slowness to come
out with workable specs (XHTML 2 anyone?). There has only been a very
small advance in web technology in the last few years I've been in the
industry. The WHATWG seems to be taking up the torch well. I hope the
W3C can get in on it though.
Alan Trick
I don't know if this is important to you, but you should really use GET,
not POST. POST is supposed to be used when you're actually doing
something to a page like submitting data. There, you're just getting a
form. See http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec9.html
Alan Trick
Richard
I was just thinking about that and I don't think google.com (or for that
matter - anything that company creates) would manage to get more than 1
star.
On Wed, 2005-12-07 at 12:00 +1100, Peter Williams wrote:
From: Herrod, Lisa
Who really pays attention to the badges?
Are the badges
though is that if you try to assign an element to a
variable with the same name as that elements id, IE will fail to assign
the element (the variable will still be null) and it may give a really
cryptic complaint later on if you try to use it again.
Alan Trick
On Tue, 2005-12-06 at 00:58 +, Chris
Nevermind, ignore what I said, Bert is right. Although IE may misbehave
as well, it seems pretty inconsitent and buggy.
On Tue, 2005-12-06 at 09:21 +0800, Bert Doorn wrote:
G'day
I was having some trouble finding out why, whenever I call for
document.getElementById(id), it returns null
I'm going to have to go with Lachlan on this one. IE has as much support
for XHTML as it does for application/foo-bar. If I serve my
application/foo-bar as text/plain, IE will display the page as plain
text. If it 'looks' correct that is only a coincidence.
More importantly IE's HTML parser is
it as well.
Alan Trick
On Thu, 2005-12-01 at 12:45 +1000, Jason Foss wrote:
Safari was the first wasn't it?
Hope a Windows browser manages that soon... :(
On 30/11/05, James Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all
Just read this via KDE dot news (http://dot.kde.org/1133270759
with some browsers. Particularly people using things like
greasemonkey.
As far as mobile devices are conserned - most of them do not. Trying to
implement javascript in a mobile device is quite difficult. There are
some though that are working on it. I don't know if there in use though.
Alan Trick
On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 15:44 -0800, Ted Drake wrote:
Firefox has just officially released 1.5
http://www.mozilla.com/firefox/releases/1.5.html
It's time to upgrade. If you haven't been using the beta, you'll be
pleasantly surprised.
Ted
Great. I hope they fixed the copy-and-paste issues
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 12:42 +1100, Geoff Pack wrote:
Does anyone know of a downloadable CSS validator (other than the W3C one)
that I can install on an local server to batch check files on my local
network? We currently use the WDG html validator, but their CSS validator is
not available
On Thu, 2005-11-24 at 12:42 +1100, Geoff Pack wrote:
Does anyone know of a downloadable CSS validator (other than the W3C one)
that I can install on an local server to batch check files on my local
network? We currently use the WDG html validator, but their CSS validator is
not available
is forgiving! But it just murdered all my poor, innocent floats :(
Alan Trick
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
**
The discussion
Introduction to Programming 101 or 2) the students won't have a
clue as to what they're doing and will get more confused because there
is an extra layer they don't understand.
Alan Trick
On Sat, 2005-11-26 at 00:06 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are two magazines out of the UK that sometimes offer
not reason to worry about future proof with HTML.
The other thing is that I don't think anybody besides the odd bot ever
looks at those meta tags. That information belongs in your http headers.
Alan Trick
On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 10:46 -0400, The Snider's Web wrote:
Hi Everyone,
I am going to delurk
http://php.net/session for details.
Btw, I think talking about server side processing is kind of OT on this
list, but if you have any more questions about PHP and such feel free to
email me off-list.
Alan Trick
Bert Doorn wrote:
Tim Burgan wrote:
Just a quick note that'll help:
In the URL
I think thedailywtf.com needs a seperate section for web developers.
Btw, googling 'Design_Time_Lock' gives some interesting results.
Robert Nicolson wrote:
This is another Visual Studio .Net designer related question I think,
I have had a quick google, but would anyone be willing to back
Terrence Wood wrote:
Patrick H. Lauke said:
IE does not natively support 24 bit alpha transparency on PNGs without
some seriously hacky workarounds.
...which is to say that IE *does* support 8-bit transparency (i.e. same as
gif).
That is about the only reason to ever use the GIF any
This tool might help:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A//www.jimjacobe.com/ClassDescriptions.html
Alan Trick
GALLAGHER Kevin S wrote:
First off the site was designed before Firefox and was my first site.
Now I have been seeing things were Firefox is displaying something’s
If you don't use CSS hacks you have 2 options.
1. Avoid CSS that is buggy in a browser.
2. Use other hacks like conditional comments. (Conditional comments
*are* hacks, there just intentional ones)
Number 1 is simply not an option unless your willing to look like
useit.com or something. Number
Helmut Granda wrote:
. . .
it seems like FF is loosing terrain, is w3schools accurate?
No they're not, in fact I think there is a note about how they are no
accurate on the page there.
Or is there
anyother place that I can check what the general public is using.
There are 3 kinds of
Web page designed by clueless person. Film at 11.
Personally I think both designs have issues. The font size is too small
on the first one, and in the second one its a good size but it overflows
eveywhere. And don't go in to the code behind it all.
Kids these days :P
Felix Miata wrote:
Soren
Yes, but it also depends on the context. Remember that the input does
not nessisarily follow the label. And in some situations, a colon might
not fit (visually).
Alan Trick
Zach Inglis wrote:
It makes things easier to associate in my opinion. At the end of the day
its just punctuation... like
I personally think that this will be unrealistic for the time being. But
it's nice to hear that the IE team is starting to take a stand agains
the problems their buggy software created.
http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/10/12/480242.aspx
**
the date of writting and possibly information on any edits
(ins and del would be useful for this). It's something that
usability people can push, but the w3 can't really enforce it in any
meaningful way.
Alan Trick
Vignesh Mathivanan wrote:
Hello,
I have a question that has been in my mind
.
Just my thoughts.
Alan Trick
Jon Tan wrote:
Tantek Celik talks about the address and br / tags in his Elements of
Meaningful XHTML presentation at WE05 available here:
http://www.odeo.com/audio/270419/view
My suggestion would be that br / is not necessary when the same visual
effect
/standardistas.src;
updateIcon=http://mycroft.mozdev.org/plugins/standardistas.png;
updateCheckDays=5
===
with out all the ='s. No spyware here.
Alan Trick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fake Google Toolbars Spreading Identity Theft
Beware of guests bearing
The problem with testing has been argued about. The fact that Nielsen
only surveyed his subscribers, most of whom are quite different from Joe
User, probably provided different result than if more 'average' testing
was done. However, I don't really think that's a bad thing. I think it's
actually
James Bennett wrote:
On 10/3/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most Linux systems have neither Verdana
nor Arial installed, at least not by default.
True, but these days nearly every Linux distribution ships the free
Bitstream Vera font set, which includes a sans-serif with metrics
Because it's an ugly bastard of Helvetica?
I'm no typographist but my sister absolutely hates that font. However,
Windows donsn't really have any nice looking fonts anyways.
T. R. Valentine wrote:
On 04/10/05, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO arial isn't so hot for the web
On http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/products/vbdoodle/ the text in the
'VB DOODLE' box is overfollowing. This is on Firefox 1.0.7 Gentoo Linux.
My guess is that this is an issue with fonts because my default font is
not that ugly monster (:P) known as Times New Romans. Fonts tend to be
quite an
Interesting,
Not really a problem with your site, but I just checked the headers of
the top 4 sites and they had Content-Type: text/html.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
please check my new experiment.
A Xhtml Websites List Directory. Sorry but is in italian language.
I'm not quite sure what's going on, but the fact that they use
document.write raises big flags:
EXd.write(img src='http:\/\/e0.ex...lots of nasty mess...dth='1');
document.write is not part of the DOM standard and will does not work on
XML pages (including XHTML). Your page is being sent as HTML
I just looked at the page in a text browser (links) and there's a couple
of anoying issues.
1. This is not bad, but a bit of an anoyance. There is a notice about
not having javascript. This appears at the top of the page. I don't
think this is really neccisary. If you really want it, put it at
Yes. It's not as evil as some things, but it is certainly bad practice.
You'd be much better off using HTML 4.01 (which is, last time I checked
a valid spec).
Julián Landerreche wrote:
As long as I know, you shouldnt serve XHTML 1.1 as text/html. You
should serve it as text/xml, or
unfotunatly it's difficult to give any guides.
Alan Trick
Nick Gleitzman wrote:
James Oppenheim wrote:
I tend to use underscore for class and id, try very much to stay away
from two word file names.
This is a question (discussion?) that comes up every couple of months
here on the list
IIRC, position:fixed will do that for you, i.e.
#footer{
position:fixed;
bottom:0; right:0; left:0; height: 2em;
}
would create a 2em footer at the bottom of every page; however I don't
know how well this is supported. Internet Explorer certainly doesn't
support it.
Krassy wrote:
Hi
I think the future of CSS is not in hack or in conditional comments but
in using standard CSS. At the current time this isn't really possible
because of Internet Explorer, but from what I've heard about IE7 they
plan to do a fair amount of fixing up. Things won't be perfect and
support for nice
Hassan Schroeder wrote:
Terrence Wood wrote:
Constants and variables are not going to part of CSS any time soon, so you
will need some kind of server side solution ...
AFAIK they all use seom form of regex to do the replacement
Well, no -- I frequently use variables in style sheets
The whole idea that a float *even can* be sematically incorrect is
absurd. Floating is simply a style, the way something is positioned and
it has no implyed semantic meaning whatsoever.
That said, it's an honour to know that were popular enough to warrant
trolls ;)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What
Just stay on this mailing-list and you'll hear *plenty* of points of
view's :)
p.s. It's good netiquite when your sending emails to a mailing list, to
use text-only (no html nastyness). In Mozilla Thunderbird you can set
this by going to Tools Options Coposition 'Send and HTML options'
- Send
or button element should be doing. To cover up this
unholy substitution, they use a bunch of javascript. Of course the form
is completely broken to users without javascript.
Alan Trick
csslist wrote:
wasnt bashing m$ was saying a FACT, you shouldnt have to use a 3rd party
tool to get it right
Yeah, it's been nice, that was one of the things I alwasy hated about
slashdot. It got particularly funny and flamish whenever they posted
articles that had to do with web standards.
It's great to see more big sites moving towards web standards, hopefully
Google will get around to it some day.
the same.
I don't know what is up w/ brosershots.org, but I don't think it's a
problem w/ your website. I think you can just safely ignore that.
Alan Trick
Webmaster wrote:
Hi all,
The fix provided the other day to clear floats and make disappearing content
re-appear worked well enough in most
Yes, I've been doing that for some time and I really find it cleans up
my code, however you should note that class names are usually space
separated. At least in CSS the class green tomatoes will get the
styles of green and tomatoes, so by making your javascript aware of
this you can hav multiple
Paul Bennett wrote:
And Times New Roman is the default font by browsers, if I remember correctly?
At least
IE's default font.
I may be wrong (it happened once before ;) ) but I would think that the
browser would use the default SYSTEM serif font. Seeing as this (for Windows)
is Times
, and
getting a client to thing your actually part of the browser when your not?
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting
Jan Brasna wrote:
OK, beta 1 pretty bad in the field of standards, only PNG partially
fixed and peekaboo and guillotine bugs removed. Otherwise IE6-like. See
http://kurafire.net/log/archive/2005/07/28/ie7-beta-1-release
Yes, they fixed 2 bugs, and now it's a new version. That puts firefox
sizes? Is 100% a good
starting point for body? Enquiring minds want to know.
I belive not having a % value on your top element ( html for XHTML and
body for HTML ) really screws up font-scaling in IE.
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list
on all CSS2 browsers. Any better suggestions on how
to do this?
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
doing, which is the point of learning.
XHTML is a beautiful thing. I use it every day with my PHP applications.
I just can't wait till SVG gets some support.
Alan Trick
Roberto Gorjão wrote:
Anyway, I noticed that many of you use XHTML and I sure was beginning to
enjoy using it myself
or something? Are there and HOWTO's around?
Thanks,
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Acording to the WHAT-WG the small element does have semantic meaning.
I don't have the link though. They basically said that it was good for
things like 'small print' and such cases. I think small is an unusal
case here and is meanigful and useful.
Alan Trick
Matt Thommes wrote:
Is there any
you know.
Good luck promoting standards.
Alan Trick
Jad Madi wrote:
Hi
I have made some changes to W3 planet, would you please check it
http://www.w3planet.info/site/
and give me your feedback
Regards
**
The discussion list for http
There's these also, I can never spend too long w/o them:
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/REC-DOM-Level-2-Core-20001113/
Alan Trick
Nick Elliott wrote:
Hi
Following up on a thread from a month back, this book is now finally out.
DHTML Utopia
I don't think there's a really good answer to this question. It really
boils down to using what ever your comfortable with and will let you get
the job done. Personally, I use plain text editors with syntax
highlighting and I hate Dreamweaver (i've used 2002), but others feel
differently and
Yes, this would be great. I live in Canada, and being a student and all,
I don't have the time, nor the money to visit Australia. If some one
could release audio tapes or something, it'd be much appreciated. :)
Alan Trick
Cole Kuryakin - x7m wrote:
Man, oh man, would I love to attend some
The select issue is an IE bug. As far as I know, there's no workaround.
With the flash, I believe you have to set a property on your embed tag
(wMode='opaque', but don't quote me on that). I'm not very familiar with
Flash.
Alan Trick
Jamie Mason wrote:
http://www.engineerrecords.com/abspos.htm
has for IP
addresses?
Alan Trick
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org
images unless their is good reason not to otherwise the following:
img src='hello.png' alt=Hello/img src='world.png' alt=World/
will look like
HelloWorld
Alan Trick
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http
. The only time I find
this is useful is when your sending content to a UA that does not
support application/xhtml-xml and you don't want to rewrite your
document for that.
Alan Trick
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
. Something they are ever so committed to.
4. It's 4 characters shorter.
5. not as important, but can we change 'data' to 'src'. data is
confusing because it isn't consistent with the other elements.
What do you guys think of this? Is their somewhere I can submit this too?
Alan Trick
I believe that is what object is for. If IE didn't screw it up so
royaly with it's activeX it would be a considerably better option than
the img. With an object tag, this
object src='place' type='thisisnotsupported'
object src='place' type='thismightbesupported'
pThis is some alternate
designers have to be from Aussie Land? :P
-Alan Trick
Neerav wrote:
Moderators
I take it that the appearance of
http://webstandardsgroup.org/resources/jobs.cfm means that list members
can post webstandards postions they know about there?
Would this extend to the reverse eg: allowing people who
In writing (like not-web writing) there is a thing were quotes that are
just are just a few lines are written in the normal flow of the text;
however, if a quote is more than 3-4 lines it is separate and indented
(about .5' on each side, but it depends on whose rules you use).
Anyways that is
If I want a link that points to whatever page i am alread at (without
any querystrings I can use a href='' (for example, I'm at
index.php?start=10 and I want to go to index.php)
Is this allowed?
Alan
**
The discussion list for
Ah yes, those problems. IE is quite bugy when it comes to floats. Try
putting |display:inline| on everything that is floated.
http://positioniseverything.net/explorer/doubled-margin.html
Alan Trick
Javier wrote:
Hi
I'm developing a site for a friend of mine and have some rare problems.
What I
for IE). I guess one of the biggest differences here is that SVG
has a future, where as flash is bound to the world of proprietary formats.
Has anyone here actually done any development with SVG?
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http
suggestions/help on what is causeing this?
Alan Trick
Ah, yes. Gecko does the same thing once it's given xhtml. only it's a
bit more picky. You have to use the xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
if your going to get any styling action.
Alan Trick
Kornel Lesinski wrote:
On
Thu, 07 Apr 2005 19:41:16 +0100, Alan Trick
[EMAIL PROTEC
ot; header like this.
Otherwise IE tries to save your pages instead of view them.
Alan Trick
Townson, Chris wrote:
In both Mozilla
and Opera, I found that what was crucial was that the server (Apache,
in this instance) was configured to deliver the file as
application/xhtml+xml (+
I'm just curious if any popular browser would display this page properly
http://www.tarunz.org/~vassilii/html-is-an-sgml-dtd.html
I though Moz would, but it disapointed me.
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Hi,
From what I can tell, there's no reall way embed fonts, apart from
image or flash replacement. All we have is the Microsoft propriety-ware
and something that was released by Bitstream but abandoned because
Bitstream would not open-source it. Too bad.
Alan Trick
tomcask o_o wrote:
I
Tom Livingston wrote:
On Thu, 07 Apr 2005 14:41:16 -0400, Alan Trick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm just curious if any popular browser would display this page properly
http://www.tarunz.org/~vassilii/html-is-an-sgml-dtd.html
I though Moz would, but it disapointed me
Neerav wrote:
Looks nice, wish I could afford it :-)
The only 2 small problems I see are caused by the standard text size
being too small, so I choose medium size text (in Firefox 1.0 Win
2000 1024x768) and:
1. Making your African Dreams a Reality! is overlapped by Lodges
Hotels
2. Terms
Yes, I've encountered that as well. I think It's interesting that it
blocks javascript on your own computer, but will gleefully accept it
(and activeX objects and whatnot) from the internet (because we all know
who how safe the internet is). I guess it's just one of those
'undocumented
to slow down?
-Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
.
for example: input{color:_expression_(this.type=="button"?'red':'black');}
for input[type="button"]{color:
red;}.
Alan Trick
tee wrote:
Yes Sir!
And thanks million for the fix. Came up a quick copy and paste test page. It
works beautifully. Will study your code thoroughly lately tonight to make
sure I understand everything.
http://www.lotusseeds.com/tryagain_michael.html
Looks nice,
Maybe you've already thought of
Sorry, I don't have a Mac, so I can't help you in that department, but I
tested it in my versions of Firefox (1.0.2 nightly) and the menus go
down, but they won't go up again (at least I couldn't figure out how to
do it).
Alan Trick
Richard Czeiger wrote:
Let's combine a whole bunch
me hell and I was wondering if anyone has any resorces on how to make
absolute positioning work properly in IE.
The design is at http://cgemery.com/new/
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http
11:33:53 -0400, Alan Trick
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Disclamer: this was /not/ my idea, the companies graphic designer
make me do it :-P
The graphics designer at my company has a thing against pages that
are larger/smaller than the viewport. As much as I fell this is
total nonsense I've
' in the subject. I think it
would do a good amount to stem the amount of inavertent spam.
Thanks,
Alan Trick
' in the subject. I think it
would do a good amount to stem the amount of inavertent spam.
Thanks,
Alan Trick
I've wondered about this one as well, my guess is that
1. they figured the attributes were to important to drop in
the event of non-css user agents,
or more likely
2. they didn't change it because xhtml1.x was really not
much more than a reformulation of html into xml. To get real xhtml we
This is certainly valid code and as far as I know, it is accepted across
modern browsers. I've used it quite a lot and have never had any
trouble with it. I find it quite useful.
Alan Trick
Stevio wrote:
From what I understand, if you want to apply multiple classes to the one
element, you do
is an appropriate use for this. Using
print css's only have to take away from what's normally on the page.
Alan Trick
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Stevio
wrote:
How do you handle the situation of hidden
elements becoming displayed when the normal stylesheet is not used? Is
this a problem that concerns you
Hi,
There are several advatages to using list-style-image
you can click on the image to select the list item
it's slightly simpler
you can still have another background-image on the element
IMHO, the bullet as background image is still better though because of
buggy css support.
Alan
Yes, they would wrap (as in not whitespace:pre). Using a line /
element isn't ideal, but might be my only resort
In a perfect world that supported css2 properly would this work?
?xml version=1.0 encoding=utf-8?
poem xmlns=http://some.name.space;
line id='1' /Class aptent taciti sociosqu
. Of course in this situation
you'd probably be better of ignoring the q's and just using quotation
marks, but in my situation that's not really possible. I /have /to
include both the strucutral markup and the content, any suggestions?
Alan Trick
But the whole point of it is to have the data properly formated in an
xml document so I can do fun stuff with xsl and stylesheets :). Line
breaks won't cut it.
Alan Trick
Rob Mientjes wrote:
On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:26:47 -0500, Alan Trick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consider the following lines
here's the quickest fix:
on div#rhs h2, change
margin-left: 201px;
to
margin:0 0 0 201px;
It works on IE and Firefox/win, so it should work on Camino and probably
Safari too.
Alan Trick
Tony Lim wrote:
I'm having trouble with http://www.outdoorinsights.com.au appears ok
on IE on a pc
Does anyone know what is allowed to be nested under a list (ul,ol,dl)
in XHTML? I read one resource, but all it said is that ul
and ol require 1 li, and dl
requires at least one dt, and one dl.
Alan Trick
Definitly,
There are a /lot /of things you find in th specs that are overlooked
elsewhere. The DOM specs are about the only descent easy-to-download
reference I've seen on DOM, I'd be lost without them.
Alan Trick
diona kidd wrote:
Chris,
I'm finding a great value in reading the w3c specs while
I just found you that the style attribute is depreciated in xhtml 1.1.
Does this mean that it will eventually be obolete? If so, what do they
expect us to do for inline styles because it doesn't always make sense
to have everything in an external style sheet.
Alan Trick
='color:#123'], that is quite difficult to do
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
look some other way.
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
instead of DOCUMENT_NODE or 9? I used
if(aNode.tagName){ ...} to achive the required result, but it's a hack
and I want to know what's wrong with nodeType?
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http
I don't know what the problem was, but I copied Gez's code and it
started working, O:-) . Possibly just a spelling error or a missing a '
or one = instead of two.
Thanks,
Alan
Ben Curtis wrote:
I was tying to use nodeType to make sure that a node was an element
in my javascript, but it wasn't
, but is there some other way to achive this? I can't make them
inline elements because then i'll lose the fixed height and width, and
if I make them display:block then they won't line up in the rows.
Alan Trick
**
The discussion list for http
Here's a way that would work on most browsers. The middlestuff div isn't
mandatory, but it is usefull if you want to have a background, if you
don't use middlestuff then you'll have to use #footer{clear:both} .
HTML:
div id='header'/div
div id='middlestuff'
div id='leftbar'/div
div
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo
