Re: [WSG] Should logo not link to the homepage?

2006-02-24 Thread Ian Anderson

Justin Owens wrote:

* the img alt text read 'logo' but the link went to home

Your alt attribute should be modified to correctly represent the
actual image. IMHO, 'logo' is not descriptive enough to be used as
alternative text for a linked image. 


In my opinion, it is important for linked images to have alt text that 
explains the function of the link - the alt text should be more or less 
the same as the link text ought to be if the link was on text instead of 
an image. The alt should not be a literal description of the image in 
this case.


So, the logo should say something like MSNBC home page so that it 
includes functional branding but clearly conveys the destination of the 
link.


To consider two extreme examples if the MSNBC logo was linked to the 
home page, alt text of MSNBC would be the least helpful, and alt text 
of Home would be the most correct.


I think the best course of action is a compromise incorporating both 
ideas like that above.



--
_
zStudio - Web development and accessibility
http://zStudio.co.uk

Snippetz.net - Online code library
File, manage and re-use your code snippets  links
http://snippetz.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
**



[WSG] Your email requires verification verify#kdWfF4HBUy_SYGJC5A3KzB6MKspDh3nM

2006-02-24 Thread steven
The message you sent requires that you verify that you 
are a real live human being and not a spam source.

To complete this verification, simply reply to this message and leave
the subject line intact.

The headers of the message sent from your address are show below:

From wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Fri Feb 24 21:52:22 2006
Received: from hambo by qld.correctdns.com with local-bsmtp (Exim 4.52)
 id 1FCaYc-0002Tz-DX
 for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:52:22 +1100
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on qld.correctdns.com
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=4.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DATE_IN_FUTURE_06_12,
HTML_MESSAGE,INVALID_DATE,MIME_HTML_MOSTLY,NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no 
version=3.1.0
Received: from [216.119.112.83] (helo=mail.webboy.net)
by qld.correctdns.com with esmtp (Exim 4.52)
id 1FCaYa-0002Te-UI
for [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:52:18 +1100
From: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: digest for wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
charset=Windows-1252;
boundary=SM_ee87b748-7444-4a27-8b6a-739ce9f3c023
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 21:45:12 1100
message-id: [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] Should logo not link to the homepage?

2006-02-24 Thread Patrick Lauke
 Ian Anderson

 To consider two extreme examples if the MSNBC logo was linked to the 
 home page, alt text of MSNBC would be the least helpful,

although that is the exact equivalent of what happens visually for
sighted users, and they then use their acquired knowledge to understand
that it links back to the homepage of the site.

 and alt text 
 of Home would be the most correct.

but then you've removed the branding/identification from the page.

How about a dual approach of using ALT that describes the image (MSNBC)
and a title on the link to provide additional advisory information of
where the link is going to ('MSNBC home page'), i.e.

a href= title=MSNBC home pageimg ... alt=MSNBC //a

P

Patrick H. Lauke
Web Editor / University of Salford
http://www.salford.ac.uk

Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/

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

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



Re: [WSG] Page veiwing

2006-02-24 Thread T. R. Valentine
On 23/02/06, SunUp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 What is it about low quality that keeps you attracted?

 It's not that I'm attracted to it, I simply don't really care about it.
 I see those huge fancy flat screen monitors on high res, with all
 their kiddie-safe rounded corners and pastelly colours. They look like
 a Fisher-Price toy.

That sounds more like a complaint about the GUI. IMO, WinXP does have
a cartoonish look.


 At this res I can read everything without squinting or leaning forward
 or constantly upping the size in browsers because developers use teeny
 tiny text (I have 20/20 vision btw, no glasses, no contacts).

Before I needed reading/computer glasses (getting older!) I found it
preferable to see more -- more cells in a spreadsheet, more of a page
in a word processor, etc. That's why I set my 21 CRT to 1600x1200. I
still use that resolution with glasses and find it no harder to use
(without leaning forward or quinting) than reading a printed page.

But, of course, to each his (her) own.

 Incidentally, I also had to be bullied into getting a mobile phone
 (last year). Maybe I'm just a Luddite :)

I still do without one. I also resisted pagers (electronic dog
leashes) when they were in vogue. I don't need -- or want -- to be
available every moment of the day.

--
T. R. Valentine
Use a decent browser: Safari, Firefox, Mozilla, Opera
(Avoid IE like the plague it is)
N���.�Ȩ�X���+��i��n�Z�֫v�+��h��y�m�쵩�j�l��.f���.�ץ�w�q(��b��(��,�)උazX����)��

Re: [WSG] AP div problem... please!

2006-02-24 Thread Soeren Mordhorst
I set in #textbox the positioning from 'absolute' to 'relative', gave a 
little 'lesser of px' in the #TJKul and it worked fine.

Maybe you have to fix some bugs in IE5x...

#textbox{
position:relative;
display:block;
left:30px;
top:72px;
height:20px;
width:50px;
background:url(http://www.mouseriders.dk/til_michael/imagesBG/textbox_white.gif);
z-index:1;
}

#TJKul {
margin-top: 72px;
background: #FFF url(kaosjs/ulbg_white.gif)
repeat-x;
float:right;
margin-right:30px;
}


All the best,

Soeren




Kim Kruse schrieb:
I'm trying to get my text resizer to work in FF/IE/Opera but for 
some reason I don't see the AP div (#textbox) on the page in IE6.


If you go to this page 
http://www.mouseriders.dk/til_michael/index_white.php (I'm not done 
with the stylesheet for this page yet) and in the selectbox please 
choose Hvid/blå kontrast and click the submit (skift). You should 
now see a white page with the A a in the blue header (screen shot 
here http://www.mouseriders.dk/til_michael/imagesBG/ss_1.gif) ...at 
least in FF/Opera. I just can't figure out why the #textbox won't 
show up in IE.


Any ideas?




--
Soeren Mordhorst
Ellerstr. 20
33615 Bielefeld
Germany

phone  +49(521)380 29 74
mobile +49(178)141 25 90
email  [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] AP div problem... please!

2006-02-24 Thread Kim Kruse

Thanks a lot Soeren. That did the trick.

Soeren Mordhorst wrote:

I set in #textbox the positioning from 'absolute' to 'relative', gave 
a little 'lesser of px' in the #TJKul and it worked fine.

Maybe you have to fix some bugs in IE5x...

#textbox{
position:relative;
display:block;
left:30px;
top:72px;
height:20px;
width:50px;
background:url(http://www.mouseriders.dk/til_michael/imagesBG/textbox_white.gif); 


z-index:1;
}

#TJKul {
margin-top: 72px;
background: #FFF url(kaosjs/ulbg_white.gif)
repeat-x;
float:right;
margin-right:30px;
}


All the best,

Soeren




Kim Kruse schrieb:

I'm trying to get my text resizer to work in FF/IE/Opera but for 
some reason I don't see the AP div (#textbox) on the page in IE6.


If you go to this page 
http://www.mouseriders.dk/til_michael/index_white.php (I'm not done 
with the stylesheet for this page yet) and in the selectbox please 
choose Hvid/blå kontrast and click the submit (skift). You should 
now see a white page with the A a in the blue header (screen shot 
here http://www.mouseriders.dk/til_michael/imagesBG/ss_1.gif) ...at 
least in FF/Opera. I just can't figure out why the #textbox won't 
show up in IE.


Any ideas?






--


Med venlig hilsen/Best regards

Kim Kruse
-
http://www.mouseriders.dk


**
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] Should logo not link to the homepage?

2006-02-24 Thread Ian Anderson

Patrick Lauke wrote:


How about a dual approach of using ALT that describes the image (MSNBC)
and a title on the link to provide additional advisory information of
where the link is going to ('MSNBC home page'), i.e.


Great minds and all that? If you reread the previous bit of my post 
you'll see:


'So, the logo should say something like MSNBC home page'

We seem to be in agreement :)

Sorry my post was a bit disordered


--
_
zStudio - Web development and accessibility
http://zStudio.co.uk

Snippetz.net - Online code library
File, manage and re-use your code snippets  links
http://snippetz.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] Page veiwing

2006-02-24 Thread Tom Livingston



On 2/24/06 12:29 AM, SunUp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 looks just fine to me.

And that's good enough for me.

Like everyone on this list says - if you made your pages 'right', everyone
will be able to use them no mater what they are using.

To each his/her own. I feel like everyone on this list is trying to force
Sunny to change when she is clearly aware of the alternatives but chooses to
keep what she likes.

Sunny, have a go at Opera's 'Show window size' preference. Then all you have
to do is drag the edge of the window to what ever width you want to check.

HTH

-- 

Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com




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

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



Re: [WSG] Should logo not link to the homepage?

2006-02-24 Thread Darren West
It definatly should, relax and think of home ;-)

On 23/02/06, John S. Britsios [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Dear co-members,

 I would like to ask your opinion here, if a web site logo should or not
 link to the homepage.
 By the way, see for example what Jesper Tverskov wrote about this:
 http://www.smackthemouse.com/20040719

 Thanks in advance for your kind responces.

 Kind regards,

 John S. Britsios
 http://www.webnauts.net

 ---
 Redesign in process: http://www.webnauts.net/redesign/



 ---
 avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
 Virus Database (VPS): 0608-0, 20.02.2006
 Tested on: 23.02.2006 09:32:33
 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.
 http://www.avast.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] CSS and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread Mark Arnold
Pls forgive my ignorance on this subject matter, I am seeking the wisdom from the list regarding CSS and objects, flash in this case.Can I leverage CSS to show common flash content across all pages of a site or am i barking up the wrong tree?
-- Chrs,Mark 617-259-6124 (m)617-249-1539 (f)to him be praise == Old Ethiopian (Ge'ez) in my email addrAnd remember that An Incredible God Deserves Incredible Praise


RE: [WSG] Should logo not link to the homepage?

2006-02-24 Thread Patrick Lauke
 Ian Anderson

 Great minds and all that? If you reread the previous bit of my post 
 you'll see:
 
 'So, the logo should say something like MSNBC home page'

Yes, but you seemed to suggest having that as the ALT, whereas I'd say
it's more appropriate to just have MSNBC as the ALT and have the
MSNBC home page as the TITLE on the link. But yeh, in principle we're
on the same tracks :)

P

Patrick H. Lauke
Web Editor / University of Salford
http://www.salford.ac.uk

Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/

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

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



Re: [WSG] CSS and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread jesse
 Pls forgive my ignorance on this subject matter, I am seeking the wisdom
 from the list regarding CSS and objects, flash in this case.
 Can I leverage CSS to show common flash content across all pages of a
 site or am i barking up the wrong tree?

You can't embed Flash using CSS, but you may find what you're looking for
with JavaScript. If you use something like Bobby van der Sluis'
Unobtrusive Flash Objects (http://www.bobbyvandersluis.com/ufo/), and
include a JavaScript file in each page, you can have a single place in
your code where the flash content is defined.

Plus, using a method like this will also ensure users with JavaScript or
Flash can still see alternative content such as an image.

Cheers,
Jesse Skinner
www.thefutureoftheweb.com


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

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



Re: [WSG] CSS and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread kvnmcwebn

Pls forgive my ignorance on this subject matter, I am seeking the wisdom
from the list regarding CSS and objects, flash in this case.
Can I leverage CSS to show common flash content across all pages of a
site or am i barking up the wrong tree?




Jesse said

You can't embed Flash using CSS,



your prob right but what about that flash as a css background someone was 
posting about here a while back??


-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] Breadcrumb as Section Heading H1

2006-02-24 Thread Stephen Stagg
you're right of course.  I should use an OL and put the breadcrumb  
text as a heading.  However I found this method to be the most  
compliant and easiest to implement, and it is understandable in most  
browsers.



On 23 Feb 2006, at 20:55, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:


Stephen Stagg wrote:

For the benefit of Screen-readers and textmode browsers, I add a  
LI with the text 'breadcrumb' at the top of the list which is then  
hidden using CSS.  It's not a perfect solution but it works.

ul
  li class=firstBreadcrumb: /
  liaMenu Item 1//
  liaMenu Item 2//
  liaMenu Item 3//
/


As it's an unordered list, it implies that there is no particular  
order to the items...you could jumble them up at random and they'd  
still retain their meaning. This, of course, is not true for home  
paths / breadcrumb trails. The order is quite specific, so if lists  
are your thing, ordered lists should really be used. For the same  
reason, having the first item breadcrumb does not imply anything,  
as it's a sibling of the other list items...which is not the case.


--
Patrick H. Lauke
__
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
__
Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
__
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

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



**
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] Min-Width, IE, Fluid Content and Hair Loss

2006-02-24 Thread Joseph R. B. Taylor

Greetings all,

I'm working on getting a site launched - http://mcdowell.sitesbyjoe.com 
- and was hoping to make it completely fluid in all directions.


One problem, IE (surprise!)

I have a min-width applied to my wrapper div of 842px, and a width set 
to 95%.  That way it doesn't squish up (in small resolutions) too much 
and force floats downward.


Needless to day, it doesn't work on IE since it doesn't recognize min-width.

I've tried various workarounds/ searches on this, setting a width of 
842px in IE only etc...


These techniques keep it from shrinking, but I lose the fluid expansion 
that works so nicely on everything else...


Anyone have suggestions on this?

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] Min-Width, IE, Fluid Content and Hair Loss

2006-02-24 Thread Martin Heiden
Joseph,

Friday, February 24, 2006, 5:06:39 PM, you wrote:

JRBT I have a min-width applied to my wrapper div of 842px, and a width set
JRBT to 95%.  That way it doesn't squish up (in small resolutions) too much
JRBT and force floats downward.

You can try the javascript-solution that Al Sparber promotes on his
page:

http://www.projectseven.com/tutorials/css/minwidth/

Download the Dreamweaver Extension or extract the JS from the
Demo-Page.

You could also fix it by feeding IE a expression in a speacial
stylesheet hidden from the good browsers by a conditional comment.

regards

  Martin

**
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] Introduction and first submission

2006-02-24 Thread sharron
I don't know, ignorance I could claim. Was unaware that this site or list 
even existed until doing a wee bit on investigating.

I'm so glad I happened across you'all  (Texas talk) however. Smile

I belong to another forum with some great folks who have helped me 
tremendously in the past year to get past and  move into the surreal realm 
of CSS and Validation etc.


It took me quite a bit to absorb the concept! Now it appears that I have 
been labeled the compliance stickler on that forum. I am often asked why, 
my response in Because I can.


My site (personal) serves as my testing grounds. My pet peeve is, stuff not 
validatinggo figure. I love the FF Web Developers tool bar and 
the tidy addon, whatever it is called! Great tool! That way I get to see 
which sites validate and which do not. (giggle, even standards sites show if 
not errors, warnings).


PetPeeve:
I wanted a guestbook, found one, installed it, then found out the darned old 
php code was fraught with invalidations. Not knowing a thing about php, I 
crossed my fingers, jumped in and fixed it! Took me days and days. I made 
several mistakes!


My question is this, why oh why can't one who knows how to do those things, 
build them to validate before they release them for public consumption?


How darn hard is it to specify the php to write out alt tags for images, or 
table summaries in tables and so on? Excuse me whilst I growl, 
grr.


So in short, I am glad to be here, where I am not only folk, to whom it 
matters.


Onward and upwards!

Now if someone or the WC3 would find a valid alternative for the Onresize 
attribute! I would be a happy camper. BIG SMILE


I don't know how to get smiles in an email, forgive me.

Sharron



- Original Message - 
From: Mugur Padurean [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:41 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Introduction and first submission



Hi Sharon :)
What took you so long ... ? :)
**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

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



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.12/267 - Release Date: 2/22/2006




**
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] Min-Width, IE, Fluid Content and Hair Loss

2006-02-24 Thread Joseph R. B. Taylor

Thank you Project VII!  I could of sworn I had looked at that...

Joseph R. B. Taylor
Sites by Joe, LLC
http://sitesbyjoe.com
(609)335-3076
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Martin Heiden wrote:

Joseph,

Friday, February 24, 2006, 5:06:39 PM, you wrote:

JRBT I have a min-width applied to my wrapper div of 842px, and a width set
JRBT to 95%.  That way it doesn't squish up (in small resolutions) too much
JRBT and force floats downward.

You can try the javascript-solution that Al Sparber promotes on his
page:

http://www.projectseven.com/tutorials/css/minwidth/

Download the Dreamweaver Extension or extract the JS from the
Demo-Page.

You could also fix it by feeding IE a expression in a speacial
stylesheet hidden from the good browsers by a conditional comment.

regards

  Martin

**
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] Min-Width, IE, Fluid Content and Hair Loss

2006-02-24 Thread Darren West
If you werent worried about users without JavaScript enabled you could
use this http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/, alternatively have a fixed
size for IE.

Daz

On 24/02/06, Joseph R. B. Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Greetings all,

 I'm working on getting a site launched - http://mcdowell.sitesbyjoe.com
 - and was hoping to make it completely fluid in all directions.

 One problem, IE (surprise!)

 I have a min-width applied to my wrapper div of 842px, and a width set
 to 95%.  That way it doesn't squish up (in small resolutions) too much
 and force floats downward.

 Needless to day, it doesn't work on IE since it doesn't recognize min-width.

 I've tried various workarounds/ searches on this, setting a width of
 842px in IE only etc...

 These techniques keep it from shrinking, but I lose the fluid expansion
 that works so nicely on everything else...

 Anyone have suggestions on this?

 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
 **


**
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 and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread Sean Jones
Hi i'm not a hundred percent sure on this but there's a website which may be 
of use:

http://www.dezwozhere.com/links.html

scroll down to the section on embed multimedia, it has info on how to embed 
flash using CSS.


hope this helps

_
Are you using the latest version of MSN Messenger? Download MSN Messenger 
7.5 today! http://messenger.msn.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] Fluid layout

2006-02-24 Thread Adam Morris
Hi everyone!Been trying to make this site I'm building fluid after seeing it on a huge monitor in my local Mac store and marvelling at how teeny weeny it looked!The site is at
http://www.megustalatelevision.com/uwishMy attempts at getting fluid is this:http://www.megustalatelevision.com/uwish/index1.htmlI have used different ie. larger background images for top, middle and bottom... and a background img for the right side of the body but, as you will see, if you kindly take a look on all your huge monitors, it's not quite there yet. Could you point me in the right direction?
Thanks!Adam


Re: [WSG] CSS and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread Mark Arnold
Good deal Sean, Jesse, et al.On 2/24/06, Sean Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi i'm not a hundred percent sure on this but there's a website which may beof use:http://www.dezwozhere.com/links.htmlscroll down to the section on embed multimedia, it has info on how to embed
flash using CSS.hope this helps_Are you using the latest version of MSN Messenger? Download MSN Messenger7.5 today! 
http://messenger.msn.co.uk**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See 
http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list  getting help**
-- Chrs,Mark 617-259-6124 (m)617-249-1539 (f)to him be praise == Old Ethiopian (Ge'ez) in my email addrAnd remember that An Incredible God Deserves Incredible Praise


Re: [WSG] Fluid layout

2006-02-24 Thread Tom Livingston
Title: Re: [WSG] Fluid layout






On 2/24/06 2:18 PM, Adam Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

it's not quite there yet. 

Or try a look at 800 wide...

Sorry, no time to peek at it. Just an FYI...


-- 

Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com








Re[2]: [WSG] CSS and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread Martin Heiden
Sean,

Friday, February 24, 2006, 8:08:57 PM, you wrote:

SJ scroll down to the section on embed multimedia, it has info on how to embed
SJ flash using CSS.

I really doubt that it is possible to embed flash by CSS. All these
methods use the (X)HTML object tag. And this is mandatory to embed
flash or other multimedia content into HTML pages. (Ok, you could also
use the non standard embed tag for Netscape and Co., but there is
really no need to do so.)

Coming back to Mark's question, my answer is no, you can't use CSS for
your needs. The best thing you can do is using the UFO method that Jesse
already proposed, if you want to manage all your pages from one single
maintenance point. (There are other options like CMS, add your
favourite server side programming language her, or simple Dreamweaver
templates to do so.)

If you don't want to use JavaScript for that, you can use conditional
comments for showing/hiding the right/wrong object attributes to the
specific browsers:

!--[if IE]
  object classid=clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-44455354
![endif]--!--[if !IE]x--
  object data=/flash/homepage.swf type=application/x-shockwave-flash
!--![endif]--
 param name=movie value=/flash/homepage.swf /
 param name=quality value=high /
 param name=wmode value=transparent /
 !-- Alternate Content goes here --
 img src=/img/flash/homepage.jpg alt= /
  /object

This will validate, but it uses IE proprietary conditional comments.
IMHO it is a valid and safe method, but there are other opinions about
that.

I hope, I could help you.

Martin.

PS: If anyone want to try to convince me, that it is possible to embed
flash by using CSS, I'm very interested in that solution. But I can't
imagine that.

**
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[2]: [WSG] CSS and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread sharron

http://www.designbyatfb.com/test/swftest2.html

Don't wuite understand what you are asking, but lol, asked several questions 
recently myself about valid swf files and why one worked in IE and not in 
FF. Here is my test page with several examples.


- Original Message - 
From: Martin Heiden [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To: Sean Jones wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:34 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [WSG] CSS and Flash



Sean,

Friday, February 24, 2006, 8:08:57 PM, you wrote:

SJ scroll down to the section on embed multimedia, it has info on how to 
embed

SJ flash using CSS.

I really doubt that it is possible to embed flash by CSS. All these
methods use the (X)HTML object tag. And this is mandatory to embed
flash or other multimedia content into HTML pages. (Ok, you could also
use the non standard embed tag for Netscape and Co., but there is
really no need to do so.)

Coming back to Mark's question, my answer is no, you can't use CSS for
your needs. The best thing you can do is using the UFO method that Jesse
already proposed, if you want to manage all your pages from one single
maintenance point. (There are other options like CMS, add your
favourite server side programming language her, or simple Dreamweaver
templates to do so.)

If you don't want to use JavaScript for that, you can use conditional
comments for showing/hiding the right/wrong object attributes to the
specific browsers:

!--[if IE]
 object classid=clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-44455354
![endif]--!--[if !IE]x--
 object data=/flash/homepage.swf type=application/x-shockwave-flash
!--![endif]--
param name=movie value=/flash/homepage.swf /
param name=quality value=high /
param name=wmode value=transparent /
!-- Alternate Content goes here --
img src=/img/flash/homepage.jpg alt= /
 /object

This will validate, but it uses IE proprietary conditional comments.
IMHO it is a valid and safe method, but there are other opinions about
that.

I hope, I could help you.

Martin.

PS: If anyone want to try to convince me, that it is possible to embed
flash by using CSS, I'm very interested in that solution. But I can't
imagine that.

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

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



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.12/267 - Release Date: 2/22/2006




**
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] Fluid layout

2006-02-24 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

Adam Morris wrote:

http://www.megustalatelevision.com/uwish

Observation:
Fine, 840 - 3800.
...looks like any other fixed-width pages around.


http://www.megustalatelevision.com/uwish/index1.html

Observation:
Main column drops below 1000px.
OK (more or less), 1024 - 1600.
Background-problems (breaking up), 1933 - 3800.

Suggestion:
Float 'column' at a fixed width (px), and leave 'contenttext' in the
flow with fixed (px) margins and with 'width: auto'.
Make it stable from 750 to 1600 (or wider).

Personal preference: I don't think text-lines should be wider than 600 -
800px on any monitor, as long lines are generally harder to follow and
read than somewhat width-limited ones. Max-width might work for you.

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
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] Fluid layout

2006-02-24 Thread Felix Miata

On 06/02/24 16:04 Gunlaug Sørtun apparently typed:


Personal preference: I don't think text-lines should be wider than 600 -
800px on any monitor, as long lines are generally harder to follow and
read than somewhat width-limited ones. Max-width might work for you.


Speaking of sizing things in px, particularly line lengths, when 
discussing fluid layouts, makes no sense to me. I find an 800px line 
length perfectly fine, and a 500px line length rather short, when I'm 
using a 28px default. Line lengths are better set relative to text size:


http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/fflinelength.html
http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/fflinelength.jpg
--
Love your neighbor as yourself. Mark 12:31 NIV

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata  ***  http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/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] Fluid layout

2006-02-24 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

Felix Miata wrote:
Speaking of sizing things in px, particularly line lengths, when 
discussing fluid layouts, makes no sense to me. I find an 800px line 
length perfectly fine, and a 500px line length rather short, when I'm

using a 28px default. Line lengths are better set relative to text
size:


And I prefer to use /eye-movement/ when measuring what I see as a
suitable line-length - regardless of font-size and the number of letters
on each line.

To be precise: I hardly move my eyes sideways at all when I read text on
web pages - using the same reading-technique as when I read most printed
material, and I read web pages on a 1280 x 1024 screen with 72px/inch.
Viewing-distance is approximately 1.3 meter, and I set my browser(s) to
'min font size = 14px' in order to average out various font-families and
font-sizes defined in web pages to an acceptable size.
IE/win is set at 'ignore font size / medium' when it's occasionally used
on the web. Doesn't happen too often.
If web pages scale text-lines too wide for my liking - as some do when
they set line-lengths relative to text size, then I either shrink the
browser-window and/or use 'fit to window width' - in Opera.

That's _my_ preference as both web user and web developer. Everyone else
may of course have their own preferences. That's what makes the web so
user-friendly, in that we all may have it our own way if we only know
how :-)

Now, as _you_ know; I test my own creations to the extremes, since I
like to know what they may come out as - even if it doesn't make any
sense to me. I still don't care much about how visitors like it or not -
I just try to accommodate them the best I know how to.

The fact that I sometimes express what my own preferences are, is within
the scope of most discussion lists. We may of course discuss those here
if you like, as some may find such a discussion useful in case they
haven't made up their own mind about these matters already.

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
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] Flash as background (Was: CSS and Flash)

2006-02-24 Thread nic stage
On 2/24/06, kvnmcwebn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
your prob right but what about that flash as a css background someone wasposting about here a while back??this sounds interesting if it is possible. i was just working on something where this would have been useful, but i wasn't on the list when it was talked about. does anyone know about the possibility of using a flash object as a background (if it is even possible/worthwhile)? thanks!



RE: Re[2]: [WSG] CSS and Flash

2006-02-24 Thread ByteDreams
 
I like your test page.  I find it quite useful.  I've bookmarked it to share
it with some friends.

Eileen Russell
http://www.bytedreams.com

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 4:05 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: Re[2]: [WSG] CSS and Flash

http://www.designbyatfb.com/test/swftest2.html

Don't wuite understand what you are asking, but lol, asked several questions
recently myself about valid swf files and why one worked in IE and not in
FF. Here is my test page with several examples.

- Original Message -
From: Martin Heiden [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Sean Jones wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2006 2:34 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [WSG] CSS and Flash


 Sean,

 Friday, February 24, 2006, 8:08:57 PM, you wrote:

 SJ scroll down to the section on embed multimedia, it has info on how to 
 embed
 SJ flash using CSS.

 I really doubt that it is possible to embed flash by CSS. All these
 methods use the (X)HTML object tag. And this is mandatory to embed
 flash or other multimedia content into HTML pages. (Ok, you could also
 use the non standard embed tag for Netscape and Co., but there is
 really no need to do so.)

 Coming back to Mark's question, my answer is no, you can't use CSS for
 your needs. The best thing you can do is using the UFO method that Jesse
 already proposed, if you want to manage all your pages from one single
 maintenance point. (There are other options like CMS, add your
 favourite server side programming language her, or simple Dreamweaver
 templates to do so.)

 If you don't want to use JavaScript for that, you can use conditional
 comments for showing/hiding the right/wrong object attributes to the
 specific browsers:

 !--[if IE]
  object classid=clsid:D27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-44455354
 ![endif]--!--[if !IE]x--
  object data=/flash/homepage.swf type=application/x-shockwave-flash
 !--![endif]--
 param name=movie value=/flash/homepage.swf /
 param name=quality value=high /
 param name=wmode value=transparent /
 !-- Alternate Content goes here --
 img src=/img/flash/homepage.jpg alt= /
  /object

 This will validate, but it uses IE proprietary conditional comments.
 IMHO it is a valid and safe method, but there are other opinions about
 that.

 I hope, I could help you.

 Martin.

 PS: If anyone want to try to convince me, that it is possible to embed
 flash by using CSS, I'm very interested in that solution. But I can't
 imagine that.

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

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



 -- 
 No virus found in this incoming message.
 Checked by AVG Free Edition.
 Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.15.12/267 - Release Date: 2/22/2006

 

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

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

BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:2.1
N:;bytedreams ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
FN:bytedreams ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
EMAIL;PREF;INTERNET:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
REV:20050718T045116Z
END:VCARD