Bob Schwartz wrote:
The test site at
http://www.fotografics.it/fife/
has been refurbished [...] I would appreciate it
if you guys could check it out for any errors or wrong practices
It looks like the site may have problems displaying at widths of less than
1000px in Opera 9 and Firefox. The
Jeremy Boggs wrote:
Are there
any discussions or examples on strategies for marking up and styling
poetry?
I don't know of a set of guidelines for simple markup of poetry in X/HTML,
but you can find some discussions about it as well as some more involved
methods of marking up such texts
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
The script can do much more than just adding the event. It can add a
title attribute, plug an icon or even add some text within the anchor
tags. That way the info about the behavior is plugged only if the
behavior is available.
Frank Palinkas wrote:
You can find more
Felix Miata wrote:
What matters is:
[...]
5-that any deviation a designer makes from 100% is
arbitrary, as it's made from an entirely unknown starting point
100% of the visitor's choice equals respect for the visitor.
I'm not really convinced that this is an issue of respect for the users
Felix Miata wrote:
Your mission, should you choose to embrace it, is to convince the
client that maintaining an anachronistic practice is the wrong thing
to do, and that doing the right thing is always the right thing to
do. Maybe this will help whenever that discussion ensues.
Felix Miata wrote:
On 2007/05/25 17:47 (GMT-0400) Philip Kiff apparently typed:
Felix Miata wrote:
What matters is:
[...]
5-that any deviation a designer makes from 100% is
arbitrary, as it's made from an entirely unknown starting point
100% of the visitor's choice equals respect
I spent some time carousing through various sites and email lists and ended
up trying to pull together some of the disparate techniques, arguments, and
references about page font sizing into a single document. Because this
message grew to an unwieldy size, I've divided it up into 5 sections:
1.
Felix Miata wrote:
BBC
http://www.bbc.co.uk/home/d/
body {font-size: 62.5%}
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ was recently overhauled. It used to be 13px.
Here's a look at before: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/bbcSS.html
Ooops. My mistake, your screenshots are right. The BBC news site uses the
same
Felix Miata wrote:
On 2007/05/28 02:43 (GMT-0400) Philip Kiff apparently typed:
1. Use Percentage on body font-size, then apply ems on the rest
Owen Briggs
The Noodle Incident - Sane CSS Sizes
http://www.thenoodleincident.com/tutorials/typography/
This is the method of undersizing
Felix Miata wrote on EDT:
On 2007/06/02 11:06 (GMT+0100) Designer apparently typed:
Sparked partly by the recent discussions on elasticity, I've been
attempting to put together a 'template', based on em's and with a
max-width.
[]
You can see it at:
Designer wrote:
Sparked partly by the recent discussions on elasticity, I've been
attempting to put together a 'template', based on em's and with a
max-width. I've used an expression for max-width in IE 7 (pinched
from Georg!). I've tested it in FF1.5, IE6 IE7, Opera 9, and Netscape
4.02.
Lucien Stals wrote:
It seems to me that many people here have different ideas about what
semantic means. It would be helpful it we shared a common
understanding in our conversations. I welcome, and invite, a *polite
and professional* debate about the use of the term semantic as it
relates to
Michael MD wrote:
Speaking of Mac browsers -
a friend called me on the weekend and said he can't find anything
newer than IE5 for OS9 but won't upgrade to OSX because it would be
way too slow on his G3. (and he doesn't have the money to buy a new
machine)
now that is something to think
Chris Taylor wrote:
[]
My initial tests show that NN4.03 handles some CSS (float,
background, border, font etc) but not some important things
(list-style, margin and padding on lists). Is there a source for
information about CSS support on old browsers?
Nick Roper wrote:
Info on CSS
Ryan Moore wrote:
I see that it relies on a source of JS to complete the effect, and
i'm wondering if it's possible to complete this purely with XHTML
CSS. Anyone have a good example of this?
Keryx Web (Lars Gunther) wrote:
Just do not do it. It cannot be done.
a. JS is the best tool for
Benedict Wyss wrote:
My idea is to have a basic font size to allow a reasonable amount of
content with less scrolling and then in an accessibility toolbar give
the visitor the oportunity to increase the font size in the main
content area. This to me seems like a decent compromise. I am open to
Mary-Anne.Nayler wrote:
I was wondering how members here feel about the accessibility of Fly
Out menus. The type I'm talking about are CSS based, ie no
JavaScript but I'd be interested to hear what people think about
those that utilise JavaScript.
There was a discussion about this *exact*
Joyce Evans wrote:
I always thought it was a good idea to open links to other websites
in a separate window, so you don't lose the visitor. [...]
I think that the weight of public opinion has been steadily turning against
this view over the past 10 years or so. I would be interested in knowing
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
I've done usability tests where users *preferred* off-site links to
open in another window.
I find that surprising. I am sure you are right, however, that it is all
about context. Certainly if you sat down in a room full of 20- to
25-year-olds today you would not find
Designer wrote:
Can we just step back a moment, and consider what we are doing. As I
write this reply, I am typing the content of this mail IN A NEW
WINDOW.[]
Do those who proclaim annoyance at having 'new windows forced on them'
apply the same thinking to mail, Dreamweaver (and all the
Paul Collins wrote:
I've spent a while trying to figure this out and I'm not sure there is
a solution. I've got two levels of navigation here; visually one sits
on top of the other, but the second level will change according to
what top level link you click:
Philip Kiff wrote
Tested this link:
http://keryx.se/[...].html
Ooops. That isn't the link I tested. I tested the xhtml one that is
supposed to get rewritten in the htaccess rules:
http://keryx.se/resources/html-elements.xhtml
Phil
Keryx Web wrote:
This is the set of rules in my .htaccess that I think should do
the trick:
[snip]
It works with FFox, Opera 9.2, Safari for Windows (complained at first
about too many redirects for no apparent reason) and MSIE 6.
Tested this link:
Philip Kiff wrote:
Tested this link:
http://keryx.se/resources/html-elements.xhtml [corrected]
This link does not seem to work in MSIE 7, 6, or 5.55 on my test
machines.
Works now as designed on all MSIE browsers listed above - it serves HTML
4.01 Strict version, with a note added about my
James Jeffery wrote:
It is possible to get good Accessibility, Usability and Design, but
usually you have to give and take for each or one of them.
[]
Its not our fault or the clients fault, whatever the
client wants he gets
[...]
The client is the hard part. Sometimes they want
Philip Kiff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you have enough time to browse the WSG Mailing List []
then you are probably already at risk of having the
prices for your web design services severely undercut by someone who
is younger and faster, and who places less importance
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
The real reason for me to not use 'CC' for separation, is that the
versioning goes on on HTML level and adds unnecessary garbage to every
single page.
If you happen to be designing an XHTML site and decide you want to use
server-side scripting to deliver your pages as
27 matches
Mail list logo
