Re: [WSG] Another amazing css zen garden entry
A recent survey in my imagination revealed that: 99% of people don't go wow because, not having the experience of attempting to build anything remotely like it, they don't see how clever it is. Half the rest go wow because, having experience, they see it is clever, but don't quite understand the technique, and are thus impressed. (That was me). The other 0.5% (including you; congratulations!) see it is clever, and can surmise the technique, and thus give it credit as cutting-edge, but not to the extent of a wow. And now I understand it, even how the light was done. Next? At 06:02 PM 18/12/2004, Andrew Krespanis wrote: It is that sense of seeing art at the cutting-edge of science that makes us go wow. Good point John, I can't argue with that :) The backgrounds are great, the css is cutting edge. That doesn't make it a great design though. Could the people who think it is so non-wow, please explain to us in a few simple words, how it is done? Then I am going to do something similar by afternoon-tea time I haven't looked at the css, but if I was trying to achieve this it would be setup something like: diver : top layer (z-index), fixed positioning, 24-bit png. gradient: second layer, attached to top, 24-bit png. light: bottom layer, fixed positioning, 24-bit png. Everything else would be animated gifs on :hover states, two reasons the effect doesn't work in IE. The ocen floor is either a photo or render, treasure chest added after the fact. Crab is animated gif, drawn over the sand but cut back to binary transparency. That said, the conception of such a technique is usually more work than the application, and this technique is pretty damn slick. What I should have said is that while the 'diver trick' is cool, I don't rate it amongst my favourite zen entries. Andrew. ** 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 amazing css zen garden entry
Well put. For the record, my I'm not worthy comment was merely my manner of speech and should not, of course, be taken literally. Everybody was wowing -- I chose to say something different. Yes, I was (and am) very impressed. ~john _ Dr. Zeus Web Development http://www.DrZeus.net content without clutter on 12/18/2004 11:34 AM J4Web said the following: A recent survey in my imagination revealed that: 99% of people don't go wow because, not having the experience of attempting to build anything remotely like it, they don't see how clever it is. Half the rest go wow because, having experience, they see it is clever, but don't quite understand the technique, and are thus impressed. (That was me). The other 0.5% (including you; congratulations!) see it is clever, and can surmise the technique, and thus give it credit as cutting-edge, but not to the extent of a wow. And now I understand it, even how the light was done. Next? ** 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 amazing css zen garden entry
-Original Message- From: Andrew Krespanis I know I'm way out on a limb with this one, but the ocean thing really doesn't do anything for me... The diver/flashlight effect is cool (even though it looks a bit nasty as it goes over the gradient) and the rendered ocean floor has really nice lighting, but besides that... Comments like I'm not worthy are somewhat surprising; but hey, to each their own :) Andrew. I like it. I think it's a good example of what CSS is capable of (in this case; heavy graphics and some neat PNG trickery). Which is exactly what the Garden is supposed to be about. OT: Does anyone else think the Garden needs some sort of rating system or better categorisation? When there was only ~30 it was fine. But now there's ~520. A lot will never get seen, and that probably includes some really good examples that should be. I suppose one could design a separate site with frames and JS. Then people could rate each on aesthetics, usability, originality, etc. Cheers, Justin. ** 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] Nested cites?
I'm beginning to suspect nested cites might make sense sometimes. The
XHTML 1.0 spec doesn't specifically prohibit them, and neither does the
DTD, nor are the description and examples in the HTML 4.01 spec at odds
with what I'm suggesting.
Here's an example:
Greed is good. Greed works. -- citeGordon Gecko in citeWall
Street/cite/cite
Let me offer my reasons for suggesting that this strange looking usage
might be all right after all. First, if I were speaking of the movie, I
believe it would be perfectly correct to say:
I think Michael Douglas did a wonderful job in citeWall Street/cite.
Likewise, I think it would be correct to format my sig line as:
I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education. --
citeWilson Mizner/cite
or a quote from another movie:
We're depraved on account of we're deprived -- citeWest Side Story/cite
And that's why it occurs to me that when the material contains both an
attribution and within that attribution the name of a work, as in my
original example or as in this slightly more complex example:
We're depraved on account of we're deprived -- citeStephen Sondheim,
lyrics to Officer Krupke, citeWest Side Story/cite/cite
the most natural way to write it would be with a nested cite, as I've
just done.
There's a presentational advantage. You could easily style it so the
name of the work is returned to normal text (assuming the default is to
present cites in italics):
cite cite {
font-style: normal;
}
But, more importantly, I think it stands up semantically.
I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise, however, especially by someone
who knows it's illegal. Generally when I'm the first to think of
something (and google indicates I am) it's because it's either trivial
or really stupid.
Btw, the W3C validator likes it fine, tidy doesn't care for it much.
Here's an example in real life:
http://blog.crispen.org/archives/2004/12/13/greed/
In searching for whether anybody else had thought of this cockamamie
idea before, I found a treasure. At
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/HTML3.2/5.15.html Jukka Korpela
describes the W3C authors' language specifying cite as laconic.
--
Rev. Bob Bob Crispen
bob at crispen dot org
Ex Cathedra Weblog: http://blog.crispen.org/
I respect faith, but doubt is what gets you an education.
- Wilson Mizner
**
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] Nested cites?
Rev. Bob 'Bob' Crispen wrote: I'm beginning to suspect nested cites might make sense sometimes. You may have a point. It's kind of like nested quotes. ** 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] Checking in as many browsers as possible
Hi, In addition to making sure our codes adhere to standards, we also face the unenviable task of making sure they appear right in as many UAs are possible. Therefore, I reckon it's not too far off topic here when I ask what are the usual browsers to check against and how in tarnation do some of you guys manage to maintain so many of them. 1) IE 6 (at least 3 versions of them?), IE 5.5, IE/Mac and below (I've got IE 6 but how do I install IE 5.5 and where do I find it?) 2) Mozilla/Firefox (no issue finding them here, but usually the install instructions advise us not to have more than 1 version of Mozilla etc) 3) Opera (only got the most recent version but they seem pretty consistent throughout the major revisions) 4) Netscape (anybody still got a copy of that ugly monster 4? I'd like to have it) 5) Konqueror 6) Epiphany 7) Safari (it's supposed to be based on Konqueror so I do my testing based on the results from Konqueror due to the lack of a Mac) 8) PDA UAs (got an IPaq, yay) I've never failed to be amazed when somebody does a site review listing test results with 10 UAs or more. How many machines do you have running in your cubicle?!?!? Thanks! Wong ** 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] XHTML 1.1: no more iframes
Hi, Since XHTML 1.1 removed support for iframes, may I find out why exactly? Just thinking that there're lots of useful code snippets like WYSIWYG editors that are going to be rendered obsolete by this. Not trying to troll, honest, but it'd be helpful to know why... Thanks Wong ** 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] Checking in as many browsers as possible
You can go down to netscape 4.7 here: http://channels.netscape.com/ns/browsers/archive.jsp Bennie On 12/18/2004 2:12:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, In addition to making sure our codes adhere to standards, we also face the unenviable task of making sure they appear right in as many UAs are possible. Therefore, I reckon it's not too far off topic here when I ask what are the usual browsers to check against and how in tarnation do some of you guys manage to maintain so many of them. 1) IE 6 (at least 3 versions of them?), IE 5.5, IE/Mac and below (I've got IE 6 but how do I install IE 5.5 and where do I find it?) 2) Mozilla/Firefox (no issue finding them here, but usually the install instructions advise us not to have more than 1 version of Mozilla etc) 3) Opera (only got the most recent version but they seem pretty consistent throughout the major revisions) 4) Netscape (anybody still got a copy of that ugly monster 4? I'd like to have it) 5) Konqueror 6) Epiphany 7) Safari (it's supposed to be based on Konqueror so I do my testing based on the results from Konqueror due to the lack of a Mac) 8) PDA UAs (got an IPaq, yay) I've never failed to be amazed when somebody does a site review listing test results with 10 UAs or more. How many ** 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] XHTML 1.1: no more iframes
may I find out why exactly? Due to modularization. -- Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz | designlab.cz | janbrasna.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] Checking in as many browsers as possible
I'll show my setup... 1) IE 6 (at least 3 versions of them?), IE 5.5, IE/Mac and below (I've got IE 6 but how do I install IE 5.5 and where do I find it?) IE 4.0, IE 5.01, IE 5.5, IE 6.0, planning IE/Mac via PearPC. http://www.skyzyx.com/archives/94.php 2) Mozilla/Firefox (no issue finding them here, but usually the install instructions advise us not to have more than 1 version of Mozilla etc) PH 0.5, FF 1.0, Moz 1.0, Moz 1.3, Moz 1.6 in different dirs 3) Opera (only got the most recent version but they seem pretty consistent throughout the major revisions) They aren't much consistent :'( Actually having 6.01, 7.00, 7.21, 7.23, 7.50, 7.54 4) Netscape (anybody still got a copy of that ugly monster 4? I'd like to have it) None, because it gets unsyled docs... http://browsers.evolt.org/?navigator/32bit 5) Konqueror 2.2.2, 3.3.2 6) Epiphany None. 7) Safari (it's supposed to be based on Konqueror so I do my testing based on the results from Konqueror due to the lack of a Mac) None, planning 1.2 via PearPC (or via buying an iBook). Safari 1.1+ (?) is slightly different from Konqueror. 8) PDA UAs (got an IPaq, yay) PocketIE on PPC2002 and WM2003, N6230, Opera SSR. How many machines do you have running in your cubicle? One. (Linux LiveCD, PearPC, VMWare... etc.) Well, actually I do not test with all of these browsers. I'm checking the results only in few of the latest... -- Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz | designlab.cz | janbrasna.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] XHTML 1.1: no more iframes
Due to modularization. http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xhtml-modularization-20010410/abstract_modules.html#s_iframemodule http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/REC-xhtml-modularization-20010410/introduction.html#s_intro -- Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz | designlab.cz | janbrasna.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] Checking in as many browsers as possible
Ag!! Am I having Firefox problems because the latest Netscape is also on my Mac OSX (Panther) as well? The latest version of Firefox has been acting strangely ever since I installed Netscape (or thereabouts). I can't seem to quit Firefox without it remaining in the menu and is unusable without a reboot (I also get no force quit option on the dock) . It also, quite often, doesn't load any page on startup, though it is suppose to. If this is OT, I am sorry, but this has been driving me batty for a couple of weeks. I've searched for answers, but can't seem to find any. Any thoughts out there would be greatly appreciated. Wayne Godfrey Outgate Media, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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 amazing css zen garden entry
OT: Does anyone else think the Garden needs some sort of rating system or better categorisation? When there was only ~30 it was fine. But now there's ~520. A lot will never get seen, and that probably includes some really good examples that should be. [also OT] What the garden really needs is to have each entry identified in the title tag or similar. Unless the artist has included the title in one of the images, you can't easily tell what you're looking at. This has bugged me since Dave started this project -- now it's getting way out of hand. ( I can't even find my favourite entry anymore!) Andrew. http://leftjustified.net/ ** 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] styling :first-line Pseudo-element
You say you want the first line smaller than the second, but your css
will do exactly the opposite (once the selectors are fixed):
.pmi {
font-size: 1.5em;
}
.pmi p:first-line {
font-size: 1.2em;
}
Let me explain; if your default font size is 10px (it's not, but this
is just an eg.), p.pmi's text will be 15px. Now, p.pmi:first-line is
1.2em -- that's 1.2 times it's default font size. Since
.pmi:first-line is a child of .pmi, it's inherited font size is 15px,
not 10. So the first line will actually have have a font size of 18px.
Not exactly what you were asking, but it's good to know how these things work :)
Andrew.
--
http://leftjustified.net/
**
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] accessible image form buttons
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: adding a title attribute for good measure and increased accessibility, providing your image doesn't use tiny text, and has good contrast between text and background ? I prefer giving my users the ability to increase font, if possible. Not everybody with a visual disability has got a screenreader to read out the alt text. Pure text can't go wrong. I generally agree, and I certainly prefer text where possible, but in practice resizable text is more necessary when using small fonts rather than large. Well designed images of text really does not leave users less able to access the web. Also in this case it's not large blocks of text in an image, and therefore the problems of representing structure in the plain-text ALT, but just individual words like Search or Submit. I think it's wrong to say that "pure text can't go wrong" when you consider the design requirements because it's more often a balance. This isn't to say that image submit buttons are always good, but they can be a reasonable (and accessible) choice if done well. I haven't ever found any accessibility expert saying images of text are inaccessible when the image is well designed (read: 12px+ font, high contrast), and I've looked. A couple of years ago this came up and I was trying to find a reference to someone who described this scenario but there was only blanket statements about text in images being bad, and how fixed font sizes affect accessibility but the examples they used were sites with tiny 8px fonts. I was unable to find examples of harm to users when it's done infrequently and carefully, and I tested it with about a dozen elderly and disabled users. Not a one had a problem. Also, http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/serialization/Chapter06.html#h2-5485 .Matthew Cruickshank http://holloway.co.nz/
RE: [WSG] accessible image form buttons
-Original Message- From: Matthew Cruickshank [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, 19 December 2004 2:08 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] accessible image form buttons I haven't ever found any accessibility expert saying images of text are inaccessible when the image is well designed (read: 12px+ font, high contrast), and I've looked. A couple of years ago this came up and I was trying to find a reference to someone who described this scenario but there was only blanket statements about text in images being bad, and how fixed font sizes affect accessibility but the examples they used were sites with tiny 8px fonts. I was unable to find examples of harm to users when it's done infrequently and carefully, and I tested it with about a dozen elderly and disabled users. Not a one had a problem. Just one example: I tested a website recently with a range of disabled users. One of them had a visual disability that left him with a limited field of vision. The problem for him was that he could not read any font that was under 14pt. In fact, the font he could read best was 14pt and blue, as black font appeared blurry to him. I agree, it's probably not inaccessible to make the font a bit smaller, but it adds to the positive experience of the user to make the website as flexible as possible, so that he/she can modify it to suit their needs. But you are right: very often the text-only solution clashes with a nice design. It probably depends on the situation and the target audience. In my particular case the font of the button is Verdana and hasn't got anything fancy on it. So I can't see why I should make it an image. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
