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 X
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
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 s
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 n
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.
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:
http://keryx.se/resources/html-elements
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:
> http://www.method.com.au/newWe
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
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
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 knowin
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
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
>> 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
> 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:
> Inf
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
Felix Miata <> wrote on EDT:
> On 2007/06/04 12:33 (GMT-0400) Philip Kiff apparently typed:
>
>> In particular, the subheading tag line on the DancesSRQ is just a
>> wee bit too small for my tastes -- my browser computes it as 10px.
>
> The one line #element7B p
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
> relat
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
> 4.0
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:
>> http://www.marscovis
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/typogra
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
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. C
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 u
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.
> http://www
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
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 m
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 thro
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.
28 matches
Mail list logo
