[WSG] Disappearing input boxes in Firefox1.0

[Bert Doorn]

G'day
http://www.lan2go.net.au/Dinkum/ is valid XHTML1 Strict and the CSS 
validates (two warnings because I use a CSS3 property)

My client tells me the input boxes at the top of the screen, and the one 
for the google toolbar (on the home page), do not show in his version of 
Firefox.
I have tested with Firefox 1.0 on my PC and on the server itself, and 
cannot reproduce the problem.Tested at 800x600 and higher 
resolutions.  My client has the latest equipment (better than mine), 
running at 1280x1024 or higher.

I am aware of some other issues in Opera and Safari and may go back to a 
table layout, but this is a new one to me - never seen this behaviour 
before.   Screen shots are available at 
http://www.lan2go.net.au/Dinkum/screenshots/

I'm thinking it may have something to do with line heights and the way I 
use floats for form labels (rather than the old-fashioned table setup), 
but am not sure why it would be an issue in Firefox, when it's fine in 
my own installation.  

Could some of you have a look at the site with Firefox (any version) and 
tell me if they experience the issue my client reported?  If it's 
common, I will need to do something about it, otherwise it could just be 
there's something wrong with his browser setup.

Please send replies (of the "I see it" kind) direct to me (bert at 
bwdzine dot com), but if you do not see the inputs and you know what the 
cause is, perhaps share with the other members :-)

Regards 
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites 

**
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] IE layout issues - Closed

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

[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.

   "Have You Validated Your Code?"
John Horner(+612 / 02) 9333 3488
Senior Developer, ABC Online  http://www.abc.net.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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 have one and only one 'checked' item at all times.   I said,
and still hold to the view, that sometimes a form has to be presented with
none of the radio buttons 'checked'.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.CheersMike KearWindsor,
NSW, AustraliaCertified Advanced ColdFusion DeveloperAFP
Webworkshttp://afpwebworks.comColdFusion, PHP, ASP, ASP.NET hosting
from AUD$15/month

- Original Message From:
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgTo: "WSG"
Subject: Re: [WSG] Default state of
radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)Date: 02/02/05 03:56I hesitantly suggest a good place for this
discussion would be on JustinFrench's Interface list.http://lists.indent.com.au/mailman/listinfo/interfaceCheersChris
Blown


Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2


**
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] Brisbane Meeting CHANGE OF PLAN

[Andrew Krespanis]

Hi group :)

The proposed presentation for the February meeting is "some of the
technical aspects of CSS" â 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 â Studying the
workflow of CSS development". I will be presenting the creation of a
simple, yet highly usable/accessible interface using CSS, XHTML and a
dash of smoke and mirrors via the DOM. We will start at the layout
stage â planning how to chop up an existing layout (photoshop) and
create it in CSS using the minimal amount of (hopefully) semantic
mark-up. We will take it all the way to completion (time permitting).

Each decision along the way will be discussed amongst the group and
proposals for other methods of solving the same problems will be
noted; from which two layouts will be presented to the web as a whole
â my original version and the collaborative version created on the
night. Both will be accompanied by a run down on the key decisions and
compromises and the thought processes behind those.

I'm hoping to chair a group discussion, rather than do the whole 'one
way presentation' deal. I don't want to stand up and say 'this is how
I do [whatever], therefore you should do the same'; I want to get
shouted down by determined CSS freaks and semantics trolls. In other
wordsâ bring it on! Then we all learn something new! ;D


Hope to see you there :)  
Andrew.

P.S â The now obligatory S5 presentation will go online the afternoon
following the presentation.

P.P.S -- We're hitting the Pig n' Whistle afterwards - piking out is
not an option ;)

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

[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 http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**

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

[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/ - Ramblings Thoughts
http://www.bhatt.id.au/photos/
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/neerav
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**

Re: [WSG] double space after period

[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 modern age. Many old school secretaries who may have come through
'secretarial school' swear by it, but it's a very out-of-date practise
confined to old school corporate documents. Anyone insisting on it now as
'grammatically correct' simply doesn't know what they're talking about.

Cheers,
Kevin Futter

On 23/1/05 10:23 PM, "Iain Gardiner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> It certainly has nothing to do with grammar, it's more a presentation
> convention that has evolved with type.  As for a solution, maybe the CSS
> property 'white-space: pre' would work?
> 
> Iain
> 
> --
> Iain Gardiner
> http://www.firelightning.com


-- 
Kevin Futter
Webmaster, St. Bernard's College
http://www.sbc.melb.catholic.edu.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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 only two options for 
the original poster to get good information from their form:
Well, by convention, that is what radio buttons should do.
 1) Three radio buttons, one of them pre-selected for the value 
"nothing" or "incorrect input" -- the user is encouraged to select one 
of the other two and an error given by the script if they don't

 2) A select menu, with one option pre-selected for "nothing" as above.
If there are 4 or fewer responses, that is where radio buttons have 
traditionally been recommended. For more, "popup" menus.

I'd suggest a radio button with "no response" or some such, which is 
selected, and then the other two

The first seems kind of illogical to me, and the users will be more 
used to the second.
Given this limitation of radio buttons, I wonder why it has not turned 
up in UI discussion much. I've never seen it as an issue before 
(althoough I do see it as one in this instance)

j
John Allsopp
:: westciv :: http://www.westciv.com/
software, courses, resources for a standards based web
:: style master blog :: http://westciv.typepad.com/dog_or_higher/
**
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] Unicode-bidi and direction

[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
http://www.htmldog.com/reference/cssproperties/unicode-bidi/
Neerav Bhatt
http://www.bhatt.id.au
Web Development & IT consultancy
http://www.bhatt.id.au/blog/ - Ramblings Thoughts
http://www.bhatt.id.au/photos/
http://www.bookcrossing.com/mybookshelf/neerav
Maxine Sherrin wrote:
Just wondering: does anyone here have any experience with these two 
properties?

I've got a handle from the specs how you actually use them, but, are 
they in fact supported in any browsers such as Opera, Firefox or Safari 
(or any others of course, but I'm kind of assuming that with IE the 
answer is "no".

Thx
Maxine
http://westciv.typepad.com/standards/
**
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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 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 only two options for 
the original poster to get good information from their form:

 1) Three radio buttons, one of them pre-selected for the value 
"nothing" or "incorrect input" -- the user is encouraged to select 
one of the other two and an error given by the script if they don't

 2) A select menu, with one option pre-selected for "nothing" as above.
The first seems kind of illogical to me, and the users will be more 
used to the second.

   "Have You Validated Your Code?"
John Horner(+612 / 02) 9333 3488
Senior Developer, ABC Online  http://www.abc.net.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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 is (going way 
back to Mac UI guidelines in the 80s) is that a radio button group 
always has a value, and the values are mutually exclusive (you can't 
check two radio buttons in the same group), whereas checkboxes in a 
group can all be on, all be off, or any combination of on and off. It's 
a long time since I have done some intensive forms work, but IIRC, 
browsers generally managed this for you if you set up your radio button 
sets properly.

I know, its strictly off topic, but its about conventions, which are a 
kind of standard

john
John Allsopp
:: westciv :: http://www.westciv.com/
software, courses, resources for a standards based web
:: style master blog :: http://westciv.typepad.com/dog_or_higher/
**
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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 to handle forms with no answer, rather than providing a
default.  In another example, providing a default may slant
your responses in favour of the default, because respondents think that's
the answer you're wanting.  Ever-obliging they tend to give the answer
they think the  questioner wants.--CheersMike
KearWindsor, NSW, AustraliaCertified Advanced ColdFusion
DeveloperAFP Webworkshttp://afpwebworks.comColdFusion, PHP, ASP,
ASP.NET hosting from AUD$15/month

- Original Message Good surveys need "don't know/prefer not to
answer" for every question andthat might be a good
default.--regards, Kornel Lesiñskihttp://browsehappy.pl


Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2


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

[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 must 
select a button to proceed".

But should the browser really auto-select radio buttons for the user 
if none is selected? That seems like a very strange decision to me, 
and wouldn't allow your script to check the form as above.

So that argues that you should use a different kind of control, for 
instance a SELECT menu. The value of "none" can be the default, and 
your script can chuck an error if it sees "none" submitted.

   "Have You Validated Your Code?"
John Horner(+612 / 02) 9333 3488
Senior Developer, ABC Online  http://www.abc.net.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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 (or thereabouts...) 
**
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] standards in local government

[Golding, Antony]

--- Begin Message ---
Ahem... 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 

Salford City Council 
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Telephone: 0161 793 2232 

-Original Message- 
From: designer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tue 01/02/2005 21:05 
To: webstandards group 
Cc: 
Subject: [WSG] standards in local government



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!

<>--- End Message ---
DISCLAIMER: The information in this message is confidential and may be legally
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this message
by anyone else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient,any
disclosure, copying, or distribution of the message, or any action or omission
taken by you in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.
Please immediately contact the sender if you have received this message in 
error.
For the full disclaimer please access http://www.salford.gov.uk/e-mail Thank 
you.

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

[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 of your default entered. How will you know which of the  
results are where users have selected option 1, and which are where they  
have forgotten to give an answer at all?
Good surveys need "don't know/prefer not to answer" for every question and
that might be a good default.
--
regards, Kornel Lesiński
http://browsehappy.pl
**
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] QueenBee site check please!!!

[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 Brightman
Freelance web developer

On 02/02/2005, at 4:02 AM, Mani Sheriar wrote:

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 | www.ManiSheriar.com
925|914.0741
 
  



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

[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 in which case, do whatever you like).  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
of your default entered.  How will you know which of the results are
where users have selected option 1, and which are where they have forgotten
to give an answer at all?That's not to say you shouldn't use default
answers.   I'm saying you shouldn't always use defaults just
because the 'normal' practice is to do so.   If the radio button
gathers important data, another practice could well be to offer no defaults,
but instead show a warning or some kind if the user doesnt select one or the
other and force them to choose before you process the rest of the
form.CheersMike KearAFP Webworks Pty LtdWindsor, NSW,
Australia Http://afpwebworks.comIndustrial Strength hosting -
coldfusion, .asp, .asp.net, php from AUD$15/month

- Original Message From:
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgTo: "wsg@webstandardsgroup.org"
Subject: Re: [WSG] Default state of
radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)Date: 01/02/05 22:53IIRC though, while RFC 1866 says "exactly one"
the checked attributeis 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]>So if you leave them both undefined, some UAs will
select the first,some will select neither. I can't see many doing
anything else. It'snot standards aversion and I can't see why that's not
ok. HTML4.01spec goes on to say that authors should ensure one is
selected bydefault but I'm not sure why you need consistant behavior in
thiscase.If worst comes to worst, just have whichever one comes
first in thepage checked="checked". You'll be "inconveniancing" roughly
half thepeople no matter which is checked by default. If neither are
thenit's the same "inconvenience" for everyone.I guess I'm
saying that I'd consider this a moot point - checkwhichever you'd like
and the user will deal with it.Regards,mjecOn
Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:54:31 +1100, Wybrow,
Mark<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> 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 Kear>
Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2005 2:51 AM> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
Subject: RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe
OT?)>>> 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
least one option is selected.>> Cheers> Mike
Kear> AFP Webworks Pty Ltd> Windsor, NSW, Australia> http://afpwebworks.com> Industrial strength
coldfusion, .asp, .asp.net, php hosting from
A$15/month>>> - Original Message
> From: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
To: "wsg@webstandardsgroup.org" >
Subject: RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)> Date:
01/02/05 20:56>>> 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 says "At all times,> exactly one of the radio
buttons in a set is checked. If none of the > elements
of a set of radio buttons specifies 'CHECKED', then the user agent>
must check the first radio button of the set initially.">>
Does anybody know why one button has to be checked "at all times" in
a> circumstance like Chris referred to?>>
Thanks> Rowan Quoting Iain Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:>> > 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> >>
>> > -Original Message-> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On> > Behalf Of Chris W.
Parker> > Sent: 01 February 2005 19:12> > To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
> Subject: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)>
>> >> > Hello,> >> > Not sure if
this is off topic or not, but let me know if it is.> >>
> I'm wondering what the suggested

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

[Chris W. Parker]

Michael Cordover 
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 will deal with it.

Sounds good to me. Thanks!



Chris.
**
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] standards in local government

[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!
http://www.dfat.gov.au/
Incredible.  Unfortunately they've got *one* CSS error.  Ahh well,
they're not doing too shabbily...

Regards,

mjec


On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 21:05:31 -, designer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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
> 
> **
> The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> 
>  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>  for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> **
> 
> 


-- 
http://mine.mjec.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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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]
<>

So if you leave them both undefined, some UAs will select the first,
some will select neither.  I can't see many doing anything else.  It's
not standards aversion and I can't see why that's not ok.  HTML4.01
spec goes on to say that authors should ensure one is selected by
default but I'm not sure why you need consistant behavior in this
case.

If worst comes to worst, just have whichever one comes first in the
page checked="checked".  You'll be "inconveniancing" roughly half the
people no matter which is checked by default.  If neither are then
it's the same "inconvenience" for everyone.

I guess I'm saying that I'd consider this a moot point - check
whichever you'd like and the user will deal with it.

Regards,

mjec


On Wed, 2 Feb 2005 08:54:31 +1100, Wybrow, Mark
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>  
> 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 Kear
> Sent: Wednesday, 2 February 2005 2:51 AM
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)
> 
>  
> 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 least one option is selected. 
> 
> Cheers
> Mike Kear
> AFP Webworks Pty Ltd
> Windsor, NSW, Australia
> http://afpwebworks.com
> Industrial strength coldfusion, .asp, .asp.net, php hosting from A$15/month
>  
>  
> - Original Message 
> From: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> To: "wsg@webstandardsgroup.org" 
> Subject: RE: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)
> Date: 01/02/05 20:56
> 
> 
> 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 says "At all times,
> exactly one of the radio buttons in a set is checked. If none of the 
> elements of a set of radio buttons specifies 'CHECKED', then the user agent
> must check the first radio button of the set initially."
> 
> Does anybody know why one button has to be checked "at all times" in a
> circumstance like Chris referred to?
> 
> Thanks
> Rowan
> 
> 
> 
> Quoting Iain Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> 
> > 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
> >
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of Chris W. Parker
> > Sent: 01 February 2005 19:12
> > To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> > Subject: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)
> >
> >
> > 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 radio button is meant to designate what
> > type of
> > mailing address the customer has provided. Right now I've got neither
> > option
> > being defaulted to. I know that radio buttons should have exactly one
> > option
> > chosen at all times, but in this case it doesn't make sense to add a
> > third
> > option of 'None', or have the group default to one option or the other.
> >
> > How should I handle this? Should I bite the bullet and have the options
> > default to one of the options (both options will probably be chosen an
> > equal
> > amount of times, as has been the case in the past)? Or maybe I should go
> > to
> > a drop down list with three options? 1. '-', 2. 'Home', 3. 'Agency'
> >
> >
> > Your feedback is appreciated.
> >
> > Chris.
> >  **
> > 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://webs

[WSG] border order

[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: 

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

Border Order


/* this is the ul */
#navlist {float:left;width:760px;padding:4px 0;margin:0;font: bold 12px
Verdana, sans-serif;background:#EBEBEB url(bottomBorder.gif) no-repeat
bottom;}
#navlist li {display:inline;list-style:none;margin:0;padding:0;}
#navlist li a:link, #navlist li a:visited {color:#737577;padding:3px
0.5em;margin-left:3px;border-bottom:none;text-decoration: none;}
#navlist li a:hover {color:#fff;background:#737577;
border-color:#BCBEC0;}
#navlist li a#current {color:#A11D55;border:1px solid
#BCBEC0;background:#fff;border-bottom:2px solid #fff;}





  Home
  News & Media
  Members
  Products & Services
  About PIR
  FAQ




Mani Sheriar
Sheriar Designs | www.ManiSheriar.com
925|914.0741
 
  



**
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] QueenBee site check please!!!

[Tom Livingston]

On 2/1/05 3:02 PM, "Mani Sheriar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I welcome any feedback.

URL?
-- 
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
Mlinc.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] QeenBee Site Check Please!!! (WITH URL)

[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 http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**

[WSG] QueenBee site check please!!!

[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 | www.ManiSheriar.com
925|914.0741
 
  



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

[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 state of radio 
  buttons. (Maybe OT?)
  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 least one option is 
  selected. CheersMike KearAFP Webworks Pty LtdWindsor, 
  NSW, Australiahttp://afpwebworks.comIndustrial strength coldfusion, 
  .asp, .asp.net, php hosting from A$15/month
  
- Original Message From: 
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgTo: "wsg@webstandardsgroup.org" 
Subject: RE: [WSG] Default state of 
radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)Date: 01/02/05 20:56I think this is like FAQs - my FAQ is never 
there. Likewise, pre-set a controlto option A and I'm equally likely to 
want option B.IMHO pre-setting options for the user (unless they're 
VERY obvious) is likemaking assumptions about them.That said, 
RFC1866 says 'CHECKED' is optional but then says "At all times,exactly 
one of the radio buttons in a set is checked. If none of the 
elements of a set of radio buttons specifies 'CHECKED', 
then the user agentmust check the first radio button of the set 
initially."Does anybody know why one button has to be checked "at 
all times" in acircumstance like Chris referred 
to?ThanksRowanQuoting Iain Gardiner 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:> 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>>> 
-Original Message-> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On> Behalf Of Chris W. 
Parker> Sent: 01 February 2005 19:12> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org> 
Subject: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe 
OT?)>>> 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 radio button is meant to designate what> 
type of> mailing address the customer has provided. Right now I've 
got neither> option> being defaulted to. I know that radio 
buttons should have exactly one> option> chosen at all times, 
but in this case it doesn't make sense to add a> third> option 
of 'None', or have the group default to one option or the 
other.>> How should I handle this? Should I bite the bullet 
and have the options> default to one of the options (both options 
will probably be chosen an> equal> amount of times, as has 
been the case in the past)? Or maybe I should go> to> a drop 
down list with three options? 1. '-', 2. 'Home', 3. 
'Agency'>>> Your feedback is 
appreciated.>> Chris.> 
 **> 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.cfmfor 
some hints on posting to the list & getting 
help**Message 
  sent using UebiMiau 
  2.7.2** 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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 least one option is
selected. CheersMike KearAFP Webworks Pty
LtdWindsor, NSW, Australiahttp://afpwebworks.comIndustrial
strength coldfusion, .asp, .asp.net, php hosting from A$15/month

- Original Message From:
wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgTo: "wsg@webstandardsgroup.org"
Subject: RE: [WSG] Default state of
radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)Date: 01/02/05 20:56I think this is like FAQs - my FAQ is never
there. Likewise, pre-set a controlto option A and I'm equally likely to
want option B.IMHO pre-setting options for the user (unless they're
VERY obvious) is likemaking assumptions about them.That said,
RFC1866 says 'CHECKED' is optional but then says "At all times,exactly
one of the radio buttons in a set is checked. If none of the
elements of a set of radio buttons specifies 'CHECKED',
then the user agentmust check the first radio button of the set
initially."Does anybody know why one button has to be checked "at
all times" in acircumstance like Chris referred
to?ThanksRowanQuoting Iain Gardiner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:> 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>>>
-Original Message-> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On> Behalf Of Chris W.
Parker> Sent: 01 February 2005 19:12> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
Subject: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe
OT?)>>> 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 radio button is meant to designate what>
type of> mailing address the customer has provided. Right now I've
got neither> option> being defaulted to. I know that radio
buttons should have exactly one> option> chosen at all times,
but in this case it doesn't make sense to add a> third> option
of 'None', or have the group default to one option or the
other.>> How should I handle this? Should I bite the bullet
and have the options> default to one of the options (both options
will probably be chosen an> equal> amount of times, as has
been the case in the past)? Or maybe I should go> to> a drop
down list with three options? 1. '-', 2. 'Home', 3.
'Agency'>>> Your feedback is
appreciated.>> Chris.>
 **> 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.cfmfor
some hints on posting to the list & getting
help**


Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2


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

[Pringle, Ron]

> Does anybody know why one button has to be checked "at all 
> times" in a 
> circumstance like Chris referred to?
> 
> Thanks
> Rowan

Radio Buttons are meant to be either/or which implies that there will be a
value assigned to them in every instance.

If the value is optional, then you should use check boxes.

Regards,
Ron 
**
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] standards in local government

[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

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

[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 says "At all times, 
exactly one of the radio buttons in a set is checked. If none of the  
elements of a set of radio buttons specifies 'CHECKED', then the user agent 
must check the first radio button of the set initially."

Does anybody know why one button has to be checked "at all times" in a 
circumstance like Chris referred to?

Thanks
Rowan



Quoting Iain Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> 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
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of Chris W. Parker
> Sent: 01 February 2005 19:12
> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
> Subject: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)
> 
> 
> 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 radio button is meant to designate what
> type of
> mailing address the customer has provided. Right now I've got neither
> option
> being defaulted to. I know that radio buttons should have exactly one
> option
> chosen at all times, but in this case it doesn't make sense to add a
> third
> option of 'None', or have the group default to one option or the other.
> 
> How should I handle this? Should I bite the bullet and have the options
> default to one of the options (both options will probably be chosen an
> equal
> amount of times, as has been the case in the past)? Or maybe I should go
> to
> a drop down list with three options? 1. '-', 2. 'Home', 3. 'Agency'
> 
> 
> Your feedback is appreciated.
> 
> Chris.
>  **
> 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] Re: MSN redesign

[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
in the OS, just like they always do. No sense in playing fair now...

wayne

--
Wayne Godfrey
President, Creative Director
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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[Chris W. Parker]

Iain Gardiner 
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
> most likely option.

By mailing address I meant: postal mail. And by "both options will
probably be chosen an equal amount of times, as has been the case in the
past" I meant: Neither option is generally chosen more than the other.



Chris.
**
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] Re: MSN redesign

[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 even I can do better than that.  It is nice to see that they are
> > using standards though, not enough sites do that.
> 
> They are not using real standards:
> 
> http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.msn.com/
> http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2&warning=2&uri=http
> %3A//www.msn.com/
> 
>  --
> Raffaella Biscuso
> **
> The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> 
>  See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>  for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> **
> 
> 


-- 
Anthony Timberlake
Owner - StaticHost Internet Services
http://www.statichost.co.uk
http://www.spikeradio.org
**
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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Chris W. Parker
Sent: 01 February 2005 19:12
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)


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 radio button is meant to designate what type of
mailing address the customer has provided. Right now I've got neither option
being defaulted to. I know that radio buttons should have exactly one option
chosen at all times, but in this case it doesn't make sense to add a third
option of 'None', or have the group default to one option or the other.

How should I handle this? Should I bite the bullet and have the options
default to one of the options (both options will probably be chosen an equal
amount of times, as has been the case in the past)? Or maybe I should go to
a drop down list with three options? 1. '-', 2. 'Home', 3. 'Agency'


Your feedback is appreciated.

Chris.
**
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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 February 2005 19:12
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)


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 radio button is meant to designate what type of
mailing address the customer has provided. Right now I've got neither option
being defaulted to. I know that radio buttons should have exactly one option
chosen at all times, but in this case it doesn't make sense to add a third
option of 'None', or have the group default to one option or the other.

How should I handle this? Should I bite the bullet and have the options
default to one of the options (both options will probably be chosen an equal
amount of times, as has been the case in the past)? Or maybe I should go to
a drop down list with three options? 1. '-', 2. 'Home', 3. 'Agency'


Your feedback is appreciated.

Chris.
**
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] Default state of radio buttons. (Maybe OT?)

[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 radio button is meant to designate
what type of mailing address the customer has provided. Right now I've
got neither option being defaulted to. I know that radio buttons should
have exactly one option chosen at all times, but in this case it doesn't
make sense to add a third option of 'None', or have the group default to
one option or the other.

How should I handle this? Should I bite the bullet and have the options
default to one of the options (both options will probably be chosen an
equal amount of times, as has been the case in the past)? Or maybe I
should go to a drop down list with three options? 1. '-', 2. 'Home', 3.
'Agency'


Your feedback is appreciated.

Chris.
**
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] Re: MSN redesign

[Raffaella Biscuso]

Anthony Timberlake Scrive: 

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.
They are not using real standards: 

http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&uri=http%3A//www.msn.com/
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css2&warning=2&uri=http 
%3A//www.msn.com/ 

--
Raffaella Biscuso
**
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] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[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 only, so most important headers go at the top then grade downwards with less important headers always being lower down =   ..etc =


Or



=
2) With the exception of h1 used once, can you set the headers out loosely in the same tree structure lists are set out in? So h3 would only be used "as a child" (but not nested within) of an h2, h4 as a child of h3 etc? Then reading downwards through the headers, you're allowed to move backwards say from an h3, back to an h2? I'm not sure how to explain my question, but basically I think, can you define tree structures with headers? or do they have to be used in an ordered numerical hierarchy?

=

    
        
        
    
        
        
            
            
    

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

[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 what I think is the best
feature of this menu re: accessibility.
This CSS menu allows the use of "tabs" images as background-images for the
list items, so it is possible to increase or decrease text-size and have the
Tabs expand or contract to always fit the size of the navigation links.

Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com | CSS-P Templates compatible NN4.7

-
| CSS Popups | CSS Tabs | CSS Dropdown Menus | Articles and Tutorials |

**
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] avoid "Skip" link in search results?

[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 header.

Also last time this was brought up, someone mentioned putting the 
navigation LAST>
and Absolute positioning it to the top...?
I dont remember who said that.

The problem you are mentioning shoudlnt be a problem with any of the 
more advanced search engines, because they show the snippet that matches 
the search result...
So unless they searched for Skip To Content.
They wont see that little snippet.

Cheers
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 readers.

Do you know a good way to place this link?

--

Chris Stratford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neester.com


--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.3 - Release Date: 31/01/2005
**
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] avoid "Skip" link in search results?

[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 readers.

Do you know a good way to place this link?
I put the skip link after the tagline if needed.
 Company Name - Tagline
 Skip to content.
Tonico
**
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] avoid "Skip" link in search results?

[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 a good way to place this link?
--
regards, Kornel Lesiński
**
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] MSN redesign

[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:
> 
> 
>  Nice of them to continue support for Mac IE.
> 
> 
> mike 2k:)2
> 
> 
>   e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   site: http://www.webSemantics.co.uk
> 
> 
> **
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
> are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
> the system manager.
> This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
> MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
> www.mimesweeper.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
> **
> 
> 


-- 
Anthony Timberlake
Owner - StaticHost Internet Services
http://www.statichost.co.uk
http://www.spikeradio.org
**
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] MSN redesign

[Mike Foskett]

  Nice of them to continue support for Mac IE.




mike 2k:)2
 

   e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
   site: http://www.webSemantics.co.uk

 


**
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
www.mimesweeper.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] Standards?

[Juli Waddell]

Return Receipt
   
Your  RE: [WSG] Standards? 
document   
:  
   
was   Juli Waddell/OTPPB   
received   
by:
   
at:   02/01/2005 08:33:40 AM   
   




**
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] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[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 of h1 used once, can you set the headers out 
> loosely in the same tree structure lists are set out in?

This is the way I use it.
I think option 1) would be very inefficient - documents just aren't
structured like that.

warmly,
Lea
--
**

Or you could refer to the specs (mostly to restate the issue not resolve
it):

"A heading element briefly describes the topic of the section it introduces.
Heading information may be used by user agents, for example, to construct a
table of contents for a document automatically."

And just to interject an element of contention there is this as well:

"Numbered sections and references
HTML does not itself cause section numbers to be generated from headings.
This facility may be offered by user agents, however. Soon, style sheet
languages such as CSS will allow authors to control the generation of
section numbers (handy for forward references in printed documents, as in
"See section 7.2").

Some people consider skipping heading levels to be bad practice. They accept
H1 H2 H1 while they do not accept H1 H3 H1 since the heading level H2 is
skipped."


The discussion centers around whether or not each page should have an h1,
can there be more than one h1 per page, and should skipping be tolerated?
It's a fun Gordian knot.

drew
**
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] MSN redesign

[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


web: http://www.catics.com/  |  http://www.freelancecontractors.com
tel: + 27 21 982 7805



>>Anybody else notice that MSN.com now uses CSS? 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.2 - Release Date: 2005/01/28
 

**
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] Standards?

[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. (that's for  
small/simple sites, of course)
On large sites this is very important.
See "Throwing tables out of the window" on stopdesign.net
or if you have cheap hosting and get slashdotted, you'd survive a little  
longer ;D

- Improve User Experience
How?  Speed?   Broadband again - makes it MUCH less of an issue.
But still smaller pages seem to be more responsive.
Even on broadband I can see the difference, especially when table-based
layouts "jump" while loading.
Various sorces say that broadband users are only 30-50% of net population.
--
regards, Kornel Lesiński
**
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] Standards?

[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 enough yours to give her a big bill. Each to their own
:)

> 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. (that's for small/simple sites,
> of course)

You haven't used dial up in a while yet have you? What percentage of
your users would you say are on broadband vs dial up at the moment?
And in two years?

> > - Improve User Experience
>
> How?  Speed?   Broadband again - makes it MUCH less of an issue.

No I think this is talking about general usability improvements. Case
in point - today I was sitting in a meeting room, with the sun
streaming in, demoing an app on a projector to some collegues - I
couldn't read the stuff up on the screen properly so I bumped the font
size - everything still looked & worked ok. The sites I was building 3
years ago were not that flexible.


> Turning that on it's head, what's left for a client to get excited about?

A lot IMHO.


> Yeah, absolutely.  That's the bottom line. Just thought I'd share the
> conversation for interest/provocation.

No worries mate - enjoy a good civil arguement (especially when I'm right :)

-- 
Mark Stanton 
Gruden Pty Ltd 
http://www.gruden.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] MSN redesign

[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 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 that CSS (and standards in general) is on the rise, and 
something that is to be encouraged in hiring a web desginer.
**
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] IE layout issues

[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 clickable.

(3) Links in the footer are almost invisible. Also, they should change
in color, or background, or underline when hovered over.

(4) Default font is quite small. Difficult to read. On Home page you
have about 1/3 of the screen empty. There is plenty of space to make
font bigger.

Cheers, Irina.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

On Tue, 01 Feb 2005 18:08:16 +1300, Darren Wood
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello list-o-geeks,
> 
> I've recently designed (and partially built) an online store. Its in its
> 'soft launch' phase as there are some issues with IE.
> 
> None of the developers (including me) have a windows machine available
> to test on IE, etc...
> 
> Would you guys mind having a look at http://champion.net.nz and let me
> know of any massive differences between firefox and IE (possible
> solutions would be a god-send!)
> 
> The style sheet I'm worrying about is: http://champion.net.nz/default.css
> 
> Thanks in advance.
> 
> Darren
> 
> ps - i'm aware of actual bugs in the cart/store etc.  Those are being
> sorted before the css issues.
> 
> pps - i'm lazy, I know...
> **
> 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] MSN redesign

[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 that CSS (and standards in general) is on the rise, and 
something that is to be encouraged in hiring a web desginer.
--

~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] Standards?

[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

> - 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. (that's for small/simple sites,
of course)

> - Improve User Experience

How?  Speed?   Broadband again - makes it MUCH less of an issue.


> Whats there for a client not to like?

Turning that on it's head, what's left for a client to get excited about?

> I think we probably agree here - the technical detail of hows it done
> is your problem, not theirs. They just want to know about the end
> result in practical terms they can understand.

Yeah, absolutely.  That's the bottom line. Just thought I'd share the
conversation for interest/provocation.

Regards,

Bob McClelland,
Cornwall (U.K.)
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk

**
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] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[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 clean and structured.

Thats what i think anyway :)

On 01/02/2005, at 8:11 PM, 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!

Jamie 

Is it... 
= 
1) All headers must be used in order only, so most important headers go at the top then grade downwards with less important headers always being lower down

= 
 
 
 
 
 
 
..etc 
= 



Or 



= 
2) With the exception of h1 used once, can you set the headers out loosely in the same tree structure lists are set out in? So h3 would only be used "as a child" (but not nested within) of an h2, h4 as a child of h3 etc? Then reading downwards through the headers, you're allowed to move backwards say from an h3, back to an h2? I'm not sure how to explain my question, but basically I think, can you define tree structures with headers? or do they have to be used in an ordered numerical hierarchy?

= 
 
     
         
         
     
         
         
             
             
     

Re: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[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 main h1.  Each h3 belongs to a 
sub-sub-section under the h2.  And so on.  You can have multiple 
h2's each with multiple h3's etc.

That means...  Your second version.
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
**
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] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[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
**
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] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[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 tags should "nest" or "be
ordered", for it depends completely on how you've laid out your
content.

My 2 bob's worth, anyway! ;-)


On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 12:11:57 -, Jamie Mason
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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! 
> 
> Jamie 
> 
> Is it... 
> = 
> 1) All headers must be used in order only, so most important headers go at
> the top then grade downwards with less important headers always being lower
> down 
> 
> = 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> ..etc 
> = 
>  
> 
> Or 
>  
> 
> = 
> 2) With the exception of h1 used once, can you set the headers out loosely
> in the same tree structure lists are set out in? So h3 would only be used
> "as a child" (but not nested within) of an h2, h4 as a child of h3 etc? Then
> reading downwards through the headers, you're allowed to move backwards say
> from an h3, back to an h2? I'm not sure how to explain my question, but
> basically I think, can you define tree structures with headers? or do they
> have to be used in an ordered numerical hierarchy? 
> 
> = 
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  


-- 
Jason Foss
http://www.almost-anything.com.au
http://www.waterfallweb.net
Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
North Rockhampton, Queensland, 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
**

Re: [WSG] Standards?

[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 need to
> explain this to a client than an electrican needs to explain to me the
> standards they work to. I assume they are there somewhere, and I expect
> they will work to them.
> 
> Mike

I'd agree with this. Standards and Best Practices are important - but
if it's the only thing you can talk to your client about you might be
in a bit of trouble. Clients are interested in results, in ROI and the
like. Sure, you can mention standards-complientness (hey! new word)
but if your whole pitch revolves around standards your client just
won't be that interested.


-- 
Jason Foss
http://www.almost-anything.com.au
http://www.waterfallweb.net
Windows Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
North Rockhampton, Queensland, 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
**

Re: [WSG] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[Lea de Groot]

On Tue, 1 Feb 2005 12:11:57 -, Jamie Mason wrote:
> 2) With the exception of h1 used once, can you set the headers out loosely
> in the same tree structure lists are set out in?

This is the way I use it.
I think option 1) would be very inefficient - documents just aren't 
structured like that.

warmly,
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] Quick h1,h2 etc question

[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 only, so most important headers go at the top then grade downwards with less important headers always being lower down

=






..etc
=



Or



=
2) With the exception of h1 used once, can you set the headers out loosely in the same tree structure lists are set out in? So h3 would only be used "as a child" (but not nested within) of an h2, h4 as a child of h3 etc? Then reading downwards through the headers, you're allowed to move backwards say from an h3, back to an h2? I'm not sure how to explain my question, but basically I think, can you define tree structures with headers? or do they have to be used in an ordered numerical hierarchy?

=

    
        
        
    
        
        
            
            
    

Re: [WSG] Standards?

[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 for client (sorry Russ) and I don't think its meant to be.
Its aimed at us developers.

Read that Adaptive Path article - or just read the headings:

- Speed Development
- Simplify Maintenance, Increase Opportunity
- Open Up Access Options
- Reduce Bandwidth Costs
- Improve User Experience

Whats there for a client not to like? 

I think we probably agree here - the technical detail of hows it done
is your problem, not theirs. They just want to know about the end
result in practical terms they can understand.

-- 
Mark Stanton 
Gruden Pty Ltd 
http://www.gruden.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] Standards?

[Prabhath Sirisena]

Mike, 

The difference between web designers' standards and electricians'
standards is that we are in an industry where non-compliance is the
norm. In such a situation, it is benificial to both us and the client
to explain our approach to web design, and the importance of adhering
to the standards.

Prabhath Sirisena
www.vesess.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] Standards?

[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 advantage -
after all, my competitor's sites may well be outdated, but they do actually
WORK, so my customers don't see any benefit."

The advantages are geared towards both the business-owner and the user:
- lower bandwidth intensive/cheaper to host (probably not an issue for
your particular client) and also faster-loading for the end user
- easier to update/redesign in the future
- more accessible (presumably, depending on what was replaced)
- *perhaps* more search engine friendly (again, depends what was replaced)
- forwards-compatible, browser-wise
- available to a wider audience of browser-users
Jacobus van Niekerk wrote:
> Here is some comments she might like ;)
>
> http://www.adaptivepath.com/publications/essays/archives/000266.php
>
> http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/benefits/
Ok - playing devil's advocate a bit :)
I think it's pretty much a waste of time explaining standards and 
arguing standards to someone like your client. And that's not meant as a 
put-down of them. Try it - watch their eyes glaze as you show how the 
competitors' sites don't validate.

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 need to 
explain this to a client than an electrican needs to explain to me the 
standards they work to. I assume they are there somewhere, and I expect 
they will work to them.

Mike
**
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] Standards?

[Prabhath Sirisena]

Of course, we've always understood the importance of "Making A
Commercial Case for Adopting Web Standards" ;-)

http://www.maccaws.org/kit/primer/

Prabhath Sirisena
www.vesess.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] Standards?

[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/  |  http://www.freelancecontractors.com
tel: + 27 21 982 7805



This e-mail message is confidential and intended solely for the person to
whom or the entity to which it is addressed. All the contents and any
attachments remain the property of Catics Ltd unless so stated. If you are
not the intended recipient, you are prohibited from reading, copying, using
or disclosing this message to others. If you received this message in error,
please notify the sender immediately by replying to this e-mail or by
telephoning +27 21 9827805 and thereafter delete the message. Catics Ltd
does not accept liability for any personal views expressed in this message.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of designer
Sent: 01 February 2005 11:58 AM
To: webstandards group
Subject: [WSG] Standards?

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 frames). I have kept a
couple of 'naughty' tables (as yet) because I simply haven't managed to
convert to a stable/reliable alternative, but overall I was quite pleased
with it.

Anyway, as I had recently installed Firefox on the PC's in the office of
this holiday business, I decided to show the owner how wonderful the update
was [ :-) ]. I explained about standards to this (non-technical) person and,
using  Firefox developer's toolbar, I showed her the abysmal results of
validating the sites of her competitors, and she was obviously pleased. She
seemed to understand the basis of 'standards', but after a few minutes
reflection she said:

"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, my competitor's sites may well be outdated, but they do actually
WORK, so my customers don't see any benefit."

Thought I'd pass this on . . .

:-)

Bob McClelland,
Cornwall (U.K.)
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk

**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.2 - Release Date: 2005/01/28
 

**
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] Standards?

[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, my competitor's sites may well be outdated, but they do actually
> WORK, so my customers don't see any benefit."

The advantages are geared towards both the business-owner and the user:
- lower bandwidth intensive/cheaper to host (probably not an issue for
your particular client) and also faster-loading for the end user
- easier to update/redesign in the future
- more accessible (presumably, depending on what was replaced)
- *perhaps* more search engine friendly (again, depends what was replaced)
- forwards-compatible, browser-wise
- available to a wider audience of browser-users

What's not to like? :)

Zeldman's book talks about each of these ideas at length.

-- 
Kay Smoljak
http://kay.smoljak.com/
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**

RE: [WSG] Standards?

[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 http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/index.html. There's a 
very good and simple exposition of why using standards are a good thing 
(specially a part "Go get your boss", that gives you the right arguments to 
explain that to your bosses).

Good luck!
Ge Ricci


-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la
part de designer
Envoyé : mardi 1 février 2005 10:58
À : webstandards group
Objet : [WSG] Standards?


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 frames). I have kept a
couple of 'naughty' tables (as yet) because I simply haven't managed to
convert to a stable/reliable alternative, but overall I was quite pleased
with it.

Anyway, as I had recently installed Firefox on the PC's in the office of
this holiday business, I decided to show the owner how wonderful the update
was [ :-) ]. I explained about standards to this (non-technical) person and,
using  Firefox developer's toolbar, I showed her the abysmal results of
validating the sites of her competitors, and she was obviously pleased. She
seemed to understand the basis of 'standards', but after a few minutes
reflection she said:

"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, my competitor's sites may well be outdated, but they do actually
WORK, so my customers don't see any benefit."

Thought I'd pass this on . . .

:-)

Bob McClelland,
Cornwall (U.K.)
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk

**
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] IE6- XML CSS white-space pre not honored

[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 not honored
  BBsound wrote:
  



IE6 doesn't honor the CSS {white-space: pre;} 
as it does with HTML.
 
Would any body have a work 
  around?I have had similar unpredictable results 
  with white space in CSS and IE rendering. One work around is to pretty print 
  (new lines and indent) your source (X)HTML as opposed to removing white space 
  in the source. best,Iva.

[WSG] Standards?

[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 frames). I have kept a
couple of 'naughty' tables (as yet) because I simply haven't managed to
convert to a stable/reliable alternative, but overall I was quite pleased
with it.

Anyway, as I had recently installed Firefox on the PC's in the office of
this holiday business, I decided to show the owner how wonderful the update
was [ :-) ]. I explained about standards to this (non-technical) person and,
using  Firefox developer's toolbar, I showed her the abysmal results of
validating the sites of her competitors, and she was obviously pleased. She
seemed to understand the basis of 'standards', but after a few minutes
reflection she said:

"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, my competitor's sites may well be outdated, but they do actually
WORK, so my customers don't see any benefit."

Thought I'd pass this on . . .

:-)

Bob McClelland,
Cornwall (U.K.)
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk

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

[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
(http://css.maxdesign.com.au/listamatic2/horizontal02.htm) and some
basic floats.

For my frustration I changed some floats to basic 2x2 table to find
the error, but still the error remains.

The url to project and CSS can be found via the screenshots

All help is appreciated :)

Yours, Antti Tuppurainen
System Specialist, Timecan Finland | http://www.timecan.fi
**
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] newbie with popup menus question

[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,
accessibility-wise and from a web standards perspective. I would
highly recommend checking out the Suckerfish menus -
http://www.htmldog.com/articles/suckerfish/dropdowns/ - they're
simple, lightweight, search engine friendly and all round fantastic.

-- 
Kay Smoljak
http://kay.smoljak.com/
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**