Re: Moral High-horse - was Re: [WSG] Failed Redesign and the Medi a
On 2/1/06, Herrod, Lisa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There's no need to judge people. Everyone has a choice to work the way they want to. It may not be the best, or your way, but you don't know their reasons and they may be trying their best. And yet, in many other industries, I was doing my best would be considered a completely unacceptable response from a contractor who failed to adhere to the standards of that industry. If, for example, a construction firm puts up a skyscraper that doesn't adhere to building codes, do they get to say Well, we did our best, but it's just so darned difficult to follow every bit of those standards? Do they get to mumble about how they just haven't had time to pick up new versions of the building codes and learn how to comply with them? Of course not. So why should it be any different in our industry, especially now that reasonably compliant browsers are on pretty much every personal computer, and now that there are plenty of tutorials, conferences, communities and even dead-tree books devoted to standards-based design and development? Now, does that mean that we -- people who get standards -- shouldn't be as open and friendly as possible to make sure people learn how to do it right? Absolutely not. But... when people in our industry tout themselves as professionals while making little or no effort to learn or adhere to existing, established standards and best practices, the gloves have to come off and we have to make some noise. When major, respectable organizations launch redesigns that look like they belong to 1997, we have to put pressure on them to do better. If that means getting up on the moral high horse every once in a while and doing some preaching, then we may just have to accept that and do our best to mitigate the consequences. If not, at least it's less competition for you! :) Sadly, it's not. Spending this past year freelancing taught me that at every level of the market there's a huge amount of competition from people who'd have a better chance of producing valid code if they used a Ouija board. And those folks are at least as vocal and nasty as anyone who works with standards. CSS is just a fad, standards-based sites can't work in all the browsers, if it works in IE/Windows, it's not broken -- I've had to defend web standards and lay out business cases for accessibility and clean code more times than I'd care to recount, and frankly I'm tired of being the defensive side in those arguments, and even more tired of wasting so much energy fighting for contracts that I end up losing to design firms that don't know a DOCTYPE from a hole in the ground. The sooner those so-called professionals are dragged into this millennium, the better. -- May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house. -- George Carlin ** 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: Moral High-horse - was Re: [WSG] Failed Redesign and the Medi a
On 2/1/06, Herrod, Lisa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If not, at least it's less competition for you! :) I wish. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] [Fixed div elements] - Having troubles with IE
Bret! That is exactly what am I talking about. I applaud your skill, but not your memory :) I am trying to pick away at your css to figure out how you got it working but so far I have had no luck. I will most likely create a new page away from the code I have no to see if I can just get it working. Thanks for pointing me in some direction! -Andrew Brown -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bert Doorn Sent: February 1, 2006 2:16 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] [Fixed div elements] - Having troubles with IE G'day Andrew Brown wrote: I changed the doctype to strict locally and still the scrollbar does appear. I also already have those additional tags added. Do you know of a website that has enough content that scrolls and has div banners such as mine only done in css? I cannot say I have saw many that do. I am still on top of this. Kinda like www.sure-kleen.com ? Don't ask me how I did it - I forgot. But if it does what you want, feel free to reverse-engineer. 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 ** ** 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: Moral High-horse - was Re: [WSG] Failed Redesign and the Media
On 01/02/06, russ - maxdesign [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As a far-from-guru-status Web Standards supporter/coder (I try) I have witnessed, on this list and on another css-specific list, quite a bit of condescending and 'forced-opinion' type of replies. It doesn't make for a nice atmosphere when looking to these lists for help. Completely agree. The most common off-list comments I receive are along the lines of a great list, very helpful, but sometimes a bit of attitude. That's interesting feedback. I too dislike, and never engage in, the disparaging of those who perhaps know less than others and are trying to learn. In my own defence, I think a bit of light-hearted teasing is justified in this case: clearly Clear Blue Sky had not bothered to keep in touch with web development trends *at all* for the last several years. They are obviously not even trying to learn (so far) - and you have to admit, their reasons were pretty comical. If they'd invested 5 minutes in googling these reasons, they would have realised that things have moved on (and that, on one of these reasons, they were probably never right in the first place). Having said that, I'll just leap on to my web standards shetland pony and ride off into the sunset. ** 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] list's with header text
hi, for a vertical navigation bar with multiple headings like this: div class=navcontainer h3Buncrana Town/h3 ul lia href=#Business Directory/a/li lia href=#Accomodation Directory/a/li . /ul h3Community/h3 ul lia href=#Groups/a/li lia href=#Clubs/a/li . /ul so on... /div What is the proper heading to use(h1, h2, h3)? -best kvnmcwebn ** 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] list's with header text
I would use: ul id=nav-bananas li h3Buncrana Town/h3 ul lia href="" Directory/a/li lia href="" Directory/a/li /ul /li li h3Community/h3 ul lia href=""> lia href=""> /ul /li /ul Where 'bananas' is replaced with a semantically suitable name such as main for main navigation or supp for supplemental etc... I would use h3 as long as it fits in with the rest of your markup, for example h1 for page subject, h2 for content subjects on the current page, h3 for content subjects off page. Darren On 01/02/06, kvnmcwebn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi,for a vertical navigation bar with multiple headings like this: div class=navcontainer h3Buncrana Town/h3ul lia href="" Directory/a/li lia href="" Directory/a/li./ul h3Community/h3ul lia href="" lia href="">./ulso on... /divWhat is the proper heading to use(h1, h2, h3)?-best kvnmcwebn**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
RE: [WSG] list's with header text
ok thanks, just to clarify a point: what odds that the ul id have a semantically suitable name-beside making sense to people working in the code after me? -thanks again kvnmcewbn ** 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] Accessible drop down menu
Hello all, Got another question today which I can't seem to find any new information on. Was wondering with Ajax and some of these new methods coming out, is there a way of creating an accessible drop-down menu that doesn't use scripting? As in, can we have a drop-down menu that wouldsubmit to the serverwhen you click on a selection, instead of requiring a submit button? One option would be to use _javascript_ to submit using "onchange", then hiding the submit button in a nosript tag for those who don't have jscript turned on. Does anyone havea better idea? I realise it may be better practice to have a go button, but would like to know if it's possible to do without. Cheers, Paul
Re: [WSG] Accessible drop down menu
One option would be to use Javascript to submit using onchange, then hiding the submit button in a nosript tag for those who don't have jscript turned on. Does anyone have a better idea? Hi Paul, Don't know if its exactly what you are after but i did a little script a while ago that turns a list of links into a select box that acts as a jumpmenu that loads a new url onchange. If the user has no js they just get the list of links. http://www.donkeymagic.co.uk/listselect Richard -- DonkeyMagic: Website design development http://www.donkeymagic.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] IE7 Now what?
I have downloaded IE7 Beta 2 and I have looked at a couple of my sites. I have found some problems (never mind how slow the programs is). I use some * html hacks and some display: inline block tricks to emulate tables in IE's 6 and lower. Are there resources for ways to fix these hacks that are backward compatible or is the only way the method suggested by IE team which is to use conditional comments in the *head* and use a separate stylesheet? Jay -- Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[WSG] Re: Moral High-horse
James Bennett wrote: And yet, in many other industries, I was doing my best would be considered a completely unacceptable response from a contractor who failed to adhere to the standards of that industry. If, for example, a construction firm puts up a skyscraper that doesn't adhere to building codes, do they get to say Well, we did our best, but it's just so darned difficult to follow every bit of those standards? Do they get to mumble about how they just haven't had time to pick up new versions of the building codes and learn how to comply with them? You make a very good point here and, indeed, I have come across this very same attitude, however there's is an important distinction that can be seen between the use of standards-based web development and that building-a-skyscraper analogy. In the case of failing to follow building standards or codes of practice, there are serious penalties enforced if such standards are not followed properly. For example, failing to follow a standard could lead to fines, injury, being sued for negligence or, in the very worst case, the whole building collapsing. There's also the issue of licensing. i.e. You need to be a licensed/registered/qualified builder to build a skyscraper, or nearly any building for that matter, and failing to follow standards could result in loss of licence, among many other things. However, in the case of building a website, there are very few penalties - actually, there are none. You don't need a license to build a web site, you don't even need to be qualified or educated in any special way to build and publish a website. You're not likely to get fined for failing to follow the standards, and not very likely to be sued (although, it has happened for accessibility reasons in the past). The problem is that many people see the issue as what will happen if I don't follow standards?; whereas the questions they should be asking are what are the benefits of following standards?, how much easier/faster is it to develop with standards?, etc. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.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] Accessible drop down menu
Hi Richard, Thanks for that one, that will definitely come in handy in the future and I've got it bookmarked. Unfortunately though, in this instance the design won't permit me to have a list of links as it would be far too long to fit, so a select box is preferable. Really useful though, thanks very much. Paul - Original Message - From: Richard Stephenson To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 1:05 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Accessible drop down menu One option would be to use _javascript_ to submit using "onchange", then hiding the submit button in a nosript tag for those who don't have jscript turned on. Does anyone have a better idea?Hi Paul,Don't know if its exactly what you are after but i did a little scripta while ago that turns a list of links into a select box that acts asa jumpmenu that loads a new url onchange. If the user has no js theyjust get the list of links.http://www.donkeymagic.co.uk/listselectRichard--DonkeyMagic: Website design developmenthttp://www.donkeymagic.co.uk**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] list's with header text
Exactly for that point; IMHO decribing the content rather than the presentation makes your markup easier to read, style and manage by whomever - users, coders, accessibility tools, browsers, search engines, and yourself, this is why web standards are so important. Some interesting reading on suggested markup guidelines can be found at http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/whats_in_a_name.html and http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/whats_in_a_name_pt2.html On 01/02/06, kvnmcwebn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ok thanks,just to clarify a point: what odds that the ul id have a semanticallysuitable name-beside making sense to people working in the code after me?-thanks againkvnmcewbn** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] Accessible drop down menu
Richard Stephenson wrote: Don't know if its exactly what you are after but i did a little script a while ago that turns a list of links into a select box that acts as a jumpmenu that loads a new url onchange. If the user has no js they just get the list of links. http://www.donkeymagic.co.uk/listselect This is brilliant! Thanks for sharing. Thierry | 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] IE7 Now what?
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/19/ie7beta_patch_glitch/You should think twice before installing any Microsoft Better products. On 01/02/06, Jay Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have downloaded IE7 Beta 2 and I have looked at a couple of my sites. I have found some problems (never mind how slow the programs is). I use some * html hacks and some display: inline block tricks to emulate tables in IE's 6 and lower. Are there resources for ways to fix these hacks that are backward compatible or is the only way the method suggested by IE team which is to use conditional comments in the *head* and use a separate stylesheet? Jay -- Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [WSG] IE7 Now what?
2006-02-01
Thread
Marko Mihelcic - founder of mcville.net (http.//www.mcville.net)|(http://board.mcville.net)
could the new IE 7 beta 2 or beta 1 , can they be installed on Service pack 1 ? - coz I don't have SP2 jet :S :) 2006/2/1, Miles Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/19/ie7beta_patch_glitch/You should think twice before installing any Microsoft Better products. On 01/02/06, Jay Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have downloaded IE7 Beta 2 and I have looked at a couple of my sites. I have found some problems (never mind how slow the programs is). I use some * html hacks and some display: inline block tricks to emulate tables in IE's 6 and lower. Are there resources for ways to fix these hacks that are backward compatible or is the only way the method suggested by IE team which is to use conditional comments in the *head* and use a separate stylesheet? Jay -- Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: [WSG] IE7 Now what?
Thanks, but I fail to see what this has to do with the Beta 2 version. The Beta 2 version is installed on top of IE 6 and acts as it should so far. I am assuming that they have fixed any issues with Beta 1 before releasing a public beta. I have uninstalled it and all works fine in IE6 but what I want to make sure is that I can fix issues with my previous designs so that they don't remain broken in IE7 when it is in GA release. I will restate my question to be more clear: Are there any resources, index, tables or references on specific differences between IE7 box model and other browsers that will enable me to check and correct for layout issues that will exist on designs in IE 7? I don't want to have to try tweaking every single line of my stylesheets to GUESS if I have fixed it (as we all know, just because it LOOKS right in the browser doesn't mean that it IS right). There are two places I have found issues. One relates to display:table-cell and display: table. In addition I have some odd margins/padding issues with one site that doesn't exist in other sites with similar layout. All the best, Jay Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Miles Davies wrote: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/19/ie7beta_patch_glitch/ You should think twice before installing any Microsoft Better products. On 01/02/06, Jay Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have downloaded IE7 Beta 2 and I have looked at a couple of my sites. I have found some problems (never mind how slow the programs is). I use some * html hacks and some display: inline block tricks to emulate tables in IE's 6 and lower. Are there resources for ways to fix these hacks that are backward compatible or is the only way the method suggested by IE team which is to use conditional comments in the *head* and use a separate stylesheet? Jay -- Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [WSG] HTML Restructuring of hopkinsprogramming.net
Does anyone have any ideas or thoughts on my question? --ZacharyOn 1/30/06, Hopkins Programming [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all! I re-did my website (http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/) a while back in an effort to update its look and improve the quality of the coding behind it. Right now, it looks perfect, just like I want it to. But, I need to improve/clean up the XHTML coding behind it - eg, properly structure the page, designing first for Lynx and text based browsers, then going back and making everything pretty for modern browsers through CSS. Do you all have any suggestions on the proper kinds of things that should end up in the heading (h1-h3) tags? Like, is my site title or my page title supposed to be in h1? I greatly appreciate your suggestions and input. --Zachary Hopkins -- ==The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net -- ==The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net
[WSG] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
The advantages of this solution: - It uses semantic markup. - It degrades nicely (hidden elements are visible in script-disabled UAs). - DTs do not appear as links without script support. - It does not use inline event attribute (onclick()). - It does not require A elements in the markup. - It is screen-readers friendly. - It is IE Mac compatible. - It relies on one single hook. http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/toggle_elements.asp Please report errors/problems/etc.. Regards, Thierry | 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] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
Nice work Thierry. I'm going to add this one to the library. I know there are plenty of hide/show examples out there. This one has a nice combination of clean code and attention to accessibility. Ted -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thierry Koblentz Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 9:58 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page The advantages of this solution: - It uses semantic markup. - It degrades nicely (hidden elements are visible in script-disabled UAs). - DTs do not appear as links without script support. - It does not use inline event attribute (onclick()). - It does not require A elements in the markup. - It is screen-readers friendly. - It is IE Mac compatible. - It relies on one single hook. http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/toggle_elements.asp Please report errors/problems/etc.. Regards, Thierry | 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 ** ** 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] Which unit is better for web site font size?
Hello, Which unit is better for web site font size? em px % ... Thanks! Roberto Santana ** 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] Which unit is better for web site font size?
Roberto Santana wrote: Hello, Which unit is better for web site font size? em px % ... Better is like beauty-- it's in the eye of the beholder. http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingFontSize ** 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] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
Is it just me, or does this example NOT work at all with safari? The technique may be the dog's wotsits but the page is just blank in Safari. Stephen On 1 Feb 2006, at 17:58, Thierry Koblentz wrote: The advantages of this solution: - It uses semantic markup. - It degrades nicely (hidden elements are visible in script-disabled UAs). - DTs do not appear as links without script support. - It does not use inline event attribute (onclick()). - It does not require A elements in the markup. - It is screen-readers friendly. - It is IE Mac compatible. - It relies on one single hook. http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/toggle_elements.asp Please report errors/problems/etc.. Regards, Thierry | 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 ** ** 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] Holy Grail - with padding!
Hi All, I have just read Matthew Levine's interesting piece, http://www.alistapart.com/articles/holygrail and I wondered if anyone has ever seen a similar thing done with padding as well (i.e., same effect as with a padding : 25px all around)? I've searched and not found anything . . . I hate pages with no breathing-space (just my personal quirk). Anyone? Thanks, 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] Which unit is better for web site font size?
My personal preference has always been pt. I've looked at many professional source codes and alot of them uses px or % to measure size of items (divs, img, etc), em for positioning, and pt for font sizes.Minh"Joseph R. B. Taylor" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's my understanding that "em" is the very best way as it'll work with the user's preferred text size. "px" obviously gives you the most control as the designer, but doesn't scale in IE when the user changes their text size.There are other existing issues, but that pretty much covers it.I myself use both depending on the situation. I've never used a "%" measurement.Hopefully that helps.Joseph R. B. TaylorSites by Joe, LLChttp://sitesbyjoe.com(609)335-3076[EMAIL PROTECTED]Roberto Santana wrote: Hello, Which unit is better for web site font size? em px % ... Thanks! Roberto Santana ** 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** __Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [WSG] Which unit is better for web site font size?
Minh D. Tran wrote: My personal preference has always been pt. I've looked at many professional source codes and alot of them uses px or % to measure size of items (divs, img, etc), em for positioning, and pt for font sizes. Minh pt is for PRINT media, not screen. ** 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] Holy Grail - with padding!
Just a note that this 'holy grail' needs to be revisited for IE 7... At 06:52 AM 2/02/2006, you wrote: Hi All, I have just read Matthew Levine's interesting piece, http://www.alistapart.com/articles/holygrail and I wondered if anyone has ever seen a similar thing done with padding as well (i.e., same effect as with a padding : 25px all around)? I've searched and not found anything . . . I hate pages with no breathing-space (just my personal quirk). Anyone? Thanks, 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 ** Best Regards Ray Cauchi Manager/Lead Developer ( T W E E K ! ) PO Box 15 Wentworth Falls NSW Australia 2782 | p:+61 2 4757 1600 | f: +61 2 4757 3808 | m: 0414 270 400 | e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | w: http://www.tweek.com.au
Re: [WSG] Re: Moral High-horse
Lachlan wrote: The problem is that many people see the issue as what will happen if Idon't follow standards?; whereas the questions they should be asking are what are the benefits of following standards?, how mucheasier/faster is it to develop with standards?, etc. If the whole matter were addressed this way, IMHO we would have two major benefits: 1. Clear understanding of our role within the society as a whole and the www community as part of that whole. 2. Easyness in communicating this concept to others (clients and/or other webdesigners), since they will be clear to us in the first place. I hope I was able to make my point here ;-) Happy coding -- Paolo Dodetwww.noblocodenotas.comVerba volant, Scripta manent, Digitalia juvant
Re: [WSG] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
Stephen Stagg wrote: Is it just me, or does this example NOT work at all with safari? The technique may be the dog's wotsits but the page is just blank in Safari. Hmm. You're right. All I see is a blank page in Safari (Panther). -- Al Sparber PVII http://www.projectseven.com Designing with CSS is sometimes like barreling down a crumbling mountain road at 90 miles per hour secure in the knowledge that repairs are scheduled for next Tuesday. ** 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] Holy Grail - with padding!
Ray Cauchi wrote: Just a note that this 'holy grail' needs to be revisited for IE 7... Ray, I might be speaking out of turn, but premature consternation over IE7 could cause an unwarranted panic :-) It's a beta. -- Al Sparber PVII http://www.projectseven.com Designing with CSS is sometimes like barreling down a crumbling mountain road at 90 miles per hour secure in the knowledge that repairs are scheduled for next Tuesday. ** 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] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
Stephen Stagg wrote:
Is it just me, or does this example NOT work at all with safari?
The
technique may be the dog's wotsits but the page is just blank in
Safari.
You're right, I get a blank page in Safari. Very weird.
I know it worked with the previous version (using document.wrtie()),
but the following approach seems to create a problem in this
browser:
if (document.getElementsByTagName document.createElement){
var zStyles =
document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(document.createElement(
'link'))zStyles.href = '/TJK_ToggleDL/TJK_ToggleDL.css';
zStyles.type = 'text/css';
zStyles.rel = 'stylesheet';
}
Is it something I should know about Safari and the method used here?
I'm not sure except that createElement is kind of fashionable but
document.write is *much* more straightforward ;-)
--
Al Sparber
PVII
http://www.projectseven.com
Designing with CSS is sometimes like barreling down a crumbling
mountain road at 90 miles per hour secure in the knowledge that
repairs are scheduled for next Tuesday.
**
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] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
Stephen Stagg wrote: Is it just me, or does this example NOT work at all with safari? The technique may be the dog's wotsits but the page is just blank in Safari. Safari chokes on the way I set the attributes. I'll update the script to take care of the issue. Thanks a lot for your feedback. Thierry | 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] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
Stephen Stagg wrote:
Is it just me, or does this example NOT work at all with safari? The
technique may be the dog's wotsits but the page is just blank in
Safari.
You're right, I get a blank page in Safari. Very weird.
I know it worked with the previous version (using document.wrtie()), but the
following approach seems to create a problem in this browser:
if (document.getElementsByTagName document.createElement){
var zStyles =
document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(document.createElement(
'link'))zStyles.href = '/TJK_ToggleDL/TJK_ToggleDL.css';
zStyles.type = 'text/css';
zStyles.rel = 'stylesheet';
}
Is it something I should know about Safari and the method used here?
Regards,
Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com
On 1 Feb 2006, at 17:58, Thierry Koblentz wrote:
The advantages of this solution:
- It uses semantic markup.
- It degrades nicely (hidden elements are visible in script-disabled
UAs).
- DTs do not appear as links without script support.
- It does not use inline event attribute (onclick()).
- It does not require A elements in the markup.
- It is screen-readers friendly.
- It is IE Mac compatible.
- It relies on one single hook.
http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/toggle_elements.asp
Please report errors/problems/etc..
Regards,
Thierry | 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
**
**
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] Firefox being naughty
Guys and Gals, Perhaps you can help me with this mystery. I built this site over a year ago http://holidayrealty.com, and recently Firefox (I'm using 1.5 (could be the issue)) has stopped displaying my background image on the main content (on subpages only) and is instead just making the background black! I even went into the CSS and added a background-color: #FF and it didn't affect the behavior at all. Any guesses would be greatly appreciated. -- Joseph R. B. Taylor Sites by Joe, LLC http://sitesbyjoe.com (609)335-3076 [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] Holy Grail - with padding!
Designer wrote: Hi All, I have just read Matthew Levine's interesting piece, http://www.alistapart.com/articles/holygrail and I wondered if anyone has ever seen a similar thing done with padding as well (i.e., same effect as with a padding : 25px all around)? I've searched and not found anything . . . I hate pages with no breathing-space (just my personal quirk). Anyone? Something like this: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/3cols/ ? Regards, Thierry | 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] Which unit is better for web site font size?
--- Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
html { font-size:100.01%; }
body { font-size: 1em; } // this is a bug fix for
browser compatibility
Why do you need this? I don't use font-size hacks in
my CSS yet my fonts look exactly the same in all
browsers.
Francesco
Francesco Sanfilippo
Web Architect and Software Developer
http://www.blackcoil.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
402-932-5695 home office
402-676-3011 mobile
Professional web developer and Internet consultant with 10 years experience.
Specializing in ASP.NET, C#, SQL Server, CSS/XHTML, and digital photography.
Founder and developer of URL123.com - now serving 2 million clicks per month.
**
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: Re: [WSG] IE7 Now what?
Microsoft has newsgroups for identifying and reporting bugs. I blogged a for/against thing on IE7 preview beta 2 after having played with it for a morning, http://joahua.com/blog/2006/02/01/ie7-beta-2 , and discovered a zoom bug that doesn't play nice with CSS backgrounds. Bug is here: http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/list/en-us/default.aspx?dg=microsoft.public.internetexplorer.generaltid=42be81fd-c05e-4b16-bac5-3976493b33a0cat=en_us_28cca3eb-7037-4d4f-bde1-d8efee1f1420lang=encr=ussloc=en-usm=1p=1 - please vote for it! Shameless self-promotion aside, that newsgroup looks like something to watch + be active in until it gets closer to final. We won't really know for sure what render bugs IE7 is going to have until we get there, but for now the best tactic is probably to treat it like a standards-compliant browser (because, from what I've seen of it, it's definitely getting there) and if you find problems report them. (And maybe shout about them in here so they get votes from people on list + get noticed + fixed!) A good first-step would be to ensure your conditional-comments are if lte IE 6, and see how IE7 goes then. Josh On 2/2/06, Jay Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, but I fail to see what this has to do with the Beta 2 version. The Beta 2 version is installed on top of IE 6 and acts as it should so far. I am assuming that they have fixed any issues with Beta 1 before releasing a public beta. I have uninstalled it and all works fine in IE6 but what I want to make sure is that I can fix issues with my previous designs so that they don't remain broken in IE7 when it is in GA release. I will restate my question to be more clear: Are there any resources, index, tables or references on specific differences between IE7 box model and other browsers that will enable me to check and correct for layout issues that will exist on designs in IE 7? I don't want to have to try tweaking every single line of my stylesheets to GUESS if I have fixed it (as we all know, just because it LOOKS right in the browser doesn't mean that it IS right). There are two places I have found issues. One relates to display:table-cell and display: table. In addition I have some odd margins/padding issues with one site that doesn't exist in other sites with similar layout. All the best, Jay Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Miles Davies wrote: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/12/19/ie7beta_patch_glitch/ You should think twice before installing any Microsoft Better products. On 01/02/06, Jay Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have downloaded IE7 Beta 2 and I have looked at a couple of my sites. I have found some problems (never mind how slow the programs is). I use some * html hacks and some display: inline block tricks to emulate tables in IE's 6 and lower. Are there resources for ways to fix these hacks that are backward compatible or is the only way the method suggested by IE team which is to use conditional comments in the *head* and use a separate stylesheet? Jay ** 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] Which unit is better for web site font size?
On 2/1/06, Francesco [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
html { font-size:100.01%; }
body { font-size: 1em; } // this is a bug fix for
browser compatibility
Why do you need this? I don't use font-size hacks in
my CSS yet my fonts look exactly the same in all
browsers.
First of all, it's not a hack. Second of all, you haven't seen the
browsers that really do need this. It covers a lot of issues such as
various DPI and rendering errors and such. Read:
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=InternetExplorerWinBugs
... first item on the list.
--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] Re: Moral High-horse
Paolo Dodet wrote: Lachlan wrote: The problem is that many people see the issue as "what will happen if I don't follow standards?"; whereas the questions they should be asking are "what are the benefits of following standards?", "how much easier/faster is it to develop with standards?", etc. This statement is very true If the whole matter were addressed this way, IMHO we would have two major benefits: 1. Clear understanding of our role within the society as a whole and the www community as part of that whole. I don't know how this is true as we can only really know our role within a small portion of the www community within society. There are way too many subcultures in the development and design community. There are the DW users and the former graphic designers who are all over WYSIWYG editing and the tag soup makers and the perpetual transitionals (Doctypes) and the M$Word doc converters, FrontPage zealots, template selling shills, and more. Then there are the people who are just unplugged from any community and develop in a bubble at home on whatever software they were told to buy at school. So that being said we don't have a clear role unless we are to be self proclaimed pundits. Some more puntidtious (word?) than others. 2. Easyness in communicating this concept to others (clients and/or other webdesigners), since they will be clear to us in the first place. True(ish). But why do we have to continue to set ourselves on a course for a long up hill climb to never know where the peak is. I have felt for a while that the WSG and WASP need to have a clear public relations and communications strategy. If we, as the standards oriented, can agree on certain principles that can be easily made into a total cost accounting for the case for web standards to business and clients and get ourselves out of the proverbial lab with the technology then we can get on with innovating and the day to day business of web development. I consider myself as a serious student of standards based development and this ng has been a tremendous help to it but we need to stop preaching constantly to the converted and go out there and like Seth Godin and Guy Kawasaki get ourselves some standards evangelists. Clients who have implemented sites on standards and saved money, development time, upgrade headaches, forward compatibility etc. While I am a developer, I am still a businessperson who understands that the little details should never stand in the way of making a decision and to deliver a good product now --perfect it later. Cash flow and operation is most important to business. Some of the members of this group are students, interested hobbyists or just plain code freaks -- learn lots, make great websites. But for us website developers building a business around web standards development, I want to get past the point of critical mass for the knowledge and acceptance of web standards in the business community so that when I talk about it to clients they don't glaze over and even so they are asking for it. BTW this is the best ng I have ever been in -- even if people do think they see high-horses. And if you think things are at all nasty here (which they are not), I used to subscribe to the Slackware ng, and when Patrick V.(Slack's Developer and owner) got some mystery illness and people though he was going to die, there were flame wars and personal attacks like no other.
Re: [WSG] Which unit is better for web site font size?
On 01/02/06, Brian Cummiskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Minh D. Tran wrote: My personal preference has always been pt. I've looked at many professional source codes and alot of them uses px or % to measure size of items (divs, img, etc), em for positioning, and pt for font sizes. pt is for PRINT media, not screen. Wrong. Points are for all devices that operate at different ppi* than 96. Points have a locked points per logical inch resolution of 72. Pixels vary depending on ppi. So, if a medium has 96 ppi then a 12pt text will be rendered as 12*96/72=16px. If a medium has 120 ppi, then the same 12pt text will be rendered as 12*120/72=20px. If a device has 300 ppi, the 12pt text will be rendered as 12*300/72=50px. And the reverse is also true. That means that 16px text on a 96 ppi medium will be rendered the same size as 16*72/96=12pt. If a medium has 120 ppi, 16px text will be rendered as 16*72/120=9.6pt, and if a medium has 300 ppi the 16px text will be rendered as 16*72/300=3.84pt. ...except for the fact that the CSS reference pixel is defined at about 1/96 inch and not the actual medium pixels, so a smart renderer that knows about it's medium's ppi might scale it and thus make sure that 16px=12pt is always true. That knowledge or it's implementation for that matter is not guaranteed, however. * Pixels per logical inch, which is about equivalent to dots per physical inch as is used in print media. Default in Windows is 96 (Windows even calls it DPI), or 120 for large size. -- David liorean Andersson uri:http://liorean.web-graphics.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] Firefox being naughty
Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote:
Perhaps you can help me with this mystery. I built this site over a
year ago http://holidayrealty.com, and recently Firefox (I'm using 1.5
(could be the issue)) has stopped displaying my background image on the
main content (on subpages only) and is instead just making the
background black! I even went into the CSS and added a
background-color: #FF and it didn't affect the behavior at all.
The background is displaying just fine on all pages I checked. Have you
tried viewing the page from another computer, if you have one available,
and seen the same problem? Does the same problem occur whether you're
viewing the page from the web or from your local file system? Do you
have any firewall software enabled that could possibly be interfering
with the page? I've known Norton Internet Security to cause problems
with pages before, which are fixed by disabling it, though I've never
been able to work out exactly why it causes problems at all.
However, there is a problem with the CSS that you should fix.
body {
...
background-image: url(../images/greenBG.gif);
}
You should specify a background colour and a foreground colour as well.
You shouldn't rely on the browser defaults, some users may change them
and their choices may clash with yours.
background: #X url(../images/greenBG.gif);
color: black;
(where #X is roughly the same colour green as the greenBG.gif.)
--
Lachlan Hunt
http://lachy.id.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] Holy Grail - with padding!
Al That was my point - when a structure such as Thierry's works in the current Beta of IE7, I would prefer to use it over a 'holy grail' that breaks (ref: http://www.alistapart.com/d/holygrail/example_3.html) Sure its a Beta, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will all change for the final product...though I guess it is MS??? Love your work Thierry! ray At 08:01 AM 2/02/2006, Thierry Koblentz wrote: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/3cols/ ? Best Regards Ray Cauchi Manager/Lead Developer ( T W E E K ! ) PO Box 15 Wentworth Falls NSW Australia 2782 | p:+61 2 4757 1600 | f: +61 2 4757 3808 | m: 0414 270 400 | e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | w: http://www.tweek.com.au
Re: [WSG] Holy Grail - with padding!
Al That was my point - when a structure such as Thierry's works in the current Beta of IE7, I would prefer to use it over a 'holy grail' that breaks (ref: http://www.alistapart.com/d/holygrail/example_3.html) Sure its a Beta, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will all change for the final product...though I guess it is MS??? Love your work Thierry! ray At 08:01 AM 2/02/2006, Thierry Koblentz wrote: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/3cols/ ? Best Regards Ray Cauchi Manager/Lead Developer ( T W E E K ! ) PO Box 15 Wentworth Falls NSW Australia 2782 | p:+61 2 4757 1600 | f: +61 2 4757 3808 | m: 0414 270 400 | e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | w: http://www.tweek.com.au
Re: Re: [WSG] IE7 Now what?
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 dumping ground for IE7 bugs -- —pd—
RE: [WSG] [Fixed div elements] - Having troubles with IE
Andrew, You could also look at this - the code explains what's happening. http://www.homebass.info/fixedPosTest/ Grant That is exactly what am I talking about. I applaud your skill, but not your memory :) I am trying to pick away at your css to figure out how you got it working but so far I have had no luck. I will most likely create a new page away from the code I have no to see if I can just get it working. Thanks for pointing me in some direction! -Andrew Brown -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bert Doorn Sent: February 1, 2006 2:16 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] [Fixed div elements] - Having troubles with IE G'day Andrew Brown wrote: I changed the doctype to strict locally and still the scrollbar does appear. I also already have those additional tags added. Do you know of a website that has enough content that scrolls and has div banners such as mine only done in css? I cannot say I have saw many that do. I am still on top of this. Kinda like www.sure-kleen.com ? Don't ask me how I did it - I forgot. But if it does what you want, feel free to reverse-engineer. 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 ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** This message is intended for the addressee named and may contain privileged information or confidential information or both. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it and notify the sender. ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Safari issue SOLVED! - was Re: [WSG] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
It seems that adding the rel attribute to the link element through the DOM makes Safari go ballistic. Using the style element instead appears to do the trick. A new version of the script should be uploaded later today. Regards, Thierry | 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] Firefox being naughty
On Feb 1, 2006, at 3:55 PM, Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote: Guys and Gals, Perhaps you can help me with this mystery. I built this site over a year ago http://holidayrealty.com, and recently Firefox (I'm using 1.5 (could be the issue)) has stopped displaying my background image on the main content (on subpages only) and is instead just making the background black! I even went into the CSS and added a background-color: #FF and it didn't affect the behavior at all. I get a double Flash image in Safari 2.0.3 which pushes the text below the box into the background on the homepage. Double image in other pages, but the main text box stretches down to enclose the copy in other pages. I get the background, though, both in Safari and Mac Firefox 1.5. Best regards, Marilyn Langfeld Langfeldesigns http://www.langfeldesigns.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] +1.301.598.3300 business phone +1.301.598.0532 fax +1.202.390.8847 mobile ** 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] Holy Grail - with padding!
From: Ray Cauchi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Al That was my point - when a structure such as Thierry's works in the current Beta of IE7, I would prefer to use it over a 'holy grail' that breaks (ref: http://www.alistapart.com/d/holygrail/example_3.html) Sure its a Beta, but that doesn't necessarily mean it will all change for the final product...though I guess it is MS??? You lost me, Ray. I was trying to say that people should not get alarmed over pages that do not work in IE7 Beta 2. It should be completely irrelevant at this stage of developement and only to test for bugs - not in yours or our web pages - but in IE7. Sorry if I confused you. -- Al Sparber PVII http://www.projectseven.com Designing with CSS is sometimes like barreling down a crumbling mountain road at 90 miles per hour secure in the knowledge that repairs are scheduled for next Tuesday. ** 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] Article: DL + DOM = cool FAQ page
Al Sparber wrote: Is it something I should know about Safari and the method used here? I'm not sure except that createElement is kind of fashionable but document.write is *much* more straightforward ;-) I agree, but the DOM police scares me... ;-) Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com (wondering why his posts show up with so much time delay on this list) ** 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] Which unit is better for web site font size?
Joseph R. B. Taylor wrote Wed, 01 Feb 2006 14:13:13 -0500: px obviously gives you the most control as the designer, The control is illusory as to users with modern browsers, since they have the power to zoom and set a minimum font size, in addition to the power to disregard your styles entirely, and veto power to apply very specific overruling styles. but doesn't scale in IE when the user changes their text size. This is true, but it understates the problem. The problem is that px sizes bear no relationship to user defaults. Users are free to set defaults to whatever size best suits, which sizes in px totally disregard. -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/ ** 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] Which unit is better for web site font size?
Christian Montoya wrote Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:10:40 -0500: For the record, most browsers default text size is 16px = 1em = 100%. That's most, not all. While as a practical matter this is true, technically it isn't true. Some browsers have a default size in px, but others, including all versions of IE, have a default size in pt. IE's default is 12pt. 12pt means 16px only when the working DPI is 96. 96 DPI has historically been the windoze default, which is how one gets away with claiming it defaults to 16px. The problem is that the default 96 DPI isn't any longer so easy to presume. Laptop sales have for a while outnumbered desktop sales, and many higher resolution laptops are configured by their manufacturers to 120 DPI by default. 12pt @ 120 DPI is 20px. Just as with default font size, doze users are free to configure to other DPI values. This is how it has always been with Linux, where 96 DPI is clearly an exception rather than a rule. In most cases Linux's DPI is less than 96 if accurately set. OTOH, DPI values in excess of 120 are no longer ususual either, and are set to average quite a bit higher before long if the promise of $100 laptops for children materializes. http://chronicle.com/free/2005/11/2005111602t.htm So, counting on the ubiquity of a 16px default is considerably less safe than it used to be. For those interested in DPI derivation without a calculator, visit: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/dpi.html -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/ ** 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: Moral High-horse
Jay wrote: I don't know how this is true as we can only really know our role within a small portion of the www community within society. I see your point and I can't but agree, partly because I didn't really stated clearly what my point was, this in the first place, and secondly because... yeah, the web community at large is really large, know what I mean? When I stated this: 2. Easyness in communicating this concept to others (clients and/or other webdesigners), since they will be clear to us in the first place.What I really meant was that I can't sell anything if I'm not clear about what the advantages would be for my client. But then you said: we need to stop preaching constantly to the converted and go out there and like Seth Godin and Guy Kawasaki get ourselves some standards evangelists. Clients who have implemented sites on standards and saved money, development time, upgrade headaches, forward compatibility etc. I couldn't agree more. The best way to sell something is through some satisfied client of yours' friends. If I got your point here. And then, regarding this group. Well, I like it here. In spite of people who say there are some who look down to newbies and all that stuff, you know? I AM a newbie, I don't feel like I am being looked down to by nobody. I found people who helped me by giving me advice directly or indirectly, and good pieces of advice too, mind you. Surely, not all of us are from the same lot... Well, Thanks God. The world would be such a boring place, otherwise. Don't you think so? I think that the way people would look at me is the way I let them to, and if I think that somebody is treating me contemptously well, I know for experience that what I see in others is what is inside me, that's why I can spot it in the first place, see what I mean? So, I am with you, this is a nice place to share thoughts and ideas. Far better than a lot of other place I didn't mention 'cause I like to talk of good things and let the bad work out for themselves ;-) Cheers -- Paolo Dodetwww.noblocodenotas.comVerba volant, Scripta manent, Digitalia juvant
[WSG] Safari frameset link tabbing bug
Hi, Id like to alert people to a bug I have found in Safari (1.2 and 2.0 and maybe more thats all I have access to). When using framesets (I know we have a good reason that we have to use them OK?) and navigating by keyboard: The first link in a frame is skipped if both frames have links. An example - http://www.meridian-records.co.uk/recmd.html . After the link Z the focus goes to the second link in the next frame Adar. You can go back to the first by using shift tab but its not intuitive. If there are 3 frames with one link in each an example is http://cita.rehab.uiuc.edu/wai-eval/frames/frame-test.html - the focus skips from frame 1 to frame 3 and frame 2 cannot be accessed via keyboard even with shift-tab. Grant Focas **This message is intended for the addressee named and may containprivileged information or confidential information or both. If youare not the intended recipient please delete it and notify the sender.**
Re: [WSG] Web Standards Shetland Ponies
Some people write as if there were a club, a them and us, people who get it and people who don't, and never the twain shall meet. My original post was not meant to seperate 'standardistas' from the rest of the industry. It's just that I thought Standards Were the Way Things Were Done by Everyone (TM), and then I came across a huge article about a website that fit the qualification of 'Failed Redesign' (these things didn't really exist). I wanted to understand why this happened. Is standards only really something a small contingent of geeky developers go for? The more I look around at redesigns, I notice that more are failed than not. Sunbeam, Shiels Jewellry, VideoEzy, etc, etc, etc. Very few are standards compliant. I don't think there is a them and us, because I think even people on this list are creating Failed Redesigns. There are quite a few on this list, and yet very few successful redesigns. Surely it's a matter of trade-offs that people weigh up and make a decision about, and have their reasons for doing so. Not that long ago there was advice to add in all the proprietary attributes within the body element to make it work in all browsers. Wouldn't it be better to be straightforwards and honest about the reasons for the trade-off decisions and their results? Kat ** 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] Background-Image download order
Hello Everyone, We are in final testing for a largish site that uses a large amount of background images for navigation and various graphical effects (as all CSS-based sites do). We are finding that the background images for our main navigation are downloading last and as such the white text is unreadable untill the background arrives .. almost last. The list that drives this is right at the topm of the source code. Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the order the browser requests and downloads background images? Cheers Todd ** 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] IE7 Now what?
Thats a big call Ted. Ill be happy to see that back of IE6 as much as anyone but I think it will be well into next year before IE7 overtakes IE6, even if they do roll it into XP SP3. Your right tho... We need to start planning for it. On 02/02/06, Ted Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will put my neck out on a limb right now and say that the majority of your traffic by the end of October will have the ability to use :hover pseudo classes, first-child, alpha-transparency png graphics, attribute selectors, etc. ** 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] Background-Image download order
Todd Baker wrote: We are finding that the background images for our main navigation are downloading last and as such the white text is unreadable untill the background arrives You're assuming the background image will arrive. What happens if someone has images turned off? You should specify a background colour as well. Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the order the browser requests and downloads background images? Browsers would likely request images in the order that they are required, though there is no guarantee of this. If the markup for the navigation appears last in the markup, then due to incremental rendering, it is likely that the images required to render it will be downloaded near the end. If it's at the top of the markup, then it seems logical that it would be downloaded near the beginning. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.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] Background-Image download order
So you're saying that if images are disabled in the browser you navigation becomes invisible? Can you add a background color so the nav is readable before the images load? Alex On 2/2/06, Todd Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Everyone, We are in final testing for a largish site that uses a large amount of background images for navigation and various graphical effects (as all CSS-based sites do). We are finding that the background images for our main navigation are downloading last and as such the white text is unreadable untill the background arrives .. almost last. The list that drives this is right at the topm of the source code. Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the order the browser requests and downloads background images? Cheers Todd ** 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] IE7 Now what?
Todd Baker wrote: Thats a big call Ted. Ill be happy to see that back of IE6 as much as anyone but I think it will be well into next year before IE7 overtakes IE6, even if they do roll it into XP SP3. Your right tho... We need to start planning for it. On 02/02/06, Ted Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will put my neck out on a limb right now and say that the majority of your traffic by the end of October will have the ability to use :hover pseudo classes, first-child, alpha-transparency png graphics, attribute selectors, etc. I am just trying to plan ahead. I don't want to be building sites that have issues that I have to go back and fix when the GA release comes out. I have three sites with issues and want to correct them but also fear that it is to early to rely on the rendering in the current beta 2. I just don't want to be stuck with 10 projects on the go only to find that NOW I have to address these issues. -Jay ** 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] Background-Image download order
For the navigation, you can put all your nav images into the one file so that they all load at once, then use background-position to make them sit in place. As for making things readable before the background images download, how about setting a background colour as well? That way if users have images disabled (dialup users, etc.) they can still read your primary navigation. This will obviously only work if you're not dependent on the background being partially transparent for the nav. Josh On 2/2/06, Todd Baker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Everyone, We are in final testing for a largish site that uses a large amount of background images for navigation and various graphical effects (as all CSS-based sites do). We are finding that the background images for our main navigation are downloading last and as such the white text is unreadable untill the background arrives .. almost last. The list that drives this is right at the topm of the source code. Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the order the browser requests and downloads background images? Cheers Todd ** 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] Background-Image download order
On 02/02/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're assuming the background image will arrive. What happens if someone has images turned off? You should specify a background colour as well. Yes indeed we are adding a background colour that its close to the graphic. Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the order the browser requests and downloads background images? Browsers would likely request images in the order that they are required, though there is no guarantee of this. If the markup for the navigation appears last in the markup, then due to incremental rendering, it is likely that the images required to render it will be downloaded near the end. If it's at the top of the markup, then it seems logical that it would be downloaded near the beginning. Thats what I would of thought but the list for this nav is right at the top.. Thanks ** 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] Background-Image download order
Todd Baker wrote: On 02/02/06, Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You're assuming the background image will arrive. What happens if someone has images turned off? You should specify a background colour as well. Yes indeed we are adding a background colour that its close to the graphic. But you stated that the text is unreadable until the text arrives. The background colour is obviously not suitable. Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the order the browser requests and downloads background images? Browsers would likely request images in the order that they are required, though there is no guarantee of this. If the markup for the navigation appears last in the markup, then due to incremental rendering, it is likely that the images required to render it will be downloaded near the end. If it's at the top of the markup, then it seems logical that it would be downloaded near the beginning. Thats what I would of thought but the list for this nav is right at the top.. Is there a URI so that we may see the page and this effect occurring? -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.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] IE7 Now what?
You should seriously consider how you are doing your CSS right now and how you should begin planning for the not so distant future of IE6 being the minority browser. Microsoft wants to ditch IE6. IE7 will be part of a service pack upgrade to xp and as part of the fabled vista platform. Just because Microsoft *wants* to ditch IE6 doesn't mean it happen just like that. Based on that logic: considering how old IE6 is right now, you'd think that would mean nobody would be using IE5. Right? Wrong. I know thecounter isn't scientific, but it's a big sample; and they're still reporting 3% IE5.x. http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm shows up to 8% for some samples, which highlights the slow-moving software of large organisations (including .gov). In any case, that's a lot of people still sitting on *really* old software. Pushing IE7 out as part of a service pack doesn't guarantee anything either; consider all the users out there who don't have broadband yet - many of them don't install service packs. A lot of people just don't update their machines at all, for whatever reason. I will put my neck out on a limb right now and say that the majority of your traffic by the end of October will have the ability to use :hover pseudo classes, first-child, alpha-transparency png graphics, attribute selectors, etc. You are far more optimistic than I am. I'd guess a high take-up rate; but after the IE userbase gets to about 50/50 IE6/IE7 I think it will slow down a lot. We certainly won't be able to ignore IE6 in October. ...but, obviously, I really hope I'm wrong and you are right :) Further, they just announced their xmlhttp requests to match the other browsers. We will see better pages and markup very soon. If they've really fixed the CSS bugs they claim to have fixed, life will be much better. CSS layouts won't be subject to such a time blowout due to IE bugfixing, which will make it more likely that large firms will switch over from old school table designs. Consider this an open door. Remember the discussions about what true professional web developer is? Working towards an IE7 population is a true professional. Building pages with IE6 hacks is a 2005 professional. Personally I think it's worth showing some caution and waiting for the final release of IE7 before we start trying to design for it. A lot can change between beta and final release. Ben -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Web Standards Shetland Ponies
I wanted to understand why this happened. Is standards only really something a small contingent of geeky developers go for? I think it's fair to say that standards developers are still the minority, but that doesn't make them wrong. What's right is not always popular, what's popular is not always right. The more I look around at redesigns, I notice that more are failed than not. Sunbeam, Shiels Jewellry, VideoEzy, etc, etc, etc. Very few are standards compliant. Probably mostly done by larger design firms, which tend to be using older techniques. When your profit margins are up, it's easier to get comfortable I think. Also, most clients still aren't aware of standards/accessibility/usability; they're still judging sites on how they look and what the first few users say. Wouldn't it be better to be straightforwards and honest about the reasons for the trade-off decisions and their results? Yes, that's true. What really sets off the standards crowd is when the reasons are really bad, and/or people are hostile to standards. The trap is expecting and assuming the worst of reasons, I guess :) Ben -- --- http://www.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson ** 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] Background-Image download order
On 02/02/2006, at 9:59 AM, Todd Baker wrote: We are finding that the background images for our main navigation are downloading last and as such the white text is unreadable untill the background arrives .. almost last. The list that drives this is right at the topm of the source code. I've always found the download order somewhat unpredictable, particularly cross-browser. Generally the image you want most drops in last (I think its related to that butter and bread falling thing) Just to be a naysayer, have you given consideration to the accessability issues of background images being Important? Derek Featherstone's CSS Background Images: Naughty or Nice? discusses it nicely. http://24ways.org/advent/naughty-or-nice-css-background-images (Hi Derek!) Hope that doesn't make you scream too much :) Lea -- Lea de Groot 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] Background-Image download order
Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the order the browser requests and downloads background images? Bear this in mind, too - some browsers will call *all* images specified with the background property in your CSS file, whether they're needed for that page or not. I fell foul of this one, and was wondering why my first page was taking ges to render. The solution? Boring, but multiple CSS files, one for each page, containing only the bg image declarations for that page. HTH... Nick ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.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] Background-Image download order
Nick Gleitzman wrote: Boring, but multiple CSS files, one for each page, containing only the bg image declarations for that page. Maybe I've missed something, but why wouldn't you just have the one css file but declare the background image in the head section of each individual page? Regards, Ric ** 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] Separate mobile content considered harmful?
Hi all, This was big news a year or two ago now, but I just realised that, perhaps, a separate domain space for mobile content isn't particularly evil afterall. Tim Berners-Lee weighed in on this in May 2004 [1], and I do agree with everything outlined in that document -- but there is more. We're looking at mobile content for the Sunrise Family site, along similar lines to that on the Y!7 Sunrise WAP site [2]. However, this seems to make a great deal of sense for that website (crappy markup on the core Sunrise site notwithstanding) simply because the content has been trimmed down to something... intrinsically usable. I'm quietly a fan of this approach, I think, but would still be interested to hear compelling arguments against it. Obviously, I'd be keen to ensure any WAP content we produced was valid, just so there's less a pathetic mobile parser can give up on -- for example, I disagree with Yahoo!7's decision to ditch the doctype in their WAP pages, even if WAP data is still 3c/KB or whatever it is. If you're using WAP, you can probably afford it, plus they've used images for bullet points. A list would surely suffice! So I guess this is more of a content-based question. But the subdomain thing comes into it, too, as well as the fact that this equates to providing different versions for different devices. 1. http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/TLD 2. http://wap.yahoo.com.au/sunrise/ -- note the evil subdomain Regards, Josh -- Joshua Street http://www.joahua.com/ +61 (0) 425 808 469 ** 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] Background-Image download order
nick Bear this in mind, too - some browsers will call *all* images specified with the background property in your CSS file, whether they're needed for that page or not. errr.. what browsers? I wonder what would happen if the seperate stylesheets were alled called in from one importer stylesheet? would that make any sense? kvnmcwebn ** 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] Background-Image download order
On 2 Feb 2006, at 1:24 PM, Ric Raftis wrote: Nick Gleitzman wrote: Boring, but multiple CSS files, one for each page, containing only the bg image declarations for that page. Maybe I've missed something, but why wouldn't you just have the one css file but declare the background image in the head section of each individual page? You could, of course, but I use external files for the same reason that I don't include the whole CSS file in the head - separation of of content and presentation. N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.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] Background-Image download order
Todd Baker said:
We are finding that the background images for our main navigation are
downloading last and as such the white text is unreadable
This makes for quite a usability issue. Is there any way you can revisit
the design to ensure the text is visible with images turned off or not
downloaded?
Or if it's just a case of fixing the anchor color then supply a background
color for just that element. The browser will render the specified
background color and place the image over the top of it when it is
downloaded.
EXAMPLE
a {background: #000 url(image.gif); color: #fff}
Is there any logic I can apply (ordering CSS etc) that will affect the
order the browser requests and downloads background images?
Not that I'm aware of... I always thought it was something magical that
browsers and servers worked out amongst themselves to in order to make
best use of the available packets and minimise requests.
kind regards
Terrence Wood.
**
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] Background-Image download order
On 2 Feb 2006, at 1:18 PM, kvnmcwebn wrote: nick Bear this in mind, too - some browsers will call *all* images specified with the background property in your CSS file, whether they're needed for that page or not. errr.. what browsers? Safari, from memory... it was a while ago. Later versions may have seen a fix. Sorry, don't have time to test right now... I wonder what would happen if the seperate stylesheets were alled called in from one importer stylesheet? would that make any sense? Uh - wouldn't that result in the same problem? If a browser reads a CSS file, it will process all the other files called by it - won't it? N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.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] HTML Restructuring of hopkinsprogramming.net
Hi Zachary, I just have noticed that your web site does not meet the requirements for WAI AA and AAA. But it is really beautiful. Best, John Home: http://www.webnauts.net Redesign in process: http://www.webnauts.net/redesign/ Hopkins Programming wrote: Does anyone have any ideas or thoughts on my question? --Zachary On 1/30/06, *Hopkins Programming* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all! I re-did my website (http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/) a while back in an effort to update its look and improve the quality of the coding behind it. Right now, it looks perfect, just like I want it to. But, I need to improve/clean up the XHTML coding behind it - eg, properly structure the page, designing first for Lynx and text based browsers, then going back and making everything pretty for modern browsers through CSS. Do you all have any suggestions on the proper kinds of things that should end up in the heading (h1-h3) tags? Like, is my site title or my page title supposed to be in h1? I greatly appreciate your suggestions and input. --Zachary Hopkins -- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net -- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[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] HTML Restructuring of hopkinsprogramming.net
It meets -A and -AAA. This re-coding process will allow me to add text back into my a href="" tags on my main page and gain back -AA status. Do you know if its better to arrange the actual HTML code on the page such that the content all comes first, and all links are at the bottom of the page? == Example h1Site/h1 h2Page/h2 h3Section One/h3 pBlah, blah, blah.../p ul lia href="" One/a/li lia href="" Two/a/li lia href="" Three/a/li ul == --Zachary On 2/1/06, John S. Britsios [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Zachary,I just have noticed that your web site does not meet the requirementsfor WAI AA and AAA.But it is really beautiful.Best,JohnHome: http://www.webnauts.net Redesign in process: http://www.webnauts.net/redesign/Hopkins Programming wrote: Does anyone have any ideas or thoughts on my question? --Zachary On 1/30/06, *Hopkins Programming* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all! I re-did my website (http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/) a while back in an effort to update its look and improve the quality of the coding behind it. Right now, it looks perfect, just like I want it to.But, I need to improve/clean up the XHTML coding behind it - eg, properly structure the page, designing first for Lynx and text based browsers, then going back and making everything pretty for modern browsers through CSS. Do you all have any suggestions on the proper kinds of things that should end up in the heading (h1-h3) tags?Like, is my site title or my page title supposed to be in h1? I greatly appreciate your suggestions and input. --Zachary Hopkins -- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net -- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[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 **-- ==The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net
Re: [WSG] HTML Restructuring of hopkinsprogramming.net
Hopkins Programming said: [is it] better that the content all comes first? Mark Pilgrim [1], Sarah Horton (of Web Style Guide Fame, in her latest book) and others say it is. Roger Hudson, WSG's very own Russ Weakley, and Lisa Miller say that it isn't. [1]: http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_10_presenting_your_main_content_first.html [2]: http://www.usability.com.au/resources/source-order.cfm ** 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] Background-Image download order
NickGleitzman wrote: On 2 Feb 2006, at 1:24 PM, Ric Raftis wrote: Nick Gleitzman wrote: Boring, but multiple CSS files, one for each page, containing only the bg image declarations for that page. Maybe I've missed something, but why wouldn't you just have the one css file but declare the background image in the head section of each individual page? You could, of course, but I use external files for the same reason that I don't include the whole CSS file in the head - separation of of content and presentation. What about SSI or PHP. I have used this for conditional class application in navigations I don't see why you couldn't use it for applying to stylesheet insertion. For navigation where I use image replacement I use a single image and use the background image positioning to handle the various states. This way the whole nav loads at the same time and there is no need for _javascript_ preloads. This makes me think that I should put all my background images on one image for an entire site. That might be a cool experiment. Has any one tried this? Jay Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [WSG] Web Standards Shetland Ponies
heretic wrote: I wanted to understand why this happened. Is standards only really something a small contingent of geeky developers go for? I think it's fair to say that standards developers are still the minority, but that doesn't make them wrong. "What's right is not always popular, what's popular is not always right." How very true. Probably mostly done by larger design firms, which tend to be using older techniques. When your profit margins are up, it's easier to get comfortable I think. Also, most clients still aren't aware of standards/accessibility/usability; they're still judging sites on how they look and what the first few users say. As I said earlier in the high horse thread, we (standards oriented developers) have not yet provided adequate answers for business to take to their buddies and say " We just built our website around standards and it was the best thing we ever did!" Yes, that's true. What really sets off the standards crowd is when the reasons are really bad, and/or people are hostile to standards. The trap is expecting and assuming the worst of reasons, I guess :) I don't know if this is true or not. What I do know is that business doesn't care about standards because no one from THEIR group of peers have told them to. If you had some of the biggest names in marketing and business saying you should build around standards for such and such a result to the overall competitiveness of the company, then you would have standards all over. What I have said and will continue to say is that it is not our jobs as a community to sell standards to our clients -- we can do it on a one-on-one basis -- as a community we need to sell standards to the people business looks to for answers -- Marketing Gurus, Accountants, Consulting firms, Business Reporters and Pundits. Business owners rarely want to be first adopters unless they are true entrepreneurs and don't care if they flounder on their way to the top. Most business owners make decisions because it is the accepted thing to do, the cheapest thing to do or the thing to do because they look or seem better as a person or a company. When you have people like Vincent Flanders and Jakob Nielsen talking about usability to fortune 500 companies and to web design conferences etc. they both acknowledge the bottom line and the sacrificial choices companies must make to ensure viability and usefulness you don't hear them talking about whether or not the site used a clearing div at the bottom of their site or a hack in their CSS. The only way that we will ever gain wide acceptance (I sound like some sort of human rights activist) is to make business demand it because they will not be competitive without standards based design. Jay Jay Gilmore U)SmashingRed Web Marketing B)Jay Gilmore's SmashingRed Blog P) 902.529.0651 E) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[WSG] css/html snippets
on the topic of css patterns and re-usable chunks of code, there's plenty of whole css page layout resources that you can use as a starting point for your own stuff right, like the 'ol classics http://glish.com/css/ or http://www.bluerobot.com/web/layouts/ what about the insides of those layouts? with every subsequent design i do i gather more and more html associated css chunks that i reuse over and over. if you were using dreamweaver you'd call them snippets. things like: a login box a search box a search results pagination bar a set of search results a contact us form etc... you get the idea. just the really common stuff. obviously customisation of these would be/is required in almost all cases as soon as you paste them in but at least a starting point is handy are there resources/collections of these snippets out there? i cant find anything decent. ie: clean / semantic / sensible / 2006. if not, maybe there's a need for something...? ~~~ Peter Ottery ~ Creative Director Daemon Pty Ltd 17 Roslyn Gardens Elizabeth Bay NSW 2011 http://www.daemon.com.au/ COMING SOON webDU - the web technology conference http://webdu.com.au/ Sydney, March 2/3 2006 ~~~ ** 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/html snippets
That web patterns thing people were bouncing around in here a month or so back? I've lost the address... if someone else doesn't post it, it's in the archives somewhere... probably something really obvious like webpatterns.org... Ah, yes, that's it. http://webpatterns.org/ On 2/2/06, Peter Ottery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on the topic of css patterns and re-usable chunks of code, there's plenty of whole css page layout resources that you can use as a starting point for your own stuff right, like the 'ol classics http://glish.com/css/ or http://www.bluerobot.com/web/layouts/ what about the insides of those layouts? with every subsequent design i do i gather more and more html associated css chunks that i reuse over and over. if you were using dreamweaver you'd call them snippets. things like: a login box a search box a search results pagination bar a set of search results a contact us form etc... you get the idea. just the really common stuff. obviously customisation of these would be/is required in almost all cases as soon as you paste them in but at least a starting point is handy are there resources/collections of these snippets out there? i cant find anything decent. ie: clean / semantic / sensible / 2006. if not, maybe there's a need for something...? ~~~ Peter Ottery ~ Creative Director Daemon Pty Ltd 17 Roslyn Gardens Elizabeth Bay NSW 2011 http://www.daemon.com.au/ COMING SOON webDU - the web technology conference http://webdu.com.au/ Sydney, March 2/3 2006 ~~~ ** 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/html snippets
Joshua wrote http://webpatterns.org/ *checks it out* ok, so the term patterns is potentially a too far advanced term for what i'm thinking of. all that microformat and machine readable data stuff is certainly interesting (Allsopp - i can hear you screaming about it from here ;-) but... I *think* what i'm talking about it different. i'm just thinking more along the lines of a library of cut'n'paste chunks of re-usable code.. maybe i'm trying to jump to the result of what the web-patternists are aiming to investigate. pete ** 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/html snippets
Joshua also wrote: That web patterns thing people were bouncing around in here a month or so back? I've lost the address... if someone else doesn't post it, it's in the archives somewhere... oops. yeah ok: http://www.mail-archive.com/wsg@webstandardsgroup.org/msg24333.html it was a good thread. i missed it. guilty as charged. *mental note - check the archives before posting* in saying that. i think i still have a hankering to put something together. pete ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
