Re: [WSG] DreamWeaver Template Left (or Right) Halo Nav in DW MX2004
ok maybe its just the way u said this but its gotta be the dumbest thing i have ever read [quote]I imagined MacroMedia would not turn out a template that did not work in all browsers on all platforms.[/quote] i mean come on if it makes u feel better to pass some blame then blame who it is that at fault and gee wouldnt u guess who it is? micro$oft imagine that the quote should be more like this I imagined Micro$oft would not turn out such crap that did not work right and doesnt follow the recommended validation standards but then again if they built something right then all the worlds crime would go away, everything would be green and fertile, everyone would be beautiful, there would be free super slurpee's for the everyone and there would be nothing but world peace. and we all know all that aint about to happen btw, a desect quick read http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-3513_7-5570803-1.html?tag=cnetfd.ld -- Original Message -- From: Will Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:35:29 +0300 I am running IE 6 on Win 2K Adv Server. This is an interesting wrinkle. I imagined MacroMedia would not turn out a template that did not work in all browsers on all platforms. I used a 1024x768 screen resolution and if I resize the IE6 window horizontally the capsule story section drops down below the PageNav section. It may not be obvious unless you play about a bit with the size of the IE window. I have a 17 screen and the difference is very large in the placement of the text. Will ** 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] DreamWeaver Template Left (or Right) Halo Nav in DW MX2004
lol well i took the comment probably different then you meant it but microcrap chooses to avoid the main stream in hopes that everyone does things their way or pay the price. (can we say Monopoly?) now when MM made those templates im sure they worked just fine especially in IE and the probable fact is that M$ changes what they were doing so it messed up those templates. I seem to recall there being some pretty big issues between IE5 IE6, and then there are their fixes which usually mess everything else up. bottom line is that they arent gunna change until we make them change i just didnt think MM deserved the comment u gave them. And my point was just to say that blame should just go to where it belongs. and sure i dont like M$ and its because of crap like this but if u can come up with a solution out of the box and work in all browsers on all platforms you will be a rich man :) -- Original Message -- From: Will Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 12:14:40 +0300 Dave, You need some tranquilizers man. You did miss my point. Macromedia sells a product that purports to work with IE and most other browsers. Macromedia DreamWeaver MX has a defective template. Simple as that. A minor problem that could have been avoided by a bit more careful checking before release. It was not glaringly apparent until I put it into a screen resolution that allowed it to be exposed. Thanks to two fellows on this newsgroup for their guidance and simple fixes for the problem. If they can do it - so could Macromedia. IE on any platform is not my favorite browser. Nor is Safari or Opera or Netscape or Firefoxetc! All have their problems and shortcomings. I use all of them to test my products before release. According to the browser statistics in a recent posting to this group: IE owns something like 92% of the browser market (presuming, of course, that those stats are truly reflective of the user community). I do not hate a company simply because they have captured the majority of the market. I DO dislike Microsoft's inability to adapt quickly to industry standards that are emerging around them. I do NOT rant at the folks who use the products that are often pre-installed on their computers. MOST Internet users fall into this category. They are victims of Microsoft's success at marketing. Do not blame the victim! An American story comes to mind of a girl named Pollyanna - who always thought positively - perhaps naively so. You seem to imply that I am somewhat pollyanish in my belief that MacroMedia would do a little more proofing before they deliver a product to market. Macromedia did not do this and are correctly blamed for the problem with THEIR template. IE and its lack of standards compliance is an extenuating factor. I doubt you design websites only for compliance to the 'best' browsers on the market without regard for the 1,000 kilogram ape looming over you. Thanks for the article link - nothing new there - but it's always good to see someone trying to tell the already converted what they want to hear. Will Jensen Moscow, Russia On Nov 17, 2004, at 10:11 AM, csslist wrote: ok maybe its just the way u said this but its gotta be the dumbest thing i have ever read [quote]I imagined MacroMedia would not turn out a template that did not work in all browsers on all platforms.[/quote] i mean come on if it makes u feel better to pass some blame then blame who it is that at fault and gee wouldnt u guess who it is? micro$oft imagine that the quote should be more like this I imagined Micro$oft would not turn out such crap that did not work right and doesnt follow the recommended validation standards but then again if they built something right then all the worlds crime would go away, everything would be green and fertile, everyone would be beautiful, there would be free super slurpee's for the everyone and there would be nothing but world peace. and we all know all that aint about to happen btw, a desect quick read http://reviews.cnet.com/4520-3513_7-5570803-1.html?tag=cnetfd.ld -- Original Message -- From: Will Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 09:35:29 +0300 I am running IE 6 on Win 2K Adv Server. This is an interesting wrinkle. I imagined MacroMedia would not turn out a template that did not work in all browsers on all platforms. I used a 1024x768 screen resolution and if I resize the IE6 window horizontally the capsule story section drops down below the PageNav section. It may not be obvious unless you play about a bit with the size of the IE window. I have a 17 screen and the difference is very large in the placement of the text. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See
Re: [WSG] Flash Standards Validation
the noraml embed tag will choke on validation as it is a depreciated tag several ppl have added the work around already what i do for flash checking is this open up flash and change the canvas size to 1 pixel by 1 pixel and in the actionscript i just add this line of code getURL (main.html) in this case main.html is my main page and export it in the lowest version of flash that u will accept in your site, u use 6. then on the index page where u want flash checked u add the movie 1st thing then after that u add the code for getting or upgrade your flash now, i also add lots of search engine goodies on that page so what happens is that when the page is loaded if the user has at least flash 6 then it redirects them to the main page if not the movie wont be processed and will show the add/upgrade page make sense? -- Original Message -- From: Olajide Olaolorun [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 07:50:34 -0500 I am setting up a site that requires flash but i notice that some of the needed tags for some browsers are not valid... Can anyone tell me the valid code... Te last one I tried did not work well with IE5.5 or less... Thanks -- Best Regards, Olajide Olaolorun @ www.olajideolaolorun.com ...ain't nothing impossible unless you make it... ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** 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] Slightly OT... Interview with IE Dev team
LMFAO! hahahahahahahahaha how about making it like firefox? and how about seperating it from the os for all the dumb ppl who still use it and pass on all the viruses like the previous user suggested, how about actually FOLLING the w3c and not going against it and trying to make everyone follow ie instead of the w3c -- Original Message -- From: Kornel Lesinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 19:28:24 - I was wondering if any of you have any specific questions, queries, or comments regarding the development of IE, and more specifically, IE7 which may, or may not, come with Longhorn (before... if we're lucky) Does Microsoft feel resposibility for the web? Do they realize how much web traffic is wasted, because IE holds back web standards? (according to stopdesign.net it's 950gb of junk markup *per day*, on microsoft.com alone) What about fixing long-standing rendering bugs? On http://positioniseverything.net/explorer.html you can find some nasty ones (severly broken float model is my 'favorite') On IE blog I've read excuses that such things need to stay for sake of compatibility. Indeed funny it'd be when fixed IE would cease to be IE-compatible, but how long Microsoft can keep it's pet bugs? Why 8 years is not enough to implement PNG transparency? (that's a popular question :) -- regards, Kornel Lesiñski ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** 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] Slightly OT... Interview with IE Dev team
sure but maybe they should add some Ethical responsibilty to that as well instead of trying to make this planet microsoft they can start by being honest and remove the whole os, wb interaction and maybe we could at least start to get a handle on the virus situation meanwhile billy is spend your money on his own personal spam products and several teams of employees whos only jobs is to sort his email from spam. do u think he knows he can have a diff email addy? even his own company gives them away?? then maybe they will get the clue that the w3c is a GOOD thing indeed, for the ppl not ms's pocket books -- Original Message -- From: James Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2005 16:35:28 -0500 On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 15:22:45 -0500, Wayne Godfrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Oh really? That's a laugh. All Microsoft is interested in is sticking a very large hose directly into your wallet to suck as much cash out as possible. This is the 8000-pound gorilla who believes in web standards as long as those standards are theirs. In fact, that's the corporate philosophy across the board and now they're heading into your living room! Can't wait to see what havoc they reek there. Quoth Neal Stephenson: Now that the Third Rail has been firmly grasped, it is worth reviewing some basic facts here: like any other publicly traded, for-profit corporation, Microsoft has, in effect, borrowed a bunch of money from some people (its stockholders) in order to be in the bit business. As an officer of that corporation, Bill Gates has one responsibility only, which is to maximize return on investment. He has done this incredibly well. Any actions taken in the world by Microsoft-any software released by them, for example--are basically epiphenomena, which can't be interpreted or understood except insofar as they reflect Bill Gates's execution of his one and only responsibility.[1] /me not defending them, just making sure that their actions are viewed in the proper context. [1] See http://cryptonomicon.com/beginning.html -- May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house. -- George Carlin ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** 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] Question about use of flash in a pure css page
since you are using a server-side language you can do an "if" statement to where if it meets the flash needs it gives the flash menu if not gives an alternative menu. or if just refreshing is the problem, cache the swf immediately. ok i think i read that wrong i use coldfusion and i know what i'd do there but even with php why not just make a header page and include it Flash takes a while to load on slow connections. I wouldn't use it due to that fact. whats the difference between a 25k html page(with say animated gifs) and a 25k swf? there really isnt any reason that most swfs shouldnt be very compact anymore, except for poor design Generally flash menu creates problems: - links cannot be opened in new window/tab - u, yeah they can, rather easily too - links cannot be dragged (to bookmarks) - sure they can - no link context-menu, no statusbar information - i believe they now can and unless you create a reasonable alternative: - menu is inacessible to web spiders and screen readers - umm no its not, if done correctly. you should always have a static set of links available anyways (usually at bottom), spyders can read flash when do right as well. Although in this case i dont know why you would want it unless to follow links in which case an alternate means should be there as well or even a simple page of links. From: Chris Kennon [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, January 24, 2005 12:26 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] Question about use of flash in a pure css pageHi,I'm exciting a "burning time", but I adore FLASH, when used correctly. In this instance spare yourself the headache and use an animated GIF solution. This will increase accessibility options and spare you time and energy.On Monday, January 24, 2005, at 07:03 AM, Sven-Eric Buschgens wrote: Hello, I am currently busy/trying to make a pure css website.. Not using tables or frames. The problem that has occured for the menu we are using a flashbased menu. But because the index.php file is only one file which reloads when clicking on something the flash menu also reloads all the time. To see what I am talking about - have a look here : http://www.tripany.com/vdbII/ The thing that I want is that either flash isn't reload on a refresh or loading a new content.. of a way to use flash in this situation where it wont be reloaded all the time. Hope that anyone can help me with this.. else I will have to make the page using frames - which is something I dont want to do [a bit stubborn]. Thnx in advance for the help ! With regards ! Sven ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **CK__"Knowing is not enough, you must apply;willing is not enough, you must do." ---Bruce Lee**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: SPAM-LOW: RE: [WSG] .php extension
BTW surely you are not suggesting that Coldfusion is a serious competitor for PHP5? - not one for this list though? :-) a serious competitor? haha php wont catch up to coldfusions user base for a long time and that probably wont happen at all unless php takes on an underlying structure from either java or .net. last stats i saw cfm was pretty far infront an quite honestly the only real reason i have heard anyone say they dont use cfm is the cost and for most of us there really is no cost unless ur building an enterprised sized app then the $1200 is far a bargain in time saved programming and if it is a enterprised app it most likely wont be done in php anyway. i dont see how u can compare php to cfm at all, especially not power wise now that cfm has a j2ee backbone and can run jsp tags right and has all that java power to run on not to mention all the new goodies in blackstone (flash forms, reporting, sms, 1 tag codes for pdf or flashpaper output, etc...) so usually it comes down to basically ppl being severely under-informed about coldfusion. not to mention cfm flash run hand in hand together, whoo hoo and u dont have to rely on someones cruddy programming and hacks for things such as amfphp when its built into cfm but to each his own :) From: "Peter Goddard" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 3:43 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: SPAM-LOW: RE: [WSG] .php extensionIf your host has set up Apache correctly, naming the file anything.phpshould enable you to view it in your browser. Do you have Apache installed on your development machine? Does the file work there? Have you got the same Apache version as your host? Have you got the same version of PHP as your host?Could you provide a link to the source code?Have you tried posting to one of the excellent php forums - (egSitepoint.com)The chances are that your host is running Apache 1.3. with PHP4.BTW surely you are not suggesting that Coldfusion is a seriouscompetitor for PHP5? - not one for this list though? :-)Hope this helpsPeter-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] OnBehalf Of csslistSent: 20 January 2005 22:47To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] .php extensionis the page titled index.php or default.php?if so then u need to have the host set up your site to look for eitherone by default and also flush the cashu should also take a look at coldfusion ;)-- Original Message --From: Bruce Reply-To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgDate: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 13:30:45 -0500Paul wrote:I have a template that I have created and am creating all my pagesfromthat. I have named this file x.html but when I try and rename it tox.php, because I have some dynamic content on it, nothing displays.Anyideas why this happens ?Paul This may sound dumb, but I switched to php a few times, if you don't delete the old html file the browser will pick that up instead. But I'msure you thought of that :-)Bruce Prochnauwww.bkdesign.ca**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help** **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting helpThe discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
re: SPAM-LOW: Re: [WSG] The Designer Is Dead, Long Live The Designer!
well you need too use some common sense with this of course you want a few cute graphics but if you find yourself slicing images to load faster then you are probably using to muchFrom: "Jorge Colon" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 7:18 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [WSG] The Designer Is Dead, Long Live The Designer!I agree with you Danny. Just look at the various web page designs athttp://www.csszengarden.com. They are both beautiful and usable at the sametime.- Original Message - From: "David Hucklesby" To: "Mani Sheriar" Sent: Saturday, January 29, 2005 5:31 PMSubject: 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 situationby telling us design and aesthetic quality is trivial."I don't think the evidence supports that assertion. It's true that manysites promoting web standards are plain; it's equally true that manyattractive-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 withusability. One does not exclude the other - rather, I think, the twoessentially go hand in hand. "Good design" in my book means goodcommunication. Good esthetics are essential - and so is usability, aswell as other aspects of the content.Life. Love. Peace.David-- David Hucklesby, on 1/29/2005--**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**-- No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.1 - Release Date: 1/27/2005-- No virus found in this outgoing message.Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.1 - Release Date: 1/27/2005**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] Kaosweaver Complete CSS Menu - accessible or not?
communitymx.com has a free ready to go fully compliant sites via mxp http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?cid=E1100From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Sunday, January 30, 2005 5:39 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] Kaosweaver Complete CSS Menu - accessible or not?http://www.kaosweaver.com/extensions/details.php?id=76Hi I was wondering if anyone had any experience with this extension andwhether it is fully accessible etc as it looks like it could be quite atime saver.ThanksHelen***Helen RysavyWeb Designer, Teaching Learning DevelopmentCharles Darwin University, Northern Territory 0909Tel: 8946 7779 Mobile: 0403 290 842mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]www.cdu.edu.auCRICOS Provider No: 00300K*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] cover me -- I'm gonna be naughty!
Another method would be to send lots of emails to random people YEAH!! spam them to death lol From: Andy Budd [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 4:49 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] cover me -- I'm gonna be naughty!Ted Drake wrote: But if we need to do it to be competitive, would this at least protect those that are innocent, the people who need to use screenreaders?I've an idea. Quite a few people run personal sites that allow people to leave comments. You could create a script that automatically leaves comments on their site along with a link. That way you'd inherit some of their Google juice.Another method would be to send lots of emails to random people. If you send enough you are bound to find somebody interested in your products.I mean, if you need to be competitive you should really explore all the options.:-)Andy Buddhttp://www.message.uk.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] design of Macromedia site
not sure which 1 ur talking bout but communitymx.com showed how to do it this week Recreating Macromedia's Layout Macromedia's current web site layout contains two effects that are very popular today: equal-height columns and rounded corners on columns and boxes. When these two effects are combined, it creates a slick and impressive looking web site. Although there are numerous articles out there describing how to achieve both of these effects in CSS, there is not much written about how to achieve both of them in conjunction. Surprisingly, the effect can be quite simple to achieve, as our deconstruction of Macromedia's site will reveal. We'll show you how they achieve this layout feat, then describe an alternative way to produce the rounded corner effect that is more streamlined. Send http://www.communitymx.com/abstract.cfm?cid=AC5AC if ur not a member it will cost ya a few bucks but well worth it, they have been putting on lots of this stuff lately From: "ByteDreams" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 8:56 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] design of Macromedia siteA long while back I ran across an article someplace explaining how thosecontent boxes and the images on macromedia's website were created. I lovethis style, and was looking for a similar tutorial. Anyone know?Thanks ByteDreams **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] base css
what are you guys using as a base css file to start a site with common hacks and what not? Thanks happy 4th :)
re: SPAM-LOW: RE: [WSG] base css
thanks :) those are good but I guess what i meant was more in terms of hacks that are generally used in most css files, I guess meaning are you guys starting off with a chunck of hacks or adding them as needed? :)From: "Mike Foskett" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2005 10:16 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: SPAM-LOW: RE: [WSG] base cssSnippet taken from: http://www.websemantics.co.uk/tutorials/useful_css_snippets/#levellerWhere there's a fuller description and a few other snippets.On full width pages: * {margin:0; padding:0}html {height:100%; font-size:100.01%}body { min-height:101%; font:100.01%/130% Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#000; background:#fff } On fixed width pages: * {margin:0; padding:0}html {height:100%; font-size:100.01%}body { text-align:center; min-height:101%; font:100.01%/130% Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif; color:#000; background:#fff; width:760px; margin:0 auto }body * {text-align:left}#wrapper {width:760px} Both seem to work well cross browser / cross platform, but testing and change is a continual process. Regardsmike 2k:)2 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] site: http://www.webSemantics.co.uk **This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential andintended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom theyare addressed. If you have received this email in error please notifythe system manager.This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept byMIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.www.clearswift.comThe discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] 2 ?'s
anyone have a good linnk to a tut or other about footers and always having them at bottom under the content. also, i have a page banner div and on safari it's moved over to the right by 1 px, any ideas on this? thanks:)
Re: [WSG] 2 ?'s
thanks! thats the best one i have seen so far. the only 2 i have tested so far that aren't so good is on ie mac it floats up near top and on pc opera 8 it's kinda funky. seems to have even fixed my 1 px left float on safari for the header whoo hoo. another problem is the menu on pc ie6 has too big of spaces, any suggestion on that or any of it? http://www.thehatchflyshop.com/controls/template.cfm btw~ i'm not charging the client for cssp, just going so it doesnt have to be perfect ;) thanksFrom: Rick Faaberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 10:31 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] 2 ?'sOn 7/22/05 7:10 PM "csslist" sent this out: anyone have a good linnk to a tut or other about footers and always having them at bottom under the content.This was on this list recently:--- quotingLooks like someone has found a mostly-reliable CSS-only solution tothat common footer problem - getting a footer to stick to the bottomof the viewport no matter how long or short the content is, whichdoesn't overlap the content when the window is resized:Explanation: Example: --- end quotingSeems to work in Safari and degrades okay in IE Mac.Hth,Rick Faaberg**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] 2 ?'s
yeah, try it again, i was trying to get around a w3c error saying it couldnt find the closing body tag but its there. cutting up the page into header, nav and footer sections, when u do that the validator takes a crapFrom: Gary Menzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 1:26 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] 2 ?'sGot an error on that page. You appear to be missing the ##'s around expandPath. Could not find the included template expandPath(header.cfm). Note: If you wish to use an absolute template path (e.g. TEMPLATE="/mypath/index.cfm") with CFINCLUDE then you must create a mapping for the path using the ColdFusion Administrator. Using relative paths ( e.g. TEMPLATE="index.cfm" or TEMPLATE="../index.cfm") does not require the creation of any special mappings. It is therefore recommended that you use relative paths with CFINCLUDE whenever possible. The error occurred in /vservers/thehatchflys/htdocs/controls/template.cfm: line 12 10 : /cfsilent11 : !--- include application header ---12 : cfinclude template="expandPath(header.cfm)" 13 : !--- include application navigation --- 14 : cfinclude template="navigation.cfm" On 7/23/05, csslist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: thanks! thats the best one i have seen so far.the only 2 i have tested so far that aren't so good is on ie mac it floats up near top and on pc opera 8 it's kinda funky. seems to have even fixed my 1 px left float on safari for the header whoo hoo.another problem is the menu on pc ie6 has too big of spaces, any suggestion on that or any of it? http://www.thehatchflyshop.com/controls/template.cfmbtw~ i'm not charging the client for cssp, just going so it doesnt have to be perfect ;)thanks From: Rick Faaberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 10:31 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] 2 ?'sOn 7/22/05 7:10 PM "csslist" sent this out: anyone have a good linnk to a tut or other about footers and always having them at bottom under the content.This was on this list recently:--- quotingLooks like someone has found a mostly-reliable CSS-only solution to that common footer problem - getting a footer to stick to the bottomof the viewport no matter how long or short the content is, whichdoesn't overlap the content when the window is resized:Explanation: Example: --- end quotingSeems to work in Safari and degrades okay in IE Mac.Hth,Rick Faaberg** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] 2 ?'s
thanks that really sux! just another way microsucks makes our lifes miserable, truely amazing!!!From: Gary Menzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 1:44 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] 2 ?'sRemove all the whitespace between each set of the li/li tags. That will make IE behave. i.e: no whitespace inbetween the sets of tags. lia href=""home/a/lilia href=""guiding service/a/lilia href=""guides/a/lilia href=""photo album/a/lilia href=""shop/a/lilia href=""contact us/a/lilia href=""hunting/a/lilia href=""testimonials/a/lilia href=""bulletin board/a/li This same problem happenes if you create a display:inline li item - it renders one white space if there are any. Regards, Gary On 7/23/05, csslist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: yeah, try it again, i was trying to get around a w3c error saying it couldnt find the closing body tag but its there. cutting up the page into header, nav and footer sections, when u do that the validator takes a crap From: Gary Menzel [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 1:26 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject : Re: [WSG] 2 ?'s Got an error on that page. You appear to be missing the ##'s around expandPath. Could not find the included template expandPath(header.cfm). Note: If you wish to use an absolute template path (e.g. TEMPLATE="/mypath/index.cfm") with CFINCLUDE then you must create a mapping for the path using the ColdFusion Administrator. Using relative paths ( e.g. TEMPLATE="index.cfm" or TEMPLATE="../index.cfm") does not require the creation of any special mappings. It is therefore recommended that you use relative paths with CFINCLUDE whenever possible. The error occurred in /vservers/thehatchflys/htdocs/controls/template.cfm: line 12 10 : /cfsilent11 : !--- include application header ---12 : cfinclude template="expandPath(header.cfm)" 13 : !--- include application navigation --- 14 : cfinclude template="navigation.cfm" On 7/23/05, csslist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: thanks! thats the best one i have seen so far.the only 2 i have tested so far that aren't so good is on ie mac it floats up near top and on pc opera 8 it's kinda funky. seems to have even fixed my 1 px left float on safari for the header whoo hoo.another problem is the menu on pc ie6 has too big of spaces, any suggestion on that or any of it? http://www.thehatchflyshop.com/controls/template.cfmbtw~ i'm not charging the client for cssp, just going so it doesnt have to be perfect ;)thanks From: Rick Faaberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 10:31 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] 2 ?'sOn 7/22/05 7:10 PM "csslist" sent this out: anyone have a good linnk to a tut or other about footers and always having them at bottom under the content.This was on this list recently:--- quotingLooks like someone has found a mostly-reliable CSS-only solution to that common footer problem - getting a footer to stick to the bottomof the viewport no matter how long or short the content is, whichdoesn't overlap the content when the window is resized:Explanation: Example: --- end quotingSeems to work in Safari and degrades okay in IE Mac.Hth,Rick Faaberg** 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] Visual Studio/.net general question
what? thats a big load of BS! what does using coldfusion have to do with mangling your code? if you do a simple google search you will find out the what mangles code and makes it a lot more work to unmangle is .net and vs, which is what u'd expect when you let m$ write any of your code for you (look at frontpage code and decide if you want m$ to write your code). coldfusion actually makes it much easier to control your layout code because of its tag based syntax and ease of use porting it into your pages. Sorry wayne but that wasnt a good answer ;) most of the server sides are good with compliance except .net, which you obviously can get to work but it requires much more time to "unmangle" what ms gives you which shouldnt be a suprise to anyone!!! "The code I have seen being churned out looks like it has gone through a mangler with huge chunks of white space etc. " then you are comparing what you yourseld do to someone using cfm that doesnt know how to do it correctly, those chucks of whitespace are obviously when cfm code is and a simple solution it to wrap code thats in the presentaion view with cfsilentcfm code/cfsilent and that will take away the whitespace. "ASP.NET does not produce code that is capable of passing successful validation in any of the SRTICT modes (see Eric Meyer's Picking a Rendering Mode and W3C's List of valid DTDs you can use in your document for more information on DOCTYPEs). To enforce XHTML compliant code it takes some effort to implement automatic code cleaning (all right, fudging)." From: "wayne" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 12:54 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] Visual Studio/.net general questionI think you will find that coldfusion makes life harder in respect toweb standards compliance. The code I have seen being churned out lookslike it has gone through a mangler with huge chunks of white space etc. In general though, I agree with James, the server side language shouldnot really hinder this, I am developing a couple of sites using ASP.NETand the layout is pure CSS using XHTML strict. The IDE might have moreeffect on this as some of them play around with your code, but that iseasily averted by not using design view and taking the time to configurethem properly. W-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED][mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kvnmcwebnSent: 23 July 2005 11:39To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] Visual Studio/.net general questionRecently i worked on a project that involved visual studio and the wholeasp.net thing. I was reading on the maxdesign site that they only useasp byspecial request as it is not a "rapid development solution".I guess my question is this-is cold fusion the proper way to builddynamimcsites with regards to web standards?Forgive me if this is to ot.**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting helpThe 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] Visual Studio/.net general question
Well no, what you say now isnt wrong but what you said before certainly was. Before you basically implied the cfm created bad markup and now you say it's the developer which is what it should be. " I think you will find that coldfusion makes life harder in respect to web standards compliance" Thats not true at all, not even close. But I totally agree that it's all in how the developer does that makes it go :)From: "wayne" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 2:11 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] Visual Studio/.net general question Er, wwwhat?? If you use the controls provided by MS (validation controls etc), then yes, the code is junk. But who in their right mind uses those anyway? Who has ever used those? That aside, how else does .NET mangle code? I am sorry but that was not a good reply. I have built sites in XHTML STRICT/CSS that uses .NET code behind and VALIDATES 100%. If you are in the habit of dragging and dropping your websites into existence then no, it wont validate, but then I suspect it wont validate in any language. At the end of the day it is down to the developer, their lack of knowledge and sloppy coding which makes a language produce sloppy code. Explain to me how that is wrong. W From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslist Sent: 23 July 2005 18:27 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Visual Studio/.net general question what? thats a big load of BS! what does using coldfusion have to do with mangling your code? if you do a simple google search you will find out the what mangles code and makes it a lot more work to unmangle is .net and vs, which is what u'd expect when you let m$ write any of your code for you (look at frontpage code and decide if you want m$ to write your code). coldfusion actually makes it much easier to control your layout code because of its tag based syntax and ease of use porting it into your pages. Sorry wayne but that wasnt a good answer ;) most of the server sides are good with compliance except .net, which you obviously can get to work but it requires much more time to "unmangle" what ms gives you which shouldnt be a suprise to anyone!!! "The code I have seen being churned out looks like it has gone through a mangler with huge chunks of white space etc. " then you are comparing what you yourseld do to someone using cfm that doesnt know how to do it correctly, those chucks of whitespace are obviously when cfm code is and a simple solution it to wrap code thats in the presentaion view with cfsilentcfm code/cfsilent and that will take away the whitespace. "ASP.NET does not produce code that is capable of passing successful validation in any of the SRTICT modes (see Eric Meyer's Picking a Rendering Mode and W3C's List of valid DTDs you can use in your document for more information on DOCTYPEs). To enforce XHTML compliant code it takes some effort to implement automatic code cleaning (all right, fudging)."From: "wayne" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 12:54 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Visual Studio/.net general question I think you will find that coldfusion makes life harder in respect to web standards compliance. The code I have seen being churned out looks like it has gone through a mangler with huge chunks of white space etc. In general though, I agree with James, the server side language should not really hinder this, I am developing a couple of sites using ASP.NET and the layout is pure CSS using XHTML strict. The IDE might have more effect on this as some of them play around with your code, but that is easily averted by not using design view and taking the time to configure them properly. W -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of kvnmcwebn Sent: 23 July 2005 11:39 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Visual Studio/.net general questionRecently i worked on a project that involved visual studio and the whole asp.net thing. I was reading on the maxdesign site that they only use asp by special request as it is not a "rapid development solution". I guess my question is this-is cold fusion the proper way to build dynamimc sites with regards to web standards? Forgive me if this is to ot. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] link ?
ok i'm having a problem, I have a nav section on my page (see code below) that should be limited to the navwrapper div but it's not, anywhere on the page I make a link it's styled like the nav even outside the div, never had this problem before any ideas? tia #navwrapper { padding: 5px; height: auto; width: 98%; } #navwrapper ul { margin: 10px; padding: 0px; } #navwrapper li { list-style-type: none; background: transparent; display: block; } #navwrapper li a:link, a:visited { color: #006699; text-decoration: none; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Helvetica, Geneva, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: .9em; background-color: #FF; text-align: left; text-indent: 10px; padding: 4px; margin: 3px 0 2px; display: block; border-top: 1px solid #006699; border-right: 1px solid #006699; border-bottom: 1px solid #006699; border-left: 3px solid #006699; } #navwrapper li a:hover, #navwrapper li a:active { color: #33; text-decoration: none; font-family: Tahoma, Verdana, Helvetica, Geneva, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 0.9em; text-align: left; text-indent: 10px; padding: 4px; margin: 3px 0 2px; display: block; border-top: 1px solid #006699; border-right: 6px solid #006699; border-bottom: 1px solid #006699; border-left: 3px solid #006699; font-weight: bold; background-image: url(../images/linkover.gif); background-position: right center; background-repeat: no-repeat; }
Re: [WSG] link ?
yup that was it, i completely missed that, thanks :)From: Bert Doorn [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 11:04 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] link ?G'dayI'd say your problem is here: #navwrapper li a:link, a:visited {See the a:visited? That affects ALL links on the page.I think you meant to say:#navwrapper li a:link, #navwrapper li a:visited {Regards-- Bert Doorn, Better Web Designhttp://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/Fast-loading, user-friendly websites**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] ie css rollovers prob
having some probs with getting simple css rollovers to work in ie on this site http://www.elkhornflyrods.com/store/index.cfm menus on right. anyone see anything wrong? (well ok, i mean with rollover code) .linklist{ background: #d5d5d5; border: 1px solid #66; height: auto; left: 0px; padding: 5px; text-align: center; vertical-align: top; voice-family: inherit; voice-family: "\"}\""; width: 190px; margin-top: 10px;}#navcontainer { height: auto; margin: 3px; padding: 3px; width: 200px;}.burnIn { background: #f1f1f1; border: 1px solid #66;}.linklist li a { display: inline; text-decoration: none; color: #33;}.linklist li:hover { background-color: #9bc541; text-decoration: none; color: #33;}.linklist ul { list-style: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; color: #33;}
RE: [WSG] ie css rollovers prob
i figured that was it but swore it worked on another site which i went back and check and it didnt doh has anyone ever mentioned that ie sux? thanks :)From: "Edward Clarke" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, August 20, 2005 4:14 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] ie css rollovers probYes! You're using :hover on the list item not the hyperlink. Remember,you're coding for IE. Run the hyperlink as display:block and hover that togive consistent results. IE has no support for :hover on anything other thanthe a tag.having some probs with getting simple css rollovers to work in ie on thissite http://www.elkhornflyrods.com/store/index.cfmmenus on right.anyone see anything wrong? (well ok, i mean with rollover code).linklist li a { display: inline; text-decoration: none; color: #33;}.linklist li:hover { background-color: #9bc541; text-decoration: none; color: #33;}.linklist ul { list-style: none; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; color: #33;}**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: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility
Have you ever seen anything that microsoft makes that makes anything near compliant code? didnt think so If you are going to use .net and want complient code then you will spend a lot of time going back and tweaking the code to get it to comply. From: Stuart Sherwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:23 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibilityI have been lucky enough to work with a very experienced java programmer on the last few sites I have designed. I do all the front end, he does the database, application, CMS, security and e-commerce development.The experience has been very pleasurable because of the degree of separation we have achieved between the front and back ends that allows me to make the sites fully standards compatible. Any dymanic content spits out pure content with the bare minimum of markup necessary.I'm wondering how .net compares as I haven't had the chance yet to build a site with it?Regards,Stuart Sherwoodwww.re-entity.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: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility
wasnt bashing m$ was saying a FACT, you shouldnt have to use a 3rd party tool to get it right and your server-side lang shouldnt destroy your markup without user error. see other reply, the guy was right!! It does obviously favors ie and last i check ie and compliance werent on the same page. whats next? You gunna say frontpage writes complient code (if you know what you are doing) ;)~From: "Tatham Oddie \(Fuel Advance\)" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 9:09 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility Not true you just need to know how to use it properly instead of Microsoft bashing. If you do want to use the built in controls and still get compliant markup, I can provide you with a really simple article on how to do so.Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslist Sent: Tuesday, 27 September 2005 10:34 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: re: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility Have you ever seen anything that microsoft makes that makes anything near compliant code? didnt think so If you are going to use .net and want complient code then you will spend a lot of time going back and tweaking the code to get it to comply. From: Stuart Sherwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 8:23 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: SPAM-LOW: [WSG] Java (JSP) v .net for standard and accessibility I have been lucky enough to work with a very experienced java programmer on the last few sites I have designed. I do all the front end, he does the database, application, CMS, security and e-commerce development. The experience has been very pleasurable because of the degree of separation we have achieved between the front and back ends that allows me to make the sites fully standards compatible. Any dymanic content spits out pure content with the bare minimum of markup necessary. I'm wondering how .net compares as I haven't had the chance yet to build a site with it? Regards, Stuart Sherwood www.re-entity.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 **
[WSG] users changing text sizes
like on http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=2202658any good tuts on it anywhere?thanks
Re: [WSG] users changing text sizes
thanks :)From: "Terrence Wood" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005 8:15 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] users changing text sizesyou want a font-size switcher or stylesheet switcher.here's a starting point:http://source.mihelac.org/notebook/styleswitcher/kind regardsTerrence Wood.**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] extra eyes on an input:focus ?
anyone see why this wont work in ie? works elsewhere but not on ieinput:focus,textarea:focus { background: #ff; color: #27455f; border: 1px solid #ff;}
Re: [WSG] extra eyes on an input:focus ?
hum, i have it working on other sites but now that i think about it, it might be that it does because I have the ie7 hack in it.thanksFrom: Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 7:45 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] extra eyes on an input:focus ?http://archivist.incutio.com/viewlist/css-discuss/11997IE doesn't like the :focus pseudo selector.HTH,JoshOn 10/28/05, csslist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: anyone see why this wont work in ie? works elsewhere but not on ie input:focus,textarea:focus { background: #ff; color: #27455f; border: 1px solid #ff; }--Joshua Streethttp://www.joahua.com/+61 (0) 425 808 469**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] extra eyes on an input:focus ?
i put the ie7 hack in and it works fine now.gotta love ieFrom: "csslist" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 8:03 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] extra eyes on an input:focus ?hum, i have it working on other sites but now that i think about it, it might be that it does because I have the ie7 hack in it.thanksFrom: Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 7:45 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] extra eyes on an input:focus ?http://archivist.incutio.com/viewlist/css-discuss/11997IE doesn't like the :focus pseudo selector.HTH,JoshOn 10/28/05, csslist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: anyone see why this wont work in ie? works elsewhere but not on ie input:focus,textarea:focus { background: #ff; color: #27455f; border: 1px solid #ff; }--Joshua Streethttp://www.joahua.com/+61 (0) 425 808 469**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: SPAM-LOW: Re: [WSG] extra eyes on an input:focus ?
i would imagine that you could, i have noticed a lag sometimes but that seems to be only when using transparent pngs (see www.icandfashion.com) you can see a bit of a lag there for that to kick in.im not doing that on this one http://65.36.226.10/contact/contact.cfmso far i cant see any lag but i dont have any links up or nav yet so its kinda hard to tellafter clicking on those what do you think?daveFrom: Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, October 27, 2005 8:30 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [WSG] extra eyes on an input:focus ?On 10/28/05, csslist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: i put the ie7 hack in and it works fine now. gotta love ieHow big is that thing? Can you split it up so you can just use thebits you need (i.e. :pseudo-selector), or do you need to use the fullthing? I'd heard it's largish (but haven't ever used it/had to useit).Josh**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] form hidden field ?
I have a hidden field in a css styled form and when you view the page it's shown as a line in firefox, any ideas?tiadave
Re: [WSG] form hidden field ?
http://65.36.226.10/contact/contact.cfmFrom: Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 2:11 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] form hidden field ?Example link?On 10/29/05, csslist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I have a hidden field in a css styled form and when you view the page it's shown as a line in firefox, any ideas? tia dave--Joshua Streethttp://www.joahua.com/+61 (0) 425 808 469**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 hidden field ?
thanks guys :)I actually cheated and just took it out and put it elsewhere...I couldnt take the Block display off because then it screws up form.good catch though Joshua :)daveFrom: Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 2:44 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] form hidden field ?Ahh, beautiful. This site serves a dual purpose!To Joe Taylor's earlier remark that "I would be concerned about a bugonly showing up in Firefox, I believe that hiding something fromFirefox is not the way to go, but rather, make it right in Firefox andthen worry about the others." -- observe this site. Clearly, Firefoxis not infallible -- or, in the case that its rendering here fallswithin recommendations, it is at very least illogical andcounter-intuitive. I note that Opera and Konqueror (Safari-ish) renderthis page quite sensibly, properly hiding the element. Of course, wedon't need to revert to hacks to resolve this, but your (seemingly)blind faith in Firefox's correctness is discomforting.Dave, Firefox is rendering the border you've defined on the inputselector. Use inline CSS of border:0; or give it a class/ID (as youhave the other form elements) and add a rule to your stylesheet tostop this from appearing.HTH,JoshOn 10/29/05, csslist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: http://65.36.226.10/contact/contact.cfm From: Joshua Street <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2005 2:11 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] form hidden field ? Example link? On 10/29/05, csslist wrote: I have a hidden field in a css styled form and when you view the page it's shown as a line in firefox, any ideas? tia dave -- Joshua Street http://www.joahua.com/ +61 (0) 425 808 469 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **--Joshua Streethttp://www.joahua.com/+61 (0) 425 808 469**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] help on making this link validate
I need to get this email link to validate, i am using a coldfusion function to do this and I tried encoding it to a url safe line (urlencodedformat) but jacks it, any other ideas?or any good ideas for hiding emails from spammers that can use a dynamic email address..http://65.36.226.10/content/contact.cfmtiadave
Re: [WSG] help on making this link validate
thanks,the way its written im not sure if i can or not, i will try though :)From: "Patrick H. Lauke" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Monday, October 31, 2005 6:30 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] help on making this link validatecsslist wrote: I need to get this email link to validate, i am using a coldfusion function to do this and I tried encoding it to a url safe line (urlencodedformat) but jacks it, any other ideas? or any good ideas for hiding emails from spammers that can use a dynamic email address.. http://65.36.226.10/content/contact.cfmAeh...I'm not a coldfusion person, but essentially you're missing the double quotes around your href attribute...can you not just stick them in?to-- Patrick H. Lauke__redux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.ukhttp://redux.deviantart.com__Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Forcehttp://webstandards.org/__**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
[WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset
I had this fixed but it seems to be backlook at formhttp://65.36.226.10/content/contact.cfmany suggestions?tia
RE: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset
this is how it is supposed to look, see how there isnt any color above the feildset border.http://www.jamwerx.com/form2.png (on ff mac)where as this one, there is some grey extending up over border towards the top (on ie6 pc)http://www.jamwerx.com/form1.jpgthe form works just there is now some color overflow outside of the fieldsetdaveFrom: "Paul Noone" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 7:30 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset Do you mean it's getting chopped off? What's it meant to look like? I'm getting scroll bars in IE6 and can access the entire form.
RE: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset
yeah there is a bg color the png only goes half way down.it was working thats the weird thingFrom: "Paul Noone" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:06 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset Ah, I see. The background PNG is extending outside the border of the fieldset. Bizarro. Have you tried setting a background colour to see if it does the same? If not, then the problem lies with the background image. Try setting a value for background-position: top left. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslistSent: Thursday, 3 November 2005 11:40 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset this is how it is supposed to look, see how there isnt any color above the feildset border.http://www.jamwerx.com/form2.png (on ff mac)where as this one, there is some grey extending up over border towards the top (on ie6 pc)http://www.jamwerx.com/form1.jpgthe form works just there is now some color overflow outside of the fieldsetdave From: "Paul Noone" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 7:30 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset Do you mean it's getting chopped off? What's it meant to look like? I'm getting scroll bars in IE6 and can access the entire form.
Re: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldset
i tried that and it got really weird!!!From: "Thierry Koblentz" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 8:14 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] color overflow in pc ie fieldsetcsslist wrote: this is how it is supposed to look, see how there isnt any color above the feildset border. http://www.jamwerx.com/form2.png (on ff mac) where as this one, there is some grey extending up over border towards the top (on ie6 pc) http://www.jamwerx.com/form1.jpg the form works just there is now some color overflow outside of the fieldsetIE positions the background in relation to the legend element somehow.I'd use position:relative on fieldset and position:absolute on legend with anegative top value to get the same effect without the background bleeding.Thierry | www.TJKDesign.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**
[WSG] snug a border around diff sized pix
I have a div that shows phots dynamically that are different sizes and would like to throw a 1px border aound them, I can't seem to get them to hug the photo, anyone got any good tricks for this?tia
RE: [WSG] snug a border around diff sized pix
yup forgot bout those, thanks :)From: "Paul Noone" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2005 1:05 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] snug a border around diff sized pix Add a 1px border to either a or img tags within the DIV's #class. From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslistSent: Wednesday, 16 November 2005 4:45 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] snug a border around diff sized pix I have a div that shows phots dynamically that are different sizes and would like to throw a 1px border aound them, I can't seem to get them to hug the photo, anyone got any good tricks for this?tia
[WSG] menu suggestions and problems
look at my menu http://65.36.226.10/content/catalog.cfm which is fine until you increase the browsers text size to large then thereare some problems such as overflowing and such and if you use overflow it adds scrollbars even when it's technically not overflowing. Anyone have any good suggestions for this? tia dave
RE: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems
I dont know, not sure how to do that but I will look it up. I cant scale the bg to fit because its a one piece fixed size bg thanksFrom: "Stephen Stagg" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 7:25 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemsCould you use the _javascript_ getComputedStyle() function on an interval loopto test for Text-size and if the Text size was too great then the Menu'sclass could be changed to one with overflow:scroll. (Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wdf-dom/message/3820)Also if you define you DL height in EM (or not at all) then when thetext-size is increased, the background will scale to fit.StephenFrom: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of csslistSent: 24 November 2005 23:51To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemslook at my menuhttp://65.36.226.10/content/catalog.cfmwhich is fine until you increase the browsers text size to large thenthereare some problems such as overflowing and such and if you use overflowit adds scrollbars even when it's technically not overflowing.Anyone have any good suggestions for this?tiadave**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] menu suggestions and problems
The site isn't truely fluid as it uses a one piece bgFrom: "Scott Swabey - Lafinboy Productions" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 7:25 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemsTo make the site truly fluid you'll need to use relative size units (em, %)in place of pixels. This will ensure that container elements change size inproportion to the font contained therein.RegardsScott SwabeyLafinboy Productionswww.lafinboy.com-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of csslistSent: Friday, 25 November 2005 10:51 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemslook at my menuhttp://65.36.226.10/content/catalog.cfmwhich is fine until you increase the browsers text size to large thenthereare some problems such as overflowing and such and if you use overflowit adds scrollbars even when it's technically not overflowing.Anyone have any good suggestions for this?tiadave**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] menu suggestions and problems
but if you do that it still gets screwed up What i did was just set the font size in pints for the menu and it seems too work across the board better then anything elseFrom: "Stephen Stagg" [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 8:05 PMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: RE: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems Sorry I wasnt clear on the second point. The Menu-Item borders produce the bevelled effect on the menu I believe. Because you have specified a height AND line-height of 20px, the borders are always 20px apart. If the List item height were either auto or specified in EM (say 1.3EM), the menu would look better at different text-sizes because the menu-item borders would fit better. Stephen From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslist Sent: 25 November 2005 00:50 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems I dont know, not sure how to do that but I will look it up. I cant scale the bg to fit because its a one piece fixed size bg thanksFrom: "Stephen Stagg" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2005 7:25 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems Could you use the _javascript_ getComputedStyle() function on an interval loop to test for Text-size and if the Text size was too great then the Menu's class could be changed to one with overflow:scroll. (Source: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wdf-dom/message/3820) Also if you define you DL height in EM (or not at all) then when the text-size is increased, the background will scale to fit. Stephen From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of csslist Sent: 24 November 2005 23:51 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems look at my menu http://65.36.226.10/content/catalog.cfm which is fine until you increase the browsers text size to large then thereare some problems such as overflowing and such and if you use overflow it adds scrollbars even when it's technically not overflowing. Anyone have any good suggestions for this? tia dave ** 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] menu suggestions and problems
and if you take the overflow out the content just flows right on out over the bg and right down the page that would beautiful wouldnt it and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or not. From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 1:27 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemsThis website has too many things defined in absolute sizes to berobust for font resizing. What you should do is take the overflow:autoout of the left container altogether and let it flow down as far asthe content. Then when you increase text size everything flowstogether and it looks fine. Besides the only thing the overflow:autodoes for me is give me two scrollbars to use on the site rather thanone.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine. "So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in order to get to the content. Cute." Ok smart ass, thats 1 page that has a vertical scroller because I havent resized the flash form on that 1 FRICKIN page, so there is a scroll bar, geezo From: Gunlaug Srtun [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 2:57 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemscsslist wrote: and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or not.So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in orderto get to the content. Cute.Seriously, what windows/screens is that design meant to fit on? Georg-- http://www.gunlaug.no**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] menu suggestions and problems
"I could show you a million websites with the background graphic positioned at the bottom of the content."gee, really??? now wayyy!!! I don't recall asking you for your opinon on it and I didn't ask for a site check and unless you are paying the bill for the site then I will listen to the people that are. "Why not split that background image up and do like the rest of them do?" Because they didnt frickin want that, we didnt want that type of design (which btw~ was the first one i did). We didn't want long scrolling pages, they wanted scrolling within the screen size, is that ok with you master? "The page does not fit within my browser." Well its the way they wanted it too fit, is that ok with you or should i have consulted with you first? Sorry to be an ass but I asked a question for a problem not for you to tell the people what they want. I did want to cut the bg up, i wanted to do a lot of things that i couldn't and unless you know the facts don't dictate how it "should" be done, you aren't paying for it and those "issues" have all been brought up. Your sites are a perfect example of what they didn't want, yours may make sense to you but it doesn't mean you're right. And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why answer? From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 2:57 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems and if you take the overflow out the content just flows right on out over the bg and right down the page that would beautiful wouldnt itI could show you a million websites with the background graphicpositioned at the bottom of the content. Why not split that backgroundimage up and do like the rest of them do? and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or not.The page does not fit within my browser. And I'm using one of thosevery popular widescreen laptops that is very short vertically. So itis not a matter of preference.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
First of all I appriciate all help I get and I can take critizism fine when I ask for it. Ok, so if we do it your way on your browser (lets just say..) to read the page you will have to scroll the screen down and so when you want a new link you will have to scroll all the way back up to do it, where as how it is now you can scroll the content and when ready to go to new link you simply move the mouse over a tad and there you are, I'm sorry but I agree with them and think that is a much better solution than an entire page scroll, especially for their target audience. And too add to that, their stats say well over 90% of their web site users are using a screen resolution of 800 x 600 so we made it to fit their needs to what their expectations are and we wanted to get away from the way their current site is (which is kinda like yours) where everything is shoved over to the left so on bigger browsers it only takes up half the screen which is fine but at least center the damn thing. And if 6 months from now their stats change and we need to do a new layout then big deal we do a new layout. Again I don't mean to be a jerk but I asked a ? to a menu problem, if I woulda asked you for a site check then your responce would have been warranted but I didn't. You need to make a site to the requirements of the audience not your personal preference. From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 4:31 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemsOn 11/25/05, csslist wrote: its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine.This is a 1:1 image of my browser viewport:http://space.rdpdesign.com/reels.jpgNotice the height of the viewport: 536 pixels. That's 64 pixels less than 600.My laptop is a 15" widescreen. The default resolution for readabletext is 1280 x 768 pixels. My browser has the title bar, menu bar,address bar, links bar, one toolbar, tabs, and the status bar at thebottom. Then there's the thick windows bar below it. That accounts forthe 132 pixels of lost screen estate. Considering the popularity ofbrowser toolbars and tabbed browsing (soon to be standard in IE7) aswell as the popularity of widescreen displays (and even standarddisplays at 768 pixels height), I'd say this layout isn't going towork. You can take the feedback as constructive and revisit thedesign, or you can ignore it, but if you choose to ignore it then thisisn't the list for you.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
Then I appologize Christian, This is due like today and I'm really growchy but it's what they want and if it needs changed then we change it. I was opposed to the idea just like you are now but it's grown on me and I kinda like it. But you gotta remember we are targettting their main audience which is on 800 x 600. I have a pc xp (puke) set up here set to the specs they gave me, 800 x 600, ie6, ff with med to large fonts and actually it looks pretty good on it. This is the one i did before this one http://www.elkhornflyrods.com/store/index.cfm As you can see (well its not perfect css by any means, had a 2 week deadline) but I took 1 image cut it into 3 parts (header, body, footer) actually u can see my gradiant mistake lol and the header randomly rotates but thats just not how this one wanted it. So I know what you are saying but its just not happening on this one. I wish the menu section was a bit wide but there is no time right now to do it as there are 2 sites due and both have same layout with diff color schemes. From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 4:39 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why answer?You misunderstand. My reason for telling you this is that there isnothing you can do about your problem with the current layout. If theclient wants it that way, then that's fine, no need to argue. Justkeep in mind that the number of users that are going to use text-sizelarge on the page is about 1 in a thousand, and they probably won'tcare. So I say just leave it like it is.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
yes I know that But you are not getting it, which is fine, you don't have too, I do. We know some or a lot of people it wont fit which is a given. But your option is to make them page scroll and mine is to window scroll so that they DON'T have to scroll all the way up to use the menu. Does that make sense too you? Ok like on your http://cheeaun.phoenity.com/weblog/ if i am using that site and am going through the about section and i read all the way to the bottom of the page and I decide to go to a different page I have to up scroll how many hundreds if not thousands of lines to do that??? Really, it's quite annoying and thats what we DIDNT want on this site, you can stay put and scrool and have immediate access to the menu without adding additional menus or floating annoying menus. anyways, im heading to bed and im sure people are sick of this threadFrom: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 5:08 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems And too add to that, their stats say well over 90% of their web site users are using a screen resolution of 800 x 600screen resolution != viewport sizethis is a common mistake among developers. I just explained to youthat my screen resolution is 1280 x 768 which is much bigger thanthat, however my viewport size is 1257 x 536.1257 x 536 -- notice the number less than 600If you would explain that to your client maybe they would realize themistake being made.once again, screen resolution != viewport size.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine. "So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in order to get to the content. Cute." Ok smart ass, thats 1 page that has a vertical scroller because I havent resized the flash form on that 1 FRICKIN page, so there is a scroll bar, geezo From: Gunlaug Srtun [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 2:57 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemscsslist wrote: and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or not.So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in orderto get to the content. Cute.Seriously, what windows/screens is that design meant to fit on? Georg-- http://www.gunlaug.no**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] menu suggestions and problems
"I could show you a million websites with the background graphic positioned at the bottom of the content."gee, really??? now wayyy!!! I don't recall asking you for your opinon on it and I didn't ask for a site check and unless you are paying the bill for the site then I will listen to the people that are. "Why not split that background image up and do like the rest of them do?" Because they didnt frickin want that, we didnt want that type of design (which btw~ was the first one i did). We didn't want long scrolling pages, they wanted scrolling within the screen size, is that ok with you master? "The page does not fit within my browser." Well its the way they wanted it too fit, is that ok with you or should i have consulted with you first? Sorry to be an ass but I asked a question for a problem not for you to tell the people what they want. I did want to cut the bg up, i wanted to do a lot of things that i couldn't and unless you know the facts don't dictate how it "should" be done, you aren't paying for it and those "issues" have all been brought up. Your sites are a perfect example of what they didn't want, yours may make sense to you but it doesn't mean you're right. And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why answer? From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 2:57 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems and if you take the overflow out the content just flows right on out over the bg and right down the page that would beautiful wouldnt itI could show you a million websites with the background graphicpositioned at the bottom of the content. Why not split that backgroundimage up and do like the rest of them do? and I know what you are saying but we didn't want the pages to be big long pages it needed to fit within the browser(and NOT scroll), so your answer would depned upon how you want the website to be, whether you like it or not.The page does not fit within my browser. And I'm using one of thosevery popular widescreen laptops that is very short vertically. So itis not a matter of preference.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
First of all I appriciate all help I get and I can take critizism fine when I ask for it. Ok, so if we do it your way on your browser (lets just say..) to read the page you will have to scroll the screen down and so when you want a new link you will have to scroll all the way back up to do it, where as how it is now you can scroll the content and when ready to go to new link you simply move the mouse over a tad and there you are, I'm sorry but I agree with them and think that is a much better solution than an entire page scroll, especially for their target audience. And too add to that, their stats say well over 90% of their web site users are using a screen resolution of 800 x 600 so we made it to fit their needs to what their expectations are and we wanted to get away from the way their current site is (which is kinda like yours) where everything is shoved over to the left so on bigger browsers it only takes up half the screen which is fine but at least center the damn thing. And if 6 months from now their stats change and we need to do a new layout then big deal we do a new layout. Again I don't mean to be a jerk but I asked a ? to a menu problem, if I woulda asked you for a site check then your responce would have been warranted but I didn't. You need to make a site to the requirements of the audience not your personal preference. From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 4:31 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problemsOn 11/25/05, csslist wrote: its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine.This is a 1:1 image of my browser viewport:http://space.rdpdesign.com/reels.jpgNotice the height of the viewport: 536 pixels. That's 64 pixels less than 600.My laptop is a 15" widescreen. The default resolution for readabletext is 1280 x 768 pixels. My browser has the title bar, menu bar,address bar, links bar, one toolbar, tabs, and the status bar at thebottom. Then there's the thick windows bar below it. That accounts forthe 132 pixels of lost screen estate. Considering the popularity ofbrowser toolbars and tabbed browsing (soon to be standard in IE7) aswell as the popularity of widescreen displays (and even standarddisplays at 768 pixels height), I'd say this layout isn't going towork. You can take the feedback as constructive and revisit thedesign, or you can ignore it, but if you choose to ignore it then thisisn't the list for you.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
Then I appologize Christian, This is due like today and I'm really growchy but it's what they want and if it needs changed then we change it. I was opposed to the idea just like you are now but it's grown on me and I kinda like it. But you gotta remember we are targettting their main audience which is on 800 x 600. I have a pc xp (puke) set up here set to the specs they gave me, 800 x 600, ie6, ff with med to large fonts and actually it looks pretty good on it. This is the one i did before this one http://www.elkhornflyrods.com/store/index.cfm As you can see (well its not perfect css by any means, had a 2 week deadline) but I took 1 image cut it into 3 parts (header, body, footer) actually u can see my gradiant mistake lol and the header randomly rotates but thats just not how this one wanted it. So I know what you are saying but its just not happening on this one. I wish the menu section was a bit wide but there is no time right now to do it as there are 2 sites due and both have same layout with diff color schemes. From: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 4:39 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why answer?You misunderstand. My reason for telling you this is that there isnothing you can do about your problem with the current layout. If theclient wants it that way, then that's fine, no need to argue. Justkeep in mind that the number of users that are going to use text-sizelarge on the page is about 1 in a thousand, and they probably won'tcare. So I say just leave it like it is.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] menu suggestions and problems
yes I know that But you are not getting it, which is fine, you don't have too, I do. We know some or a lot of people it wont fit which is a given. But your option is to make them page scroll and mine is to window scroll so that they DON'T have to scroll all the way up to use the menu. Does that make sense too you? Ok like on your http://cheeaun.phoenity.com/weblog/ if i am using that site and am going through the about section and i read all the way to the bottom of the page and I decide to go to a different page I have to up scroll how many hundreds if not thousands of lines to do that??? Really, it's quite annoying and thats what we DIDNT want on this site, you can stay put and scrool and have immediate access to the menu without adding additional menus or floating annoying menus. anyways, im heading to bed and im sure people are sick of this threadFrom: Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED]Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 5:08 AMTo: wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgSubject: Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems And too add to that, their stats say well over 90% of their web site users are using a screen resolution of 800 x 600screen resolution != viewport sizethis is a common mistake among developers. I just explained to youthat my screen resolution is 1280 x 768 which is much bigger thanthat, however my viewport size is 1257 x 536.1257 x 536 -- notice the number less than 600If you would explain that to your client maybe they would realize themistake being made.once again, screen resolution != viewport size.Christian Montoyachristianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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**
