically comforting way? Am I wrong?
Thanks,
Nick
**
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
**