RE: [WSG] Position and peace of mind
With the absolute style you've tried, a z-index may help the ie issue's. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Unsworth Sent: 04 September 2008 05:29 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Fwd: [WSG] Position and peace of mind -- Forwarded message -- From: John Unsworth [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 4 Sep 2008 14:05 Subject: Re: [WSG] Position and peace of mind To: Kepler Gelotte [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 04/09/2008, Kepler Gelotte [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John, It would really help when you have a specific issue like this to post a url where people could see your site. Most hosting companies allow you to create subdomains so you could put the web site on your host as http://problemsite.mydomain.com/ Best regards, Kepler Gelotte Neighbor Webmaster, Inc. 156 Normandy Dr., Piscataway, NJ 08854 www.neighborwebmaster.com phone/fax: (732) 302-0904 Thanks for replying Kepler, I've arranged to put the two versions up for viewing. The relatively positioned div's is at; http://distributeit.com.au/wsg/relative-index.html and the absolutes are here; http://distributeit.com.au/wsg/absolute-index.html The issue with the More Info buttons in Opera disapears when I removed the absolute position call in the CSS...but so do the images. And I'd like to advise that the call in the head of the HTML for the CSS is taken from Jon Hicks' presentation A Day in Deployment, I thought it was a good method although I am aware that the Yahoo front end optimisation people advise that the @import rule is not perfect. For anyone not aware of the Jon Hicks presentation, you'll find it here; http://www.hicksdesign.co.uk/journal/design-to-deployment Many thanks John Unsworth *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.15/1649 - Release Date: 03/09/2008 07:15 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Position and peace of mind
John Unsworth wrote: So my questions to the group are; Was the decision to write the markup in the order I did correct or pedantic? Because if I didn't then I wouldn't have the layout issues I'm having I'd guess. Positioning out of visual order on a detailed level, can easily create more problems than it solves. Unless found to be absolutely necessary, and tested to function flawlessly (see below), I advice not to rearrange actual vs. visual order for accessibility or other reasons. Was it a mistake to try and create an elastic layout in em's and expect the entire interface to expand? In this case might it be better to use pixel for width's but em's for font and % for height and allow the boxes to expand with the text? Or should I just stick to pixel's all round. Elastic layouts with lots of images tend to not do to well in the real world, but otherwise there's nothing principally wrong with them - they just have to be done right. Percentage for height will create problems. Proper equal height boxes can only be created in a reliable way when using HTML or CSS 'table', ant the latter ain't supported by IE7 and lower. Is there a 'golden rule' about repositioning sections of markup out of the order they're written, and why was there variation with the margins across apparently very well behaved browsers? The only reliable 'golden rule' is that _it has to work_ - preferably also under stress. Stress-testing should ideally cover what end-users _might_ do to your layout because their browsers allow, not only what most of them are most likely to do to it. This means you as designer has to know at least as much about each of the browsers you choose to support, as the most knowledgeable end-users, while still catering reasonably well for the majority of dummies. For instance: your dimensioned boxes are overflown by their content when exposed to the 'minimum font size' option (I always set)... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_1_03_04.html Other misalignments in the layout look pretty unimportant then, since vital parts become inaccessible and unusable. [...] Generally the whole IE thing I ignore until required. You should run through the supported IE-versions regularly while designing, so you don't run into problems that can't be solved later on without changing things for/in all browsers. regards 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] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like...
Cole, can you post a url so people can see the validator results and review the code? Everything looks on the up-and-up from what you've posted. I've never used the FF HTML Validator extension (is it the one based on HTML Tidy?), so i can't speak for that. The Web Developer extension just pushes the page to the W3C validator. Please also verify which Validator of the 2 you're running into trouble with. On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:47 AM, Cole Kuryakin wrote: Hello all – I’ve got the following doctype at the head of each of my pages: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=en lang=en I take great pains to validate everything I do on every page, but, even if the page shows as valid (using FF’s HTML Validator extension – or Web Developer extension… I can’t remember which) when I view source on a “valid” page, I always get an info box that states: Info: Doctype given is -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN Info: Document content looks like XHTML 1.0 Transitional I don’t think that this is – by any means – any reason for me to be worried about my code/structure/et. al, but I’ve always wondered why, if I feed a xhtml 1.0 STRICT doc type why the validator always says that my stuff looks TRANSITIONAL? Am I doing something wrong? Any insight would be appreciated. Cole *** 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] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
Do you relocate? Anya V. Gerasimchuk Web Designer, IT - Web Shared Services UNIFI Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] (513) 595 -2391 Levell Rampono [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/03/2008 08:49 PM Please respond to wsg@webstandardsgroup.org To wsg@webstandardsgroup.org cc Subject RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... Hi Guys, I'm in desperate need of a senior front end developer within Sydney! Key skills HTML, CSS, DHTML, JavaScript and a little PHP.. If anyone is interested, please email me [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cheers, Lev -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Montoya Sent: Wednesday, 3 September 2008 10:26 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:24 AM, David Storey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 13:08, Todd Budnikas wrote: On Sep 3, 2008, at 6:19 AM, David Storey wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 11:42, tee wrote: On Sep 3, 2008, at 2:36 AM, David Storey wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 11:28, Regnard Raquedan wrote: Well, if it's akin to Safari, then it's as good as testing it there, right? :) Or is it...? No, it has a different JavaScript engine, and doesn't support a number of things the regular WebKit supports, such as text-shadow, @font-face and a few others. Does it support border-radius or -webkit-radius? no browsers support border-radius. It does support -webkit-border-radius, as far as I know (I'm running on Mac and parallels doesn't work on my 64-bit Vista, and I can't be bothered to do the few hours re-install process of Vista) -webkit-border-radius renders just fine. Running Chrome on XP on VMWare Fusion. http://www.css3.info/preview/rounded-border/ Without WebKit's anti-aliasing as far as I can tell from Twitter posts. I'm wondering if this is due to webkit using platform specific code for things like this and text-shadow, as being a reason why they are not in Chrome (Safari on Windows has a compatibility layer), or if it is a older branch. I'm thinking more the former. Could someone tell me if it has Google Download Accelerator or other Google Toolbar features built in? I'm just wondering how much is under the hood... -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Accesbility Help
http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page Hi All, This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I'm building. I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one because they are far from accessible, I'm not that good at PHP though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form for general contact but this will be to process order request. I've trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can any one point me in the right direction? Many thanks Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd 6 Gibson Place Meir Stoke-on-Trent www.essentialebizsolutions.net Disclaimer: This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments then please contact the sender and do not use or forward this e-mail to anyone. Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place, Meir, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST3 5PQ. Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail. CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies permitted are to be made by the named recipient and for the purpose of completing successful electronic transmission to the named recipient and then only on condition that these copies, with this notice attached, are kept confidential until destruction Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***image001.jpg
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
It seems the best alternative might be to have the ability to call you or contact you in some way for verification for handicapped individuals. regards, kevin This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I'm building. I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one because they are far from accessible, I'm not that good at PHP though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form for general contact but this will be to process order request. I've trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can any one point me in the right direction? Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:41 AM, Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: *[image: Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page]http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net * * Hi All,* *This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I'm building. I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one because they are far from accessible, I'm not that good at PHP though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form for general contact but this will be to process order request. I've trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can any one point me in the right direction?* * * *Many thanks* Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd 6 Gibson Place Meir Stoke-on-Trent www.essentialebizsolutions.net *Disclaimer*: This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments then please contact the sender and do not use or forward this e-mail to anyone. Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place, Meir, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST3 5PQ. Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail. CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies permitted are to be made by the named recipient and for the purpose of completing successful electronic transmission to the named recipient and then only on condition that these copies, with this notice attached, are kept confidential until destruction Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Hi, I've seen this captcha service and, according to their website, it's accessible to blind users. I didn't check it, so I don't know... anyway, here's the link: http://recaptcha.net/ Gonzalo *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***image001.jpg
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
reCAPTCHA sounds good. I tried it out and the audio for vision impaired visitors worked fine. The service seems to be free and is set up to digitize old books that cannot be scanned, literally, one word at a time. Pretty amazing! kevin Hi, I've seen this captcha service and, according to their website, it's accessible to blind users. I didn't check it, so I don't know... anyway, here's the link: http://recaptcha.net/ Gonzalo Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:34 AM, kevin erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: reCAPTCHA sounds good. I tried it out and the audio for vision impaired visitors worked fine. The service seems to be free and is set up to digitize old books that cannot be scanned, literally, one word at a time. Pretty amazing! From the reCaptcha about page[1] To archive human knowledge and to make information more accessible to the world, multiple projects are currently digitizing physical books that were written before the computer age. The book pages are being photographically scanned, and then transformed into text using Optical Character Recognition (OCR). The transformation into text is useful because scanning a book produces images, which are difficult to store on small devices, expensive to download, and cannot be searched. The problem is that OCR is not perfect. I think there's a strong relationship between reCaptcha and this group - via standards and accessibility. :-) [1] http://recaptcha.net/learnmore.html -- Scott Elcomb http://www.psema4.com/ http://www.psema4.com/blog/ http://www.google.com/reader/shared/14892828400785741937 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
Hi eBiz, In this article [1] I explain the how-to a bit and offer some additional solutions. Perhaps you could integrate those code snippets in your order form. [1] http://green-beast.com/blog/?p=220 Respectfully, Mike Cherim - Original Message - From: Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:41 AM Subject: [WSG] Accesbility Help http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page Hi All, This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I'm building. I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one because they are far from accessible, I'm not that good at PHP though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form for general contact but this will be to process order request. I've trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can any one point me in the right direction? Many thanks Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd 6 Gibson Place Meir Stoke-on-Trent www.essentialebizsolutions.net Disclaimer: This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments then please contact the sender and do not use or forward this e-mail to anyone. Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place, Meir, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST3 5PQ. Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail. CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies permitted are to be made by the named recipient and for the purpose of completing successful electronic transmission to the named recipient and then only on condition that these copies, with this notice attached, are kept confidential until destruction Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1 *** 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] Accesbility Help
Well I can vouch that reCAPTCHA doesn't work for hearing impaired or deaf folks. There have been times when I've been unable to decipher the warped text visually (and I'm not sight impaired) - and audio is no use at all. Contact form spam should never be the problem of the user. And there is no need for it to be. I've used Mike's contact form http://green-beast.com/gbcf-v3/ with success. Perhaps it may be possible to liaise with him about how to customise it for your own purposes? Vicki. :-) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Accesbility Help
Mike your still a god in my eyes, even more so now. Many thanks. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike at Green-Beast.com Sent: 04 September 2008 17:12 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help Hi eBiz, In this article [1] I explain the how-to a bit and offer some additional solutions. Perhaps you could integrate those code snippets in your order form. [1] http://green-beast.com/blog/?p=220 Respectfully, Mike Cherim - Original Message - From: Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 10:41 AM Subject: [WSG] Accesbility Help http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page Hi All, This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I'm building. I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one because they are far from accessible, I'm not that good at PHP though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form for general contact but this will be to process order request. I've trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can any one point me in the right direction? Many thanks Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd 6 Gibson Place Meir Stoke-on-Trent www.essentialebizsolutions.net Disclaimer: This email and its attachments may be confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments then please contact the sender and do not use or forward this e-mail to anyone. Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place, Meir, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, ST3 5PQ. Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail. CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies permitted are to be made by the named recipient and for the purpose of completing successful electronic transmission to the named recipient and then only on condition that these copies, with this notice attached, are kept confidential until destruction Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1 *** 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] *** -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.16/1650 - Release Date: 03/09/2008 16:13 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
If you want to avoid captchas, my recommendation would be to add a
question that would foil a robot. Just explain that this field is for
that specifically.
Something like:
fieldset
legendHuman Verification/legend
pThis section is used to thwart evil spam robots. Fill in the correct
answer./p
div
labelWhat color is the sky? (hint: blue)/label
input type=text name=human_verifier
/div
/fieldset
You're PHP would be:
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
This is obviously a very, very simple solution but it has worked on
reducing/removing form spam on a couple of my sites quite well while
being an accessible solution. I'm welcome to an contradictory thoughts
on this.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd wrote:
* Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page
http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net *
* Hi All, *
* This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I’m building.
I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one
because they are far from accessible, I’m not that good at PHP
though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form
for general contact but this will be to process order request. I’ve
trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can
any one point me in the right direction? *
* *
* Many thanks *
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd
6 Gibson Place
Meir
Stoke-on-Trent
www.essentialebizsolutions.net http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net
** Disclaimer ** : This email and its attachments may be confidential
and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz
Solutions Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and
its attachments then please contact the sender and do not use or
forward this e-mail to anyone.
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company
Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place , Meir,
Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire , ST3 5PQ .
Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail.
CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named
recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our
apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of
this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies
permitted are to be made by the named recipient and for the purpose of
completing successful electronic transmission to the named recipient
and then only on condition that these copies, with this notice
attached, are kept confidential until destruction
Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1
***
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] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
I am located in Florida, I am available 24/7. I do not let a phone call go unnoticed. I wish I could re-locate, however I will not put a company through the cost of moving me and my family. I would feel more comfortable working from my home office I have established. Please let me know if you have any problems with that. Thank you in advance. Sherri Graphic's Web Designing, LLC (941)429-5005 (941)525-3955 Cell (941)426-8117 Fax/Phone (877)447-8932 Have a great day. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://webgraphicdesigning.com/ http://webgraphicdesigning.com Save on your next Vacation/Travel http://paycationdestination.net/ Check out our online travel site and save money. As independent certified referral travel agents (RTA's), we offer the same travel vendors you already know at prices which rival Orbitz, Expedia, Travelocity. You're already booking online...why not book with someone you know...us! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:48 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... Do you relocate? Anya V. Gerasimchuk Web Designer, IT - Web Shared Services UNIFI Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] (513) 595 -2391 Levell Rampono [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/03/2008 08:49 PM Please respond to wsg@webstandardsgroup.org To wsg@webstandardsgroup.org cc Subject RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... Hi Guys, I'm in desperate need of a senior front end developer within Sydney! Key skills HTML, CSS, DHTML, JavaScript and a little PHP.. If anyone is interested, please email me [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cheers, Lev -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Montoya Sent: Wednesday, 3 September 2008 10:26 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:24 AM, David Storey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 13:08, Todd Budnikas wrote: On Sep 3, 2008, at 6:19 AM, David Storey wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 11:42, tee wrote: On Sep 3, 2008, at 2:36 AM, David Storey wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 11:28, Regnard Raquedan wrote: Well, if it's akin to Safari, then it's as good as testing it there, right? :) Or is it...? No, it has a different JavaScript engine, and doesn't support a number of things the regular WebKit supports, such as text-shadow, @font-face and a few others. Does it support border-radius or -webkit-radius? no browsers support border-radius. It does support -webkit-border-radius, as far as I know (I'm running on Mac and parallels doesn't work on my 64-bit Vista, and I can't be bothered to do the few hours re-install process of Vista) -webkit-border-radius renders just fine. Running Chrome on XP on VMWare Fusion. http://www.css3.info/preview/rounded-border/ Without WebKit's anti-aliasing as far as I can tell from Twitter posts. I'm wondering if this is due to webkit using platform specific code for things like this and text-shadow, as being a reason why they are not in Chrome (Safari on Windows has a compatibility layer), or if it is a older branch. I'm thinking more the former. Could someone tell me if it has Google Download Accelerator or other Google Toolbar features built in? I'm just wondering how much is under the hood... -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** 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] *** *** 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] ***attachment: image001.gif
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
Hi Joseph,
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
You can make that a little more foolproof by setting the case of the text
before matching, upper or lower it doesn't matter, but either way it'll
prevent answers like Blue, BLUE, bLuE, etc. from triggering the Robot! Get
out! error.
Respectfully,
Mike Cherim
- Original Message -
From: Joseph Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
If you want to avoid captchas, my recommendation would be to add a
question that would foil a robot. Just explain that this field is for that
specifically.
Something like:
fieldset
legendHuman Verification/legend
pThis section is used to thwart evil spam robots. Fill in the correct
answer./p
div
labelWhat color is the sky? (hint: blue)/label
input type=text name=human_verifier
/div
/fieldset
You're PHP would be:
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
This is obviously a very, very simple solution but it has worked on
reducing/removing form spam on a couple of my sites quite well while being
an accessible solution. I'm welcome to an contradictory thoughts on this.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd wrote:
* Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page
http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net *
* Hi All, *
* This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I’m building.
I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one
because they are far from accessible, I’m not that good at PHP
though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form
for general contact but this will be to process order request. I’ve
trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can
any one point me in the right direction? *
* *
* Many thanks *
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd
6 Gibson Place
Meir
Stoke-on-Trent
www.essentialebizsolutions.net http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net
** Disclaimer ** : This email and its attachments may be confidential and
are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd.
If you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments
then please contact the sender and do not use or forward this e-mail to
anyone.
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company
Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place , Meir,
Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire , ST3 5PQ .
Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail.
CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named
recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our
apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of
this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies permitted
are to be made by the named recipient and for the purpose of completing
successful electronic transmission to the named recipient and then only
on condition that these copies, with this notice attached, are kept
confidential until destruction
Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1
***
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]
***
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
RE: [WSG] Accesbility Help
Pretty much what I was lucking for, similar to Mike's solution. Work on a
screen reader to unlike captcha.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Joseph Taylor
Sent: 04 September 2008 18:02
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
If you want to avoid captchas, my recommendation would be to add a
question that would foil a robot. Just explain that this field is for
that specifically.
Something like:
fieldset
legendHuman Verification/legend
pThis section is used to thwart evil spam robots. Fill in the correct
answer./p
div
labelWhat color is the sky? (hint: blue)/label
input type=text name=human_verifier
/div
/fieldset
You're PHP would be:
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
This is obviously a very, very simple solution but it has worked on
reducing/removing form spam on a couple of my sites quite well while
being an accessible solution. I'm welcome to an contradictory thoughts
on this.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd wrote:
* Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page
http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net *
* Hi All, *
* This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I'm building.
I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one
because they are far from accessible, I'm not that good at PHP
though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form
for general contact but this will be to process order request. I've
trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can
any one point me in the right direction? *
* *
* Many thanks *
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd
6 Gibson Place
Meir
Stoke-on-Trent
www.essentialebizsolutions.net http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net
** Disclaimer ** : This email and its attachments may be confidential
and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz
Solutions Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient of this email and
its attachments then please contact the sender and do not use or
forward this e-mail to anyone.
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company
Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place , Meir,
Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire , ST3 5PQ .
Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail.
CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named
recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our
apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of
this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies
permitted are to be made by the named recipient and for the purpose of
completing successful electronic transmission to the named recipient
and then only on condition that these copies, with this notice
attached, are kept confidential until destruction
Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1
***
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]
***
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 270.6.16/1650 - Release Date: 03/09/2008
16:13
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
Good call.
?php
// check the answer
if (strtolower($_POST['human_verifier']) != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
I agree that Mike's form is well made too. It takes my concept and adds
in all the other pieces you'd want for the complete solution.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
Hi Joseph,
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
You can make that a little more foolproof by setting the case of the
text before matching, upper or lower it doesn't matter, but either way
it'll prevent answers like Blue, BLUE, bLuE, etc. from triggering the
Robot! Get out! error.
Respectfully,
Mike Cherim
- Original Message - From: Joseph Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
If you want to avoid captchas, my recommendation would be to add a
question that would foil a robot. Just explain that this field is for
that specifically.
Something like:
fieldset
legendHuman Verification/legend
pThis section is used to thwart evil spam robots. Fill in the
correct answer./p
div
labelWhat color is the sky? (hint: blue)/label
input type=text name=human_verifier
/div
/fieldset
You're PHP would be:
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
This is obviously a very, very simple solution but it has worked on
reducing/removing form spam on a couple of my sites quite well while
being an accessible solution. I'm welcome to an contradictory
thoughts on this.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd wrote:
* Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page
http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net *
* Hi All, *
* This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I’m building.
I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one
because they are far from accessible, I’m not that good at PHP
though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form
for general contact but this will be to process order request. I’ve
trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can
any one point me in the right direction? *
* *
* Many thanks *
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd
6 Gibson Place
Meir
Stoke-on-Trent
www.essentialebizsolutions.net http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net
** Disclaimer ** : This email and its attachments may be
confidential and are intended solely for the use of the individual
to whom it is addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely
those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd. If you are not the intended recipient
of this email and its attachments then please contact the sender and
do not use or forward this e-mail to anyone.
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales
Company Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson
Place , Meir, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire , ST3 5PQ .
Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail.
CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the
named recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept
our apologies and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the
contents of this e-mail to anyone, nor take copies of it. The only
copies permitted are to be made by the named recipient and for the
purpose of completing successful electronic transmission to the
named recipient and then only on condition that these copies, with
this notice attached, are kept confidential until destruction
Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1
***
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]
***
***
List Guidelines:
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
Hi,
just another vote for Mike's GB Contact Form - been using it successfully
for a while now and it works beautifully.
Had tried a lot of other options and form setup - this one is by far the
best, in my humble opinion anyway.
So - thank you, Mike ;)
Prisca
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 6:48 PM, Joseph Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good call.
?php
// check the answer
if (strtolower($_POST['human_verifier']) != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
I agree that Mike's form is well made too. It takes my concept and adds in
all the other pieces you'd want for the complete solution.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
Hi Joseph,
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
You can make that a little more foolproof by setting the case of the text
before matching, upper or lower it doesn't matter, but either way it'll
prevent answers like Blue, BLUE, bLuE, etc. from triggering the Robot! Get
out! error.
Respectfully,
Mike Cherim
- Original Message - From: Joseph Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 1:01 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
If you want to avoid captchas, my recommendation would be to add a
question that would foil a robot. Just explain that this field is for that
specifically.
Something like:
fieldset
legendHuman Verification/legend
pThis section is used to thwart evil spam robots. Fill in the correct
answer./p
div
labelWhat color is the sky? (hint: blue)/label
input type=text name=human_verifier
/div
/fieldset
You're PHP would be:
?php
// check the answer
if ($_POST['human_verifier'] != 'blue')
{
// incorrect
echo 'Robot! Get out!');
}
else
{
// correct
echo 'Welcome, Human.';
}
?
This is obviously a very, very simple solution but it has worked on
reducing/removing form spam on a couple of my sites quite well while being
an accessible solution. I'm welcome to an contradictory thoughts on this.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd wrote:
* Click the Essential eBiz Solutions logo to visit our home page
http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net *
* Hi All, *
* This is a mixed question, I have a contact form that I'm building.
I want to add a human verifier to the forms but not a captcha one
because they are far from accessible, I'm not that good at PHP
though to figure it out, I already use the Mikes Green Beast form
for general contact but this will be to process order request. I've
trawled the internet but all I can find is captcha solutions, can
any one point me in the right direction? *
* *
* Many thanks *
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd
6 Gibson Place
Meir
Stoke-on-Trent
www.essentialebizsolutions.net http://www.essentialebizsolutions.net
** Disclaimer ** : This email and its attachments may be confidential
and are intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is
addressed. Any views or opinions expressed are solely those of the author
and do not necessarily represent those of Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd. If
you are not the intended recipient of this email and its attachments then
please contact the sender and do not use or forward this e-mail to anyone.
Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd, Registered in England and Wales Company
Registration No: 57200784. Registered Office: 6, Gibson Place , Meir,
Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire , ST3 5PQ .
Please consider the environmental impact of printing this e-mail.
CONFIDENTIAL: This email is intended for and confidential to the named
recipient. If you have received a copy in error, please accept our
apologies
and destroy it. You may not use or disclose the contents of this e-mail to
anyone, nor take copies of it. The only copies permitted are to be made by
the named recipient and for the purpose of completing successful electronic
transmission to the named recipient and then only on condition that these
copies, with this notice attached, are kept confidential until destruction
Hosting Plans http://www.krystal.co.uk/aff/aff.php?id=135_1
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
Hi, You can send your profile and portfolio to this company. Sometimes we outsource some projects. thanks regards, n i s h a n t h director- media operations p.o box: 8284 | dubai | u . a . e tel: 04 273 6885 fax: 04 273 6884 http://www.amdeas.com/ www.amdeas.com ||| Disclaimer: This email is the property of amdeas, and the information contained herewith is only intended for the recipient/s named above and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended or one of the intended recipient/s, any unauthorized use is prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender so that arrangements can be made for its retrieval or destruction. Distribution or copying of this email, or the information contained herein, to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. ♣ Please consider your environmental responsibility before printing this e- mail _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Graphics Web Designing, LLC Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 9:18 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... I am located in Florida, I am available 24/7. I do not let a phone call go unnoticed. I wish I could re-locate, however I will not put a company through the cost of moving me and my family. I would feel more comfortable working from my home office I have established. Please let me know if you have any problems with that. Thank you in advance. Sherri Graphic’s Web Designing, LLC (941)429-5005 (941)525-3955 Cell (941)426-8117 Fax/Phone (877)447-8932 Have a great day. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://webgraphicdesigning.com/ http://webgraphicdesigning.com Save on your next Vacation/Travel http://paycationdestination.net/ Check out our online travel site and save money. As independent certified referral travel agents (RTA's), we offer the same travel vendors you already know at prices which rival Orbitz, Expedia, Travelocity. You're already booking online...why not book with someone you know...us! From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 8:48 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... Do you relocate? Anya V. Gerasimchuk Web Designer, IT - Web Shared Services UNIFI Information Technology [EMAIL PROTECTED] (513) 595 -2391 Levell Rampono [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 09/03/2008 08:49 PM Please respond to wsg@webstandardsgroup.org To wsg@webstandardsgroup.org cc Subject RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... Hi Guys, I'm in desperate need of a senior front end developer within Sydney! Key skills HTML, CSS, DHTML, JavaScript and a little PHP.. If anyone is interested, please email me [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cheers, Lev -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Montoya Sent: Wednesday, 3 September 2008 10:26 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 7:24 AM, David Storey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 13:08, Todd Budnikas wrote: On Sep 3, 2008, at 6:19 AM, David Storey wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 11:42, tee wrote: On Sep 3, 2008, at 2:36 AM, David Storey wrote: On 3 Sep 2008, at 11:28, Regnard Raquedan wrote: Well, if it's akin to Safari, then it's as good as testing it there, right? :) Or is it...? No, it has a different JavaScript engine, and doesn't support a number of things the regular WebKit supports, such as text-shadow, @font-face and a few others. Does it support border-radius or -webkit-radius? no browsers support border-radius. It does support -webkit-border-radius, as far as I know (I'm running on Mac and parallels doesn't work on my 64-bit Vista, and I can't be bothered to do the few hours re-install process of Vista) -webkit-border-radius renders just fine. Running Chrome on XP on VMWare Fusion. http://www.css3.info/preview/rounded-border/ Without WebKit's anti-aliasing as far as I can tell from Twitter posts. I'm wondering if this is due to webkit using platform specific code for things like this and text-shadow, as being a reason why they are not in Chrome (Safari on Windows has a compatibility layer), or if it is a older branch. I'm thinking more the former. Could someone tell me if it has Google Download Accelerator or other Google Toolbar features built in? I'm just wondering how much is under the hood... -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines:
Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
I can't believe this is still going. You guys are ALL off-topic for this list. Please take your employment discussions elsewhere (like, off-list). 2008/9/4 nishanth [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, You can send your profile and portfolio to this company. Sometimes we outsource some projects. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... ADMIN THREAD CLOSED
ADMIN THREAD CLOSED The employment aspect of this thread has been closed for two reasons 1. This list does not allow posts about employment opportunities. If you wish tyo post a job, email me offlist and I can add it to the weekly email that goes out to all members. 2. This discussion has hijacked a totally different thread. Please do not reply to this thread unless you are discussing the original thread topic - CHROME. Thank you Russ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
Good gosh, can you not see that people are only HUMAN and make MISTAKES for the love of god, Stop getting so huffy. I guess next to you being perfect nobody can make a mistake! No wonder I hardly post anything to this. I would hate to upset those that are to perfect for this world! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Christian Montoya Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 4:26 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... I can't believe this is still going. You guys are ALL off-topic for this list. Please take your employment discussions elsewhere (like, off-list). 2008/9/4 nishanth [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, You can send your profile and portfolio to this company. Sometimes we outsource some projects. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** 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] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon???
Just got chrome on my XP machine. Looks good but I am concerned about accessibility. Again, thanks Steve. James Jeffery On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 5:19 PM, kevin erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Thank you for the report Steve. It was very helpful!! kevin On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 11:23:15 -0400, Steve Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, this is the case. There has been a lot of talk about this in GAWDS, and Steve Faulkner has written about it at http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?p=92. Basically it looks like there's no MSAA support. If they don't address this, many large organisations (at least in the UK) will not use it. I imagine that such organisations are exactly the people Google are expecting to build applications using Chrome, so hopefully this will be addressed at some point, ideally before it comes out of beta. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kevin erickson Sent: 03 September 2008 16:07 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon??? I have a huge concern about accessibility here. Apparently Jaws and other screen readers don't work on Google Chrome at all. Can others please confirm? kevin *** 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] *** -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ *** 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] Google chrome...
what do you all think about the way chrome re-sizes (ctrl +) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome...
First i thought it felt unfinished, but then the minimal design grew on me. Very uncluttered. And drop down menus consolodate a lot of screen real estate. Well designed gui, all its needs now is firebug and id use it. And i like the incognito windows, thats a slick feature. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome...
I believe it's a know bug, a missing feature. It's something David Pogue mentioned in his column on the Chrome releasehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/03/technology/personaltech/03pogue.html, his most recent column: At the moment, for example, there's no way to e-mail a Web page to someone, no full-screen mode, no way to magnify the page (rather than just the text), and no bookmarks organizing screen. Google says that these features are at the top of its to-do list. On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 4:49 PM, kevin mcmonagle [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: what do you all think about the way chrome re-sizes (ctrl +) *** 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] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon???
Hey guys... it is great that talk about accessibility and chrome has been raised - but I do think that we need to wait until it is out of beta. Cheers Adam - Original Message - From: James Jeffery To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 7:13 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon??? Just got chrome on my XP machine. Looks good but I am concerned about accessibility. Again, thanks Steve. James Jeffery On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 5:19 PM, kevin erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you for the report Steve. It was very helpful!! kevin On Wed, 03 Sep 2008 11:23:15 -0400, Steve Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, this is the case. There has been a lot of talk about this in GAWDS, and Steve Faulkner has written about it at http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?p=92. Basically it looks like there's no MSAA support. If they don't address this, many large organisations (at least in the UK) will not use it. I imagine that such organisations are exactly the people Google are expecting to build applications using Chrome, so hopefully this will be addressed at some point, ideally before it comes out of beta. Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kevin erickson Sent: 03 September 2008 16:07 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon??? I have a huge concern about accessibility here. Apparently Jaws and other screen readers don't work on Google Chrome at all. Can others please confirm? kevin *** 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] *** -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome...
One thing I have noticed today is that it creates 3 different processes in the Task Manager to run one coyp of chrome. I have tested this several times with the Task Manager open and everytime I open the browser, I add three processes all named chrome. They vary from 5mb to 44mb of memory usage. I can't figure out why it has to load the process three times in order to run. Nancy - Original Message - From: kevin mcmonagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... First i thought it felt unfinished, but then the minimal design grew on me. Very uncluttered. And drop down menus consolodate a lot of screen real estate. Well designed gui, all its needs now is firebug and id use it. And i like the incognito windows, thats a slick feature. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3416 (20080904) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome...
Shift+Esc in Chrome will open up Task Manager - Google Chrome, which should help in answering your question. On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 5:44 PM, Nancy Gill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: One thing I have noticed today is that it creates 3 different processes in the Task Manager to run one coyp of chrome. I have tested this several times with the Task Manager open and everytime I open the browser, I add three processes all named chrome. They vary from 5mb to 44mb of memory usage. I can't figure out why it has to load the process three times in order to run. Nancy - Original Message - From: kevin mcmonagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... First i thought it felt unfinished, but then the minimal design grew on me. Very uncluttered. And drop down menus consolodate a lot of screen real estate. Well designed gui, all its needs now is firebug and id use it. And i like the incognito windows, thats a slick feature. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3416 (20080904) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com *** 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] Google chrome...
Nancy Gill wrote: I can't figure out why it has to load the process three times in order to run. the google explanation: http://blogoscoped.com/google-chrome/3 -- Chris Knowles *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon???
Adam wrote: Hey guys... it is great that talk about accessibility and chrome has been raised - but I do think that we need to wait until it is out of beta. Isn't that what beta is for - to get feedback for further development? And Gmail is still in beta after several years. Kerry --- This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete all copies of this transmission along with any attachments immediately. You should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. --- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome...
Nancy Gill wrote: I can't figure out why it has to load the process three times in order to run. It runs every tab in a separate process, plus one main one for the browser. This means a crash on a single page won't bring down the whole browser, it also means there is, for the first time in a browser, the possibility of seeing exactly how much memory and CPU power an individual website is using up (right click on the window bar and select Task Manager). Rob *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon???
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Martin Sent: 04 September 2008 23:33 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon??? Hey guys... it is great that talk about accessibility and chrome has been raised - but I do think that we need to wait until it is out of beta. Cheers Adam -- Why? Accessibility can't just be bolted on afterwards - it needs to be designed in from the start. The fact that the application cannot be used with just a keyboard is criminally negligent - that's a fundamental requirement of any application. The simplicity of the UI means it should have been really easy, and the fact that the application is device-dependent suggests that accessibility isn't on their radar at all. The fact that keyboard-only users, screen reader users and others cannot use the browser at all means that they are entirely excluded from the beta phase, so it seems they will not be able to provide feedback until it goes gold, if it ever does. For an organisation with Google's resources this is totally unacceptable. Steve *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon...
Return Receipt Your RE: [WSG] Google chrome... Coming very soon... document: wasLisa Kerrigan/StateDevPolicy/DSD received by: at:05/09/2008 09:20:43 AM ** Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development, Government of Victoria, Victoria, Australia. This e-mail and any attachments may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not distribute reproduce this e-mail or the attachments. If you have received this message in error, please notify us by return e-mail. ** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like...
Hi Todd - Link is here: http://www.koisis.com/.framework/-public/index.php Yes, I have verified that it's HTML validator - which is based upon Tidy - extension that is giving me this info (it's not an error or even a warning). As mentioned, all my pages do validate (as per HTML Validator) as I always get a green check mark and 0 errors / 0 warnings at the bottom-right-hand corner of FF. As mentioned, no where near an emergency or a problem, but I am just curious. Cole _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Budnikas Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 7:08 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like... Cole, can you post a url so people can see the validator results and review the code? Everything looks on the up-and-up from what you've posted. I've never used the FF HTML Validator extension (is it the one based on HTML Tidy?), so i can't speak for that. The Web Developer extension just pushes the page to the W3C validator. Please also verify which Validator of the 2 you're running into trouble with. On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:47 AM, Cole Kuryakin wrote: Hello all - I've got the following doctype at the head of each of my pages: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=en lang=en I take great pains to validate everything I do on every page, but, even if the page shows as valid (using FF's HTML Validator extension - or Web Developer extension. I can't remember which) when I view source on a valid page, I always get an info box that states: Info: Doctype given is -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN Info: Document content looks like XHTML 1.0 Transitional I don't think that this is - by any means - any reason for me to be worried about my code/structure/et. al, but I've always wondered why, if I feed a xhtml 1.0 STRICT doc type why the validator always says that my stuff looks TRANSITIONAL? Am I doing something wrong? Any insight would be appreciated. Cole *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Z-index
Hello everyone!
I got a problem here. I´m trying to get the header of my website fixed at
the top on a z-index but it´s not working. My website iswww.laertjansen.com
http://www.laertjansen.com%20
I just want to fix the info at the top but what happens can be seen
herehttp://www.laertjansen.com/test/
.
The Header´s css is:
#header {
margin:auto;
width:894px;
margin-bottom:26px;
position:fixed;
z-index:100;
Does anyone have any idea of what´s my mistake? Thanks a lot in advance.
--
Laert Jansen
www.laertjansen.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Z-index
On Sep 4, 2008, at 4:44 PM, Laert Jansen wrote:
The Header´s css is:
#header {
margin:auto;
width:894px;
margin-bottom:26px;
position:fixed;
z-index:100;
Impressive work The Jacob Ferreira is very barackobama though. Is
barackobama.com your work?
One of my client last year told me she loves the design and wanted her
site looks like his - the feel, the color, the design. Freaked me out!
Too me a great effort to convince her I cannot pirate other's work.
You can't use margin:auto with fixed position.
Try something like this:
#header {
top:0;
left:80px; /* if you want it centered */
width:894px;
margin-bottom:26px;
position:fixed;
z-index:100;
}
You can also use absolute position.
tee
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
RE: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like...
As far as I'm aware XHTML strict was never programmed to acknowledge attributes, this was something that was only available in the transitional format. If you remove language=javascript1.2 then you're page will validate perfectly. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cole Kuryakin Sent: 05 September 2008 00:40 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like... Hi Todd - Link is here: http://www.koisis.com/.framework/-public/index.php Yes, I have verified that it's HTML validator - which is based upon Tidy - extension that is giving me this info (it's not an error or even a warning). As mentioned, all my pages do validate (as per HTML Validator) as I always get a green check mark and 0 errors / 0 warnings at the bottom-right-hand corner of FF. As mentioned, no where near an emergency or a problem, but I am just curious. Cole _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Budnikas Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 7:08 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like... Cole, can you post a url so people can see the validator results and review the code? Everything looks on the up-and-up from what you've posted. I've never used the FF HTML Validator extension (is it the one based on HTML Tidy?), so i can't speak for that. The Web Developer extension just pushes the page to the W3C validator. Please also verify which Validator of the 2 you're running into trouble with. On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:47 AM, Cole Kuryakin wrote: Hello all - I've got the following doctype at the head of each of my pages: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=en lang=en I take great pains to validate everything I do on every page, but, even if the page shows as valid (using FF's HTML Validator extension - or Web Developer extension. I can't remember which) when I view source on a valid page, I always get an info box that states: Info: Doctype given is -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN Info: Document content looks like XHTML 1.0 Transitional I don't think that this is - by any means - any reason for me to be worried about my code/structure/et. al, but I've always wondered why, if I feed a xhtml 1.0 STRICT doc type why the validator always says that my stuff looks TRANSITIONAL? Am I doing something wrong? Any insight would be appreciated. Cole *** 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] *** *** 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] Z-index
you may need to put some more positioning on the header and some leading room
above the folio to account for the gap required for FF and IE7 and possibly
others.
I'd ask the question on the relevance of maintaining the header as it is so
large and will take up a lot of screen real estate and some of the folio items
are large.
I'm assuming the aim is to highlight the fulle experience of these.
From memory position:fixed is not supported in IE6.
William
Laert Jansen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello everyone!
I got a problem here. I´m trying to get the header of my website fixed
at
the top on a z-index but it´s not working. My website
iswww.laertjansen.com
http://www.laertjansen.com%20
I just want to fix the info at the top but what happens can be seen
herehttp://www.laertjansen.com/test/
.
The Header´s css is:
#header {
margin:auto;
width:894px;
margin-bottom:26px;
position:fixed;
z-index:100;
Does anyone have any idea of what´s my mistake? Thanks a lot in advance.
--
Laert Jansen
www.laertjansen.com
***
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] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like...
Cole, from what i can see, if i remove the comment after your head tag !--PUT THE PROPER LANGUAGE ID HERE?-- , it changes from content looks like transitional to a matching content looks like Strict. Seems in almost every case where i use that extension, it does give you some some message, i guess the hope is that what it recognizes matches what it interprets the page to be. Extension creator has this to say.. although doesn't help a ton: http://www.htmlpedia.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=9t=66 cheers On Sep 4, 2008, at 7:39 PM, Cole Kuryakin wrote: Hi Todd – Link is here: http://www.koisis.com/.framework/-public/index.php Yes, I have verified that it’s HTML validator – which is based upon Tidy - extension that is giving me this info (it’s not an error or even a warning). As mentioned, all my pages do validate (as per HTML Validator) as I always get a green check mark and “0 errors / 0 warnings” at the bottom-right-hand corner of FF. As mentioned, no where near an emergency or a problem, but I am just curious. Cole From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Budnikas Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 7:08 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like... Cole, can you post a url so people can see the validator results and review the code? Everything looks on the up-and-up from what you've posted. I've never used the FF HTML Validator extension (is it the one based on HTML Tidy?), so i can't speak for that. The Web Developer extension just pushes the page to the W3C validator. Please also verify which Validator of the 2 you're running into trouble with. On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:47 AM, Cole Kuryakin wrote: Hello all – I’ve got the following doctype at the head of each of my pages: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=en lang=en I take great pains to validate everything I do on every page, but, even if the page shows as valid (using FF’s HTML Validator extension – or Web Developer extension… I can’t remember which) when I view source on a “valid” page, I always get an info box that states: Info: Doctype given is -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN Info: Document content looks like XHTML 1.0 Transitional I don’t think that this is – by any means – any reason for me to be worried about my code/structure/et. al, but I’ve always wondered why, if I feed a xhtml 1.0 STRICT doc type why the validator always says that my stuff looks TRANSITIONAL? Am I doing something wrong? Any insight would be appreciated. Cole *** 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] *** *** 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] Google chrome...
Because that is an intentional part of the way the system is designed. Read the comic for all the details http://www.google.com/googlebooks/chrome/index.html Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 Nancy Gill wrote: One thing I have noticed today is that it creates 3 different processes in the Task Manager to run one coyp of chrome. I have tested this several times with the Task Manager open and everytime I open the browser, I add three processes all named chrome. They vary from 5mb to 44mb of memory usage. I can't figure out why it has to load the process three times in order to run. Nancy - Original Message - From: kevin mcmonagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 2:42 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... First i thought it felt unfinished, but then the minimal design grew on me. Very uncluttered. And drop down menus consolodate a lot of screen real estate. Well designed gui, all its needs now is firebug and id use it. And i like the incognito windows, thats a slick feature. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 3416 (20080904) __ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com *** 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] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like...
cole, i get the same thing in the ff html validator. copied and pasted the w3c doc type into my document. must be a bug or something. as long as your document validates through the online validator, i wouldn't worry about it. it's in the format the w3c recommends. cheers, dwain On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 11:47 PM, Cole Kuryakin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello all – I've got the following doctype at the head of each of my pages: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=en lang=en I take great pains to validate everything I do on every page, but, even if the page shows as valid (using FF's HTML Validator extension – or Web Developer extension… I can't remember which) when I view source on a valid page, I always get an info box that states: Info: Doctype given is -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN Info: Document content looks like XHTML 1.0 Transitional I don't think that this is – by any means – any reason for me to be worried about my code/structure/et. al, but I've always wondered why, if I feed a xhtml 1.0 STRICT doc type why the validator always says that my stuff looks TRANSITIONAL? Am I doing something wrong? Any insight would be appreciated. Cole *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety. Benjamin Franklin *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon???
From: Adam Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 6:33 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon??? Hey guys... it is great that talk about accessibility and chrome has been raised - but I do think that we need to wait until it is out of beta. --- I think it might be in beta in perpetuity - sort of like g-mail and Adobe Spry. My guess is it protects them from litigation. I would be very surprised to ever see a shipping release. That said, I'm not sure what this all has to do with standards :-) -- Al Sparber - PVII http://www.projectseven.com Fully Automated Menu Systems | Galleries | Widgets http://www.projectseven.com/go/Elevators *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] DocType Given is... SOLVED
Essential, Todd and Dwain - Thank you all for your input. Have removed the javascript language attributes as well as the errant html comment and now the Tidy message I get matches Strict/Strict Thanks again to everyone! Cole _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Essential eBiz Solutions Ltd Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 8:11 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like... As far as I'm aware XHTML strict was never programmed to acknowledge attributes, this was something that was only available in the transitional format. If you remove language=javascript1.2 then you're page will validate perfectly. _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cole Kuryakin Sent: 05 September 2008 00:40 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like... Hi Todd - Link is here: http://www.koisis.com/.framework/-public/index.php Yes, I have verified that it's HTML validator - which is based upon Tidy - extension that is giving me this info (it's not an error or even a warning). As mentioned, all my pages do validate (as per HTML Validator) as I always get a green check mark and 0 errors / 0 warnings at the bottom-right-hand corner of FF. As mentioned, no where near an emergency or a problem, but I am just curious. Cole _ From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Todd Budnikas Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 7:08 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] DocType Given is... Document Looks Like... Cole, can you post a url so people can see the validator results and review the code? Everything looks on the up-and-up from what you've posted. I've never used the FF HTML Validator extension (is it the one based on HTML Tidy?), so i can't speak for that. The Web Developer extension just pushes the page to the W3C validator. Please also verify which Validator of the 2 you're running into trouble with. On Sep 4, 2008, at 12:47 AM, Cole Kuryakin wrote: Hello all - I've got the following doctype at the head of each of my pages: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; html xmlns=http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml; xml:lang=en lang=en I take great pains to validate everything I do on every page, but, even if the page shows as valid (using FF's HTML Validator extension - or Web Developer extension. I can't remember which) when I view source on a valid page, I always get an info box that states: Info: Doctype given is -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN Info: Document content looks like XHTML 1.0 Transitional I don't think that this is - by any means - any reason for me to be worried about my code/structure/et. al, but I've always wondered why, if I feed a xhtml 1.0 STRICT doc type why the validator always says that my stuff looks TRANSITIONAL? Am I doing something wrong? Any insight would be appreciated. Cole *** 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] *** *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accesbility Help
Hey, I saw a funny one once. A site had a really basic math problem. Like 4x2 or something. Type in the answer and you submitted the form. Because it's HTML it's accessible. IceKat. Scott Elcomb wrote: On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:34 AM, kevin erickson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: reCAPTCHA sounds good. I tried it out and the audio for vision impaired visitors worked fine. The service seems to be free and is set up to digitize old books that cannot be scanned, literally, one word at a time. Pretty amazing! From the reCaptcha about page[1] To archive human knowledge and to make information more accessible to the world, multiple projects are currently digitizing physical books that were written before the computer age. The book pages are being photographically scanned, and then transformed into text using Optical Character Recognition (OCR). The transformation into text is useful because scanning a book produces images, which are difficult to store on small devices, expensive to download, and cannot be searched. The problem is that OCR is not perfect. I think there's a strong relationship between reCaptcha and this group - via standards and accessibility. :-) [1] http://recaptcha.net/learnmore.html *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Google chrome... Accessibility coming very soon???
Hey guys... it is great that talk about accessibility and chrome has been raised - but I do think that we need to wait until it is out of beta. Well... Google has a track record of a) keeping products in permanent beta; and b) never getting around to that pesky accessibility bit. So, personally I think waiting until its out of beta is a bad idea :) -- --- http://weblog.200ok.com.au/ --- The future has arrived; it's just not --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
