Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Bob Schwartz
Lachlan,I'm going to take your much appreciated response one bit at a time.By doing as you suggested, I lose the point of having used the JS in the first place.(For the purposes of this discussion, let's assume that having the copyright notices reflect the current year is a desired thing).With the

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Bob Schwartz
I suppose you mean PHP or ASP or similar? If so, wouldn't this be taking things to an extreme just to do a simple copyright that is already handled so well with this little JS? Bob Javascript is for behaviour, not content (or structure, really). Therefore, if you want to dynamically change

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Lachlan Hunt
Bob Schwartz wrote: This one all alone on the page, with no linked JS in the head: div id=copy script type=text/javascript ... document.write(copy; +yr); /scriptnbsp;Cedar Tree Books /div p id=copy© 2005 Cedar Tree Books/p No script (or entity reference) required. I'm going to take your

Re: [WSG] talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Robert O'Neill
I made the comparison to the construction industry because: 1. we are both in the business of building things and 2. the standards used benefit the end user. A 'brickie' lays bricks in one of a number of standard methods using standard materials. The benefit of this is that the house

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Martin Heiden
Bob, on Tuesday, December 6, 2005 at 18:57 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote: These connected to a linked JS in the head: 1. a href=http://www.fotografics.it; onclick=popUp (this.href,'elastic',500,650);return false;nbsp;powered by: FotoGrafics/a a href=http://www.fotografics.it;

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Peter J. Farrell
Martin Heiden wrote: Do it on the serverside!!! Maybe I'm a cycle head, but it seems silly to use computation cycles (although very little) to compute a year that changes only once per year. Use a server side include or hard code it in your footer template and remember to change it in the

Re: [WSG] getElementById() always returns null

2005-12-07 Thread Roberto Gorjão
Hi Chris, As JavaScript isn't a precompiled language (rather a scripting one), functions, objects and variables are processed one after another, following the source order. When you declare your variables, the browser is not yet aware of the existence of the two requested elements. You have

[WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread designer
Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html lang=en

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Srecko Micic
It looks ok. It is validated. 2005/12/7, designer [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Lachlan Hunt
designer wrote: Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html lang=en

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Marilyn Langfeld
Looks fine in Mac Firefox 1.5 and Safari 2.02. Best regards, Marilyn Langfeld Langfeldesigns http://www.langfeldesigns.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Dec 7, 2005, at 8:13 AM, designer wrote: Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug

Re: [WSG] talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Stephen Stagg
I was being specific and not defining the situation well, my bad. In the UK it is against the law to provide an inaccessible service. Therefore ONLY in the field of Accessibility, it is within the rights of any disabled person to demand that any UK site should be accessible. In practice, it

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Carl Reynolds
Peter J. Farrell wrote: Martin Heiden wrote: Do it on the serverside!!! Maybe I'm a cycle head, but it seems silly to use computation cycles (although very little) to compute a year that changes only once per year. Use a server side include or hard code it in your footer template and

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Stephen Stagg
I'm no Lawyer but what are the legal ramifications of a user having the wrong year set on the client. If the client's clock were set to 1900 then wouldn't the Copyright notice then be invalid? That is one of the ramifications of not Using PHP or ASP. Stephen Bob Schwartz wrote: Lachlan,

Re: [WSG] talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Robert O'Neill
Yes, the key to this argument/discussion is whether your site offers a service to the general public. As suggested earlier we cant expect someone hosting his/her home page on Geocities to follow web standards, but anyone offering services online bears a moral responsibility to make those

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Stephen Stagg
Designer wrote: Dear colleagues, Forgive my labouring the point, but after our discussions I have done what Gunlaug did, i.e., made a page as xhtml, with the headers as below: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Christian Montoya
On 12/7/05, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you choose to do content negotiation and serve application/xhtml+xml to browsers that support it and text/html to those that don't, be aware that it prevents incremental rendering in Mozilla. So is the best thing to target xhtml browsers?

RE: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Mike Foskett
Mac report: Worked fine in Safari v1 - bottom margin of about 1.5em, same as top Worked okay in IE v5.2 - the bottom margin was extended 10em approx. Worked fine in Opera v8.51 - bottom margin approx 3em Personally I'd ignore the margin difference but I thought I'd mention it in case it

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Rimantas Liubertas
2005/12/7, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]: So is the best thing to target xhtml browsers? Like, specifically Opera, Safari, Konquerer, etc? How exactly would one do content negotation with PHP? You may try this: http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php On the other hand:

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Christian Montoya
On 12/7/05, Mike Foskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mac report: Worked fine in Safari v1 - bottom margin of about 1.5em, same as top Worked okay in IE v5.2 - the bottom margin was extended 10em approx. Worked fine in Opera v8.51 - bottom margin approx 3em Personally I'd ignore the margin

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread designer
Duh? Stephen? Stephen Stagg wrote: Apart from using copyrighted images without attributing them :). Best Regards, Bob McClelland Cornwall (UK) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun
Lachlan Hunt wrote: You may as well just use valid HTML 4.01 Strict. See XHTML is not for Beginners, the MIME type issue is just one of the many reasons. http://lachy.id.au/log/2005/12/xhtml-beginners (yes, I'm aware of the irony that the article itself is XHTML as text/html, but that's the

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun
Christian Montoya wrote: doesn't work! You are all viewing text/html. Pretty soon everyone on this list will think they are serving xhtml. Yes, and a large percentage of them will serve complete garbage :-) I'll get it started right: DID NOT work in every single browser. Version 0.1 to

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Martin Heiden
Peter, on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 at 12:31 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote: Martin Heiden wrote: Do it on the serverside!!! Maybe I'm a cycle head, but it seems silly to use computation cycles (although very little) to compute a year that changes only once per year. Use a server

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Stephen Stagg
Sorry, just the map you used. My comment was meant light-heartedly. Your location map looks very like the one that can be got from http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/. As these are crown copyright, I assume that you haven't got an agreement with them to use their data unattributed.

Re: [WSG] standards or confusion?

2005-12-07 Thread Peter J. Farrell
Martin Heiden wrote: Peter, on Wednesday, December 7, 2005 at 12:31 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote: Maybe I'm a cycle head, but it seems silly to use computation cycles (although very little) to compute a year that changes only once per year. Use a server side include or hard

[WSG] re:talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Drew Trusz
Bert wrote:When it comes to search engines, can anyone prove that lean codeis better? Has anyone done research on this claim? Google is fullof tagsoup sites that are highly ranked.I searched for web design in Google (pages from Australia only). The top 3 (non sponsored) sites used tables for

[WSG] IE 5 MAC - Is it a clear issue?

2005-12-07 Thread Ben Logan
Hi folks I have a site design which I am working on coding up and at the moment it appears to be IE5.2.3 on OSX that is causing me problems. Safari seems okay so far! I have a right hand login box box which has a top and a middle section. The div I am looking at is :

[WSG] absolute positioning?

2005-12-07 Thread Greg Morphis
Hey, I'm trying to build a daily schedule view which will have schedules from 6am - 10pm. I'm not sure if this is the correct approach so I'm asking for help... I was thinking of using a table with 3 columns, 1 column for the name, 1 column for job title and 1 column for their daily schedule. I

Re: [WSG] absolute positioning?

2005-12-07 Thread Ben Wong
Hi Greg, Although it's an interesting thing you're trying to do. I think it's a bit hacky. While it's seem table-like it's actually a graph and I'd probably consider a few other options. 1. do the third column with images 2. do the entire graph as one big image or 3. use SVG If you still think

Re: [WSG] page check please - mime type!

2005-12-07 Thread Lachlan Hunt
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: http://lachy.id.au/log/2005/12/xhtml-beginners I am prohibited from getting comments through to that article. That's weird, if you contact me off list and let me know what error you received I might be able to do something about it. If you send me

[WSG] problems!!!

2005-12-07 Thread Gerardo Cháirez
Hi guys, I hate to bother all you guys with this, but I Cant Fix it!!! On this address: http://www.addictivemedia.com.mx/limpeq/ I need to display the quienes somos and Nuestros clientes divs right below the photo and bienvenidos section. I already clear them both, clear them right, left, and it

Re: [WSG] problems!!!

2005-12-07 Thread Bert Doorn
G'day On this address: http://www.addictivemedia.com.mx/limpeq/ I need to display the quienes somos and Nuestros clientes divs right below the photo and bienvenidos section. I already clear them both, clear them right, left, and it doesnt do it... I've done a quick test in Firefox (with the

[WSG] CSS - Fixing PNG Transparency Issues in IE?

2005-12-07 Thread Artemis
I was reading Matt's WordPress blog and noticed at the bottom of the page he has an up arrow so you can click to go up, so I tried peeking at his css with the Web Developer Toolbar so I could see how he did it. But, something else caught my attention. I noticed in his other.css file that he

Re: [WSG] CSS - Fixing PNG Transparency Issues in IE?

2005-12-07 Thread Matthew Cruickshank
Artemis wrote: If anyone knows anything about this htc file, if it would be good to use, how exactly it works, and where I might find a bit more information about it I would be ever so appreciative :) http://webfx.eae.net/dhtml/pngbehavior/pngbehavior.html .Matthew Cruickshank

[WSG] Commerce sites - advice and examples

2005-12-07 Thread Michelle Roberts
Hi all I have someone who is looking for a commerce site (in Australia) to sell their products from. They obviously would like a simple shopping cart, and do not have too many products. It's not something I've learnt how to do, and they are looking for someone closer to them and wanted some

[WSG] Valid alternative to textarea WRAP

2005-12-07 Thread Sarah Peeke (XERT)
Hi all Just wondering if there is an altenative to textarea wrap=soft (for e.g.) that validates. I have come across the following: textarea { overflow: auto; } but there appear to be some problems with it. Any other suggestions appreciated. Thanks Sarah -- XERT Communications email: [EMAIL

Re: [WSG] Valid alternative to textarea WRAP

2005-12-07 Thread Lachlan Hunt
Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote: Just wondering if there is an altenative to textarea wrap=soft (for e.g.) that validates. Just wondering why you need it. In which non-obsolete browser does the value soft have any effect upon rendering or submission? -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.au/

Re: [WSG] Valid alternative to textarea WRAP

2005-12-07 Thread Sarah Peeke (XERT)
I'm modifying some of the Zen Cart code to ensure validation. The FF Tidy plugin gives a warning on the wrap attribute, and I'm hoping to do a find and replace to fix it. Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote: Just wondering if there is an altenative to textarea wrap=soft (for e.g.) that validates.

Re: [WSG] Valid alternative to textarea WRAP

2005-12-07 Thread Lachlan Hunt
Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote: Just wondering if there is an altenative to textarea wrap=soft (for e.g.) that validates. Just wondering why you need it. In which non-obsolete browser does the value soft have any effect upon rendering or submission?

Re: [WSG] Valid alternative to textarea WRAP

2005-12-07 Thread Bert Doorn
G'day The FF Tidy plugin gives a warning on the wrap attribute, and I'm hoping to do a find and replace to fix it. Does that (proprietary) attribute actually do anything in any browser? The only values I have seen mentioned for it are off, Virtual and physical - I've not seen soft

RE: [WSG] New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Alan Trick
I was just thinking about that and I don't think google.com (or for that matter - anything that company creates) would manage to get more than 1 star. On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 12:00 +1100, Peter Williams wrote: From: Herrod, Lisa Who really pays attention to the badges? Are the badges

Re: [WSG] New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Christian Montoya
On 12/7/05, Alan Trick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was just thinking about that and I don't think google.com (or for that matter - anything that company creates) would manage to get more than 1 star. You just now realized that Google doesn't care at all about standards compliance??? I think

RE: [WSG] New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Paul Bennett
Trolling? :) Tip:(unrelated to this dead thread) I found this good reference: a list of commonly confused HTML special characters http://www.cs.sfu.ca/~ggbaker/reference/characters/#single Paul -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan

Re: [WSG] Valid alternative to textarea WRAP

2005-12-07 Thread Bert Doorn
G'day Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote: Hi Bert So remove *wrap=soft* entirely? Yep - I agree with Lachlan (for a change :-) Soft is the default value, so it's completely unnecessary. Remove it. Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading,

Re: [WSG] Lengthy form buttons

2005-12-07 Thread Nick Cowie
One way around this is to use button type=submit instead of input type=submitThe button tag offers far more opportunity to style than input, and allows you to include an image inside a button tag. The buttons look the same in all modern browsers regadless of OS.Did a little experimenting here:

RE: [WSG] Lengthy form buttons

2005-12-07 Thread Paul Noone
I find it hard to believe but it looks like it's using an image file to draw the button?!?! I'v enever noticed this before. Perhaps I've never had buttons that long. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tim Burgan Sent: Thursday, 8 December

Re: [WSG] Lengthy form buttons

2005-12-07 Thread Tim Burgan
Hi Nick, Does button type=submit still submit a form by default, or does it require javascript to do so? If it doesn't require javascript.. why doesn't everyone use button type=submit? Tim Nick Cowie wrote: One way around this is to use button type=submit instead of input type=submit

[WSG] IE adding image margin

2005-12-07 Thread Julia Birks
Hi everyone, I'm having problems with IE adding a margin to images.  As is always the case, it displays fine in Firefox / Safari etc.  The footer at the bottom should have rounded corners which have been created by putting the images in the cell left + right, and having the center part as a

Re: [WSG] IE adding image margin

2005-12-07 Thread Ric Jude Raftis
G'day Julia, Firefox is actually not displaying properly either. Your text is quite small on the page, so if you hit Control and the plus key a few times to enlarge it you'll see what happens to your footer area. I also note you have two doctypes in your code. One for xhtml and one for

Re: [WSG] IE adding image margin

2005-12-07 Thread Alexander Todorenko
Best would be to rewrite the code at least in the footer, too many nested tables. For a quick fix - add hspace=0 to the corner images. Alex On 12/8/05, Julia Birks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone, I'm having problems with IE adding a margin to images. As is always the case, it displays

RE: [WSG] problems!!!

2005-12-07 Thread gchairez
Thanx for your response Bert, My problem is this: If I display the page on 800*600 it would look correct, the thing is when I use a higher resolution as 1024*786 or bigger... the quienes somos text would move right below the bienvenidos section, I need that the twocols items display on the same

Re: [WSG] Lengthy form buttons

2005-12-07 Thread Nick Cowie
Tim askedDoes button type=submit still submit a form by default, or does it require _javascript_ to do so?button type=submit = input type=submit but don't take my word for it, do what I did when I found out about the button element, go visit the W3c

Re: [WSG] Lengthy form buttons

2005-12-07 Thread Tim Burgan
Thanks Nick, Nick Cowie wrote: The button element is the new kid on the block it was only introduced in 1997 with HTML 4.0 http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-html40-970708/interact/forms.html#edef-BUTTON input has be around a lot longer. http://nickcowie.com No kidding! RIP:

Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Joshua Street
Single sane reason: Well now, I suppose they're not trying to get themselves indexed by a search engine, are they? ;-) josh -- Joshua Street http://www.joahua.com/ +61 (0) 425 808 469 On 12/8/05, Lea de Groot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 08/12/2005, at 12:54 PM, Paul Bennett wrote:

Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Mark Harris
Lea de Groot wrote: On 08/12/2005, at 12:54 PM, Paul Bennett wrote: Trolling? Well, it isn't the first thing that occurred to me! I've often wondered why it is that Google doesn't validate. I mean its not as if they were just a couple of errors, and we could all just shake it off - they

[WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Lea de Groot
On 08/12/2005, at 12:54 PM, Paul Bennett wrote: Trolling? Well, it isn't the first thing that occurred to me! I've often wondered why it is that Google doesn't validate. I mean its not as if they were just a couple of errors, and we could all just shake it off - they are no where near

Re: [WSG] Need help with form

2005-12-07 Thread Ben Wong
Dunno, doesn't it give you any feedback? By the way, the page isn't valid according to w3c validator either. http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A//mouseriders.dk/check.php On 12/8/05, Kim Kruse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I thought I've done everything correct with my forms...

[WSG] Need help with form

2005-12-07 Thread Kim Kruse
Hi, I thought I've done everything correct with my forms... but no. So now I'm trying to figure out why Cynthia/WEBXACT fails my form pages. I just don't understand what it is I'm supposed to do with these forms. So if someone would tell me what it is I need to do to make cynthia happy and

Re: [WSG] Need help with form

2005-12-07 Thread Joshua Street
label for=NavnFor og efternavnspan class=required*/spanbr input name=navn value= type=text /label You're using the name attribute, which isn't valid, and some of your for values have the first letter capitalised, whilst the respective input name does not. The

Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Christian Montoya
On 12/8/05, Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Single sane reason: Well now, I suppose they're not trying to get themselves indexed by a search engine, are they? ;-) josh Good answer. Maybe also: - they aren't making a browser - they use lots of javascript - they don't care Maybe the

RE: [WSG] problems!!!

2005-12-07 Thread gchairez
Well, you fixed another problem that I had... :-) But I still having the problem... The thing is this... The Bienvenidos text and the photo are in one line, The next line are quienes somos and nuestros clients (This two should be displayed in the same line, without being one higher than the other)

Re: [WSG] Need help with form *SOLVED*

2005-12-07 Thread Kim Kruse
Thanks you very much for helping me out. I've corrected the errors and everything is fine now. Kim ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to

Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Bert Doorn
G'day Well, it isn't the first thing that occurred to me! I've often wondered why it is that Google doesn't validate. I never looked at it closely, but you're right - it's tagsoup, tables for layout and deprecated elements and attributes galore (font, center anyone?). No DTD either.