RE: [WSG] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid?
Title: RE: [WSG] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid? Hi all, Thanks a lot for your feedback so far, I'm going to wait for Pat Lauke's full feedback before I respond, unless that recent one was it? Regards, Jamie Mason Skybet.com -Original Message- From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 11 November 2005 13:43 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org; Rimantas Liubertas Subject: Re: [WSG] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid? Quoting Rimantas Liubertas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > So, kidding aside, invalid is invalid. Right, as far as generating completely new invalid elements/nodes, I'll agree completely. However, in my view it gets muddy when we're talking about just adding additional attributes to an existing node. Once the XHTML has been loaded into the browser and the DOM been built internally, I don't see a major problem with creating new *attributes* for each of the nodes, either as a way of storing script information related to that node (i.e. use it as a variable container) or as a pragmatic way to get certain non-compliant things to work properly (for instance, that whole autocompletion debacle that I think sparked this separate thread). Should it be done at all? Possibly not, but it's "less evil" in my mind than doing horrid things like converting a valid document into a completely invalid mess with wrongly nested elements, unclosed tags, etc -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.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] Divs over Flash in Safari
On Nov 10, 2005, at 11:55 PM, Al Sparber wrote: I wouldn't compromise or risk problems by using markup hacks. Al, thanks for the concern, and I agree for the most part. However, this project is for a captive audience - our own Intranet - so I think I have some wiggle room for using something I ordinarily wouldn't. We really are only supporting Win IE6 and Safari. Thanks to everyone else for the replies. Terry, I'm gonna look through your stuff and see if I can work it into mine if that's OK. Any off-list guidance would be most appreciated. As I said above, it is an internal project, but I can credit you in some comments if you'd like! :-) - Tom Livingston Senior Multimedia Artist Media Logic www.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 **
RE: [WSG] hiding legend tag
Hi Phillipe,
> legend{margin:-1em; font-size:0px;}
> In my copy of Firefox, your legend will be 12px in size
> (minimum font-size set, us older people really do like that
> little preference in the browser ;-))
Ah, I forgot to consider this, thanks for the reminder. Ideally, the
document's structure should allow for users to override whatever
necessary and the design should be flexible enough to display the
legends without breaking.
> visibilty:hidden or text-indent:-1px !important are some options.
My understanding is that elements using either visibility:hidden; and
display:none; will not be seen or heard by screen readers. (Based on
this: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=ScreenreaderVisibility ).
That's why I'm trying to use some other method. I'm also trying to stay
away from !important, well, because it isn't really important, just
cosmetic.
Thanks,
Sacha
**
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] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid?
Quoting Rimantas Liubertas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: So, kidding aside, invalid is invalid. Right, as far as generating completely new invalid elements/nodes, I'll agree completely. However, in my view it gets muddy when we're talking about just adding additional attributes to an existing node. Once the XHTML has been loaded into the browser and the DOM been built internally, I don't see a major problem with creating new *attributes* for each of the nodes, either as a way of storing script information related to that node (i.e. use it as a variable container) or as a pragmatic way to get certain non-compliant things to work properly (for instance, that whole autocompletion debacle that I think sparked this separate thread). Should it be done at all? Possibly not, but it's "less evil" in my mind than doing horrid things like converting a valid document into a completely invalid mess with wrongly nested elements, unclosed tags, etc -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.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] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid?
2005/11/11, Wayne Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >It's a tricky one > > How? > > If a tree falls in a wood and no-one hears it - does it still make a noise? Well, it is tricky one. It certainly makes some air waves, but can those waves be called noise until they hit someone's eardrums? ;) But digging deeper we find that noise is sound and sound is certain vibration, "capable of being detected by human organs of hearing." So, kidding aside, invalid is invalid. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.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] Visited links
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 19:18:18 +1030, Tim Burgan wrote: > Do you have any suggestions as to how to overcome this? 2 points: - Its only purple while it exists in their cache, so for infrequent visits they won't see that anyway. - If it is 'changeable', or non-static, content then don't differentiate the link and visited styles. IMHO Lea -- Lea de Groot Elysian Systems - http://elysiansystems.com/ 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 **
Re: [WSG] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid?
>It's a tricky one How? If a tree falls in a wood and no-one hears it - does it still make a noise? w .// Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Quoting Jamie Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Hi all, Did I ask something really daft here or...? I'd appreciate your help or opinions. I'm at d.Construct at the moment, but I've been formulating a reply over the last few days. It's a tricky one...but I'll be attempting a reply once I'm back :) P ** 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] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid?
Quoting Jamie Mason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Hi all, Did I ask something really daft here or...? I'd appreciate your help or opinions. I'm at d.Construct at the moment, but I've been formulating a reply over the last few days. It's a tricky one...but I'll be attempting a reply once I'm back :) P -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.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] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid?
Making an element invalid, whether it be in the HTML or through JS, makes that element invalid. The validator might not catch it but the fact stands. Correct me if I am wrong. HTH :] w .// Jamie Mason wrote: Hi all, Did I ask something really daft here or...? I'd appreciate your help or opinions. Thanks, Jamie Mason Skybet.com *From:* Jamie Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *Sent:* 09 November 2005 11:10 *To:* 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org' *Subject:* [WSG] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REALLY valid? Hi all, I was looking at the source of the Fisheye demo after reading about it here on WSG - hoping it would be valid. It contains it's own made up attributes which devalidate the code. So then I thought fine, I'll just take them out the source and write them in with JavaScript onload instead, making sure it degrades well. But that's where I thought, is that REALLY valid? It'll pass at the W3C validator but my generated source is going to be invalid. Screen readers in my fairly limited understanding (sorry, I'm still young and learning :) ) don't use JavaScript so *should* be ok right? Which groups of users would be affected by this? Respectfully, and thanks in advance. Jamie Mason Skybet.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] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REAL LY valid?
Title: Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REALLY valid? Hi all, Did I ask something really daft here or...? I'd appreciate your help or opinions. Thanks, Jamie Mason Skybet.com From: Jamie Mason [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 09 November 2005 11:10To: 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'Subject: [WSG] Altering a Valid (X)HTML with DHTML => Is it still REALLY valid? Hi all, I was looking at the source of the Fisheye demo after reading about it here on WSG - hoping it would be valid. It contains it's own made up attributes which devalidate the code. So then I thought fine, I'll just take them out the source and write them in with _javascript_ onload instead, making sure it degrades well. But that's where I thought, is that REALLY valid? It'll pass at the W3C validator but my generated source is going to be invalid. Screen readers in my fairly limited understanding (sorry, I'm still young and learning :) ) don't use _javascript_ so *should* be ok right? Which groups of users would be affected by this? Respectfully, and thanks in advance. Jamie Mason Skybet.com
Re: [WSG] Visited links
On 11/11/05, Tim Burgan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In CSS, if I style my visited links so they are purple, as so...
>
> a:visited { color: purple; }
>
> ...once the user has visited a particular link, from then on the color for
> that link will not be purple.
>
> Once the content for that visited page is updated, does the browser realise
> the linked page has changed and link color change back to it's previous
> state?
>
> No it does not, the browser still thinks that link is visited. Problem!
>
>
> Do you have any suggestions as to how to overcome this?
There is no solution for that, unless you get yourself a
URI-/datastructure like FogBugz's.
[WSG] Visited links
In CSS, if I style
my visited links so they are purple, as so...
a:visited { color: purple; }
...once the user has visited a particular link, from then on the color
for that link will not be purple.
Once the content for that visited page is updated, does the browser
realise the linked page has changed and link color change back to it's
previous state?
No it does not, the browser still thinks that link is visited. Problem!
Do you have any suggestions as to how to overcome this?
Tim
RE: [WSG] CSS filesize and selector names
Anders Nawroth wrote: > Mixing lower/uppercase enhances readability, just remember to > write it the same way everywhere, class names and ID's are case > sensitive. I tend to prefer hyphens, like #btn-save > hyphens? bah! .realCoders use #camelCase ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
