[WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: WSG Digest

2008-02-26 Thread Cook, Karen
Hi, I'm out of the office Wed 27th - Fri 29th February. I'll be back on Monday 3rd March. Contact Joi Champion or Amelia Brennan for whereis.com questions. Otherwise I will respond to your email upon my return. Karen Sensis. Australia's leading information resource. Making complex

[WSG] Unobtrusive JavaScript (was: generate data)

2008-02-26 Thread Chris Taylor
Hi, I've written a small set of helper functions that will allow you to unobtrusively add JavaScript to a web page. It's built on the back off the prototype library so you'll need that as well. See the details here: http://www.stillbreathing.co.uk/projects/performer/performer.html A couple of

Re: [WSG] Unobtrusive JavaScript (was: generate data)

2008-02-26 Thread Ben Dodson
Hi, Although I'm a jQuery man myself, it's good to see someone actively encouraging the use of unobtrusive javascript although I would make one or two tweaks. Wouldn't it be better to add your class hooks to the p rather than to an a as at present, if the user had javascript disabled then they

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

2008-02-26 Thread Mike at Green-Beast.com
Hi Matt, I guess I would prefer verbose and have them fill the form out once than have them have them misinterpret and have to fix errors, [...] I agree. [...] which I imagine can be tedious using a screen reader. Is this the case? Can be a horror show. My understanding is that client

[WSG] Web Browser Testing and the Practicallity of Testing other OS's

2008-02-26 Thread Andrew WC Brown
Hi WSG, I'm testing a custom application to see if it works in different OS's and Web Browsers. My question is there any practical reason to test different OS when you can download them on your current OS. eg. W2K Internet Explorer 5.5 vs WXP Internet Explorer 5.5 I have multiple IE but is there

RE: [WSG] Unobtrusive JavaScript (was: generate data)

2008-02-26 Thread Chris Taylor
Good ideas Ben, thanks. I did think about that but went for the option which means the least amount of work for the developer. I don't pretend that Performer is suitable for really advanced stuff, just the basics. The reason I hook the events into the a element is because it gives the developer

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

2008-02-26 Thread Steven Faulkner
don't know if this has been pointed out yet, but as far as screen readers like JAWS and Window Eyes are concerned the strong element does not convey any meaning. It is not recognised by them. They do not change the way text within strong elements are announced, but neither do they do it for em or

RE: [WSG] Web Browser Testing and the Practicality of Testing other OSs

2008-02-26 Thread Steve Green
This kind of testing is our core business, and I have to say that these days there is very little difference when running a particular browser version on different Windows versions. One difference that comes to mind is that Windows 2000 has native 56-bit encryption, and this is not increased

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

2008-02-26 Thread Christian Snodgrass
Something quick I just thought of was that you could use some small icon to indicate required fields, and specify the alt for that to say required. That way, sighted users don't have to look at the word required repeated 50 times, while unsighted users will be able to hear that the field is

[WSG] Special site check invitation (for one)

2008-02-26 Thread Mike at Green-Beast.com
Hello all, I am looking for a volunteer to check out a web site for me. I need another set of eyes. This volunteer needs the following: 1) Access to an extra wide viewport (beyond 1024). 2) A solid knowledge of CSS so if a bug is found, together we might be able to find a fix (you will be

Re: [WSG] Web Browser Testing and the Practicallity of Testing other OS's

2008-02-26 Thread Thomas Thomassen
It might be worth testing on different platforms. Firefox 2.0 on Windows, OSX and Linux. I belive there some times are some quirks that creeps up. All though rare. - Original Message - From: Andrew WC Brown To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 3:28

Re: [WSG] Special site check invitation (COMPLETE)

2008-02-26 Thread Mike at Green-Beast.com
Hello all, Thank you to all who volunteered. I owe you one :) I did actually extend the invitation to three people -- more the merrier, right? Cheers. Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm

[WSG] generated source

2008-02-26 Thread jody tate
Does anyone have a preferred way to view and validate generated source code? By generated source I mean after Ajax, JavaScript, and so on have done their magic. I'm asking because I'm working on a web application for browsing network devices (close to 9000 routers, switches, WAPs, etc.)

RE: [WSG] generated source

2008-02-26 Thread Paul Bennett
Hi Jody, I recall having a similar problem. The issue came down (from memory) to the doctype I was using. I was closing elements in xhtml style, while the doctype I was using was html. Firefox was happily removing the extraneous closing elements in the rendered source to fit the doctype. :)

Re: [WSG] Special site check invitation (COMPLETE)

2008-02-26 Thread willdonovan
Also a thank you for informing everyone that it is completed. This tends not to happen a lot and people (like myself) see the message a few days later and find that the site is taken down. thanks, William Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Hello all, Thank you to all who volunteered. I owe

Re: [WSG] generated source

2008-02-26 Thread jody tate
Thanks, Paul, for the suggestion. Doctype, I don't think, is the issue. The doctype is set in the static XHTML that the Ajax builds on as XHTML strict. However, most generated source views remove the doctype, a phenomenon I asked about here:

Re: [WSG] generated source

2008-02-26 Thread Adam Martin
There are a few plugins for firefox that does validation for you. Can't remember the names of them offhand though. Sorry. On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 4:44 AM, jody tate [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone have a preferred way to view and validate generated source code? By generated source I mean

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

2008-02-26 Thread tee
Hi Steven, On Feb 26, 2008, at 6:49 AM, Steven Faulkner wrote: don't know if this has been pointed out yet, but as far as screen readers like JAWS and Window Eyes are concerned the strong element does not convey any meaning. It is not recognised by them. bottom line is that for users

[WSG] WCAG Samurai released.

2008-02-26 Thread Kane Tapping
Members of this list should be interested that the WCAG Samurai errata for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 has been released. http://wcagsamurai.org/ For those not familiar with the Samurai errata, it is alternative to the FUBARed WCAG 2.0 For more information on what happened to WCAG

Re: [WSG] generated source

2008-02-26 Thread David Hucklesby
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:44:13 -0800, jody tate wrote: Does anyone have a preferred way to view and validate generated source code? By generated source I mean after Ajax, JavaScript, and so on have done their magic. [...] Yet viewing generated source in Firebug, that same meta tag

Re: [WSG] Unobtrusive JavaScript (was: generate data)

2008-02-26 Thread Susie Gardner-Brown
Hi Chris Thought I'd let you know - I looked at your web page and the first two examples, when I clicked on the link, didn't work for me at all! No extra paragraph appearing (or disappearing!) and no time change. I'm on a Mac using Firefox 2.0.0.12 ... It sounds good - I'd like to access a

Re: [WSG] generated source

2008-02-26 Thread Michael MD
Does anyone have a preferred way to view and validate generated source code? By generated source I mean after Ajax, JavaScript, and so on have done their magic. I like the view generated source in the Web Developer Firefox plugin, Firebug is very handy too btw does anyone know how

Re: [WSG] Site review - alachua co library

2008-02-26 Thread Felix Miata
On 2008/02/25 10:31 (GMT-0500) Andrew Maben apparently typed: I'm almost done with a site redesign, and the time is right to ask for your opinions: http://beta.www.aclib.us for comparison, the current site is: http://www.aclib.us ... Of course accessibility is important, and this is where

Re: [WSG] Site review - alachua co library

2008-02-26 Thread John Hancock
Hi Felix, Here's a screenshot of a typical moderately high resolution environment: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/SC/sc-alaclib1.jpg and the setup source: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/tmp/sc-alaclib1.html Just a thought, but a moderately high resolution environment to me is a setup of over