Re: [WSG] newbie with popup menus question

2005-02-01 Thread Kay Smoljak
On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 16:06:27 -0700, Devendra Shrikhande [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Till now I have been using Fireworks to create popup menus for web sites. Just saw this, looks like there were never any replies... Devendra, if you're still listening, Fireworks menus are actually really bad,

[WSG] Mac IE frustrating my mind - some help would be nize

2005-02-01 Thread Antti Tuppurainen
Hi all! I have been fighting now for several hours with Mac IE 5.1.4 on OS X 10.1.5. You can find the public screenshots via browserCam: http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=133206 (The first pic shows the error) I have used Mark Lynch CSS/List based navigation

[WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread designer
Good Day everyone: I have been doing the annual maintenance/update of a Holiday Home letting site I've had for a few years, so this year I attempted to convert it all to standards. It is now XHTML1 /CSS and most of it validates. (I say most because there is a bit of Flash and some of it uses

Re: [WSG] IE6- XML CSS white-space pre not honored

2005-02-01 Thread BBsound
Thanks Iva, well with xlink not honored aswell seems like a bad idea doing XML+CSS directly anyway... - Original Message - From: Iva Koberg To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 3:09 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] IE6- XML CSS white-space pre

RE: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Ricci Angela
Hi, Bob There's so many ways to argue and defend the pros of doing XHTML and CSS layout! First, it reduces bandwidth, it saves time (and therefore money ;-) in maintenance and updating, it is flexible and reusable. Take a look at

Re: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Kay Smoljak
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:57:46 -, designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can appreciate that I am getting a 'quality' product, but from a practical point of view, what am I getting that improves my business? As far as visitors to my site are concerned there seems to be no advantage - after all,

RE: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Jacobus van Niekerk
Here is some comments she might like ;) http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/essays/archives/000266.php http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/benefits/ Kind Regards Jacobus van Niekerk Creative Consultant web: http://www.catics.com/ |

Re: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Mike Brown
Kay Smoljak wrote: On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 09:57:46 -, designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can appreciate that I am getting a 'quality' product, but from a practical point of view, what am I getting that improves my business? As far as visitors to my site are concerned there seems to be no

Re: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Mark Stanton
Try it - watch their eyes glaze as you show how the competitors' sites don't validate. Of course if you talk them about it in terms of standards and validation and doctypes they are going to get bored and stop listening. The overall language and structure of Russ's article is not appropriate

[WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

2005-02-01 Thread Jamie Mason
Title: Quick h1,h2 etc question Hi, I'm sure this has been asked time and time again and is probably a daft question, but which is the proper way to use header tags? Thanks in advance for your patience and help! Jamie Is it... = 1) All headers must be used in order

Re: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Jason Foss
They shouldn't have to care about standards. They shouldn't have to know about standards. Their time is too short, they're too busy running their business. Just build a standards-compliant site as something you do as a matter of course. I don't see any reason not to do that. We have no more

Re: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

2005-02-01 Thread Jason Foss
I can't see any problems with your second example in theory - but it's an impossible question to answer without content. Remember that (X)HTML elements are supposed to describe or explain (for want of better words) the content that they are marking up. So there aren't any rules as to how header

Re: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

2005-02-01 Thread Tonico Strasser
Jamie Mason wrote: Hi, I'm sure this has been asked time and time again and is probably a daft question, but which is the proper way to use header tags? Thanks in advance for your patience and help! Depends on what you want to optimize. Tonico

Re: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

2005-02-01 Thread Bert Doorn
G'day Think of the headings as a collapsible outline, with sections and sub-sections, each with a heading of the *appropriate* level. Collapse it (as one can do in Word for instance) and you should see an outline made up of headings that makes sense. Each h2 belongs to a sub-section of the

Re: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

2005-02-01 Thread Karl Brightman
Have to remember that search engines will read the contents of header tags so i think best way is for heading text, titles etc. For list headings i think it would be easier to using a seperate style. The second option i think is the better way to go though, just for organization and nice and

Re: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread designer
Hi All, Everyone has had something sensible to say, but it's interesting to play Devil's advocate with Mark's list: - Speed Development Hey - she'll be expecting me to reduce my prices next year! :-) - Simplify Maintenance, Increase Opportunity Ditto! - Open Up Access Options OK -

[WSG] MSN redesign

2005-02-01 Thread john
Anybody else notice that MSN.com now uses CSS? Can't say I'm impressed with the design, but with the money that Microsoft is investing to try and compete with Google, the new MSN search (and MSN.com) is going to get some serious attention. Like Yahoo's redesign, MSN's will continue to show

Re: [WSG] IE layout issues

2005-02-01 Thread Irina Ahrens
Hi Darren, In addition to what was said by other guys, a few general comments: (1) Home and Products links in the right menu point to the same page. I think it is confusing. (2) Cursor shape should change when hovered over the link to the current page to create appearance that it is not

Re: [WSG] MSN redesign

2005-02-01 Thread john
I just found Doug Bowman's well-written blog entry about it. http://tinyurl.com/5xyey ~john _ Dr. Zeus Web Development http://www.DrZeus.net content without clutter on 2/1/2005 12:49 PM john said the following: Anybody else notice that MSN.com now uses CSS? Can't say I'm

Re: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Mark Stanton
Hey Bob Hey - she'll be expecting me to reduce my prices next year! :-) Yeah well these two ways to approach it - give her more for less because of the efficiency gains hope you benefit in terms of greater customer respect/loyalty or stuff around doing things the hard way so you can spend

Re: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Kornel Lesinski
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 12:44:21 -, designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Reduce Bandwidth Costs Not relevant - small site, with folk increasingly being on a high speed line. Here in UK (where it's called Broadband) the user pays a standard fee, no matter how much/how long he/she uses it.

RE: [WSG] MSN redesign

2005-02-01 Thread Jacobus van Niekerk
Great, glad to see Microsoft getting out the closet and embracing web standards! Now lets hope they upgrade all the other MS sites. If so, I'll start to believe in MS again, as a forward thinking company, that works with us and not against. Kind Regards Jacobus van Niekerk Creative Consultant

RE: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

2005-02-01 Thread Trusz, Andrew
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lea de Groot Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 7:18 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 12:11:57 -, Jamie Mason wrote: 2) With the exception

RE: [WSG] Standards?

2005-02-01 Thread Juli Waddell
Return Receipt Your RE: [WSG] Standards? document :

RE: [WSG] MSN redesign

2005-02-01 Thread Mike Foskett
sarcasm Nice of them to continue support for Mac IE. /sarcasm mike 2k:)2 marqueeblink e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] site: http://www.webSemantics.co.uk /marquee/blink ** This email and any files transmitted with it

Re: [WSG] MSN redesign

2005-02-01 Thread Anthony Timberlake
I like it, but it leaves room to improve. They are a large company and even I can do better than that. It is nice to see that they are using standards though, not enough sites do that. On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 13:31:30 -, Mike Foskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sarcasm Nice of them to continue

[WSG] avoid Skip link in search results?

2005-02-01 Thread Kornel Lesinski
I don't like putting Skip to main content or Skip to navigation link, because they can be seen in search results. I thought about replacing it with or something that won't contain keywords and won't go in the way in search results, but that probably is a killer for screen readers. Do you know

Re: [WSG] avoid Skip link in search results?

2005-02-01 Thread Tonico Strasser
Kornel Lesinski wrote: I don't like putting Skip to main content or Skip to navigation link, because they can be seen in search results. I thought about replacing it with or something that won't contain keywords and won't go in the way in search results, but that probably is a killer for screen

Re: [WSG] avoid Skip link in search results?

2005-02-01 Thread Chris Stratford
I dont bother with them either Kornel. I know they seem to be the best option for screenreaders. although I have found it is and would be best to simply keep your navigation short and quick. That of course depends on the type of website. But is it really necessary to have a million links in the

Re: [WSG] Kaosweaver Complete CSS Menu - accessible or not?

2005-02-01 Thread Thierry Koblentz
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.kaosweaver.com/extensions/details.php?id=76 Hi I was wondering if anyone had any experience with this extension and whether it is fully accessible etc as it looks like it could be quite a time saver. Hi Helen, I'm biased on this, but I'd like to point out

[WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

2005-02-01 Thread Jamie Mason
Title: Quick h1,h2 etc question Hi, I'm sure this has been asked time and time again and is probably a daft question, but which is the proper way to use header tags? Thanks in advance for your patience and help! Jamie Is it... = 1) All headers must be used in order

[WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Chris W. Parker
Hello, Not sure if this is off topic or not, but let me know if it is. I'm wondering what the suggested default state of a group of radio buttons is? Let me use a current, specific example. In a form I'm writing I have one set of radio buttons. The current options are 'Home', or 'Agency'. The

RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Iain Gardiner
I think it's the good old checked=checked attribute that you add in your default radio button's code. HTH Iain -- Iain Gardiner http://www.firelightning.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris W. Parker Sent: 01

RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Iain Gardiner
Oops, sorry I didn't really read your question thoroughly. Surely an e-mail address will be either a personal or a business address. Personally I'd set the default to personal as this seems to me the most likely option. Iain -- Iain Gardiner http://www.firelightning.com

Re: [WSG] Re: MSN redesign

2005-02-01 Thread Anthony Timberlake
But at least it looks like they were. It is better than that crowded horrible page that they used to have. On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 17:55:56 +0100, Raffaella Biscuso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anthony Timberlake Scrive: I like it, but it leaves room to improve. They are a large company and

RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Chris W. Parker
Iain Gardiner mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 12:04 PM said: Oops, sorry I didn't really read your question thoroughly. Surely an e-mail address will be either a personal or a business address. Personally I'd set the default to personal as this seems to me the

Re: [WSG] Re: MSN redesign

2005-02-01 Thread Wayne Godfrey
Actually, it's kind of ironic that they would even consider trying to use standards when those very standards are so poorly executed on their own product(s). Maybe there's hope...I just won't hold my breath. I'm sure after this experience, they'll add a few of their own new standards buried deep

RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Rowan Smith
I think this is like FAQs - my FAQ is never there. Likewise, pre-set a control to option A and I'm equally likely to want option B. IMHO pre-setting options for the user (unless they're VERY obvious) is like making assumptions about them. That said, RFC1866 says 'CHECKED' is optional but then

[WSG] standards in local government

2005-02-01 Thread designer
Hi All, I was surprised to find a local government web site (English) using standards and accessibility: http://www.oldham.gov.uk/ It doesn't quite validate, but it's a determined start! Bob McClelland, Cornwall (U.K.) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk

RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Mike Kear
With radio buttons, no value is passed to the form's action page unless one of the options is selected. This will normally cause an error in the processing page unless special consideration is given to this possibility.Normally if there are radio buttons on the form, it is best to ensure that at

RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Wybrow, Mark
Or pass hidden parameters onto the action page ... these then can be over ridden if the radio is selected From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike KearSent: Wednesday, 2 February 2005 2:51 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] Default

[WSG] QueenBee site check please!!!

2005-02-01 Thread Mani Sheriar
Good Day All, I'm developing a new site and was wondering if you guys could take a look at the initial layout. It's a bit more complicated than I tend to do with xhtml/css and I'm wondering how it's holding up so far. I welcome any feedback. Thanks! Mani Sheriar Sheriar Designs |

[WSG] QeenBee Site Check Please!!! (WITH URL)

2005-02-01 Thread Mani Sheriar
Lol, I'm tired. Sorry guys!! Here it is ... http://www.manisheriar.com/queenbee Mani Sheriar Sheriar Designs | www.ManiSheriar.com 925|914.0741      ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See

[WSG] border order

2005-02-01 Thread Mani Sheriar
Hi There, Just use a background image for the nav border. I made one that was 760x20 with no repeat, but it could even be 1x1 and repeat y. Just position it at the bottom. You can look at the page here: http://www.manisheriar.com/wsg/borderOrder/ Here's the code: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Michael Cordover
IIRC though, while RFC 1866 says exactly one the checked attribute is optional in W3C guidelines. HTML 4.01 (and thus also the XHTML 1 series) state: [http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#radio] If no radio button in a set sharing the same control name is initially on, user agent

Re: [WSG] standards in local government

2005-02-01 Thread Michael Cordover
Hi, I was even more surprised to find an entire Australian government department website not only uses an effective table-free design, not only has a website which is at least partially accessible, not only does it collapse well when styling is removed, it is also XHTML 1.0 conformant!

RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Chris W. Parker
Michael Cordover mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tuesday, February 01, 2005 2:51 PM said: IIRC though, while RFC 1866 says exactly one the checked attribute is optional in W3C guidelines. [snip] I guess I'm saying that I'd consider this a moot point - check whichever you'd like and the user

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Mike Kear
There are reasons why you might not want to select a 'default' on radio buttons. It can distort your data.For example, if you have option 1 checked as the default, and a user forgets to choose one of the options, they're selecting option 1 anyway. This may be erroneous data. (Or it may not matter

Re: [WSG] QueenBee site check please!!!

2005-02-01 Thread Karl Brightman
Hey Mani, Looks nice, good balance and the colours mix nicely. I think the one thing that looks a bit odd is the space for text between the advert on the right and the middle section. The text seems quite squashed but i guess it all depends on whats being placed there. Good work -Karl

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Kornel Lesinski
On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 17:24:35 -, Mike Kear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For example in a survey, if you indicate any default answers, you are automatically slanting the results, and if someone doesnt make a choice to a question, they wont get a warning popup, instead they will have a selection

RE: [WSG] standards in local government

2005-02-01 Thread Golding, Antony
---BeginMessage--- Ahem... http://www.salford.gov.uk http://www.salford.gov.uk :) All UK local government sites have a requirement to be AA rated for accessibility, so expect to see a lot more of them in the near future. Antony Antony Golding Principal e-Government Services Officer

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Rowan Smith
Quoting Mike Kear [EMAIL PROTECTED]: There are reasons why you might not want to select a 'default' on radio buttons. That's exactly the point Mike. GENDER: (x) Male ( ) Female [ Submit ] I think I'd opt for all unchecked and blame the UA for making the wrong call half of the time

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread John Horner
I'm a bit baffled by this question -- in a way it's not about CSS or HTML or standards at all. If you want to get good data from your form, and you have two radio buttons, then neither should be checked by default. Your CGI script or whatever should do the checking and return the form with you

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Mike Kear
Perhaps, Kornel, but in that case how to you tell the difference between responses where people preferred not to say/didn't know (i.e. an answer to the question), and where people didn't answer the question or didnt notice it?There are cases where a default is a bad thing, and you need to be able

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread John Allsopp
John, If you want to get good data from your form, and you have two radio buttons, then neither should be checked by default. Your CGI script or whatever should do the checking and return the form with you must select a button to proceed. the difference between a radio button set and checkboxes

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread John Horner
At 11:36 AM +1100 2/2/05, John Allsopp wrote: John, the difference between a radio button set and checkboxes is (going way back to Mac UI guidelines in the 80s) is that a radio button group always has a value [snip -- I did know the difference between checkboxes and radio buttons!] If you're

Re: [WSG] Unicode-bidi and direction

2005-02-01 Thread Neerav
Some searching revealed these: http://www.htmlref.com/reference/appb/css_unicode-bidi.htm states support is: CSS2 IE 5, 5.5, 6 Nav 6, 7 No Opera support http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/css/properties/intl/unibidi.htm http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/css/properties/intl/direction.htm

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread John Allsopp
John, [snip -- I did know the difference between checkboxes and radio buttons!] I was almost certain you did :-) If you're saying that a set of radio two or more buttons must always be shown with at least one pre-selected, i.e. as soon as the page loads, one is already selected, then there are

Re: [WSG] double space after period

2005-02-01 Thread Kevin Futter
Apologies for being so late on this (been rather busy at work). The double-space after a full-stop (period) thing is simply a notational convention that sprang out of the typing pools of the 1950s. It has nothing to do at all with grammar, and is in fact actively discouraged as practise in the

[WSG] Leading accessibility/usability companies in Sydney/NSW?

2005-02-01 Thread Neerav
Hi I'd appreciate it if anyone on the list who has worked with leading accessibility/usability companies in Sydney/NSW could email me contact details for these companies off-list thanks -- Neerav Bhatt http://www.bhatt.id.au Web Development IT consultancy http://www.bhatt.id.au/blog/ -

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Chris Blown
I hesitantly suggest a good place for this discussion would be on Justin French's Interface list. http://lists.indent.com.au/mailman/listinfo/interface Cheers Chris Blown ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See

[WSG] Brisbane Meeting CHANGE OF PLAN

2005-02-01 Thread Andrew Krespanis
Hi group :) The proposed presentation for the February meeting is some of the technical aspects of CSS a title invented by the good people at WSG to account for my slackness ;) The presentation I will be giving is Site in an Hour Studying the workflow of CSS development. I will be presenting

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread Mike Kear
Well I got involved in it because (i thought) someone said at the beginning of this thread that it was only valid markup if a set of radio buttons had one and only one 'checked' item.My point was that regardless of the validity of the code, it is sometimes invalid communications/user interface to

Re: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

2005-02-01 Thread John Horner
That's the relevance to standards - i.e. that if it's only standard if there is a default radio button and never valid if none of them are 'checked' then the standard is wrong and ought to be changed. I heartily agree, Mike.

Re: [WSG] IE layout issues - Closed

2005-02-01 Thread Darren Wood
hey all, Thanks for the help, everyone! I'm now slowly ironing out the issues. :) Cheers Darren Darren Wood wrote: I've recently designed (and partially built) an online store. Its in its 'soft launch' phase as there are some issues with IE. **