Re: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?

2008-05-16 Thread Matthew Pennell
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Michael Horowitz 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 However when it comes to literacy most people using websites are computer
 competent or they wouldn't be surfing the web in the first place.


Sorry, but that's complete speculation. In my experience, a large proportion
of computer/web users struggle to understand online concepts that we expert
users take for granted. Many regular surfers have no idea how to interact
with a scroll bar - and there are lots of people who don't know how the
address bar of their browser works! (Look at Google's top searches, they are
all URLs - people use that rather than type in the address bar.)

-- 

- Matthew


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] IE6 background image positioning problem

2008-05-16 Thread Matijs
 And I've spent more time that I should have on this site already! At least
 I've fixed up the lefthand nav so it holds together, and displays
correctly
in IE6 (which is as low as we have to go here).

We all feel your pain ;)

Anyway, good luck with the site and I'm sure you'll get it to work the way
you want it to.

Gr.

Matijs


On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 1:22 AM, Susie Gardner-Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 Thanks very much Gunlaug - that did work!

 And Matljs - re the banner table, I work at a university where you are
 supposed to use their template for university web pages. And the template
 is
 all in tables!! Over time I have taken most of the template out of tables,
 but to date have left the banner. This time I got the lefthand nav
 successfully out! I'll have a look at using your solution next time but I
 imagine it will take a while to get the banner to display the way it's
 supposed to without being in a table.

 And I've spent more time that I should have on this site already! At least
 I've fixed up the lefthand nav so it holds together, and displays correctly
 in IE6 (which is as low as we have to go here).

 cheers
 susie


 On 15/5/08 6:13 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Susie Gardner-Brown wrote:
 
  http://crunchie.tedi.uq.edu.au/trials/UCTLC/index6.html
 
  That big image on the right is a bg image in a container that has
  absolute positioning. It works fine in Firefox on my Mac, but IE6 it
  drops down.
 
  Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong?
 
  You're trying to fixed-position a background, which I don't think you
  really want since that means the background is positioned relative to
  the browser-window - not the page.
 
  Anyway, IE6 can't handle fixed backgrounds on regular elements inside
  body, so it is absolute positioning that background.
 
  Change to...
 
  #entryContainer {
  background: #FFF url(entry-bg.jpg) no-repeat 193px 0;
 
  }
 
  ...and IE6 will line up with the other browsers - or rather the other
  way around but with all parts in the correct places.
 
  regards
  Georg



 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize resize?

2008-05-16 Thread Thomas Thomassen
Add some padding at the bottom of the content with the same size as the 
absolutely positioned element. That should prevent the preseeding content to 
not overlap. You might have to do some position and size adjustments to make 
it all fit again after you add the padding.




--
From: tee [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 11:00 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize 
resize?


Lately I have coded many templates that clients wanted an element that 
aligns horizontally and has it stayed at the bottom of a content  block. 
The only way I could think is using absolute position, but it  creates an 
overlapping problem with font size resize. I am curious if  there is a 
technique that I am totally unaware of (already googled and  visited the 
archive of css-d).


example ($xx/month):
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/s/raz_compare_plans.html

Thank you!


tee


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



[WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize resize?

2008-05-16 Thread tee
Lately I have coded many templates that clients wanted an element that  
aligns horizontally and has it stayed at the bottom of a content  
block. The only way I could think is using absolute position, but it  
creates an overlapping problem with font size resize. I am curious if  
there is a technique that I am totally unaware of (already googled and  
visited the archive of css-d).


example ($xx/month):
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/s/raz_compare_plans.html

Thank you!


tee


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



RE: [WSG] Accessibility for HTML Email

2008-05-16 Thread michael.brockington
I'm guessing you don't actually administer a corporate size
spam-filtering 'solution' do you?  

(The word solution should really be in quadruple quotes, 'cos it ain't
one.)


Mike


-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2008 9:22 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accessibility for HTML Email

Erickson, Kevin (DOE) wrote:
 Although spam is a big red flag for many.

Which should ideally be solved at the email server + email 
client end, in my view.

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?

2008-05-16 Thread Rick Lecoat

On 16 May 2008, at 06:50, Matthew Pennell wrote:

In my experience, a large proportion of computer/web users struggle  
to understand online concepts that we expert users take for granted.  
Many regular surfers have no idea how to interact with a scroll bar  
- and there are lots of people who don't know how the address bar of  
their browser works!


Matthew, my experience tallies with yours. At least half of the people  
I work with (I mean clients, not co-workers) are not very IT-savvy at  
all. It brings to mind the Blackadder line: I am one of these people  
who are quite happy

to wear cotton, but have no idea how it works.

In some extreme cases this seems to extend to an almost willful  
ignorance, as if they feel that learning how to operate their computer  
would somehow diminish them. It is certainly true that the older the  
client the more likely this seems to be -- although I would certainly  
not generalise too much as I know plenty of completely computer- 
literate 'silver surfers'. I find it frustrating when they stubbornly  
refuse to learn what the most basic controls are on their browser, but  
unless it has a negative impact on the project I generally ignore it.


In any case the evidence would suggest that it is a generational  
thing, and that should come as no surprise. As someone born at the  
back end of the 60s, I can understand it, because I personally find  
the more leading edge web technologies hard to keep up with - much  
more so than, say, people 15 years my junior who live and breathe that  
stuff.


It's a matter of degree, I guess. People absorb information at a  
fundamental level early in their lives, and I think that beyond a  
certain age they stop absorbing it quite so easily and have to work at  
*learning* it. That includes information about current technology. If  
a new technology comes out when you're in your 40s it's probably going  
to be harder for you to pick it up than for your 16 year old nephew.


The old chestnut about adults having to get their kids to programme  
the VCR for them are clichés, sure, but based on a lot of truth.


--
Rick Lecoat

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?

2008-05-16 Thread Stuart Foulstone

But that's not because lots of people don't know how to use the address
bar,  its because MOST PEOPLE find it easier to type partial URL's into
Google rather than typing the whole URL into the address bar - plus if you
make a slight error you get prompted for the correction rather than just
told it doesn't exist.

Experienced IT literate people do this too.


On Fri, May 16, 2008 6:50 am, Matthew Pennell wrote:

 ... and there are lots of people who don't know how the
 address bar of their browser works! (Look at Google's top searches, they
 are all URLs - people use that rather than type in the address bar.)

 --

 - Matthew


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



RE: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?

2008-05-16 Thread michael.brockington
Have to disagree with you there - just because some people do it for a
good reason doesn't mean that the illiterate aren't.

Certain people that I know, type the full, exact URL for a site into the
Google search box in the middle of the page, wait for the results to
load, then click the first link - don't even use the 'I'm Feeling Lucky'
button - I can't begin to list the number of ways that process could be
improved on, but it is generally taken as a personal insult if I tell
that person they are being stupid (even when I try my hardest to
sugar-coat it.) It only takes a second or two longer, so what is the
point in learning something different?

Regards,
Mike 

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stuart Foulstone
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 2:01 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?


But that's not because lots of people don't know how to use 
the address bar,  its because MOST PEOPLE find it easier to 
type partial URL's into Google rather than typing the whole 
URL into the address bar - plus if you make a slight error you 
get prompted for the correction rather than just told it doesn't exist.

Experienced IT literate people do this too.


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?

2008-05-16 Thread Matthew Pennell
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Stuart Foulstone [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 its because MOST PEOPLE find it easier to type partial URL's into
 Google rather than typing the whole URL into the address bar


And which user research are you basing your PROCLAMATION on?

-- 

- Matthew


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize resize?

2008-05-16 Thread Robert O'Rourke


Lately I have coded many templates that clients wanted an element 
that aligns horizontally and has it stayed at the bottom of a 
content  block. The only way I could think is using absolute 
position, but it  creates an overlapping problem with font size 
resize. I am curious if  there is a technique that I am totally 
unaware of (already googled and  visited the archive of css-d).


example ($xx/month):
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/s/raz_compare_plans.html

Thank you!


tee


Thomas Thomassen wrote:
Add some padding at the bottom of the content with the same size as 
the absolutely positioned element. That should prevent the preseeding 
content to not overlap. You might have to do some position and size 
adjustments to make it all fit again after you add the padding.




While that will work quite nicely you could also avoid absolute 
positioning altogether. Because those ordered lists are all nicely lined 
up you could set the min-height rule on them instead of .box_res and 
.box_biz eg.


add this:

.box_res ol,
.box_biz ol {
min-height: 220px; /* dont forget IE=6 needs a fallback */
}

and remove the positioning from .price:

#content p.price {padding-left: 20px;}

Then you may need to tweak the margin/padding on p.price to get it perfect.

Another way to do this would be to set the min-height on .box_res and 
.box_biz to a value in ems (so they stay the same height on text resize) 
although that approach isn't entirely bullet-proof if the text in those 
boxes is likely to change.


Pick your favourite solution :)

Regards,
Rob


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



[WSG] PHP Standards

2008-05-16 Thread Ian Chamberlain
Fingers crossed this is not too far off topic; being a newby to PHP; any 
clues where I can find how-to's, snippets, libraries or even application 
suites built from PHP that are built to a good minimum standard please.

I am guessing that PHP is much like JavaScript in that a lot of what is 
floating about is either poor or pooh the result of all the good programmes 
stending their time on ASP or J2EE.

Thanks

Ian 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] help with menu positioning

2008-05-16 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

tee wrote:


Tell me, what do you like for Christmas gift ?


An internet-connection that is extremely fast and works all the time ;-)
(Maybe I'll get one before Christmas, but I'm not holding my breath.)

Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



RE: [WSG] Accessibility for HTML Email

2008-05-16 Thread James Leslie
I like the idea of a title tag being used i.e.- a
href=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title=e-mail address -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]first name last name/a

I don't know what you would gain by this Any bots harvesting email
addresses will just pick up on the address in the href.

Unfortunately, I think the only accessible way to do this is to have the
traditional form of email address being used and getting server side
protection from spam. If you don't care about accessibility (though you
wouldn't be on this list!), then use JavaScript to cut down on spam, but
I am sure that bots will be able to read generated source pretty soon if
they can't already.

James





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] PHP Standards

2008-05-16 Thread Designer
I think that it's basically your responsibility Ian, in that there are 
many sources of snippets available and if you use them you just validate 
the generated code and put right what is wrong in the php.  Then, you 
check for best practice too . . .


Bob



Ian Chamberlain wrote:
Fingers crossed this is not too far off topic; being a newby to PHP; any 
clues where I can find how-to's, snippets, libraries or even application 
suites built from PHP that are built to a good minimum standard please.


I am guessing that PHP is much like JavaScript in that a lot of what is 
floating about is either poor or pooh the result of all the good programmes 
stending their time on ASP or J2EE.


Thanks

Ian 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***









***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] PHP Standards

2008-05-16 Thread Andrew Maben

On May 16, 2008, at 11:32 AM, Ian Chamberlain wrote:

Fingers crossed this is not too far off topic; being a newby to  
PHP; any
clues where I can find how-to's, snippets, libraries or even  
application
suites built from PHP that are built to a good minimum standard  
please.


I am guessing that PHP is much like JavaScript in that a lot of  
what is
floating about is either poor or pooh the result of all the good  
programmes

stending their time on ASP or J2EE.

Thanks

Ian


Seems like this may be a ways OT, and you may be better off  
consulting one of the PHP lists, but...


Are you asking about PHP Standards or (X)HTML Standards within the  
context of PHP? Even the sloppiest of PHP (or any server-side  
scripting) can deliver impeccable standards-compliant markup, and  
conversely even the most carefully crafted PHP can deliver the most  
hideous tag soup. Though I think you will find that following best  
practices will be mutually reinforcing.


If you're interested in PHP Coding Standards, a Google search will  
open the door to a wealth of information, and there are PHP mailing  
lists as well.


For (X)HTML Standards, this list is an extraordinarily useful  
resource, and if you spend a little time with the archive you can  
find many useful links.


good luck,

Andrew







***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] PHP Standards

2008-05-16 Thread Matthew Pennell
On Fri, May 16, 2008 at 4:32 PM, Ian Chamberlain 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Fingers crossed this is not too far off topic; being a newby to PHP; any
 clues where I can find how-to's, snippets, libraries or even application
 suites built from PHP that are built to a good minimum standard please.


There's a good ongoing thread in the Sitepoint PHP forum filled with best
practices:

http://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=456441

-- 

- Matthew


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] PHP Standards

2008-05-16 Thread Andrew Boyd
On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Andrew Maben [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:

 Are you asking about PHP Standards or (X)HTML Standards within the context
 of PHP? Even the sloppiest of PHP (or any server-side scripting) can deliver
 impeccable standards-compliant markup, and conversely even the most
 carefully crafted PHP can deliver the most hideous tag soup. Though I think
 you will find that following best practices will be mutually reinforcing.

 If you're interested in PHP Coding Standards, a Google search will open the
 door to a wealth of information, and there are PHP mailing lists as well.

 For (X)HTML Standards, this list is an extraordinarily useful resource, and
 if you spend a little time with the archive you can find many useful links.

 good luck,

 Andrew


Andrew,

good point. Generating web standards-compliant (X)HTML with PHP is one
thing, and writing re-usable code is another.

If I could make a small plug on behalf of the latter - please people, take
the time to document your code properly. The life/job/sanity you save may be
your own.

Best regards, Andrew

-- 
---
Andrew Boyd
http://onblogging.com.au


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize resize?

2008-05-16 Thread tee


On May 16, 2008, at 6:30 AM, Robert O'Rourke wrote:




While that will work quite nicely you could also avoid absolute  
positioning altogether. Because those ordered lists are all nicely  
lined up you could set the min-height rule on them instead  
of .box_res and .box_biz eg.


add this:

.box_res ol,
.box_biz ol {
min-height: 220px; /* dont forget IE=6 needs a fallback */
}

and remove the positioning from .price:

#content p.price {padding-left: 20px;}

Then you may need to tweak the margin/padding on p.price to get it  
perfect.



Robert, thank you very much! It works really great and I didn't even  
need to adjust padding/margin.

 I am so glad to learn a new technique!

Dean Edwards' IE7 takes care of the min-height in IE6 too.  It's a  
updated version, and downsized from 120kb to 30kb, consider it fixes  
so many IE problem, even if it's 200kb I can live with it  :-)


Thanks Thomas for the padding suggestion too.

tee


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?

2008-05-16 Thread James Ellis
Hi

Reading through all the replies on this topic is quite interesting. The one 
thing that you can be sure about in web work of any kind is (aside from 
taxes) that users will interact with an interface in ways we never dreamed 
of - using their fridge, a keyboard, a mobile, the wrong address bar and 
possibly even a fair degreee of shouting, among others.
Whether these are minor or major differences the end goal is:

that the user can use an application and
reach there intended goal with the minimum of fuss.

Take the scrollbar point - I learnt this while I was watching my 
father-in-law, who has just learnt how to use Gmail and Skype. When he wants 
to scroll a page he goes and finds the up or down button and clicks 
repeatedly on it. For some of us this might seem inefficient but the point is 
that any good user interface has multiple pathways to the same end result. In 
the scrollbar case we can use:
* the keyboard
* the scroll wheel
* the scrollbar drag
* the scrollbar buttons
* any other device that can trigger a scroll event...

In that instance, who is to say that what someone else does is wrong? The only 
time something is classically wrong is when the user cannot control the 
interface in the way they want (user or interface is wrong) OR when they do 
control the interface in a normal fashion for the day and the interface fails 
to handle that interaction (interface is wrong).
Note that the user should control the interface, not the other way round, and 
when something does go wrong then a user should be able to back out and try 
again easily.

Examples like typing in an address into the google bar or the multitude of 
ways that one can upload an image to Flickr fall under the same banner.

The discussion about willful ignorance may not be because the person is 
confronted by interacting with machine but because they have tried in the 
past and something has scared them off. I worked with someone many years back 
whose bug reporting system was the widga-ma-doo is not working. Most 
people, given enough time, will get the basics. Some people won't - just as I 
won't probably understand heart surgery. It's all relative.

Stepping back for a moment, you can see how all these examples can fall under 
the Web2.0 (i dislike that term) way of doing things - which to paraphrase 
Jeff Veen is, among others,  about Openness, not control. Use-more 
interfaces are the ones general enough to be controlled in ways that we as 
the developers may not have thought about - with a user getting the end 
results they wished.
An icon is an interface that is useful - it responds to clicks, keyboard 
controls and can optionally be configured. Do icons in your web pages respond 
to that interaction? most do not.
Use-less interfaces are those which attempt to control the user interaction to 
a point where it may be impossible to continue. If I took the scroll buttons 
away from (or moved them) my father-in-law would probably get very frustrated 
with Email.

A message saying Do not click the back button is another use-less interface. 
If you need to supply that message then your application is not working 
correctly. Period.

An even simpler one is Hit Ctrl+Q to quit the application - a simple enough 
action for English keyboards - but apply that logic to a Slovene audience who 
have neither a key spelt Ctrl or a Q character on their keyboard and you 
end up with useless interface - especially if that is the only interaction 
allowed.

Finally, if people using your apps are happy then they will use them even 
more - even if they use them in ways you didn't design - then you have a 
use-more interface and isn't that a good thing ?

Thanks
james


On Fri, 16 May 2008 08:26:45 pm Rick Lecoat wrote:
 On 16 May 2008, at 06:50, Matthew Pennell wrote:
  In my experience, a large proportion of computer/web users struggle
  to understand online concepts that we expert users take for granted.
  Many regular surfers have no idea how to interact with a scroll bar
  - and there are lots of people who don't know how the address bar of
  their browser works!

 Matthew, my experience tallies with yours. At least half of the people
 I work with (I mean clients, not co-workers) are not very IT-savvy at
 all. It brings to mind the Blackadder line: I am one of these people
 who are quite happy
 to wear cotton, but have no idea how it works.

 In some extreme cases this seems to extend to an almost willful
 ignorance, as if they feel that learning how to operate their computer
 would somehow diminish them. It is certainly true that the older the
 client the more likely this seems to be -- although I would certainly
 not generalise too much as I know plenty of completely computer-
 literate 'silver surfers'. I find it frustrating when they stubbornly
 refuse to learn what the most basic controls are on their browser, but
 unless it has a negative impact on the project I generally ignore it.

 In any case the evidence would 

Re: [WSG] PHP Standards

2008-05-16 Thread James Ellis
Hi

Using both Tidy (1) and HTML Purifier (2) can improve tag soup no end -- 
although even they have their limits. They also add a bit to processing time, 
especially HP as it is written in PHP - you can solve that issue with page 
caching, though.

(1) php.net/tidy
(2) htmlpurifier.org
HTH
James

On Sat, 17 May 2008 09:56:25 am Andrew Boyd wrote:
 On Sat, May 17, 2008 at 3:32 AM, Andrew Maben [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 wrote:
  Are you asking about PHP Standards or (X)HTML Standards within the
  context of PHP? Even the sloppiest of PHP (or any server-side scripting)
  can deliver impeccable standards-compliant markup, and conversely even
  the most carefully crafted PHP can deliver the most hideous tag soup.
  Though I think you will find that following best practices will be
  mutually reinforcing.
 
  If you're interested in PHP Coding Standards, a Google search will open
  the door to a wealth of information, and there are PHP mailing lists as
  well.
 
  For (X)HTML Standards, this list is an extraordinarily useful resource,
  and if you spend a little time with the archive you can find many useful
  links.
 
  good luck,
 
  Andrew

 Andrew,

 good point. Generating web standards-compliant (X)HTML with PHP is one
 thing, and writing re-usable code is another.

 If I could make a small plug on behalf of the latter - please people, take
 the time to document your code properly. The life/job/sanity you save may
 be your own.

 Best regards, Andrew




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] [OT] users - IT literate?

2008-05-16 Thread David Hucklesby
On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:01:01 +0100 (BST), Stuart Foulstone wrote:

 But that's not because lots of people don't know how to use the address bar,  
 its
 because MOST PEOPLE find it easier to type partial URL's into Google rather 
 than typing
 the whole URL into the address bar - plus if you make a slight error you get 
 prompted
 for the correction rather than just told it doesn't exist.

 Experienced IT literate people do this too.


Personally, for an address like http://www.example.com/ I just type
the example bit, hold down the Ctrl key, and press enter. Works
in most browsers.

But then, I have worked with computers daily for almost 50 years.

(This last comment to counter the age arguments.)

Cordially,
David
--



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize resize?

2008-05-16 Thread David Hucklesby
On Fri, 16 May 2008 02:00:37 -0700, tee wrote:
 Lately I have coded many templates that clients wanted an element that aligns
 horizontally and has it stayed at the bottom of a content block. The only way 
 I could
 think is using absolute position, but it creates an overlapping problem with 
 font size
 resize. I am curious if there is a technique that I am totally unaware of 
 (already
 googled and visited the archive of css-d).

 example ($xx/month):
 http://lotusseedsdesign.com/s/raz_compare_plans.html


Just one more tiny suggestion to add to those you already have:
If you use a min-height specified in EMs, it would adjust better for
text re-sizing.

For some reason, sizing nearly everything in pixels is viewed as
easy and efficient. I find I have to be super-careful when using
fixed pixel sizes for anything, given the many and varied ways that
this or that browser or operating system affects text sizes.

Cordially,
David
--




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***