Hi Roy,
Think of each cell as a div tag. We use XSLT to make tables linear within XStandard.
Here is the link to download the XSLT:
http://xstandard.com/download/screenreader.xsl
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
- Original Message -
From: RC Pierce [EMAIL
of the developers of XStandard - a standards-compliant XHTML (Strict / 1.1)
WYSIWYG editor. We offer a free version so that Web standards are in reach of every
developer. A Mozilla/Firefox version will be available next month.
Here is the link:
http://xstandard.com
Regards,
-Vlad Alexander
This is a bit off topic (sorry) but we need your support once again to make XStandard
for Mozilla/Firefox even better.
The guys at Mozilla Foundation have been real helpful, but Firefox still has a bug
that makes integrating plug-ins like XStandard a bit of a kluge (compared to IE). So
we
://xstandard.com/misc/beta/x-pro.exe
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
- Original Message -
From: Aaron Tate [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 7:40 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] about.com's Web standards article
Quoting john
Hi Robyn,
Sorry, not yet.
Regards,
-Vlad
- Original Message -
From: ROBYN BALL [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, October 10, 2004 9:38 PM
Subject: RE: [WSG] about.com's Web standards article
Hi Vlad,
Will Xstandard run on Mac? If not, do you know
of the developers of XStandard. It is a true standards-compliant
XHTML editor. A free version is available that you can use in your commercial
applications. Here is the link for more info:
http://xstandard.com
To see how XStandard generates standard-compliant markup, check out this article:
http
Let's give Yahoo our feedback. They provide a way to receive feedback using the link
under the search box. True, our comments may fall on deaf ears, or they may not. But
from my experience, numbers do matter, so I filled out the feedback form and voiced my
option on their partial move to
can be
processed by XML parsers.
Regards,
-Vlad Alexander
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
- Original Message -
From: Kim Kruse [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 10:53 AM
Subject: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?
Hi,
First of all... I'm
One of the pillars of Web Standards is that content should be Best Viewed With Any
Browser. This principle is fundamental to Web Standards.
We actually adhere to this principle when we use the CSS import directive to hide
CSS from Netscape 4 so that it's poor support for CSS is not going to
Hi Berry,
Here is an example of a UTF-8 page with non-escaped French characters:
http://xstandard.com/page.asp?p=18BF64A8-DF0A-473E-8402-50E9E917E0C1
Are you able to see them in your browser?
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Standards-compliant XHTML WYSIWYG editor
- Original Message
with xsl:for-each or xsl:template.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
XStandard Development Team
- Original Message -
From: Jonathan T. Sage [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 1:43 PM
Subject: [WSG] Experimentations in XSLT
Good afternoon or insert more
Hi Anura,
According to WCAG20, the ALT text for English should be less than 100
characters. Here is the link:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test3.html
If memory serves me right, for Section 508, the limit is 80 characters.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Standards-compliant XHTML
Hi Kornel,
BOM is a Unicode standard. Without BOM, applications have to waste resources
trying to figure character encoding. Here are some FAQs about BOM:
http://www.unicode.org/faq/utf_bom.html#22
The reason PHP breaks is because PHP does not support Unicode.
Regards,
-Vlad
Hi Alan,
I just found you that the style attribute is depreciated
in xhtml 1.1. Does this mean that it will eventually be
obolete?
It depends on what you mean by obolete. Deprecated means that it's part of
the spec but the construct is outdated and its use is strongly discouraged. The
next
via classes and external/internal css.
The only other place I've used it is when I want to randomly generate a
background-image or something, but that probably better doen with
internal css
Alan Trick
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
Hi Alan,
I just found you that the style attribute
Hi Lisa,
Check this out:
http://www.dpivision.com/
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Standards-compliant XHTML WYSIWYG editor
Lisa B. McLaughlin wrote:
Hi,
Are there web standards for shopping carts? I'm looking for a secure cart.
Perhaps this isn't the best list to post this
rendering. The sub and sup elements should be used to markup text in these
cases.
Examples:
E = mcsup2/sup
span xml:lang=frMsuplle/sup Dupont/span
[/quote]
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Patrick Lauke wrote:
Vlad Alexander (XStandard)
sub and sup are not presentational.
I
Hi David,
I am not aware of any articles but I can give you some examples. All examples
below will validate against one doctype or another but will produce less than
accessible markup:
1. Using tags incorrectly. For example, using blockquote to indent.
2. Using images incorrectly. For
We are building an Outline validator - similar to the Show Outline feature in
http://validator.w3.org/detailed.html The purpose of this Outline validator is
to help non-technical authors create better structured documents.
I have a question regarding the use of H1 headings. From the spec, it
Hi Kornel,
Thanks for the example. The W3C outline validator flags this example as missing
an H2 headings an puts Other Books under Beginning of another book.
Here is your example online:
http://xstandard.com/test1.htm
I think blockquote should create it's
own headingspace :)
Interesting
Hi Tat,
You do it via JavaScript. For example:
a href=http://mysite.com; onclick=window.open(this.href); return false;
onkeypress=window.open(this.href); return false;/a
This is the most accessible way to do this. If the user agent does not support
JavaScript or it is disabled, the link
Russ wrote:
[quote]
At the risk of being burned at the stake, I think that unless you are willing
to serve your pages as application/xhtml+xml with content negotiation, then you
are probably better off staying with HTML 4.01 at this time.
[/quote]
Let me be the first to gather the kindling :-)
Hi Duncan,
Is there really that many disabled internet users?
Accessibility is about usability for everyone, not any specific interest group.
Millions of users on the Web don't consider themselves disabled but use
features that we incorrectly consider as accessibility only features. These
to report it,
can you please CC me on it in Bugzilla.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Original Message
From: Patrick Lauke
Date: 9/20/2005 11:37 AM
Possibly a bizarre question, but: currently working on integrating
XStandard http://xstandard.com in a form, but trying to make
In an Open Letter to WaSP, we are proposing that WaSP should take the
initiative and lead a campaign to change to how we in the Web Standards
community communicate Web Standards to newcomers. The proposal involves the
creation of a Web Standards Charter. Our proposal may affect many of you in
Hi Hope,
There is nothing evil about the br element unless one is using it for visual
effect. In your example, you are using br correctly. For addresses, you might
want to use the address element instead of p.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Original Message
From: Hope
[Lori wrote]
I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards conforming web
pages using XHTML and would like to know what HTML editor you folks that are
light years ahead of me would recommend?
[Lachlan wrote]
Since you're new, you might want to stick with HTML4
Lachlan, here is a
Here is Hickson's reasoning as taken from http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml
1. Authors write XHTML that makes assumptions that are only valid for tag soup
or HTML4 UAs, and not XHTML UAs, and send it as text/html.
2. Authors find everything works fine.
3. Time passes.
4. Author decides to
From: Lachlan Hunt
Date: 12/2/2005 5:08 PM
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Lori Cole wrote:
I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards
conforming web pages using XHTML and would like to know what HTML
editor you folks that are light years ahead of me would
it in
XHTML (even if right now it's still processed by some current browsers as HTML).
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Original Message
From: Lachlan Hunt
Date: 12/3/2005 5:50 AM
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
Lachlan, you have been on this list long enough to know
; just wanted to illustrate the ease of use of XML tools over SGML tools
:-)
[Lachlan wrote: I challenge you to name several readily available off-the-shelf
CMSs that actually do make use of XML tools.]
Here comes shameless self promotion - any CMS that uses XStandard.
Regards,
-Vlad
http
Hi Terrence,
The summary attribute is best used to describe the
structure of the table, not to summarise it's content.
Thanks for sharing that with us. Can you please let me know the
source of this info? Anybody else have an opinion on this?
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Paul wrote:
I came across a strange issue last night while converting
some XML data via an XSL template into XHTML.
You can write your XSLT to output XHTML that follows compatibility guidelines.
You can use the technique in this XSLT:
http://misc.xstandard.com/wsg/preview.zip
If you need a
Lachlan wrote:
It is just as easy to set xsl:output method=html, output
an HTML4 DOCTYPE and not worry about inserting a space
before '/' for empty elements.
If you use the 10 lines of re-usable code that I suggested in your XSLT, one
does not need to worry - you have XML in and you have XML
Lachlan wrote:
That code [XSLT] your referring too seems to be incomplete.
As I mentioned in previous email, it is to illustrate the technique and not
meant to be the final script.
Lachlan wrote:
Fair enough, but do you agree that if there is no intention
of any further XML processing, then
Nancy Johnson wrote:
I believe best practices are to have all images in
a directory entitled images
Hi Nancy,
I would not encourage this practice. There are two types of images on Web site
- site level images (mostly used in page layout like logos, buttons,
backgrounds, etc.) and document
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
Never delete them! Since Cool URIs don't change,
no document should ever be deleted
Lachlan, I'd hate to think that you are giving advice based on an article
you've read or from the practice of operating a personal blog. So I am going to
assume that you are basing your
Hi Richard,
Can you please suggest a reason why there would be an
absolute need to delete a file?
That's a good question. Here are some reasons to absolutely delete files:
- Legal issues / licensing. Your site may be licensed to use content for a
period of time and then content needs to be
Brad wrote:
Omitting the alt attribute as a requirement may have a level of
appropriateness for sites like flickr
Creating content on the Web that is only accessible by one group of people is
never appropriate.
Sites like flickr have tools that let photo contributors upload photos in
batches
/en/documentation/xstandard-dev-guide/accessibility/#markup-images
Lachlan wrote:
What should wikipedia use by default for images used in articles?
What should sites like Flickr, Photobucket, Facebook, MySpace,
etc. generate and insert?
What should forums (e.g. phpBB) or blogs (e.g. Blogger) use
.
Designer wrote:
Surely, there ARE cases where a purely visual site...
I don't know what is a purely visual site. Can you please provide an example?
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xhtml.com
Original Message
From: Designer
Date: 2007-08-30 12:51 PM
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote
be such a things as a purely
visual site.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xhtml.com
Original Message
From: Designer
Date: 2007-08-31 6:50 AM
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote:
I don't know what is a purely visual site. Can you please provide an
example?
Regards,
-Vlad
Hi Vlad
Designer (Bob) wrote:
Those images just cannot be appreciated by someone who
cannot see them. No amount of descriptive prose will
mean anything to to a blind reader.
I've never heard such shit in my life.
Designer (Bob) wrote:
I personally do use alt tags, every time : but I am
aware of
This article may be useful:
http://juicystudio.com/article/choosing-an-accessible-cms.php
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
XStandard XHTML WYSIWYG Editor for CMS
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail
Tee wrote:
Personally I don't think there is a fully accessible
WYSIWYG Editor existed that delivers pure clean code.
It all depends on how you define fully. XStandard has a keyboard accessible
interface and most definitely delivers clean, accessible markup.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Tee wrote:
[XStandard] Mac version finally came out - a very long wait,
must be at least 2 year
It wasn't a straight port - we were pioneering new accessible UI and few
features such as authoring definition lists at the same time as we were writing
the OS X code. Whenever you're first to do
Hi,
We have just published a QA with Opera regarding their antitrust complaint
against Microsoft, lodged with the European Commission. The QA focus on the
Web standards aspect of Opera's complaint.
http://xhtml.com/en/web-standards/conversation-with-opera/
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xhtml.com
,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
XStandard XHTML (Strict or 1.1) WYSIWYG Editor
Original Message
From: Nikita The Spider The Spider
Date: 2008-05-12 8:36 PM
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Simon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Does anyone use XHTML 1.1
Of the doctypes that my
http://xstandard.com
Original Message
From: Nikita The Spider The Spider
Date: 2008-05-13 7:49 PM
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 3:17 PM, XStandard Vlad Alexander
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Nikita,
Are you talking about putting an HTML doctype on
XHTML 1.1-formatted code
messages are overly cautious - it still
warns about the use of BOM which was a problem in the 90's.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Original Message
From: Nikita The Spider The Spider
Date: 2008-05-13 10:51 PM
On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 10:02 PM, XStandard Vlad Alexander
[EMAIL
.
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
XStandard XHTML WYSIWYG editor
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Serving XHTML as application/xhtml+xml
Depending on the type
Hi Mark,
I am new to the group and if this topic has been discussed ad nauseam - I do
apologize for raising it again.
See my response to ActiveX here:
http://www.accessifyforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=1021
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
- Original Message
Hi Christopher,
No. But you should probably serve up XHTML 1.0 Strict to IE and 1.1 to
Mozilla/FireFox/Opera. Here is the link on how to do this:
http://xstandard.com/page.asp?p=16A6EBD1-9EEC-4611-98C8-C0F6234B9737
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
XHTML 1.1 WYSIWYG editor
http
for you. Here
is the link to the W3C validator:
http://validator.w3.org/
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
- Original Message -
From: David Gironella [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: WSG (E-mail) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, May 06, 2004 6:26 AM
Subject: [WSG
Hi David,
Check out http://xstandard.com
This is a XHTML (Strict or 1.1) WYSIWYG editor. It generates clean,
accessible and standards-compliant markup. Formatting is done through
external or embedded CSS.
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
- Original Message
I think XStandard will meet most of your criteria - stable, user-friendly,
lightweight, standards-compliant and FREE. As far as platform independent -
maybe sometime in the future :-)
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
XStandard - XHTML 1.1 WYSIWYG editor
- Original Message
Hi Alex,
As far as I know, we are the only producers of a standards-based XHTML
(Strict / 1.1) WYSIWYG editor. It's called XStandard and there is a free
version. For more information check out:
http://xstandard.com
Here is an article that might help you evaluate WYSIWYG editors.
http
is the link to see the
banners:
http://xstandard.com/page.asp?p=65AD7677-2F9B-4488-B91F-8FD5D56A53F7
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
http://xstandard.com
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org
Hi Chris,
I am still working on the Parsing algorigthm.
If you are on Windows, you can use our free CSS parser. Here is the link:
http://xstandard.com/page.asp?p=E784B605-2413-49B1-B17C-20A634CB0150
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
XHTML Strict / 1.1 WYSIWYG editor
http://xstandard.com
Hi Geoff,
But still it is no guarantee to maintain the sites
standards compliance when you hand it over to the client
Actually, we are working hard to address this specific issue. Check out
http://xstandard.com
Regards,
-Vlad
XStandard Development Team
XHTML Strict / 1.1 WYSIWYG Editor
Mozilla fans, we need your help. The Mozilla version of the
standards-compliant XHTML WYSIWYG editor XStandard is almost ready.
Unfortunately, Mozilla's new scriptable plug-in API announced in June has a
bug that needs fixing before XStandard can be released. The Mozilla
Foundation prioritizes
Hi Simon,
I am on the XStandard dev team. I am not going to do a sales pitch on this
list but I will say that XStandard was designed for the requirements you
described. There are no font-selectors or color-pickers to hide because
these tools create non-standards compliant markup, hence
Hi Tom,
Yes - the markup will validate as HTML. Here is an example:
http://xstandard.com/html4.htm
Validate it using:
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fxstandard.com%2Fhtml4.htm
Check out an article I wrote about this a while back:
63 matches
Mail list logo
