Tim MacKay provided the following information on 27/03/2008 4:37 PM:
Hi List,
My question is about embedding Flash on html pages (just certain
elements -- not talking about full flash sites). I always get errors
from HTML Tidy and the validator about the object and embed tags,
which
Use swfobject, check my web site http://www.pureflash.net, see how I embed
my swfs and make it that way, it will work.
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 8:06 AM, Andrew Freedman
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tim MacKay provided the following information on 27/03/2008 4:37 PM:
Hi List,
My question is
Hi Tim,
Already we had some discussion related to this. Please refer the mails with
heading *The correct way of placing a swf file into a XHTML webpage*.
Here, you can find some information.
Thanks!
Venkatesan M
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Tim MacKay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi List,
Hi Tim,
For XHTML 1.0 Strict I use:
object type=application/x-shockwave-flash
data=swf/flash-file-name.swf width=xxx height=xxx
param name=movie value=swf/flash-file-name.swf /
param name=play value=true /
param name=quality value=best /
pAlternative content for users if plug-in fails to
thanks for the heads up on ie6. i added the width to the rule. thanks for
the article as well. i read it and still don't know any more than i did
before i read it. maybe because i'm tired. i bookmarked it for later
perusal.
makes me wonder when ms will get it right in their browsers. maybe
Please clarify dwain.
have you got two examples, one shrink-wrapping (??) the other not?
Do you mean one div will only be as large as the content within it
and the other will retain a fixed size regardless of content?
Joe
On Mar 27 2008, at 05:07, dwain wrote:
after my experience tonight
I completely agree with you'll when you say that most designers in
India are still unaware of web standards, accessibility, interaction
and usability.
If you guys are in Mumbai on the 29th of March, and interested in Web
standards and accessibility you'll can check out BarCamp Mumbai at
IIT
Am looking for an intuitive and elegant example of a password field
with an strength indicator that updates as you type each character.
I've seen plenty around, and off the top of my head I quite like
Google's* (although I'd say it should show small amount of red graph
to begin with,
tried moo tools or JQuery?
Joe
On Mar 27, 2008, at 09:37, Sigurd Magnusson wrote:
Am looking for an intuitive and elegant example of a password field
with an strength indicator that updates as you type each character.
I've seen plenty around, and off the top of my head I quite like
I do the exact same thing (clicking on underlined text which isn't a
link) but it does make it very complicated to create access keys for
forms because u was used to show which letter was the access key.
Messing around with endless spans will discourage them. I'm really sorry
there is no
Hi
I am stuck with dropdown menus. They are working fine in IE-7, and firefox and
the evil IE6 doesn't render it.
Should I use javascript or CSS for this.
Here is my code:
** XHTML code **
div id=main_nav
ul id=menu
li id=nav_home class=menu_active aHome/a/li
lia
I Like the following:
http://www.passwordmeter.com/
Show the strength as you type, with a detailed explanation of that strength.
You can download the script:
http://www.passwordmeter.com/pwd_meter.zip
Have fun!
Gregorio Espadas
gespadas [at] gmail [dot] com
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 3:37 AM,
is it on this page?
http://www.alforddesigngroup.com/
On Mar 27, 2008, at 12:47, dwain wrote:
with my haslayout problem, the div around the pictures shrink
wrapped while the nav div, containing a ul, and along with the ul
sized to 100% of the wrapper.
dwain
On 3/27/08, Joe Ortenzi
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:07 AM, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
after my experience tonight i was wondering why some divs will shrink wrap
their contents while others don't. any takers?
Block level elements such as DIV will be 100% of the width of their parent
container, unless they are
I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml
Why not. I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with javascript.
http://weblogtoolscollection.com/archives/2004/01/02/targetblank-xhtml-10-strict-conversion/
--
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
On Mar 27, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Michael Horowitz wrote:
I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with javascript.
No, better practice is to avoid foisting new windows on users
altogether.
(IMHO - but I don't think I'm alone...)
Andrew
Because it's against accessibility of a webpage.
On 27/03/2008, Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just read how a target=_blank is not part of xhtml
Why not. I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with
javascript.
I totally agree .. in fact just having this conversation elsewhere. How can
javascript be more accessible when those most concerned with accessibility
will probably turn it off anyway? Makes no sense to have this removed .. I
open new windows all the time .. for PDFs .. for links that go
Michael
I would recommend that you use target=_new and then use XHTML transitional
DTD
--
Regards
- Rob
Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk
Linking in with others: http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton
On 27/03/2008, Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just read how a
For acessibility and usabilitty issues i think we shouldn't use this.
http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_16_not_opening_new_windows.html
http://www.useit.com/alertbox/990530.html
http://www.w3.org/WAI/wcag-curric/sam77-0.htm
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-validator/2002Apr/0100.html
Andrew
of course you are right there, however if the brief says so
--
Regards
- Rob
Raising web standards : http://ele.vation.co.uk
Linking in with others: http://linkedin.com/in/robkirton
On 27/03/2008, Andrew Maben [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 27, 2008, at 11:44 AM, Michael
Has the same problem. Target is not xhtml.
Are people arguing web standards prohibit opening a new page in a new
browser or tab?
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079
Rob Kirton wrote:
Michael
I would recommend that you use target=_new
Michael Horowitz wrote:
I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml
It's not part of XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional -- it's part of
XHTML 1.0 Frameset. Choose the doctype you want to validate to. Or
use the JavaScript approach.
Ya pays yer money and ya makes yer choices :-)
Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour. I for one find it
very annoying when sites force open a new window. If I want to navigate a
link I open the link up in a new tab. Forcing the link to open up in a new
window doesn't make me stay on the site, it just makes me click extra
Hi Michael,
If I recall / understood correctly, the opening of a new browser window
was seen by the W3C as functionality and therefore consigned to
scripting.
As for web standards prohibiting opening of new windows, this AA
requirement is a little ambiguous for my taste:
10.1 Until user agents
Hi,
I am currently away from the office and will return on Tuesday as a married
man. I will attend to you email at that time.
If the matter is urgent, please contact Elise Fitzgerald on 9268 2962 or [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
I am contactable on my mobile if my urgent attention is required, 0414 259
I see your point, Thom. The exception, IMO, is when you link to a PDF ..
the Acrobat Reader takes over the window and the only way to go back in the
same window is to use the back button in the browser .. not very good
practice, IMO. Most people would just close the reader thinking they would
On 3/27/08, Joseph Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
is it on this page?
http://www.alforddesigngroup.com/
yes
--
dwain alford
The artist may use any form which his expression demands;
for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky
On 3/27/08, Matthew Pennell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:07 AM, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
after my experience tonight i was wondering why some divs will shrink
wrap their contents while others don't. any takers?
Block level elements such as DIV will be 100%
On 27 Mar 2008, at 12:32, IceKat wrote:
I do the exact same thing (clicking on underlined text which isn't
a link) but it does make it very complicated to create access keys
for forms because u was used to show which letter was the access
key. Messing around with endless spans will
Thomas Thomassen wrote:
Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour.
Making assumptions about users' needs and behavior is your job as
a designer/developer. Which is not to say everyone makes the best
possible decisions. :-)
Not everything built with (X)HTML is a brochureware
On 27 Mar 2008, at 12:44, Amrinder wrote:
I am stuck with dropdown menus.
Uh Oh. http://www.message.uk.com/index.php?page=81
They are working fine in IE-7, and firefox and the evil IE6 doesn't
render it.
Should I use javascript or CSS for this.
JavaScript. You can't minimise
On 27 Mar 2008, at 15:44, Michael Horowitz wrote:
I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml
You read wrong. It is not part of Strict (HTML or XHTML), it is part
of Transitional.
Why not.
Opening new windows is behaviour and thus out of scope for a markup
language that
On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 5:41 PM, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i had no width set on the nav ul or the nav div and they both went to
100%. the div didn't shrink wrap the div and ul.
That would be correct behaviour, unless you are saying that they were
floated.
--
- Matthew
On 27 Mar 2008, at 16:31, Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Michael Horowitz wrote:
I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml
It's not part of XHTML 1.0 Strict or Transitional
It is part of Transitional.
-- it's part of XHTML 1.0 Frameset.
Frameset is for frameSET documents, i.e.
On 27 Mar 2008, at 16:09, Rob Kirton wrote:
I would recommend that you use target=_new and then use XHTML
transitional DTD
Don't do that. _new is not (X)HTML.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/types.html#h-6.16
Paraphrasing: Except for the reserved names (_blank, _self, _parent,
_top), frame
Sure, there are cases where you would wish to open a new window. But I
wouldn't compare a website and a web application, or desktop application.
For websites I don't see the need to pop up windows left and right because
the links lead off-site. This is something that's often done with the intent
Thomas Thomassen wrote:
Frames and popup windows is fine features to use in web based
applications. I'll agree to that.
Which is exactly my point -- why remove (or even deprecate) a useful
capability because it's been abused by some?
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL
On Mar 27, 2008, at 12:11 PM, Rob Kirton wrote:
of course you are right there, however if the brief says so
I know, I know... sigh / I'm in the middle of half a dozen
conversations in which which I'm being commanded to make hideous
assaults on usability - but I do feel duty-bound in
As for PDFs I find it ok that they open in a new window. As a personal
preferance.
But for regular links I feel that it's best leaving them alone. I've seen
many novice computer users get confused when a link opens in a new window as
they don't allways realise they're now navigating in a new
em and strong are NOT for screen readers. they are for the semantic markup.
screen readers do not render em and strong, they read it as plain text.
2008/3/27, IceKat [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I do the exact same thing (clicking on underlined text which isn't a
link) but it does make it very
I have seen that too Thom .. and you have a good point. I have also had
clients specifically request that while they want to link to other sites,
they don't want the user to be off their site either. And even I don't do
frames. ;)
Nancy
- Original Message -
From: Thomas
I agree, where possible, you shouldnt make decisions for your visitors.
Users will return to a website using the back button if they want to.
Darren Lovelock
Munky Online Web Design
http://www.munkyonline.co.uk/ http://www.munkyonline.co.uk
T: +44 (0)20-8816-8893
_
From: [EMAIL
But semantic mark-up such as em and strong is there for user-agents
such as screen-readers to use. That they do not currently render them as
different from normal text does not mean that it is not the intention.
We create Web standards that user-agents can work towards implementing (if
they
Chris,
it is all design.
This list is (in my observation) more about standards-compliant design than it
is about the standards themselves. Some of it is tag-level accessibility, some
of it about wider user experience issues. But it is all design.
Cheers, Andrew
Andrew Boyd
Consultant
SMS
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Horowitz
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 8:45 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] a target= blank not part of xhtml
I just read how a target=_blank is not part of xhtml
Why not.
I think that b and i are equivalent to u and that they probably
should be deprecated. They probably will be in HTML5 (though I haven't
looked). In my opinion, those are purely style, not semantic, and should
be done with CSS.
Joseph Ortenzi wrote:
Very good points
b and i are stylistic and
Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour.
I second that. Originally I had the target solution, then (to make it
XHTML-compliant) an inline JS solution. With the next redesign I will
throw it out altogether and just indicate external links through CSS,
but leave it to the user to
Yes but you choose to do so rather than being forced to do so. Usability
tests still show that opening a new window confuses people. They can't
work out whey they can't go back and don't seem to be aware of the task
bar. I'm not sure how users react to tabbed browsers but in my own
limited
49 matches
Mail list logo
