Re: [WSG] The World Wide Web is not enough
Hi Irapuan, Your English is not bad - better than some native speakers I have worked with, in fact! :) On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:40:00 -0300, you wrote: Look that: http://www.apcmag.com/apc/v3.nsf/0/A569C81864DC4F1BCA256E5F001A59C5 Here in Brazil, I see this same type of opinion frequently, ... I have worked in the computer field for over forty years, and, like you, am still amazed to find how intransigent many in this field are. You'd think that a cutting-edge field would attract people open to change, but such is not the case. Only three years ago I had a project lead angry at me for daring to use lower case in my COBOL code! There is a name for such people in English - Luddites: http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/itc_data/luddite.html Thanks for raising this issue. After forty years I still don't know how to deal with it. Life. Love. Peace. David -- David Hucklesby, on 4/16/2004 Read Obituary at http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] CSS Debugger in JS
On Wed, 12 May 2004 12:49:38 +1000, Gary Menzel wrote: This looks very kewl - but, while I could cut and paste the stylesheet into the Edit CSS window for FireFox, I could not get the bookmarklets to work. Hi Gary, I found that you can't use a local style sheet for web-based pages. So I made two bookmarks - one for looking at pages on the web, and one for use locally when I'm not connected to the web. I used File Bookmark from the Bookmarks menu and pasted the script into the Location box. I named this bookmark CSS Debug - web. Then I pasted this same script into a text editor. Next I saved the stylesheet into a folder, opened it in the browser, and copied the URL to this file from the address bar. I pasted this URL into the script in the text editor, replacing the http: type URL. Finally I made another File Bookmark entry from this modified script, naming this bookmark CSS Debug - local. Hope this helps. Write me off list if my explanation is obtuse. Life. Love. Peace. David -- David Hucklesby, on 5/11/2004 Read Cinco de Mayo at http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Have stared too long
On Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:20:03 -0400, Veine K Vikberg wrote: As for the Safari, I could use a ss of that if you can make me one, as I have no clue to how much etc. Hello Veine, FYI - the splendid Daniel Vine offers free screen shots on iCapture: http://www.danvine.com/icapture/ This for Safari 1.2. He also does IE PC. Life. Love. Peace. David -- David Hucklesby, on 6/16/2004 Read Harry Belafonte in San Francisco at http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help *
Re: [WSG] Designing for Opera's zoom functionality
On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 14:31:12 +1000, Anura Samara wrote: I am well on the way to developing new designs for our site. However, in having the design tested for accessibility, I have run into some problems with the way Opera handles zooming. Hi Anura, The only time I had problems with Opera's zooming was due to positioning right. Opera respects this right position when zooming, and, as you noticed, squishes the middle. If you want Opera to expand out to the right of the browser window, I suggest positioning to the left and using a left margin. Depending on your content, you could also use percent margins on the center column large enough to allow the right column to expand without overlapping. Hard to advise without seeing your code. That's assuming your problem is with absolute positioning. Life. Love. Peace. David -- David Hucklesby, on 8/25/2004 Pieces - daily news at http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ Proud presenters of Web Essentials 04 http://we04.com/ Web standards, accessibility, inspiration, knowledge To be held in Sydney, September 30 and October 1, 2004 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] zoom, or text zoom?
On Tue, 16 Nov 2004 12:51:58 -, designer wrote:
- Opera has a beautiful zoom feature which simply magnifies
everything and keeps the design intact, so isn't that the way
browsers should be going, instead of just acting on the text?
I love Opera, but it's not perfect. If you have a layer positioned
to the right, that layer expands to the left when zoomed, thus
squashing the middle.
Clearly, the use of ems is just a nightmare, esp when you have
several images and have to guess what the em dimensions are,
so what's wrong with
'complete zoom' instead of 'text zoom'?
As you noted, only IE stops users from zooming. I think that maybe
even IE for Mac allows pixel sizes to zoom.
Personally, I never really got the hang of table based design, and
quickly latched on to CSS. Like any technique, you have to play with
it a while to get the hang of it. The developer toolbar for Firefox
lets you edit the CSS and get immediate feedback. I find this
great for adjusting percents and ems.
Another suggestion I saw is to use pixels, which are easier to figure,
then use the star hack to give relative sizes to IE only, viz:
html,
body {font: normal 16px/1.5 Lucida, Arial, Verdana, sans-serif;
}
* html,
* html body {font-size: 100%;
}
I think that once you accept that you cannot control the appearance
of a web page like a magazine page or brochure, it gives a freedom
that is fun to explore.
Life. Love. Peace.
David
--
David Hucklesby, on 11/16/2004
http://www.hucklesby.com/
--
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Imaginary Borders
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 10:39:42 -0800, Chris Kennon wrote: In the following code the tr#n rules are not taking. I've looked around and have no reason for this failure. Would someone assist? Hi Chris - you seem to have a space between tr and #... in your selector. If so, try it without the space. Life. Love. Peace. David -- David Hucklesby, on 1/27/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] The Designer Is Dead, Long Live The Designer!
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:20:01 -0600, Mani Sheriar wrote: I thought this was an interesting article from Digital Web Magazine: http://www.digital-web.com/articles/the_designer_is_dead/ It speaks of the importance of design and its effects on usability and *perceived* usability. The article begins with the premise: design comes first, usability second. It ends: We do not need usability experts aggravating the situation by telling us design and aesthetic quality is trivial. I don't think the evidence supports that assertion. It's true that many sites promoting web standards are plain; it's equally true that many attractive-looking sites are unusable by mere mortals, even abled ones, whatever that may mean. But who, specifically, suggests that design and aesthetic quality is trivial? Personally, I believe that good design combines attractiveness with usability. One does not exclude the other - rather, I think, the two essentially go hand in hand. Good design in my book means good communication. Good esthetics are essential - and so is usability, as well as other aspects of the content. Life. Love. Peace. David -- David Hucklesby, on 1/29/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] New member introduction
On Fri, 01 Apr 2005 07:22:18 -0800, tee wrote: Hi I'd just joined this group, thought it's polite to introduce myself. -- (snipped) Tee www.lotusseeds.com Hello Tee, and welcome, I am impressed with your site. Funny, I was just experimenting with a pink and green color scheme! Not me though, but I like it. A quick note on your accessibility notes: I tried out your access keys in Opera 7.54 Win and they work fine. But Opera's access keys work after pressing Shift + Esc : then press the access key. Pressing Ctrl + Esc triggers the Windows start menu. Kind regards, David -- David Hucklesby, on 4/2/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] javascript IE5
On Fri, 24 Jun 2005 10:12:57 +0100, Phil Baines wrote: ... I have come across a javascript problem. The javascript used on the site allows subcategories to be closed, and clicked open/closed. This worked wonders in Firefox, IE6 and IE5.5 (Although my cursor:pointer; isn’t right in IE5). But I get a javascript error in IE5.5. Can anyone else confirm this for me, and does anyone have even the slightest idea what is causing the error? Link: http://dev.netring.co.uk/newporttown/ Sorry, Phil - I see no sub-categories! I tried clicking around but nothing happens, in IE 6 or Opera 7 on XP SP2. But I can help you with the cursor problem. IE uses the proprietary cursor: hand for what you want. Non-standard, of course. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 6/26/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] help or web - THREAD CLOSED
On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 23:14:13 -0700, tee wrote: Forgive me Russ, while I was writing this email, your THREAD CLOSED came in but I have an urge to finish my message. Hello Tee, Thank you for your heart-felt message to the group. I'm so glad you squeezed it in. It reflects my sentiments, too. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 7/12/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] HTML Codes - Characters and symbols
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 11:08:03 +1000, jackie reid wrote: this is handy for people like me who dont know the HTML Codes - Characters and symbols off by heart or even 1% by heart http://www.ascii.cl/htmlcodes.htm Thank you, Jackie, Nice one. I'm adding that to my bookmarks! Another great reference is Brian Wilson's HTML and CSS reference. It's two years old, but I still find it valuable: http://www.blooberry.com/indexdot/html/index.html Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 7/13/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] web standards detection - is it possible?
On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 23:13:40 +1000, russ - maxdesign wrote: ... I heard a presentation the other day where a major site went to standards and in the process dished up unstyled pages to NN4. They received heaps of feedback from people using NN4 thanking them for making the browsing experience easier and faster. I'm saving a copy of this. Thank you, Russ. I needed to know that. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 7/13/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Making CSS Buttons active
Mike Kear asked:
I'm building a site with a navigation button stack in the left
column, and I'm trying to figure out how to make the whole button
active. I know I've seen it happening somewhere but I can't find
an example right now. Can anyone show me how that is achieved?
Christian Bradford replied:
I believe what you might be missing is a specified width for the
anchor tags to fill the buttons. Your stylesheet's ul.menu li a,
or equivalent, needs a width: 100%; added.
Mike, Christian is correct that, for IE to make the whole button
clickable it needs a dimension. If you don't want a 100% width
you can also give (IE Win only) a height, using the star html hack
and the backslash comment hack to hide it from IE Mac, viz:
/* for IE Win only \*/
* html #yournav a {height: 1em;}
/* stop hiding from Mac */
IE Win will (wrongly) increase the height if necessary.
Cordially,
David
--
David Hucklesby, on 7/30/2005
http://www.hucklesby.com/
--
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Making CSS Buttons active
Mike Kear asked:
I'm building a site with a navigation button stack in the left
column, and I'm trying to figure out how to make the whole button
active. I know I've seen it happening somewhere but I can't find
an example right now. Can anyone show me how that is achieved?
Christian Bradford replied:
I believe what you might be missing is a specified width for the
anchor tags to fill the buttons. Your stylesheet's ul.menu li a,
or equivalent, needs a width: 100%; added.
Mike, Christian is correct that, for IE to make the whole button
clickable it needs a dimension. If you don't want a 100% width
you can also give (IE Win only) a height, using the star html hack
and the backslash comment hack to hide it from IE Mac, viz:
/* for IE Win only \*/
* html #yournav a {height: 1em;}
/* stop hiding from Mac */
IE Win will (wrongly) increase the height if necessary.
Cordially,
David
--
David Hucklesby, on 7/30/2005
http://www.hucklesby.com/
--
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Styling Form Elements
Chris Kennon wrote: Found this article on styling form elements (http://www.picment.com/ articles/css/funwithforms/), unfortunately, it fails in Safari. Any suggestions or filters for making a suitable presentation in Safari? Chris, Styling forms can be an exercise in frustration. 456 Berea Street has done some comprehensive tests, with screenshots, that show what is possible - and not: http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200409/styling_form_controls/ http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200410/styling_even_more_form_controls/ Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 8/2/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Does anyone still design for 640x480?
On Wed, 3 Aug 2005 21:58:32 +1000, Michael Kear wrote: Is that what you are all doing nowdays? What sizes are you designing for? Personally, I design for the minimum width I can achieve, since I see students at a computer lab I attend switching their monitors to 800 x 600 and NOT maximizing the browser window. So, yes, 770px or less, if achievable with a decent font size. Then I force a scrollbar at that minimum, using Stu Nicholls's brilliant CSS-only technique: http://www.stunicholls.myby.co.uk/boxes/width.html HTH Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 8/3/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Form labels - What is correct usage?
On Sat, 6 Aug 2005 Nathan wrote: ... Should the form 'label' element (label/label) wrap around the form elements that they are a label for (almost like a container), or should they be left on their own? I have seen some keep the form labels separate from say a input field, but then wrapped around multiple elements, like say radio buttons. Well, Nathan, I don't claim to know which is semantically correct, but I use both wrapping and non-wrapping, depending on what I want to do. In either case, though, I discovered long ago that the for attribute is needed for some browsers to associate the label with the form element so that it is clickable. For text input boxes, with labels lined up to the left, I use a label followed by the input. I can then float the label left with a specific width to align all labels. For radio buttons, on the other hand, I put the label on the right and wrap it around the button. I can then apply a hover effect to the background of the entire label/button combination to indicate that the label is clickable. I also add a focus behavior to the label for those who, like me, tend to use the keyboard for navigating forms. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 8/6/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] IE min-width problem
On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 12:20:27 +0800, Tania Morris wrote: ... except that due to the fact that IE doesn't accept min-width, it becomes quick ugly in IE when the window is resized... Tania, you may also like to look at Stu Nicholls's CSS-only method of enforcing min-width. It seems to be cross-browser, with versions for both quirks and standards mode: http://www.stunicholls.myby.co.uk/boxes/minwidth.html Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 8/10/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] another 'open new window' dilemma
Hi Tee, Sorry about the delay. I am behind on my emails. :-) Should you decide to use Thierry's solution, there's a variant in Sitepoint's new book you may like. It adds a checkbox so the surfer can choose the behavior they want. It is described in Chapter three as Creating Smarter Links. Sitepoint offers the first four chapters for free, so you may like to check out the details: DHTML Utopia: Modern Web Design Using JavaScript and DOM http://www.sitepoint.com/books/dhtml1/ With respect to using title attributes, I attend a computer lab and observe a lot of user behaviors. Most seem to point and click too fast to allow a title to appear. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 8/25/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Fix for min-max in IE
On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 17:19:33 +1200, Rachel Radford wrote: We have just launched a site (www.eastwoodhill.org.nz) but have received feedback that IE for windows is crashing!!! We have figured out that it is a bit of Javascript making it crash this bit of Javascript mimicks the CSS min-max behaviour that is needed for the navigation and for some images that have captions underneath them such as the one on the home page. Hi Rachel, We observed the same problem in my web class. I have reason to believe that this only happens on XHTML documents. At least, one document I had coded as HTML 4 strict did not have this problem. This may not be a viable solution for you, but you may like to give it a try. Seems to be an IE6 on Win XP SP2 problem only. Again, I may be wrong. Needs testing. BTW - IE did not exactly crash for us - it simply locked up. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 8/30/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Submenus anyone?
On Fri, 2 Sep 2005 14:44:42 -0700, Phil Gohr wrote: I would be interested in an example of a horizontal menu. TIA Phil Hi Phil, you may be interested in this pure CSS solution from Thierry: http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/dropdown/demo.asp Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 9/2/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] images in html or css
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 14:48:13 -0700, Ben Curtis wrote: On Sep 16, 2005, at 1:43 PM, kvnmcwebn wrote: browsers do not cache the images linked from the stylesheet so caching is a little more work wow, thats news to me. I believe that's actually browser, singular. Who else, but IE? Hi Ben - [quote cite=http://www.ryanbrill.com/archives/form_highlighting_redux/;] to tell all browsers to cache the images, you can use apache's .htaccess put this in a .htaccess file in your images folder. this will cause ALL files/images in that folder to be cached for 2 months. ExpiresActive On ExpiresDefault access plus 2 months [/quote] See comment #13 in the cited article. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 9/17/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] CSS Rollover Flicker
Hello Tee, You wrote: Thanks all for the pointers, I am trying the sliding doors method now. For other sites, I may have to use javascript preloader as going back to recreate images for menus can be quite a hassle. If that's the case, there's no need to use JS. Long ago, I had this problem and solved it by putting the background images in an insignificant part of the page, and giving the IMG tags attributes of width=1 height=0. It seemed to work. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 12/27/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Dean Edwards IE7... just PNG support?
Joshua, you wrote: Just wondering if anyone's had any luck with using JUST the PNG component of Dean Edwards' IE7 JavaScript? Aaron Boodman published Sleight a good while back. It has reportedly been adapted for background images by Drew McLellan: http://allinthehead.com/retro/69/sleight-of-hand (Google is your friend :-) Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 12/27/2005 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] site check: FONT sizes
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:21:36 -0800, Hassan Schroeder wrote: To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults and minimal resizing capability is to abdicate your responsibilities as a Designer. Hassan, With all due respect, I find that IE's default settings are just fine for me. I am using a laptop with a 15 screen at 1440 x 1050. I don't use it on my lap as I find that too close for comfort. Not to belabor the point, I suggest that the trend seems to be towards smaller screens at ever higher definition. My own site was designed three years ago, when 800 x 600 was the norm. It uses reduced font sizes -- now I wish that I hadn't done so, and am redesigning it. I agree with you about having to know your audience. But your audience changes daily, hopefully. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 2/18/2006 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font Sizes - Best practice
Martin Heiden wrote: I use to set the body font-size to 62.5% for getting 1em = 10px at default settings. ... Martin, you may like to consider the effect of defining a small font size on the BODY element. Georg Sørtun did some experiments that illustrate the problem: http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_1_03_04.html FWIW - I installed Clear Type on my laptop recently. These fonts are anti-aliased, and I'm amazed how much easier they are to read. I think perhaps the reason you see so many sites that use tiny text is the design comes from a Photoshop layout that uses anti-aliased fonts. Take a look at a web page under the screen magnifier sometime - it amazes me that 10px fonts can be read at all! (Accessories Accessibility Magnifier) An additional effect from using a 120 dpi setting (needed for Clear Type) is that IE and Opera show text 125% larger than Gecko browsers. So I simply set IE and Opera to smaller fonts to match. Even with IE set to smaller text, I notice that some sites still break at the new dpi setting. Little wonder that most people leave their settings as they come from the store. On the subject of trying to please everyone, I wonder if you are familiar with the story of the man, the boy, and the donkey? : http://www.bartleby.com/17/1/62.html Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 2/20/2006 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font Sizes - Best practice
Martin Heiden wrote: I know that it is impossible to please everyone, but I'd like to find a method which makes the world better for at least one person without doing any harm to others ;-) Touché! (Have you read A theory of justice by John Rawls ;-)) Actually, no. But I just googled and read a synopsis. Nice reference, thank you. I feel sure we agree. (Hopefully the link to Georg's article helped.) Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 2/21/2006 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font Sizes - Best practice
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006 02:02:35 +0200, Rimantas Liubertas wrote: ... c) How many have an idea what 'px' or 'pt' is, and have an idea how big is 16pt/px. Same goes for DPI settings. In an attempt to inject something factual into this debate, a quick calculation for my 15 1440 x 1050 laptop tells me that a 10px font size is the same size as (poorly cast) 6pt type on paper. 16px is 9.6pt. 1pt = 1/72. I just changed Windows xp to 120 dpi, but this does not appear to have altered the text size in Firefox, but has increased it 25% in IE - so I set IE to smaller to compensate. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 2/22/2006 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Min-Width, IE, Fluid Content and Hair Loss
Yesterday, Joseph R. B. Taylor said: I have a min-width applied to my wrapper div of 842px, and a width set to 95%. That way it doesn't squish up (in small resolutions) too much and force floats downward. Needless to day, it doesn't work on IE since it doesn't recognize min-width. There is a CSS solution. See Stu Nicholls's solution here: http://www.cssplay.co.uk/boxes/minwidth.html Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 2/25/2006 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] how important are validation-programs?
Soeren Mordhorst wrote: In this case my question would be: Why should I define a background-color, if the background-color that should be used is already defined in the body-element? Short answer - because the validator only checks one rule at a time. It does not remember you had already defined it. It's a good warning, though. If a background color is not set anywhere on a page, the browser defaults to its own setting. That could be any color at all. Ric Raftis replied: Best way around this I have found is to use background-color: inherit; and the warning will be removed. But be aware that this may cover up a background image set in an underlying element. I suggest transparent if you feel you need it-- this is the default value. I suggest you don't accept the validator as gospel. It occasionally makes mistakes too (but rarely). Use it as an excellent tool to discover errors that may give you grief if not fixed. It can save hours of debugging time! :-) Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 3/3/2006 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Collapsing columns on liquid design
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] said: I am working on a liquid design of a website. The design fits fine into 800x600 and starts expanding beyond that. The problem I am facing is that I want a 10 pixel border to appear on the left and right of the design if the browser window is larger than 800x600. If the window is 800x600 the border should disappear (because otherwise the design doesn't fit). Hi Andreas, Does it have to be an unchanging 10px border? I ask because there's a design layout called jello layout that achieves something similar to what I think you are trying to accomplish. But it gives a gradually increasing border as the viewport is widened, not a fixed border. You may like to take a look anyway: http://www.positioniseverything.net/articles/jello-expo.html Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 3/7/2006 http://www.hucklesby.com/ -- ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] PopUp windows
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 11:05:01 +0100, Bob Schwartz wrote: Problem: client wants (insists on having) popup windows. Question: can they be made OK according to all canons of WSG? (ie served in a different/alternative manner for people, devices, etc. - leave aside the js argument, as that I have solved). I would say that, standards or no standards, pop-ups increasingly just don't work. Speaking for myself, I find links that open new windows/ tabs when I don't want them to highly irritating. All the browsers I use let me control where I want my next page to appear - I don't need that decision made for me. Perhaps the linked pages belong to competitors, and the client does not want visitors to see them? Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] PopUp windows
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 11:05:01 +0100, Bob Schwartz wrote: Problem: client wants (insists on having) popup windows. Question: can they be made OK according to all canons of WSG? (ie served in a different/alternative manner for people, devices, etc. - leave aside the js argument, as that I have solved). I would say that, standards or no standards, pop-ups increasingly just don't work. Speaking for myself, I find links that open new windows/ tabs when I don't want them to highly irritating. All the browsers I use let me control where I want my next page to appear - I don't need that decision made for me. Perhaps the linked pages belong to competitors, and the client does not want visitors to see them? Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] centring and viewport size (OT?)
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 13:03:25 +, Designer wrote: [...] Most of the methods (non-tables) for centering a div vertically (and horizontally) suffer from the same problem: they use the div height to attach a top margin and use percentages. The result is that, when the window size gets to be smaller than the div size, the top of the content can't be seen and it won't scroll. So, it seemed to me, it must be simple to 'get' the viewport size (javascript, DOM?), subtract the div height, then apply a top margin in CSS with php. I'd rather do it all in php to avoid folk without js, but that seems improbable) There are several methods listed on CSS-Discuss[1] (scroll to the bottom). FWIW - Using display: table; and display: table-cell; works well for non-IE browsers[2]. But I never found a pure CSS way that works reliably for IE, so I (gasp) use a single-cell table. You could cheat, and add the table markup to IE with a script. With PHP you would have to sniff for IE, while JavaScript would be a bit more reliable in a way, since IE employs its own methods, avoiding confusion when a browser alters the user-agent string to pretend it is IE. A case for AJAX, perhaps? But - yes - you *do* need client-side scripting to detect the size of the viewport. -- [1] http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CenteringBlockElement [2] http://www.jakpsatweb.cz/css/css-vertical-center-solution.html Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] centring and viewport size (OT?)
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007 13:03:25 +, Designer wrote: [...] Most of the methods (non-tables) for centering a div vertically (and horizontally) suffer from the same problem: they use the div height to attach a top margin and use percentages. The result is that, when the window size gets to be smaller than the div size, the top of the content can't be seen and it won't scroll. So, it seemed to me, it must be simple to 'get' the viewport size (javascript, DOM?), subtract the div height, then apply a top margin in CSS with php. I'd rather do it all in php to avoid folk without js, but that seems improbable) There are several methods listed on CSS-Discuss[1] (scroll to the bottom). FWIW - Using display: table; and display: table-cell; works well for non-IE browsers[2]. But I never found a pure CSS way that works reliably for IE, so I (gasp) use a single-cell table. You could cheat, and add the table markup to IE with a script. With PHP you would have to sniff for IE, while JavaScript would be a bit more reliable in a way, since IE employs its own methods, avoiding confusion when a browser alters the user-agent string to pretend it is IE. A case for AJAX, perhaps? But - yes - you *do* need client-side scripting to detect the size of the viewport. -- [1] http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CenteringBlockElement [2] http://www.jakpsatweb.cz/css/css-vertical-center-solution.html Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] centring and viewport size (OT?)
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:43:58 +, Designer wrote: Thanks to those who responded on this. What I've done is to make a file which uses the javascript to determine the space available in the browser window, viz: [...] (code snipped) Of course, since the php is server-side, I then have to send the height variable to the php via another page load (window.location.href). This page then takes the height, knocks off the div height and divides by 2 to get the correct margin-top, which it then writes to the inline CSS in two sections: [...] (more code) You can see all this at: http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/ It's a bit clumsy, and I don't like reloading a page, so I'm grateful for any really good /suggestions / improvements! Use JavaScript to change the element's top-margin style directly, perhaps? Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] centring and viewport size (OT?)
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:43:58 +, Designer wrote: Thanks to those who responded on this. What I've done is to make a file which uses the javascript to determine the space available in the browser window, viz: [...] (code snipped) Of course, since the php is server-side, I then have to send the height variable to the php via another page load (window.location.href). This page then takes the height, knocks off the div height and divides by 2 to get the correct margin-top, which it then writes to the inline CSS in two sections: [...] (more code) You can see all this at: http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/ It's a bit clumsy, and I don't like reloading a page, so I'm grateful for any really good /suggestions / improvements! Use JavaScript to change the element's top-margin style directly, perhaps? Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] centring and viewport size (OT?)
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:43:58 +, Designer wrote: Thanks to those who responded on this. What I've done is to make a file which uses the javascript to determine the space available in the browser window, [...] You can see all this at: http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/ David Hucklesby suggested: Use JavaScript to change the element's top-margin style directly, perhaps? On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:56:06 +, Designer then asked: How exactly would you do that? (I'm interested, and I'm learning :-) ) Well, as you figured the amount of space needed to push the DIV down in order to center it, I was thinking of something like: contentDiv.style.marginTop = calculatedGap + 'px'; However, did you look at Georg's solution he sent Saturday? http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/alien/test_07_3810.html For IE, he uses JavaScript (or is it JScript?) in a Microsoft-only expression to position the DIV's top. It seems to solve your problem nicely, even in IE7, while modern browsers are happy with CSS alone. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] centring and viewport size (OT?)
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 14:43:58 +, Designer wrote: Thanks to those who responded on this. What I've done is to make a file which uses the javascript to determine the space available in the browser window, [...] You can see all this at: http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/ David Hucklesby suggested: Use JavaScript to change the element's top-margin style directly, perhaps? On Tue, 20 Mar 2007 18:56:06 +, Designer then asked: How exactly would you do that? (I'm interested, and I'm learning :-) ) Well, as you figured the amount of space needed to push the DIV down in order to center it, I was thinking of something like: contentDiv.style.marginTop = calculatedGap + 'px'; However, did you look at Georg's solution he sent Saturday? http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/alien/test_07_3810.html For IE, he uses JavaScript (or is it JScript?) in a Microsoft-only expression to position the DIV's top. It seems to solve your problem nicely, even in IE7, while modern browsers are happy with CSS alone. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Markup for Poetry?
On Thu, 29 Mar 2007 17:50:09 -0400, Jeremy Boggs wrote: Hello, I'm working on a website that contains a number of poems. Are there any discussions or examples on strategies for marking up and styling poetry? I haven't started doing markup yet, but if it would help folks on the list, I could that and post the links. Does this help? - http://webtypography.net/Rhythm_and_Proportion/Blocks_and_Paragraphs/2.3.4/ Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] colour matching transparent png files
On 4/11/07, Andrew Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am having trouble matching transparent png files to html background colours. The dodgy test page here: http://www.woowoowoo.com/pngtest/ illustrates the effect. On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:22:03 +1000, James Gollan advised: PNG has built in colour correction that creates problems when trying to match against a hexcode in the browser. If you really need png you can export a small backgroound tile for the area that it needs to blend into. http://hsivonen.iki.fi/png-gamma/ There are several tools that let you strip out this gamma correction data from PNG files. This has the added advantage of making the image files smaller (fewer bytes, I mean :) I use PNGOUTWin, but there are more you can google for. PNGOUTWin has a 30-day free trial[1]. It works great out of the box - no need to mess with the options. [1] http://www.ardfry.com/pngoutwin/ Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] colour matching transparent png files
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 13:13:07 +1000, Andrew Harris wrote: Learned friends - hope you can help me. I am having trouble matching transparent png files to html background colours. The dodgy test page here: http://www.woowoowoo.com/pngtest/ illustrates the effect. twe melb wrote: As far as i know png alpha transparency does not work well in IE 5.5 and 6, On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 14:40:26 +1000, Lachlan Hunt confirmed: Correct. it seems to only works in firefox, And IE7, Opera, Safari, etc. i tend to avoid the use of png as it is not cross browser compatible, Nonsense! Aside from alpha transparency problems in IE6 (and earlier), PNG is widely supported. PNG8 supports index transparency, just like GIF, and that is widely supported. Alpha transparency can be used if care is taken to work around the limitations in IE6. i uses gif instead. Don't use GIF, it is inferior to PNG in every way. Animated GIFs are the exception, but they should be used sparingly anyway. 8-bit PNG works very well, even in IE 5.01. Graphics programs such as Photoshop add a lot of cruft to PNG files, so you need to get an optimizing tool. The result will likely be significantly smaller than a GIF. I believe that IE 5 Mac supports full alpha transparency, along with practically every browser made since then, with the exception of IE for Windows, as Lachlan points out. Please don't give up on PNG for the sake of one old make of browser! Give IE 5/6 Windows its own style that's usable but not quite as pretty. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] colour matching transparent png files
On Wed, 11 Apr 2007 17:58:05 +0100, Ben Dodson wrote: Please don't give up on PNG for the sake of one old make of browser! Give IE 5/6 Windows its own style that's usable but not quite as pretty. That has 42.3% of the market share. http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp And falling. :) Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] commenting javascript in script tags
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007 10:26:41 +1000, Andrew Harris wrote: 'morning all, It is common and often recommended practice to comment javascript placed in a document. script type=text/javascript language=javascript !-- myVariable = 'woo'; // -- /script Netscape 2 introduced JavaScript (Livescript) in 1995. Netscape 1 did not recognize the SCRIPT tags, and rendered the script on screen. Hence the need, back then, for the HTML comments. Only needed today if you wish to support Netscape 1. While I'm on the topic - what about the whole ![CDATA[ ... ]] thing? Should I be using that? What are the possible consequences of ignoring it like the vast majority of page authors? CDATA sections are required for embedded code only for XHTML. If your file names end in .htm, .html, .php etc. then every browser in the world will treat your XHTML as poorly marked up HTML. XHTML markup works because, unlike XHTML, HTML is required to be forgiving of minor errors and several omissions. If you use a strict XHTML DOCTYPE, you can check out the consequences of various markup options by saving a local copy of your page with a .xhtml extension instead of .html. Opera and Firefox on Windows, at least, will treat this as real XHTML. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Acronym tag usage
On Fri, 11 May 2007 09:54:47 -0600, Dan Dorman wrote: On 5/11/07, Nick Fitzsimons [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The OED seems pretty clear on the issue: abbreviation, noun: a shortened form of a word or phrase http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/abbreviation acronym, noun: a word formed from the initial letters of other words (e.g. laser, Aids) http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/acronym initialism, noun: an abbreviation consisting of initial letters pronounced separately (e.g. BBC) http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/initialism Fantastic! This is exactly the sort of reference I was looking for--but I was unable to find a version of the OED through which I could search. If the OED says it, I'll buy it. Thanks, Nick! But be aware that common U.S. practice employs acronym for initialisms[1]. I must agree with the Yanks that inititalism does not roll easily off the tongue! [1] http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionaryva=acronym Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] IE6 problem - more general
On Tue, 15 May 2007 10:36:17 -0400, Kepler Gelotte wrote:
1) put a border around the problem area and surrounding or enclosing blocks
using
border: solid red 1px;
But be aware that a border can alter the layout. (By trapping margins
that normally escape for example.)
My preference is to add colored backgrounds to the main blocks.
Viz:
#content {background: #ccf;}
#header {background: #fcf;}
#sidebar {background: #ffc;}
I put these at the end of the main style sheet where I can delete
them easily when done.
Of course, this is just for IE, which I test last. When developing
the layout I find Firebug invaluable. It is the only tool I know that
shows you where the margins are. (Negative margins excepted.)
Cordially,
David
--
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
RE: [WSG] IE6 problem - more general
On Tue, 15 May 2007 10:36:17 -0400, Kepler Gelotte wrote:
1) put a border around the problem area and surrounding or enclosing blocks
using
border: solid red 1px;
But be aware that a border can alter the layout. (By trapping margins
that normally escape for example.)
My preference is to add colored backgrounds to the main blocks.
Viz:
#content {background: #ccf;}
#header {background: #fcf;}
#sidebar {background: #ffc;}
I put these at the end of the main style sheet where I can delete
them easily when done.
Of course, this is just for IE, which I test last. When developing
the layout I find Firebug invaluable. It is the only tool I know that
shows you where the margins are. (Negative margins excepted.)
Cordially,
David
--
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] ive given up on css
On Wed, 16 May 2007 10:28:41 +0100, kevin mcmonagle wrote: Today i just told them to go back to using table based layouts and i will restrict my designs accordingly- i cant listen to the whining anymore. What would you have done in this situation? I just tell clients I have no knowledge of using tables for layout. But then, I am retired and can afford to choose what I work on. I suggest that you keep your identity off those sites if you want to protect your reputation, though. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] ive given up on css
On Wed, 16 May 2007 10:28:41 +0100, kevin mcmonagle wrote: Today i just told them to go back to using table based layouts and i will restrict my designs accordingly- i cant listen to the whining anymore. What would you have done in this situation? I just tell clients I have no knowledge of using tables for layout. But then, I am retired and can afford to choose what I work on. I suggest that you keep your identity off those sites if you want to protect your reputation, though. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] border vs outline
On Sat, 19 May 2007 11:18:04 +0100, Designer wrote:
On 18/05/07, Stephen Kelly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I find this invaluable,
http://www.webdevout.net/css-hacks
The most valuable part (for me) was introducing me to 'outline' instead of
border. I
confess, I'd never come across it before. I've had a quick play and it does
validate
OK. The interesting thing (I think, anyway) is that whereas border applies an
extra
width/height, outline does not. This can be useful sometimes, esp when
testing [ as in *
{outline : red dashed thin}, for example].
The big question of course, is whether there is anything undesirable about
the use of
'outline'?
While border affects layout, adding to size and trapping margins,
for example, AFAIK outline does not, acting in a similar manner to
background.
As you noted, this is valuable when testing. As you also say, not
for IE, where I resort to background-color instead.
Incidentally, have you tried Firebug? It's the only thing I know
that indicates where your margins are (and lets you change them
dynamically).
Cordially,
David
--
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
RE: [WSG] css type loop
On Mon, 21 May 2007 18:46:33 -0700, Thierry Koblentz wrote: But at the end of the day, this will only piss of the people on this mailing list, and the next developer to work on your web site. The users will still see a nice bold heading. The semantics are meanlingless to them. Actually with your example, I believe there are more users who would be bothered; screen-reader users for example who can navigate (cycle) through headings. [...] Count me in on that, Thierry. I use Opera by default, and find it very useful to be able to tab through the headings on a long page. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout
On Tue, 22 May 2007 14:28:02 +1000, Joshua Street wrote: My vote generally goes in for tables. Use th cells appropriately and there's a clear relationship there. Definition lists are semantically on par, but often harder to implement/require effort to make them *look like a table* (which is what people expect when filling out forms, on paper or on the web). I'm not sure about that assertion, Josh, I have seen studies that suggest forms showing labels above the input field are easier to complete. Personally, I would use labels above the input for short forms, and a table-like layout for longer forms in order to reduce the need to scroll. As well as being advantageous for the visitor (?) this design allows me to use the full line on the LABEL to add error messages. Viz: Before validation looks like this: Name: (required) || After validation looks like this: Name: Please enter your full name || Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] A CMS for POSH sites?
Following up on Lisa McLaughlin's recent query about blogging software, I wonder if anyone can help me find a CMS that lets me use Plain Old Semantic HTML? I'm not convinced XHTML is the wave of the future for web sites, but cannot find a version of TextPattern or WordPress or the like that does not use XHTML markup (and sends it as HTML !) (FWIW - I love Textile, but that, too, creates XHTML.) Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] A CMS for POSH sites?
On Fri, 25 May 2007 08:56:31 -0400, Christian Montoya wrote: Getting Wordpress to use HTML 4.01 as opposed to XHTML is something I do all the time, and it's not hard at all. Read my article: http://www.christianmontoya.com/2006/02/13/serve-your-weblog-as-html-401/ Thank you all for your feedback. The article Christian wrote is particularly useful. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Converting font size from pt to % or em
On Fri, 25 May 2007 10:48:29 +0530, Sagnik Dey wrote: Hi Guys, I'm developing a website that have some standards defined. The font size specified is 9pt. But due to accessibility standards I wanted to convert that in % or em. Can anybody tell what do i need to use to view the same size in different browsers? Experimenting in IE7, Opera 9, FF2, and NS 7.2 on a Win xp PC running at 120 DPI shows all of them display text specified as 9pt to be 15px in size. I think this will be the same at 96 DPI. Same size in different browsers is not really achievable. But you do raise an interesting question, as I have been reading Richard Rutter's ideas on composing to a rhythm.[1]. He employs a scale of font sizes that are measured in points. It occurred to me that a base of ten points would make it easy to use percents or ems - along the lines of the (problematic) idea of using 62.5% as a base font size to represent ten pixels. 10pt translates to 17px if my browsers interpretation of points is to be trusted. Now comes the tricky bit that I need help with. We could use 17px as the base font size, but IE Win will not resize the results. We could use a base of 104.2% to help IE users, but at 120 DPI the results are 25% bigger in both IE and Opera. The bigger text may not affect the scale I am attempting - I need to do more experiments. [1] http://24ways.org/2006/compose-to-a-vertical-rhythm Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] resizing text via graphics/text?
On Mon, 11 Jun 2007 11:36:11 +0100, Designer wrote: Good Morning/afternoon/evening, Further to recent discussions on text size, and in particular, using graphics sized in ems so that they resize, I've pondered the use of graphical text when wanting to use an uncommon font. So, I put a heading into a simple graphic (using the required text), but I've noticed that when the font is a thin, light font (sometimes called 'spidery'), the quality falls through the floor on enlargement when sized in ems. However, if the heading using the font is produced in Flash, the quality is maintained when resizing. You can see an example, comparing 3 approaches ( flash, graphics in ems and graphics in pixels) here: http://www.marscovista.fsnet.co.uk/newtemplate/flashtext.htm Sweet. It falls back to an image if Flash is disabled, even in IE! 8-O Now if only it increased with font size in IE... Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] why is this text not resizable,?
On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 19:36:06 -0700, Tee G. Peng wrote: I was at Media Temple reading mySQL stuff, and one thing caught my eyes. First I saw the h3 text seems to have shadow effect so I tried to select it to see if it's graphic. It's not and then I notice the font isn't enlarged when I resize the fontsize. http://www.mediatemple.net/webhosting/gs/mysql-pool.htm Look for blue heading under the 'Notable features'. Hi Tee, You have had your answer, but thought that you may be interested in an alternative method[1] mentioned in an earlier thread[2]. The example (still being worked on) uses plain text in a Flash image, but there's no reason why it could not have an effect applied. The point is, this experimental method uses EM sizing for the Flash. I found the demo quite convincing. [1] http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/flashtext.php [2] http://tinyurl.com/29aohk Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] 1 pixel gap
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:33:34 +0100, Paul Collins wrote: Hi all, Just got a 1 pixel gap at the left of my image here that is baffling me. It is happening in Firefox and Safari on Mac - the only browsers I have tested in so far. you can see there is space below the image to the right where it sticks out a bit too. http://method.com.au/test.html I have changed the doctype to HTML 4.0, I have made the image inline, position:relative, but nothing I can do seems to work. Any ideas? The 1 pixel gap does go away when the scrollbar apears on the browser window, so when there is enough content to go below the fold. ~ Hi Paul, Your background image (white) is 710 pixels wide. I think that reducing this to 709 pixels to match the header image may fix it. BTW - Opera is putting the inline image - well - inline. It appears to the right of the text, jutting out to the right of the page. Putting it in a block element helps. I used a DIV to fix it. Adding display: block; for the image works also. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] 1 pixel gap
On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:33:34 +0100, Paul Collins wrote: Hi all, Just got a 1 pixel gap at the left of my image here that is baffling me. It is happening in Firefox and Safari on Mac - the only browsers I have tested in so far. you can see there is space below the image to the right where it sticks out a bit too. http://method.com.au/test.html I have changed the doctype to HTML 4.0, I have made the image inline, position:relative, but nothing I can do seems to work. Any ideas? The 1 pixel gap does go away when the scrollbar apears on the browser window, so when there is enough content to go below the fold. ~ Hi Paul, Your background image (white) is 710 pixels wide. I think that reducing this to 709 pixels to match the header image may fix it. BTW - Opera is putting the inline image - well - inline. It appears to the right of the text, jutting out to the right of the page. Putting it in a block element helps. I used a DIV to fix it. Adding display: block; for the image works also. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Background image problem
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:46:52 -0400, Dean Matthews wrote: I have a page with 3 divs in a wrapper div, essentially top, middle, bottom. The repeating background for the middle div is showing about 5 pixels below the bottom div (which has it's own background). This is only happening on IE 6 Windows. http://www.madisonFH.com/new ~~ Hi Dean, Try adding background-position: bottom left; to your rule for #bottomBevel. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Background image problem
On Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:46:52 -0400, Dean Matthews wrote: I have a page with 3 divs in a wrapper div, essentially top, middle, bottom. The repeating background for the middle div is showing about 5 pixels below the bottom div (which has it's own background). This is only happening on IE 6 Windows. http://www.madisonFH.com/new ~~ Hi Dean, Try adding background-position: bottom left; to your rule for #bottomBevel. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] H1 font not set in IE
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:25:00 +0100, Nick Roper wrote: Hi James, Yup, as I say, it works fine for both headers and menus on FF/MAc, but only for the menus on FF/Win. What I'm trying to figure out is why the menus render in Garamamond but the headings don't on FF/Win Interesting. I'm on a pretty basic Win XP Pro setup. Opera shows both the menu and headings in Garamond; Firefox 2 shows Times, I think, for *both* here, as does IE. Hmm. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] H1 font not set in IE
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:25:00 +0100, Nick Roper wrote: Hi James, Yup, as I say, it works fine for both headers and menus on FF/MAc, but only for the menus on FF/Win. What I'm trying to figure out is why the menus render in Garamamond but the headings don't on FF/Win Interesting. I'm on a pretty basic Win XP Pro setup. Opera shows both the menu and headings in Garamond; Firefox 2 shows Times, I think, for *both* here, as does IE. Hmm. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] H1 font not set in IE
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:25:00 +0100, Nick Roper wrote: Hi James, Yup, as I say, it works fine for both headers and menus on FF/MAc, but only for the menus on FF/Win. What I'm trying to figure out is why the menus render in Garamamond but the headings don't on FF/Win Correction to my previous post. Garamond is not installed on my computer. I don't know what Opera substitutes, but it is certainly not the default Times New Roman defined in my preferences. Sorry for the noise. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] H1 font not set in IE
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 14:25:00 +0100, Nick Roper wrote: Hi James, Yup, as I say, it works fine for both headers and menus on FF/MAc, but only for the menus on FF/Win. What I'm trying to figure out is why the menus render in Garamamond but the headings don't on FF/Win Correction to my previous post. Garamond is not installed on my computer. I don't know what Opera substitutes, but it is certainly not the default Times New Roman defined in my preferences. Sorry for the noise. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Using target=_blank
On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:19:21 -0400 (EDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Personally I prefer links to open in the same Window. But that's me. And I don't want to force my preference on anyone. That's why it's nicer to leave it to the user to decide. The only way to let users decide is to open links in the same window by default and teach said users a function of their browser they may not be aware of. Or to provide some preference control widget. Sorry but I don't agree...to a point. As a web designer and user myself, I prefer opening another window IF it is to a different website that I am referring them to. That way the customer doesn't go wondering thru the other website and forget to come back to mine. Mine will always be open in the background to remind them (kind of like I'm the one they came to the dance with). Now if the link is in my own website, then of course I prefer them to be in the same window. I co not believe you have to TEACH a potential consumer/buyer to use your site. It should have a natural flow and be easy to use. Hmm. What's easy to use when you wind up with a bunch of spawned windows that must be closed one by one? What's easy about watching out for warnings from my pop-up blocker that I'm trying to open a new window? What's easy about new windows compared to the convenience of tabbed browsing? What's wrong with indicating external links in some way? Why not add a short note to your page: right-click on a link to open a new tab or window? Just asking. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: RES: [WSG] HELP with CSS
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 21:36:38 -0300, SosCpdGMail wrote: Hello Ted There is, somewhere, a reference or tutorial of how can we read and learn about the structural way and css? I have look around many and many approaches to this subject, in many and many different ways like books, googling and sources. Its hard to pick one. Any of them always have a catch, and it is much more difficult if you write code from interpreted scripts like I do. Hi Rafael, Well, I'd say that the rules for writing structural (X)HTML are the same as those for writing formal documents of any kind. I imagine any text that teaches such writing skills would do. I don't think this is a matter of HTML skills, but one of how a document is put together. I don't know, but I imagine this would be much the same in any language, at least as far as writing for the global marketplace is concerned. The use of headings, lists, paragraphs, quotations, and so on are a matter of writing style, rather than code. For me, having an unstyled HTML page make sense as a document I would write using any word processor for submission to any group of peers is where I usually start. The decoration (CSS) comes later, I think. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] setting fontsize in body
On Tue, 7 Aug 2007 12:01:04 +0100, David Dorward wrote: This would be the older generation who tend towards having poor eyesight and needing larger font sizes? Sorry, David, Your comment makes me smile. Being retired, I assist at a computer training lab where students of all adult ages learn computer skills - web design; MS Office; Photoshop etc. I use a 15 notebook with 1400 x 1050 resolution at home. The lab has just installed 19 LCD monitors, native resolution 1280 x 1024. To me, text on the lab computers looks huge by comparison. Invariably, when I turn on my workstation, I find the monitor resolution reset to a lower resolution by someone from the morning class. I also observe that a significant number of students also reset their monitors - some of them to 800 x 600. (!) This phenomenon seems unrelated to age. (FWIW - I am 71 1/2. And, yes, I need glasses.) Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE, alpha transparency and sliding doors...
On 21/8/07 (04:02) Joseph said: Safari will sometimes show a different hue of your color than other browsers will when .png images set as backgrounds. On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 1, Rick Lecoat replied: /Slightly/ off-thread, but... I believe that this is a product of PNGs containing a built-in gamma profile; many browsers ignore it (as they ignore other colour profile info) but Safari (and maybe some others?) adjust the colour render accordingly, meaning that the image is displayed with a slightly different gamma to 'non-gamma' elements (eg. GIFs and background colours set in HTML/CSS). A solution to this is reported to be GammaSlamma http://tinyurl.com/ yuchvh which strips out the gamma information. I say 'reportedly' because although I've downloaded it and plan to give it a whirl, I have not, as yet, had opportunity to try it out. But just thought in case it helps anybody. In the same spirit, I can tell you that PNGOUTWin also removes this gamma information. Out of the box, it also safely removes all the gunk with which Adobe products infest PNG files. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] IE, alpha transparency and sliding doors...
On 21/8/07 (04:02) Joseph said: Safari will sometimes show a different hue of your color than other browsers will when .png images set as backgrounds. On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 1, Rick Lecoat replied: /Slightly/ off-thread, but... I believe that this is a product of PNGs containing a built-in gamma profile; many browsers ignore it (as they ignore other colour profile info) but Safari (and maybe some others?) adjust the colour render accordingly, meaning that the image is displayed with a slightly different gamma to 'non-gamma' elements (eg. GIFs and background colours set in HTML/CSS). A solution to this is reported to be GammaSlamma http://tinyurl.com/ yuchvh which strips out the gamma information. I say 'reportedly' because although I've downloaded it and plan to give it a whirl, I have not, as yet, had opportunity to try it out. But just thought in case it helps anybody. In the same spirit, I can tell you that PNGOUTWin also removes this gamma information. Out of the box, it also safely removes all the gunk with which Adobe products infest PNG files. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] When is invalid CSS okay?
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:27:11 +0100, Rick Lecoat wrote: [...] So, is it considered 'okay', in a web standards sense, to have a non- valid bug-fixes stylesheet working alongside your perfect, pristine, uiber-valid main stylesheet? Personally, after working with separate style sheets for IE, I found them difficult to maintain. I am now experimenting with a single style sheet for everything (including print styles). So far I like it. My view on validation is that it is as essential as a spell checker. Like a spell check, I think you need to use common sense with it. After all, if I write about the Sheraton Centre in Manhattan, my U.S. spell checker tells me I misspelled Centre. So do I change the spelling? I think not. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Jquery and/or Yahoo UI
On Mon, 15 Oct 2007 09:23:04 +1000, Kit Grose wrote: [...] I'm a big fan of JS libraries. I use Prototype (and Script.aculo.us) and YUI quite a lot as the basis of a lot of my larger JS-based sites. The advantage of YUI isn't so much its ability to maintain strong standards, but its very strong cross-browser compatibility (so if you use Yahoo.DOM, you're getting a standard DOM across every browser; as with events, etc.). Prototype's biggest strength is its ability to keep common functions short and simple in your own code files. I can perform complex AJAX throughout a webapp with maybe three lines of JS (plenty of PHP, mind you). I've never really tried jQuery, because it's been marketed wrong for me. I've been using Javascript since ~1998 and have been doing things with it the old way (when everyone declared their variables on a global scope and functions were all called on the onclick, onmouseover events explicitly in code, and when anything fancy was called DHTML). I've spent the years since then developing my syntax and thinking to keep in line with the industry, and am comfortable with the syntax people have come to associate with new Javascript (Object notation, DOM manipulation, etc.). jQuery is marketed as a way to change JS syntax significantly (with a view to greater speed, marketed as a sort of Rails on the client side), which would mean a massive change for someone who already has four different programming/ scripting languages to flick between on a daily basis (not counting HTML and CSS syntax). I've heard only good things from people starting out with JS though. Just chiming in here to say that I think all of Kit's comments are right on the money. I was initially very attracted to jQuery because I am much more familiar with CSS syntax than JavaScript/ECMAScript. However, using it does not make me a better scripter, while YUI simply gives me cross-browser routines where I need them, so I can make better choices of technique as I learn the language. Protoype etc. I have yet to learn, but I understand the same thing is true. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Best way to clear a float
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:58:37 -0600, Likely, James A. wrote:
Hello,
I am curious to see how others clear floats.
*Sometimes* I find this works:
#parent {overflow: auto;}
This does require thorough testing, however.
Another simple method is the one Mohamed described - floats
always contain floats.
Others suggested here are also good. It depends on your design
as to which one works best. As always, design is largely a matter of
compromise.
Cordially,
David
--
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Best way to clear a float
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 09:58:37 -0600, Likely, James A. wrote:
Hello,
I am curious to see how others clear floats.
*Sometimes* I find this works:
#parent {overflow: auto;}
This does require thorough testing, however.
Another simple method is the one Mohamed described - floats
always contain floats.
Others suggested here are also good. It depends on your design
as to which one works best. As always, design is largely a matter of
compromise.
Cordially,
David
--
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
[WSG] Input tag - closing tag optional?
Trying to help a friend with their form markup, I suggested they look up the W3C specifications. Their question was does the input tag require a closing /input. I told them categorically no but was embarrassed to see this in the W3C specs[1]: !ELEMENT INPUT - O EMPTY -- form control -- Now, I read that as closing tag optional. So I am wrong. Or am I? Anyone? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interact/forms.html#edef-INPUT Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Input tag - closing tag optional?
On 21 Nov 2007, at 05:12, David Hucklesby wrote: Trying to help a friend with their form markup, I suggested they look up the W3C specifications. Their question was does the input tag require a closing /input. I told them categorically no but was embarrassed to see this in the W3C specs[1]: !ELEMENT INPUT - O EMPTY -- form control -- On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 15:20:00 +, David Dorward replied: From: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.3 'The hyphen and the following O indicate that the end tag can be omitted, but together with the content model EMPTY, this is strengthened to the rule that the end tag must be omitted.' Thank you David, That's more encouraging. :) I see now that I am reading the specifications incorrectly. I expected to see an N instead of the O -- but that's not the way the specs are written. I did RTFM -- I just did not read far enough. :\ Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Input tag - closing tag optional?
On 21 Nov 2007, at 05:12, David Hucklesby wrote: Trying to help a friend with their form markup, I suggested they look up the W3C specifications. Their question was does the input tag require a closing /input. I told them categorically no but was embarrassed to see this in the W3C specs[1]: !ELEMENT INPUT - O EMPTY -- form control -- On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 15:20:00 +, David Dorward replied: From: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.3 'The hyphen and the following O indicate that the end tag can be omitted, but together with the content model EMPTY, this is strengthened to the rule that the end tag must be omitted.' Thank you David, That's more encouraging. :) I see now that I am reading the specifications incorrectly. I expected to see an N instead of the O -- but that's not the way the specs are written. I did RTFM -- I just did not read far enough. :\ Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Site check please
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 21:53:13 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: Sorry, I meant: Can the more obsessive compulsive members of the group, check our new site for problems please? :) www.clickfind.com.au Without even trying to be obsessive compulsive I can report that there is not enough room for the form labels on my end, so several of them wrap. FWIW - I have a high-definition laptop running at the default 120 DPI, so both Opera and IE's default of 12 point text displays 25% larger than at 96 DPI. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Site check please
On Fri, 23 Nov 2007 21:53:13 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: Sorry, I meant: Can the more obsessive compulsive members of the group, check our new site for problems please? :) www.clickfind.com.au Without even trying to be obsessive compulsive I can report that there is not enough room for the form labels on my end, so several of them wrap. FWIW - I have a high-definition laptop running at the default 120 DPI, so both Opera and IE's default of 12 point text displays 25% larger than at 96 DPI. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Site check please
On Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:31:30 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: Without even trying to be obsessive compulsive I can report that there is not enough room for the form labels on my end, so several of them wrap. Would you be able to post a link to the form in question? The link is the one you gave. I did not go further. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Validation questions
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:34:05 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: I have an error where it says document type does not allow element OL here The ol tag is within a formfieldset I don't understand, is this not allowed? Pass. I have an error where it says end tag for element P which is not open. The p tag is actually within javascript, within the headscript I don't see how I can fix this error. Are you using the hide from Netscape 1 practice of enclosing embedded JS within HTML comments? If so, you may have a decrement operator -- that ends the comment, causing some agents to begin parsing your JS as HTML. Without seeing your code, though, this is just a guess. There are several other possibilities. We need more information. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Validation questions
On Tue, 27 Nov 2007 13:34:05 +1000, Taco Fleur wrote: I have an error where it says document type does not allow element OL here The ol tag is within a formfieldset I don't understand, is this not allowed? Pass. I have an error where it says end tag for element P which is not open. The p tag is actually within javascript, within the headscript I don't see how I can fix this error. Are you using the hide from Netscape 1 practice of enclosing embedded JS within HTML comments? If so, you may have a decrement operator -- that ends the comment, causing some agents to begin parsing your JS as HTML. Without seeing your code, though, this is just a guess. There are several other possibilities. We need more information. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Disabling Fonts in Font Stacks
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 18:23:25 -, James Leslie wrote: Does anyone know if there is a way of disabling a font at the browser level, maybe a firefox plug-in, to be able to do quick checks on legibility, sizing issues, layout, etc. Sorry I am a bit late -- but Opera's web developer toolbar has an option under the Display menu to change applied fonts to any one of a dozen or so common fonts. http://operawiki.info/WebDevToolbar Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] preserve whitespace
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 16:09:03 +, Simon Cockayne wrote:
I have an HTML page and I want to (well my client wants me to) preserve
leading blanks
in the value of a table data cell. ...
td {white-space: pre;} /* perhaps? */
Cordially,
David
--
www.hucklesby.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] File comparison tool for Dreamweaver CS3
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:38:07 +, Simon Cockayne wrote: Hi there, What file comparison tool would you recommend for Dreamweaver CS3? Odd. I'm surprised DW does *not* have a file compare capability. I have used text editors for decades, but have not used DW much. All text editors I ever used had file comparison built in.(?) Currently I am using TextPad (ww.textpad.com) as my Windows based editor. Even better options are available on other platforms. TextPad can compare files. It also has good support for UTF-8, its only weakness due to the need to display the characters using the Windows encoding. More a limitation of Windows than the editor, I believe. Perhaps that will fill the bill? They let you try it out for almost as long as you want. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] BBC in Beta
On Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:30:21 +, Paul McCann wrote: Heads up, the BBC has a new site in Beta. http://www.bbc.co.uk/home/beta Thoughts/praise/comments :) It looks like they are doing some (unsuccessful?) browser sniffing. I get a mostly black and white page in Opera, and a brightly colored page in Firefox. Both IE6 and IE7 say that the page cannot be displayed. There's some vertical overflow of boxes in Opera, which displays text 25% larger than Firefox due to my OS setting of 120 DPI. Don't laugh at the sunny weaather icons. Sunny really looks like that in the UK. ;) Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] semantic list with explanations
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 18:13:13 +1100, Chris Knowles wrote: because thats a different issue. Its an issue of the user not upgrading to software thats available and thats better. ... Just one niggle here. The user might well be using a computer at work, school, a library, or an Internet café. What chance do these millions have of upgrading? It *is* possible to conform to web standards *and* to write code that is accessible to a wide audience, as a great deal of Thierry's writing makes abundantly clear. As an example, I work for a school district that still inflicts Netscape 4 on its children. A clean, semantically marked-up plain HTML page with little or no styling should work fine for them, I hope. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type
On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:37:26 +1100, Andrew Freedman wrote: Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type http://www.bigbaer.com/css_tutorials/css.image.text.wrap.htm Yah. DOCTYPE is XHTML 1.1, which should only be served as XML. I suggest HTML 4.01 or XHTML 1.0 instead, unless you want to sniff for browsers that accept XML on your server processing. Be aware that the XML prolog puts IE6 into quirks mode. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] PNG in IE6
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 09:30:08 -0600, Tim Palac wrote: Why not just use http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/ as the plugin to display your PNG? That way, if people are using IE6 with Javascript enabled, you can add png functionality, advanced CSS support, etc. I know Eric Meyer personally endorses this method (well at least he did at An Event Apart) and I've used it before with much success. Good solution. Dean has just updated IE7.js to conform to the real IE 7, which should save us all a ton of grief: http://dean.edwards.name/weblog/2008/01/ie7-2/ Then there is IE8.js ... http://code.google.com/p/ie7-js/ Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] generated source
On Tue, 26 Feb 2008 10:44:13 -0800, jody tate wrote: Does anyone have a preferred way to view and validate generated source code? By generated source I mean after Ajax, JavaScript, and so on have done their magic. [...] Yet viewing generated source in Firebug, that same meta tag remains closed. Firebug, however, doesn't have (or I haven't noticed?) a way to copy and paste source code for direct input validation to the W3C validator. This, then, is the ultimate goal: to get the generated source, copy it and paste it into a validator. I validated with static mockups prior to de-building the XHTML and giving it over to JavaScript, but I want to validate now to make sure I'm staying on track. Have others run into this problem? Yes. I have come across it, although for me it is not a problem. This behavior seems logical to me. After all, what displays is the browser's interpretation of the document, which is likely HTML. Unless you are doing something server-side, you are likely sending the documents to the browser with an HTML MIME type, as opposed to XHTML, which requires special handling. One suggestion I have to get Firefox to treat the page as XHTML is to rename your document with dot-xhtml (.xhtml) extension instead of the dot-htm or dot-html. This works from the hard drive, and quite a few hosts are set up to send the correct MIME type as well. Not all are though - you need to check with your host. You may have problems viewing this in Internet Explorer, so don't use it as a permanent web page - just use it for your purpose of validating generated code. I hope this suggestion helps. [Aside] I help out at a computer lab where web design is taught. One misconception I see over and over is that putting things like an XHTML DOCYPE or declaring UTF-8 encoding in a META element somehow alters the document itself. Saying it is so does not make it so, despite what certain politicians would have us believe. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] SEO, fact or fiction
On Mon, 17 Mar 2008 16:10:31 +, kevin mcmonagle wrote: hi, Im doing a site for a nightclub. So im doing a hybrid. The owner has demanded a music track playing continuously. What would you lot do if you had to put in a continually playing music track? Hi Kev - Because I am on dial-up at home, I get out a lot. :) At the various Wi-Fi hotspots I inhabit, I see many surfing with their headphones on, listening to their own sound track. I can only imagine that, should they come across a site playing something not of their choice over the top of their music, that they would hit the back button PDQ. I know almost nothing about SEO, but knowing a little about how search bots work, I can't imagine them taking notice of a music player. If it were me, I would deliver a normal web page (no frames) and offer the visitor the choice of playing the music, or not. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Fieldsets outside of forms. Was: Safari 3.1 and webkit-border-radius
On Fri, 21 Mar 2008 13:15:22 +0100, Keryx Web wrote: David Dorward skrev: From the spec: The FIELDSET element allows authors to group thematically related controls and labels. --- [...] E. I wanted the effect... Effects are the realm of CSS and JS, not markup. Generally true, but for me not worth the trouble in this case. Default styling of an element (this particular effect I wanted) can be an ally. Keryx's point of view seems to be dominant, I fear. Even the teacher at my web design class seems to think that using EMs to style citations is valid. Yet she generally encourages web standards... :( Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Rogue text appears in IE6.
On Thu, 3 Apr 2008 10:51:02 +0100, Rob Enslin wrote: I've recently built a website trying to move towards more standards-compliant code. After the delight at pushing the site live my world 'caved in' (a little over-dramatic maybe) this morning when a colleague noticed rogue 'ls. text some way down the home page. Live site: http://www.londoncalling2008.com Screen-grab in IE6: http://www.flickr.com/photos/doos/2384241027/ [...] Could anyone find an explanation for this? On 03/04/2008, Ted Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that you should read through the documents on positioniseverything a bit closer. It's not just the comments. Removing comments from source code is a really bad idea for best practices. Other people may have to work on your site and it's a pain to reverse-engineer code. Use native commenting, i.e. /**/ in php, to avoid placing comments in the final source code. But don't treat comments as a problem generator. I agree with Ted here. If you butt the comments up against the closing tags, there is usually no problem. At least, _I_ have not come across a situation that triggers duplicate characters when this is done. Example: /div!-- #content -- [strong]However[/strong] - the example that Georg posted seems to have no intervening space either. So I may be all wet here. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Character Encoding Mismatch
On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 4:16 PM, Kristine Cummins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can someone tell me how to fix this W3C warning – I'm new to understanding this part. http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.beverlywilson.com%2F On Fri, 4 Apr 2008 20:15:19 -0400, Nikita The Spider replied: Kristine, If your server is already specifying the character set (a.k.a. encoding) then you don't need to do so in your HTML. In fact, I'd recommend against doing so, ... The META tag is needed when serving the page from the hard drive - for example, when the page is saved for viewing later. (The hard drive does not send HTTP headers.) Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Centered Horizontal Menu
On Sun, 04 May 2008 12:36:55 +1000, IceKat wrote: I have a list menu which is supposed to be horizontal and centered. Not a problem right? Wrong. There are three problems. 1. IE7 doesn't use display: inline very well when text is enlarged or made smaller. (just try it and see the mess it creates) 2. The width cannnot be set because the number of items changes on a regular basis without warning. 3. Float combined with margin: 0 auto doesn't work because the width of the ul is always 100% and can't be set smaller because of the reason given above. This is creating a huge problem because I can't center lists without setting a width. Is there a way of getting around this in IE7? Is there a javascript or PHP script which can detect the width of something so I can put that in to the css? Or just fix the problem? The CSS-discuss Wiki has some ideas[1]. Scroll down to the section When you don't know the width. [1] http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CenteringBlockElement Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] :: CSS Code Formatting ::
On Tue, 6 May 2008 19:19:24 +0530, Amrinder wrote: I was reading this article on Smashing Magazine which shows how to increase code readability, http://www.smashingmagazine.com/2008/05/02/improving-code-readability-with-css- styleguides/ but I have listened to Andy Clarke over Lynda.com saying that one should save the white space as it increases the file size. Ted Drake replied: Reduce the number of css files used Link to them in the top of the page, no inline styles Gzip and reduce the whitespace when going to production. ~~~ A job for a server-side script. See: http://www.coolphptools.com/dynamic_css Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] The Problem of adjacent links
On Thu, 8 May 2008 15:52:38 +0100 (BST), Stuart Foulstone wrote: From a usability/accessibility point a view. The most common separator used in such circumstances (and therefore that most expected by screen-reader users) is the vertical bar. How about a border? http://htmlfixit.com/tutes/tutorial_CSS_Generated_Faux_Pipe_Delimited_Unordered_List.php Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Older Browsers
On Mon, 12 May 2008 10:04:44 +0300, Michael Persson wrote: Dear Scott, I think helping your client to install a proper web browser would also eliminate other website problems also. IE5 have terrible CSS support and you will need to make table design again to make a website look ok in IE5... dont even go there.!!! using a IE5 is really ancient nad was maybe standard 1999, its really bad to see these clients but we should educate them and teach them the difference in order to keep updating these softwares... ~~ Latest browser stats[1] for the U.S. suggests around 6% of surfers use IE 5.x. That's twice as many as Safari users. Of the IE 5 users, only 41% are using the latest version (5.5). Oddly, I find working around IE 5 bugs easier than for IE 6. But that's likely because I learned CSS on IE 5.5. [1] http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat_trends.htm Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Large Background Images
On Tue, 13 May 2008 22:11:29 -0400, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Hi Chris, bandwidth. However standards are still a concern, what perils of wisdom for using a full-page BG can the list cultivate? Hard on those with a slow connection, but I cannot foresee another issue unless the background is a big animated GIF ;-) You can offer a removal tool for those users easily enough. I do that on my hosting company's site [1] [...] This particular changer uses PHP and a cookie to manage the option. It places the new styles in the head with a single property: background-image : none; applied to the various elements. The link to it is on the sidebar under Page Tools -- the link says Remove Backgrounds. [1] http://gbhxonline.com ~ Nice solution, Mike. Now wouldn't the Web be a kinder, gentler place, if all web sites were designed so thoughtfully? I notice the BBC has two links at the top of each page: Low graphics and Accessibility help. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Accessibility for HTML Email
On Thu, 15 May 2008 10:35:16 -0400, Erickson, Kevin (DOE) wrote: What is the most accessible method to have email links on web pages? After putting a plain email address on my web site I got a lot of spam. So I changed my contact address and put it on the page as mail(at)example(dot)com. Then I used a small script to convert that to a conventional mailto:; link. No spam from that address in over a year, so it seems to fool 'bots for now. I'd be interested to hear from the accessibility folks, though. Cordially, David -- *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
