[WSG] Website Review (prose.code215)
Hello, I've had some free time over the past couple of days, so I thought why not make a simple website, with a minimalistic design, just for kicks. And I must say, I like the results (www.prose.code215.com). I've tested it on a few browsers: Internet Explorer 6, Opera 6, Firefox 1, Netscape 7, Lynx Text Browser (all on Windows), and all show it perfectly. I can't really find any bugs, but i'm sure there are some when using a Mac. What do you think? -- Johnno Shadbolt Web Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED], www.code215.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] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML
G'day 1. Technical -- there will be times when the validator shows errors. > 2. Marketing -- people consider a document validates or doesn't. It's not only people... "Almost valid" documents will most likely not display if the document in question is served as "application/xhtml+xml". Therefore, use valid attributes or extract the info you need (e.g. required fields) from values stored in hidden fields. I like Gez's suggestion to use classes. Using a custom DTD is *in my opinion* a last resort and it may not work reliably ion some browsers (haven't tested that - I always use the standard DTDs). Still, it would be nice to have additional input types, like "integer", "email" or "currency", to go along with the existing types. 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] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 03:46:21 +, Gez Lemon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Didn't mean to leave the required attribute in, sorry :-) Cheers, Gez _ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.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] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML
On Sun, 20 Mar 2005 15:04:23 +1200, Sigurd Magnusson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Over the past few years, we have built up a library of rather useful > Javascript libraries that we thought were a very elegant solution for adding > behaviour to menu systems and forms. These have been used on dozens of > websites, and are going to be offered to webdesigners' use. > > For example, we built some javascript which could be used by including a > single external javascript file, and when the page loaded, it would > efficiently look through the the DOM (document object model) for fields like > this: > > /> > > It would then automatically add javascript events to ensure when the form > was clicked, that this text field contained a value, and that this value > followed the [EMAIL PROTECTED] format. One option would be to use the class attribute instead of making one up, as you would still have access to it through scripting: As the class attribute can take more than one value, it wouldn't clash with existing classes. Best regards, Gez _ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.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] Dilemma: Useful, additional attributes in elements, invalidating HTML
This is a split technical/marketing dilemma for people to ponder... Over the past few years, we have built up a library of rather useful Javascript libraries that we thought were a very elegant solution for adding behaviour to menu systems and forms. These have been used on dozens of websites, and are going to be offered to webdesigners' use. For example, we built some javascript which could be used by including a single external javascript file, and when the page loaded, it would efficiently look through the the DOM (document object model) for fields like this: It would then automatically add javascript events to ensure when the form was clicked, that this text field contained a value, and that this value followed the [EMAIL PROTECTED] format. We had a number of different types of validation; for example; numeric, which contained other options such as minimum/maximum numeric values. Clever, we thought -- very easy to implement, reliable, cross-platform tested, et al. We looked to the XForms' spec in coming up with conventions, so they could become a standard in time. Supposedly, somewhere it was once mentioned that any unknown attribute it left ignored by a browser, so we utilised that feature, knowing that many scripts around the net use the DOM in this way. Of course, we strike a major problem when we attempt to validate such HTML; these attributes are not known, and show as failures. Doh! So, as I see it, there are two problems; 1. Technical -- there will be times when the validator shows errors. This may lead to us letting in other errors--its much easier to go through pages and check they are 100% correct instead of checking they are nearly correct, bar some permissble exceptions. 2. Marketing -- people consider a document validates or doesn't. If you say "Well, it validates, except for some things where we've ..." people will stop listening and just summarise it as "It doesn't validate". This dilutes our ability to promote that sites we create validate, and also diluates our crusade to encourage others to build valid sites. I'm interested to know what your views on how important these concerns seem to you (especially in terms of marketing? Would you, as a webdesigner, use scripts like this, knowing they would invalidate your code, but make certain areas of development way easier?) Possible solutions: 1. Create a custom DTD that takes the DOCTYPE of XHTML1.1 and adds the extra attributes such as 'required' to the 'input' element. Alistapart has a recent article on this. Basically, browser's ignore them, but will be in standards mode, and frustratingly, the W3C Validator doesn't interpret them, so we'd have to promote that such sites don't validate with that validator (but you can use an alternative validator, sigh). This is a possible solution with XHTML 1.1, especially in time to come, but a solution to apply to XHTML 1.0 or even old HTML 4.01 sites would be useful. I find this to be a good 'technical' solution, but means we have a battle every time we explain the "do you validate?" topic. 2. Use a different style for attributes. I was reading that you could include them as XML attributes, e.g. But I haven't seen much information. Doesn't anyone know if this approach would be suitable (i.e. that browsers support it, the DOM can be used to retrieve values, the W3C validator would silently pass over them, etc). I presume you could only put these in with XHTML 1.0/1.1 documents, and that there is no way to put in extra attributes into HTML 4.01. Has anyone got some resources on the purpose or usage of XML attributes? 3. Leave it as it, and just have pages with forms fail on these items ... 4. Some jewel that is only thought up by mailing the WSG :) Cheers for taking your time to mull over this one :) Siggy ** 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] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button?
Sigurd Magnusson wrote: One other note--does having an initial value in the text field aid blind readers? Is it advocated by WAI or aid WCAG rules? (I would express a view that it helps visual users). Any initial value forces users to clear the input first before being able to input their own data. Using javascript to clear the field onfocus is not the solution, as the problem still persists for users without javascript. The opposite approach is, however, quite useful: don't have initial values, then prepopulate the fields (plus add the onfocus behaviour mentioned above). I made a proof of concept ages ago...not perfect, but should give you an idea: http://www.splintered.co.uk/experiments/22/ Doing this (i.e. leaving the value empty) will be flagged up as an error by dumb validators such as Bobby, as you're breaking the letter of WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 10.4 http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#tech-place-holders "Until user agents handle empty controls correctly, include default, place-holding characters in edit boxes and text areas." Key here, however, is "until user agents". I have spoken in person to people from the W3C WAI EO (education and outreach) initiative, and they agree that this guideline is now irrelevant. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button?
Cheers - had wondered about using display:none, but always feel a little annoyed there aren't better ways; it surprises me that an alt tag on the is insufficient. One other note--does having an initial value in the text field aid blind readers? Is it advocated by WAI or aid WCAG rules? (I would express a view that it helps visual users). Sig - Original Message - From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:55 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button? Sigurd Magnusson wrote: Rule: 12.4.1 - Identify all non-hidden INPUT elements that do not have an explicit LABEL association. Failure - INPUT Element, of Type TEXT, at Line: 109, Column: 30 in FORM Element at Line: 108, Column: 2 I could put the label around the image button, or have a blank one, but this sort of defeats the purpose in my opinion... ideas? Firstly: submit buttons and image button do not need an additional label: for submit buttons, the value itself acts as a label; for images, the ALT attribute takes that role. So your only real problem here is the text input (as the above error message suggests). Search You can then use CSS to hide the label, if you want...and this is one of those rare cases where even if you use display:none, screenreaders will still "see" the label (due to its explicit tie to the input field). -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button?
Cheers - had wondered about using display:none, but always feel a little annoyed there aren't better ways; it surprises me that an alt tag on the is insufficient. One other note--does having an initial value in the text field aid blind readers? Is it advocated by WAI or aid WCAG rules? (I would express a view that it helps visual users). Sig - Original Message - From: "Patrick H. Lauke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 11:55 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button? Sigurd Magnusson wrote: Rule: 12.4.1 - Identify all non-hidden INPUT elements that do not have an explicit LABEL association. Failure - INPUT Element, of Type TEXT, at Line: 109, Column: 30 in FORM Element at Line: 108, Column: 2 I could put the label around the image button, or have a blank one, but this sort of defeats the purpose in my opinion... ideas? Firstly: submit buttons and image button do not need an additional label: for submit buttons, the value itself acts as a label; for images, the ALT attribute takes that role. So your only real problem here is the text input (as the above error message suggests). Search You can then use CSS to hide the label, if you want...and this is one of those rare cases where even if you use display:none, screenreaders will still "see" the label (due to its explicit tie to the input field). -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Change to application/xhtml+xml breaks background colour.
It's okay. I've fixed it. I was having an issue with overflow. Thanks again, didn't know that detail about xhtml :) - Original Message - From: Michael Dale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 12:35:09 +1100 Subject: Re: [WSG] Change to application/xhtml+xml breaks background colour. > Thanks for that, > > Is is possible to wrap everything in a DIV tag to do this? Because my current > problem is that most of my other > div tags have their own background colour and I cannot apply my body > background > to them. > > - Original Message - > From: Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org > Sent: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 12:23:07 +1100 > Subject: Re: [WSG] Change to application/xhtml+xml breaks background colour. > > > > Michael Dale wrote: > > > I've just decided to output application/xhtml+xml to browsers that support > it > > (Mozilla, firefox etc). Now the site > > > is XHTML 1.1 and valid so that is all good. But the problem I am seeing is > > that the background colour doesn't cover the > > > whole page. > > > > > Now this only happens when I output application/xhtml+xml. Go have a look > > > in > > IE (which gets text/html), its fine. > > > > in XHTML, the BODY element isn't "magic" anymore. It does not cover the > > entire browser viewport, but only stretches as far as its content (which > > is then compounded if you're floating or otherwise removing elements > > from the natural flow). > > > > The solution: apply your background colours and/or images to the HTML > > element instead of the BODY element. > > > > -- > > Patrick H. Lauke > > _ > > re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively > > [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] > > www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk > > http://redux.deviantart.com > > > > ** > > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > > ** > > > > > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > ** 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] Change to application/xhtml+xml breaks background colour.
Thanks for that, Is is possible to wrap everything in a DIV tag to do this? Because my current problem is that most of my other div tags have their own background colour and I cannot apply my body background to them. - Original Message - From: Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Sun, 20 Mar 2005 12:23:07 +1100 Subject: Re: [WSG] Change to application/xhtml+xml breaks background colour. > Michael Dale wrote: > > I've just decided to output application/xhtml+xml to browsers that support > > it > (Mozilla, firefox etc). Now the site > > is XHTML 1.1 and valid so that is all good. But the problem I am seeing is > that the background colour doesn't cover the > > whole page. > > > Now this only happens when I output application/xhtml+xml. Go have a look in > IE (which gets text/html), its fine. > > in XHTML, the BODY element isn't "magic" anymore. It does not cover the > entire browser viewport, but only stretches as far as its content (which > is then compounded if you're floating or otherwise removing elements > from the natural flow). > > The solution: apply your background colours and/or images to the HTML > element instead of the BODY element. > > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > _ > re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively > [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] > www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk > http://redux.deviantart.com > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Change to application/xhtml+xml breaks background colour.
Michael Dale wrote: I've just decided to output application/xhtml+xml to browsers that support it (Mozilla, firefox etc). Now the site is XHTML 1.1 and valid so that is all good. But the problem I am seeing is that the background colour doesn't cover the whole page. Now this only happens when I output application/xhtml+xml. Go have a look in IE (which gets text/html), its fine. in XHTML, the BODY element isn't "magic" anymore. It does not cover the entire browser viewport, but only stretches as far as its content (which is then compounded if you're floating or otherwise removing elements from the natural flow). The solution: apply your background colours and/or images to the HTML element instead of the BODY element. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] NS4 spacing & borders
> but a useful one to know for sure. Since we're talking about NN4... Another interesting thing about this browser is the way it handles the noscript tag. In NN4, a simple noscript tags pair can break apart a whole CSS layout; at other times, it can be a great way to clear floats. Once a designer knows about these things (as using a clear.gif to set backgrounds color) it becomes much easier to support this browser. Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.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] Change to application/xhtml+xml breaks background colour.
Hey everyone, I've just decided to output application/xhtml+xml to browsers that support it (Mozilla, firefox etc). Now the site is XHTML 1.1 and valid so that is all good. But the problem I am seeing is that the background colour doesn't cover the whole page. Here is a linky to my site: http://www.bluetrait.com/ See the blue behind the header? That should be the background colour for the whole site. Now this only happens when I output application/xhtml+xml. Go have a look in IE (which gets text/html), its fine. If you look at the source the background colour stops as soon as it hits the first DIV tag. So any ideas? Thanks heap, Michael Dale. ** 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] NS4 spacing & borders
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 22:17:35 -, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thierry Koblentz wrote: (I believe NN4 doesn't do CSS without JS enabled anyway): Excellent...I wasn't aware of that one; as it sounded a bit strange, I proceeded to test it, and indeed you're right. It must be a bug (as the options for javascript and styles should be completely separate), but a useful one to know for sure. It's not a bug, it's a feature :) Netscape doesn't have "native" CSS support. It internally converts CSS to JSSS. -- 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] Bullets not showing up in Firefox/Opera
I see the foollowing two lines:
#navbox ul, li{display:block;margin:0;padding:0 0 0 0;}
and
#buttons ul, li{display:block;margin:0;padding:0 0 0 0;}
Both do not declare (#navbox ul) And (#navbox li),
instead (#navbox ul) And (li)
If I kill both 'li' or change them to the undefined 'lis', the error
is away.
Use instead:
#navbox ul, #navbox li{display:block;margin:0;padding:0 0 0 0;}
and
#buttons ul {display:block;margin:0;padding:0 0 0 0;}
#buttons li {display:block; margin-left:1em;padding:0;}
On my own domain, the margin:0;padding:0 also didn't work.
Best Regards
Juergen Auer
**
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] CSS validator says " "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed."
I have valid XHTML
http://idealcouple.com/
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2F
...
Please, validate your XML document first!
Line 2
Column 6
The processing instruction target matching "[xX][mM][lL]" is not
allowed.
...
I have both XHTML and CSS valid, but CSS Validator dont think so :(
Whats my
problem?
...
We use PHP to render XML prolog and DOCTYPE, and we use PHP sessions.
XHTML served as text/html is valid with the prologue optional.
XML documents must have the prologue.
Your CSS validation error claims that you should validate your XML
document. Obviously, then, it believes your *xml* is flawed, even if
your *xhtml* is ok.
The problem is likely a PHP quirk: newlines immediately after closing
PHP compilation markers ("?>") are trimmed. So this code:
Hello,
Bob.
...will output this text:
Hello, Bob.
...and not this:
Hello,
Bob.
Thus, your doctype is on the same line as your prologue, and your
prologue it on the second line when it must be on the first. Hope that
helps.
--
Ben Curtis : webwright
bivia : a personal web studio
http://www.bivia.com/
v : 818 507 6613
**
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] Internationalization and Unicode Conference: Berlin, April 6-8
Unicode, Cultural Diversity and Multilingual Computing http://www.global-conference.com/iuc27/ Berlin, Germany April 6-8, 2005 Program Highlights: == * Multilingual and Multicultural Computing * Computing in the Expanded European Union * Web Internationalization * Localization Technologies, sponsored by TILP (The Institute of Localization Professionals), * Language Support in Francophone Africa NEW!! An in-depth workshop, conducted in French, led by a panel of experts including Donald Osborn on the languages of Francophone Africa. * Other highlights: - Common Locale Data Repository (CLDR) - Internationalized Web Addresses - A progress report on Language Tags - Supplementary characters in Linux - Internationalized mobile applications * Tutorials and implementation support: One day of our highly acclaimed tutorials, including Unicode 4.0, Web internationalization, XML and localization, getting started with ICU, and designing culturally appropriate user interfaces. Register now at http://www.global-conference.com/iuc27/ WHO SHOULD ATTEND? If you have a limited training budget, this is the one Internationalization conference you need. Send staff that are involved in either Unicode-enabling software, or internationalization of software and the Internet, including: managers, software engineers, systems analysts, font designers, graphic designers, content developers, Web designers, Web administrators, system administrators, technical writers, and product marketing personnel. CONFERENCE WEB SITE, PROGRAM and REGISTRATION The Conference Program and Registration form are available at the Conference Web site: http://www.global-conference.com/iuc27/ GLOBAL COMPUTING SHOWCASE Visit the Showcase to find out more about products supporting the Unicode Standard, and products and services that can help you globalize/localize your software, documentation and Internet content. For more information, please see: http://www.global-conference.com/iuc27/showcase.html CONFERENCE VENUE The Conference will take place at the: Crowne Plaza Berlin City Centre Nuernberger Strasse 65 D-10787 Berlin Germany Tel: +49 (0) 30 21 00 70 Fax: +49 (0) 30 21 32 00 9 CONFERENCE MANAGEMENT Global Meeting Services Inc. 8949 Lombard Place, #416 San Diego, CA 92122, USA Tel: +1 858 638 0206 (voice) +1 858 638 0504 (fax) Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] or: [EMAIL PROTECTED] THE UNICODE CONSORTIUM The Unicode Consortium was founded as a non-profit organization in 1991. It is dedicated to the development, maintenance and promotion of The Unicode Standard, a worldwide character encoding. The Unicode Standard encodes the characters of the world's principal scripts and languages, and is code-for-code identical to the international standard ISO/IEC 10646. In addition to cooperating with ISO on the future development of ISO/IEC 10646, the Consortium is responsible for providing character properties and algorithms for use in implementations. Today the membership base of the Unicode Consortium includes major computer corporations, software producers, database vendors, research institutions, international agencies and various user groups. For further information on the Unicode Standard, visit the Unicode Web site at http://www.unicode.org * * * * * Unicode(r) and the Unicode logo are registered trademarks of Unicode, Inc. Used with permission. ** 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] Bullets not showing up in Firefox/Opera
See here - http://69.174.31.29:99/products/vbdoodle/ The bullets are visible in IE, but not in Firefox/Opera. I've never seen this happen before and I am sure I've done something goofy to make them go away, but I am unable to figure out what it is. Perhaps you guys have some suggestions? Thanks! --Zachary -- "The best way to predict the future is to invent it." [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.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] NS4 spacing & borders
Thierry Koblentz wrote: (I believe NN4 doesn't do CSS without JS enabled anyway): Excellent...I wasn't aware of that one; as it sounded a bit strange, I proceeded to test it, and indeed you're right. It must be a bug (as the options for javascript and styles should be completely separate), but a useful one to know for sure. -- Patrick H. Lauke _ reÂdux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] NS4 spacing & borders
Michael Wilson wrote:
> stylesheets designed for more modern browsers. The only caveat being
> that the styles you use in your linked CSS will need to be overridden
> in your @imported stylesheet or they will bleed over to the modern
> browsers. I generally complete my global CSS first and then go back
> and apply some simple stying in my NN4 stylesheet for the things I've
I prefer to serve the styles for NN4 using JavaScript (I believe NN4 doesn't
do CSS without JS enabled anyway):
if (!document.getElementById) document.write('');
and then use @import to serve a totally different Sheet.
Doing it this way, there are no styles to override.
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.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] NS4 spacing & borders
Kornel Lesinski wrote: True, but management should make "educated decision" and that means listening to developers. However, that's not the only influencing factor. Target audience is another major one. Like schools or institutions that didn't upgrade their equipment in 10 years? Yes. If the reason for that is lack of money, but they are still part of your site's sizeable audience, then they still deserve a tiny amount of consideration. As long as websites are going to work OK on their outdated equipment NN4 will be haunting web developers. Someone must stop that circle. Haunting? Heck, create a simplistic, minimal stylesheet that works in NN4, and hide the complex, bells and whistles, multi-column, positioning one via @import. It's not rocket science. And again, as I said previously: I'm not talking about porting all styles to NN4, and neither am I advocating "lowest common denominator" usage of CSS...but a sensible approach for those cases where NN4.x still features highly in your audience. One small fix provokes another :) Only if the developer lacks discipline ;) I especially don't like what damage NN4 support does to CSS. Aeh...that makes no sense, sorry. NN4 does not do any damage to CSS, provided developers are fully aware of NN4's limitations and take a dual approach, as outlined above. It's not "all or nothing", as you seem to suggest... -- Patrick H. Lauke _ reÂdux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] NS4 spacing & borders
Carol Doersom wrote:
I can't put
margins in for NS4, because they'll mess up my page layout in the
up-to-date browsers, so I guess I'll use s or s where necessary.
Thanks to all of you for your suggestions!
It's really not all that difficult to compensate for NN4. Just use a
linked stylesheet for NN4 and @import url("styles.css"); for stylesheets
designed for more modern browsers. The only caveat being that the styles
you use in your linked CSS will need to be overridden in your @imported
stylesheet or they will bleed over to the modern browsers. I generally
complete my global CSS first and then go back and apply some simple
stying in my NN4 stylesheet for the things I've already addressed in the
global. It usually works out quickly and painlessly and while I'm not
trying to make NN4 look and feel like the more modern version, I can
still give it more than a standard markup face lift.
For example--
In the head of your document you would add something like:
followed by:
Your nn4.css would contain:
div {
margin: 10px 0 10px 0;
}
Your global.css would contain:
div {
margin: 0;
}
...or whatever styling is appropriate. If you do find that you have to
add something to your NN4 stylesheet that you don't already address in
your global stylesheet, just sneak back in and add some defaults to your
global.css compensate.
HTH
--
Best regards,
M. Wilson
**
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] NS4 spacing & borders
Hassan Schroeder wrote: >>Also, is there a way to prevent NS4 from putting big ugly blue borders around images that are links?<< Or use CSS :-) I am using CSS and just want my pages to degrade nicely in NS4. I'm definitely _not_ going to try to make them match what they look like in up-to-date browsers, even though my boss is my client and she is one of those dinosaurs! I work for a college, and why they continue to distribute NS4 is beyond me, since there are free, good browsers available--which some of us at work download and use. I finally noticed that I had media="all" in my . So that explains why my instructions to apply no borders were being ignored. I've just put 'border:none' inline and voila...that problem is solved. I can't put margins in for NS4, because they'll mess up my page layout in the up-to-date browsers, so I guess I'll use s or s where necessary. Thanks to all of you for your suggestions! Carol ** 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] NS4 spacing & borders
> True, but management should make "educated decision" and > that means listening to developers. But a developer who doesn't know how to design for NN4 would be biased, no? IMHO, supporting NN4 is a call for: - bad semantic, - structural hacks, - extra hours spent on the project. Out of these three points, I'd say only the last one would make sense for a client :-) Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.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] NS4 spacing & borders
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 18:12:10 -, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Kornel Lesinski wrote: Please, don't support NN4. Unfortunately, this type of decision often does not rest with the actual developers, but with management or other stakeholders. True, but management should make "educated decision" and that means listening to developers. Otherwise - give those poor dinosaurs some reason to upgrade. Some of those "dinosaurs" have valid reasons for still using older browsers. Like schools or institutions that didn't upgrade their equipment in 10 years? As long as websites are going to work OK on their outdated equipment NN4 will be haunting web developers. Someone must stop that circle. (especially when it's only a simple fix or slight concession, such as sticking with a transitional DTD) is certainly a better solution, no? One small fix provokes another :) I especially don't like what damage NN4 support does to CSS. -- 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] NS4 spacing & borders
Kornel Lesinski wrote: Please, don't support NN4. Unfortunately, this type of decision often does not rest with the actual developers, but with management or other stakeholders. I'd say it's a dangerous sweeping statement to make. Otherwise - give those poor dinosaurs some reason to upgrade. Some of those "dinosaurs" have valid reasons for still using older browsers. If your audience is comprised of those users, it's a bit of an elitist attitude to simply shut them out from any styling. This is a decision that needs to be taken on a site-by-site basis, after careful analysis of the audience. I'm not talking about bending over backwards to make a layout pixel-perfect and exactly the same even in old browsers, but a tad of consideration (especially when it's only a simple fix or slight concession, such as sticking with a transitional DTD) is certainly a better solution, no? -- Patrick H. Lauke _ reÂdux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS validator says " "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed."
It may have something to do with the PHP echoing the prologdo you have a special circumstance setup, like it only sends the prolog to mozilla or something? I think the validator is receving something that the browsers aren't. Also, I just checked in IE5/mac, safari, and FF/mac. Everything is perfect, aside from the double borders on the bottom of the "you are here" link for each page. They are all black in Safari and IE/mac, but really its nothing I would worry about. On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 07:36:29 -0600, Leslie Riggs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Out of curiosity, I'm wondering why the xml prolog is there in the > document when the page is being served as text/html? > > I'm still pretty new to this, so I'm happy to learn and understand > > Leslie Riggs > > >Hi, > > > >I have valid XHTML > >http://idealcouple.com/ > >http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2F > > > > > >And valid CSS > >http://idealcouple.com/styling/idealism.css > >http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2Fstyling%2Fidealism.css&usermedium=all > > > > > >But when my client click "CSS" link in the footer, > >CSS validator says : > > > >Please, validate your XML document first! > >Line 2 > >Column 6 > >The processing instruction target matching "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed. > > > > > >I have both XHTML and CSS valid, but CSS Validator dont think so :( Whats my > >problem? The same trouble i have in my other site in development (line and > >column number are different) > >http://it.net.ua/weblog/ > > > >We use PHP to render XML prolog and DOCTYPE, and we use PHP sessions. > > > >Any help are welcome, as well as screenshots from Mac people. > > > >Thanx, > >Andrey. > > > > > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > -- Andrew Sutherland Jalenack.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] NS4 spacing & borders
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 16:15:11 -, Carol Doersom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Is there a standards compliant way to force NS4 Please, don't support NN4. It's buggy outdated browser. If you start worrying how your page works in NN4, your code will start decaying. If you hide CSS from it, probably content will be accessible and thats more than enough. Otherwise - give those poor dinosaurs some reason to upgrade. -- 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] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button?
On Sat, 19 Mar 2005 20:51:33 +1300, Sigurd Magnusson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I could put the label around the image button, or have a blank one, but this > sort of defeats the purpose in my opinion... ideas? Both Patrick and Roger are correct. It's the text field that requires a label in order to adhere to WCAG 1.0 double A. The spirit of that checkpoint is to ensure that that visitors using an assistive device have an explicit prompt for each input form control. As you pointed out, it is common not to provide a prompt for a search box. Jakob Nielsen listed providing a label for a search field as one of the ten most violated homepage design guidelines [1]: 8. Don't use a heading to label the search area; instead use a "Search" button to the right of the box. This is contradictory advice, and leads us back to the point of the guideline; ensuring that people using assistive devices understand the purpose of the input element. A good solution to this problem is to provide a title attribute on the input box. People using assistive devices will be provided with a prompt, which ensures it is accessible. It's debatable as to whether failure to provide a label fails WCAG 1.0 double A. WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 12.4 [2] states: Associate labels explicitly with their controls. [Priority 2] For example, in HTML use LABEL and its "for" attribute. That text implies it's only applicable when a prompt has been provided. In the absence of a prompt, we should consider the spirit of that checkpoint, which is to ensure that the purpose of the form control is exposed to people using assistive devices who may not be able to determine it's function from the context. In that case, using a title ensures that the form is accessible. If true accessibility is your goal, that approach should be fine. If you need to ensure it passes an automated validation test, then an invisible form prompt is your best solution. Best regards, Gez [1] http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20031110.html [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/wai-pageauth.html#tech-associate-labels _ Supplement your vitamins http://juicystudio.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] NS4 spacing & borders
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Also, is there a way to prevent NS4 from putting big ugly blue
borders around images that are links?
If NN4 is still among the browsers you want to support visually, I'd
recommend sticking with HTML4 or XHTML1.0 transitional, and still adding
the border attribute (which is deprecated, but still valid) on the image.
Or use CSS :-)
Since the "border" is actually the link color, you can set it to
the page's background color, using ID, CLASS, or even descendent
selectors like this:
div a:link, div a:visited {
color: #fff;
}
/* (tested in NS4.7/W2K) */
You probably only need the `border="0"` if the image in question
is over another background image.
YMMV!
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com
dream. code.
**
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] NS4 spacing & borders
Carol Doersom wrote:
Is there a standards compliant way to force NS4 to put some space
between items in my html...besides adding otherwise unneeded s
after images and links, or wrapping them in s? I've noticed that it
does not put any space between s.
Unless I'm missing something, it behaves like any other browser. If you have
something
something else
the spacing in NN4.7 is exactly the same as in Firefox.
In any case, simple css margin seems to work as expected
div { margin-bottom: 2em; }
or whatever.
Also, is there a way to prevent NS4 from putting big ugly blue borders
around images that are links?
If NN4 is still among the browsers you want to support visually, I'd
recommend sticking with HTML4 or XHTML1.0 transitional, and still adding
the border attribute (which is deprecated, but still valid) on the image.
--
Patrick H. Lauke
_
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
[WSG] NS4 spacing & borders
Is there a standards compliant way to force NS4 to put some space between items in my html...besides adding otherwise unneeded s after images and links, or wrapping them in s? I've noticed that it does not put any space between s. Also, is there a way to prevent NS4 from putting big ugly blue borders around images that are links? tia, Carol ** 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] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button?
On 19 mar 2005, at 08.51, Sigurd Magnusson wrote: However, it seems that even if I put an ALT on the text field, the automated WCAG-AA test still fails the form; why?? Because it isn't associated with the text input field, which is what needs a label. I could put the label around the image button, or have a blank one, but this sort of defeats the purpose in my opinion... ideas? If you're determined not to show the label, you can use CSS to hide it from visual browsers. /Roger -- http://www.456bereastreet.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS validator says " "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed."
Out of curiosity, I'm wondering why the xml prolog is there in the document when the page is being served as text/html? I'm still pretty new to this, so I'm happy to learn and understand Leslie Riggs Hi, I have valid XHTML http://idealcouple.com/ http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2F And valid CSS http://idealcouple.com/styling/idealism.css http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2Fstyling%2Fidealism.css&usermedium=all But when my client click "CSS" link in the footer, CSS validator says : Please, validate your XML document first! Line 2 Column 6 The processing instruction target matching "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed. I have both XHTML and CSS valid, but CSS Validator dont think so :( Whats my problem? The same trouble i have in my other site in development (line and column number are different) http://it.net.ua/weblog/ We use PHP to render XML prolog and DOCTYPE, and we use PHP sessions. Any help are welcome, as well as screenshots from Mac people. Thanx, Andrey. ** 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] Making accessible a one-text field form with an image submit button?
Sigurd Magnusson wrote: Rule: 12.4.1 - Identify all non-hidden INPUT elements that do not have an explicit LABEL association. Failure - INPUT Element, of Type TEXT, at Line: 109, Column: 30 in FORM Element at Line: 108, Column: 2 I could put the label around the image button, or have a blank one, but this sort of defeats the purpose in my opinion... ideas? Firstly: submit buttons and image button do not need an additional label: for submit buttons, the value itself acts as a label; for images, the ALT attribute takes that role. So your only real problem here is the text input (as the above error message suggests). Search You can then use CSS to hide the label, if you want...and this is one of those rare cases where even if you use display:none, screenreaders will still "see" the label (due to its explicit tie to the input field). -- Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS validator says " "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed."
Hi Andrey, it could be an error because of the first line. The Xml-Declaration has to be found in the first line, not in the second. The Declaration allows an encoding-switch or the version 1.1, then the NEL (#x2028) would be allowed as line-break. So the Declaration has to be the first in an xml-document. Best Regards Juergen ** 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] CSS validator says " "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed."
Andrey Stefanenko wrote: Hi, I have valid XHTML http://idealcouple.com/ http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2F Yes, valid according to validator. However, Tidy turns up a bit more especially in the
Re: [WSG] CSS validator says " "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed."
I get the same response, so would seem to be a bug; perhaps submit a bug report to w3c? (Our company has sent in a bug report for the w3c xhtml 1.1 validator the other week, so don't treat it as absolutely perfect!!) Siggy - Original Message - From: "Andrey Stefanenko" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2005 8:42 PM Subject: [WSG] CSS validator says " "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed." Hi, I have valid XHTML http://idealcouple.com/ http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2F And valid CSS http://idealcouple.com/styling/idealism.css http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fidealcouple.com%2Fstyling%2Fidealism.css&usermedium=all But when my client click "CSS" link in the footer, CSS validator says : Please, validate your XML document first! Line 2 Column 6 The processing instruction target matching "[xX][mM][lL]" is not allowed. I have both XHTML and CSS valid, but CSS Validator dont think so :( Whats my problem? The same trouble i have in my other site in development (line and column number are different) http://it.net.ua/weblog/ We use PHP to render XML prolog and DOCTYPE, and we use PHP sessions. Any help are welcome, as well as screenshots from Mac people. Thanx, Andrey. ** 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 **
