[WSG] Writing authoritative content
Aaron, I'll try and be as constructive as possible but I have to point out a few things and make some suggestions?! People who read articles, magazines, discuss on boards, are in large, learners. We're all students of the Web but all too often we learn on the advice of others with, what we perceive to be, authority. The contents of this month's issue states: perfect menus, perfect layouts and clean code. Now, may I ask on what authority do you claim to be in a position to write such material? The reason I ask is when I read your post, I checked out your website, www.stageguy.co.uk, blindly hoping for a useful resource but instead I was met with a seriously poor mix of HTML which chokes the validator and makes no sense. Beyond this I checked out your portfolio and even your clients websites share the same poor mix of HTML which makes no logical sense (but somehow renders). Since this is a standards list, I'd hope this would be a bigger priority before imparting your knowledge of CSS, after all, how can you effectively style poor, invalid markup when the markup is the foundation? Apologies is this sounds like a bashing, I don't normally post but it's just I've spent two days with some web designers and I've been (not literally) wringing their necks trying to unlearn authoritative information about markup and style they've read on the web. I hope you see this in the light it was meant for. Don't try to run before you can walk, sort your website out, improve the quality of your clients work and perhaps you'll have great success as an author and we can all read and learn, as I've previously mentioned, we're all students of the Web. Regards, Edward Clarke www.ebizconsultancy.co.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aaron Wheeler Sent: 25 October 2008 18:57 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Font-size inheritance issue? Hi all my name is Aaron and I own the new site cssboard.co.uk I am writing to you all today to see if anyone could help me out with 3 minutes of their time. I am startinga new magazine (FREE) called Css Design it is a magazine designed at reaching the designers of the web world who loved and will only stick to the css standard way of life. In short I am looking for as much help as I can writing the articles ( all adverts go to you and you companies / projects) The themes this month is as follows IN THIS ISSUE The Growth of Gallery Design Competition Sites (Article) How to create the perfect css menu navigation (Tutorial) Where is design heading in 2009(Article) The Perfect Layout (Tutorial) Clean Code (Article) Design Competition - Design a new church site (Prize award of free css bible book) Resources ( A collection of links that will build up as the magazine gets better) 3 - 4 pages of advertising throughout the issue Best CSS Gallery - We will be doing an article on the best css gallery site we can find. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Writing authoritative content
I don't doubt your intentions, the more useful resources there are the more the standards are raised but people will interpret / get led by / take as gospel information they receive when the source of the information is, in their eyes, authoritative. With this comes a responsibility to be factually accurate and be of unquestionable quality. Just look at the UK's current education system for the results of poor teaching, economically unproductive numpties who struggle to spell correctly. I wouldn't worry too much about arguments, let it fall on deaf ears, but do heed knowledge and experience from seasoned coders here, after all, it's something you'll be expecting your readership to do ;) WSG is a very productive list for students of standards so you're definitely in the right place. I wish your magazine every success. Regards, Edward Clarke www.ebizconsultancy.co.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Aaron Wheeler Sent: 25 October 2008 20:40 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Writing authoritative content Edward Sorry but to elaborate further, I found this problem to with so many people offering the true compliant ways to code and not performing and once again blaming the web for their mistakes. I would like to point out this is why I have turned to this site as a means to help out on my magazine to make sure all stuff is compliant. I was going to send an email next saying any articles that are made for my magazine if they were posted in these emails. If when people got a chance could please read and confirm all this. I do not mean to upset people and start arguments which some people would seem want to I just want a magazine that is easy to follow and keeps us to a line with compliant standards. If you have any issues regarding this email please feel free to contact me on the details below. Aaron Wheeler Tel: 01483 860 235 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.stageguy.co.uk *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] Writing authoritative content
Andrew, I'm not sure who those questions were aimed at but does the medium matter if the information is the same? It's the validity of the content that's at question here. Regards, Edward Clarke www.ebizconsultancy.co.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andrew Brown Sent: 25 October 2008 22:16 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Writing authoritative content This isn't a magazine website?, its a physical magazine? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate?
Google is the preferred search engine of use for the majority of users of assistive devices due to its clear and simple layout; another example of the 'religion of the perfection of writing to W3C standards' not always required to deliver accessibility and usability. Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://www.tn38.net http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lea de Groot Sent: 08 December 2005 06:55 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards On 08/12/2005, at 12:54 PM, Paul Bennett wrote: Trolling? Well, it isn't the first thing that occurred to me! I've often wondered why it is that Google doesn't validate. I mean its not as if they were just a couple of errors, and we could all just shake it off - they are no where near validating. Lets just look at the home page (although I'm not aware of any of their other products that are an improvement). 51 errors - *51*! On around the same number of lines of markup! For a company with the motto of 'do no evil', its embarrassing no less, and they should pick up their act. Can anyone think of a single sane reason why their pages are nowhere near compliant? Lea ~ why, yes, I do like changing the subject line ;) -- Lea de Groot Elysian Systems Brisbane Australia ** 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] Re: UK Government Web Accessibility
Hi WSG, Ive just been informed of a BBC article referencing the UK Government and accessibility. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4478702.stm The stats claimed are actually a lot sharper than I'd imagine but I can see why this is the case. My current contract means I provide ecommerce advice to local businesses as well as support and project manage our organisations internet infrastructure, which is an EU and Government funded org. From the business angle, I am promoting web standards from a commercially beneficial point of view as it's the language they want to hear. This works very well as it means I have sent out about 400 local businesses to local internet service providers and they are all demanding a site with a strong specification in terms of accessibility and usability. From the project management angle, I am responsible for delivering a handful of sites that offer event booking, content management, customer relationship management and news delivery system. I sell a specification to the board, the accountants reluctantly agree and it goes to tender. Again, this is great. We have a Government agency with a dedicated budget and a mighty online application they wish to deliver. Here lies the problem, the web design agencies. When either communicating with the board or following up with the businesses, when I take a look at the quotes agencies have provided them with, accessibility is an optional extra or it's the usual yeah, everything we do is accessible. You know it isn't. I also recently had a chat with a local University lecturer about how to address this. Governments are getting websites they are genuinely informed is up to scratch. They are paying for expert advice and being misinformed so who's fault is this? Is an accountant meant to know about W3C validation? I'm fortunate enough to be in a position to do something about it in my home town. The team and I pulled together a web accessibility event which showed practical use of the web with assistive technology. We called on AbilityNet (http://www.abilitynet.org.uk/), East Sussex Disability Association (http://www.esda.org.uk/) and a usability/accessibility consultant Nikki Rae (http://www.webaccessforeveryone.co.uk/) to deliver information to web designers in the town. There was even a query about it in the accessify forum (http://www.accessifyforum.com/viewtopic.php?p=26737) and to answer that, it was because it was subsidised for local businesses and was only funded for Hastings and the Rother District (sorry guys). This has had a massive impact on the town and we (Hastings) are a force in terms of the delivery of web services. I know this is a long winded mail but it's flagging a solution to the problem on a small scale. Create business demand and awareness and then pull the web design industry in for a slap. How do we address the bigger picture though? Micro-perfection of HTML tags and solid CSS design across even the most stubborn of browsers is not financially viable for the majority of the website market. All comments, suggestions or recommendations welcome. I am also about to sign up for another 2 1/2 years as a consultant for this EU organisation and am looking at more ways to reinforce web standards to the wider region (Sussex, UK). I know a few regional list members are around but a heads up would be good. Offline mails welcome to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://www.tn38.net http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom ** 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] javascript and no script -- best practices
There's an article for accessible popups over at
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/popuplinks/
The code you posted has some issues that will need to be dealt with.
thanks for the citehelp/cite with my last question. now i have a
page with javascript opening a new window from a link. the reason for
this is that i want to allow the visitor to close the window and still
be at the site from whence they came. my problem and question is. what
is the best practice for allowing someone to click the link and go to
the site with js disabled?
here's the script:
a href=JavaScript: void(0) onclick=window.open('pagename.htm',
'_blank', 'optionlist')link text/a
hope all of you are having a smashing weekend.
dwain
**
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] ie css rollovers prob
Yes! 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 to
give consistent results. IE has no support for :hover on anything other than
the a tag.
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 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: [WSG] html design - best practices
Without trying to drag this on Ben, I still fail to see the purpose of using the B tag over the SPAN tag and don't genuinely believe I'm declaring my own preference as a standard. If backward compatibility is the only argument then it only goes slightly further back than SPAN so the weight of that isn't sufficient to warrant what, to me, a human, doesn't *seem* logical. SPAN has a greater range of acceptance, past, present and future, than B, as an empty tag to hook a style to, which is the only purpose of this. Non-backwards compatibility of the B tag is screen rendered bold text which may not be the purpose of the class hook, now, or in the future. SPAN is neutral which is what we want. Without turning this into a tit-for-tat, it's hard to resolve because, as you say, it's a debatable subject and one, really, that should be cleared up, whether for my benefit or the rest of the captive audience. Believe me, I'm all for learning and open to suggestions, but unless I get a sound and reasoned argument as to why B is *better* than SPAN, I won't be applying it to any markup I produce. My last word: SPAN, as a neutral hook for adding inline styles, is the recommended logical solution. Time for a cold one I think... ;) I agree fully that this is a debatable topic, with merits (non-CSS backwards compatibility) and liabilities (possibly greater *human* incompatibility). However, I'll always get worked up when people declare their own preference is the standard, and I think it's useful to point out such a fallacy. Such declarations, although well- intentioned, do not help a person struggling to understand the standard. -- ** 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] Semantic Calendar
On Aug 17, 2005, at 8:31 PM, T. R. Valentine wrote: On 17/08/05, Scott Swabey (Lafinboy Productions) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does a calendar (single month) qualify as tabular data, are ordered lists a better fit, or should I be looking at another option? IMO, a calendar is always tabular data. Ahh, tables! Here's my 0.02$ Answer == Calendars should be marked up using tables not lists. Reason == Tables represent tabular data. Tabular data *does not* need a row identifier as data can be legitimately consumed in columnar format. Data in the rows can inherit meaning by the very context they are contained in, i.e. TH, CAPTION and SUMMARY. TH can be used as a row identifier if it is required in order to comprehend the data. CAPTION: March 2005 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 CAPTION: Staff NameAge Gender P. Smith28 Male S. Bloggs 32 Female The above models provide a perfectly clear tabular format and should be marked up as such. As Ben correctly points out, OL is the correct structure of the *data*, but the *data* isn't complete without identifying headers, giving the *data* a second dimension, hence a tabular format, hence TABLE is the correct structure. ** 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] html design - best practices
You are correct, it hasn't been 'officially' deprecated but as visual tags and not logical ones; CSS offers a better long term solution. http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xhtml2-20050527/elements.html seems to agree. Regarding books, if you carry extra [per book] information in the context of the book title then a definition list would suit your needs. CITE would certainly play a part within the list. b is not deprecated, it just has no semantic value and in the fight to get people to markup their content semantically instead of visually, b and i became clear targets. Unfortunately, this means that many people think they should use strong and em when they really should use b and i. It's similar to the people who bend over backwards in order to put tabular data in some sort of floating list construct, just because they think that CSS-styled markup should not have the table tag. ** 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] html design - best practices
I see your point about backward compatibility but B and I aren't
technically, semantically empty. (If that makes sense).
span style=font-weight: normal;Harry Potter/span
makes sense...
b style=font-weight: normal;Harry Potter/b
does not.
B and I being visual tags should be removed from the markup and styled via
SPAN or inherited from its parent element, the styled using CSS. It's a
fundamental aspect of removing presentation from content; something I
believe should fail (but doesn't) the validator on any STRICT DTD check.
Now, that all said, I think that we're on pretty much the same side
on this issue. Edward also points out:
On Aug 16, 2005, at 11:51 PM, Edward Clarke wrote:
You are correct, it hasn't been 'officially' deprecated but as
visual tags
and not logical ones; CSS offers a better long term solution.
When there are only semantically inappropriate tags to use (e.g., the
a tag as the original poster had implemented), then I opt for
semantically empty tags, with a class applied, and the class is
styled. Some opt for the semantically empty span tag; I opt for the
semantically empty b tag. In both cases, they must be styled to suit:
b.bookTitle { font-weight:bold; }
If you treat the b or i tag (or any other valid markup) as
semantically empty, then treat it in your CSS as having no default
style. The only advantage is backwards compatibility with non-CSS
browsers. As a long term solution, one must keep in mind that the
declared doctype is just as much a part of the document as the other
tags in it. Therefore, if I were to convert the doctype to, say,
XHTML 2, then it would be just as easy to use XSLT to convert span
class=bookTitle to something appropriate as to convert b
class=bookTitle to the same thing. If your doctype states XHTML
1.0 Strict, then that's the standard it needs to conform to.
**
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] Site Check: Broadleaf
The problem is youre designing for a technology [DSL], not accessibility. May I suggest a handheld stylesheet to alleviate some of the problem with a large media screen footprint? Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) Sent: 25 July 2005 07:51 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf Mugur, This article only discusses reducing the HTML size which if you take a look at the site is already rather anorexic. Loading an image once, caching it for potentially weeks, and not loading anything other than small HTML pages as they browse the rest of the site seems like the smartest way its going to happen. Basically, unless theres some fancy new way to encode the image, I dont see any point is destroying an otherwise good design that our VCD team has generated for the sake of saving a few seconds once-off. Yes I think 120kb is big (not huge though). If there is a way to make it smaller, feel free to suggest and Ill implement. Otherwise, the speed of an extreme minority of our user base shouldnt restrict how we work. Also, Im not assuming as you suggest we have bandwidth stats from the current broadleaf.com.au site to suggest that narrowband isnt a significant concern. Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mugur Padurean Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 3:48 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf Sorry, but quoting Microsoft page as good design example is not a good ideea. No web page that big IS a good ideea. Maybe this will help you: http://www.stopdesign.com/articles/throwing_tables/ The purpose of the article it's slightly different but it's a very good motivator for small size web pages. Also asuming that your clients will not care or will not be affected by a web page size does not sound to me like a good business atitute. I have no intention to annoy you or to start a rant. It's just just that i'm on ADSL connection ... half the planet away. And big pages load slowly, almost as dial-up (or so it feels). On 7/25/05, Tatham Oddie (Fuel Advance) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Edward, Thanks for your input, however we didn't really consider this a big issue as: most of the target market will be on office internet connections and ADSL is basically a minimum for such people in Australia the image is only downloaded once, and will be reused in the content pages, just with different column layouts because the image is only downloaded once, only the first page hit will be slow and first page hit occurs because users are after something on your site - they are prepared to wait a bit longer to get it; keeping tight page sizes is more critical when moving around a site in which case we're only about 4k total because the image is loaded through CSS, all of the content will be positioned and usable anyway before the background clogs the connection just that a few seconds later the thing will start to look good as well many larger sites are starting to acknowledge all of these points as well: microsoft.com home page is pushing 140k sxc.hu home page is pushing 107k yahoo.com.au home page is pushing 167k ninemsn.com home page is pushing 136k news.com.au home page is pushing 383k Thanks, Tatham Oddie Fuel Advance - Ignite Your Idea www.fueladvance.com From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Edward Clarke Sent: Monday, 25 July 2005 3:08 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf I suspect the 120Kb footprint of the background image is of more concern to most visitors. Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Matthew Vanderhorst Sent: 24 July 2005 17:52 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf The design is very nice but the background image of the tree repeats. It is not noticeable until the resolution goes beyond 1024x768. There were some css validation errors as well (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile="">).
RE: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf
I suspect the 120Kb footprint of the background image is of more concern to most visitors. Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matthew Vanderhorst Sent: 24 July 2005 17:52 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Site Check: Broadleaf The design is very nice but the background image of the tree repeats. It is not noticeable until the resolution goes beyond 1024x768. There were some css validation errors as well (http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile="">).
RE: [WSG] Visual Studio/.net general question
Theres nothing wrong with any of the server side scripting languages if you build the client side output yourself. Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom 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!!!
Re: [WSG] site check please
Re: http://www.tdrake.net/joan/index-liquid.html I think a nice Georgia font would go down well with that template. Edward Clarke ECommerce and Software Consultant TN38 Consulting http://blog.tn38.net Creative Media Centre 17-19 Robertson Street Hastings East Sussex TN34 1HL United Kingdom
RE: [WSG] Two questions: SEO document structure and font resizing
If you mean what
does body{display:none;} do for SEO? then the answer is not very much.
Taking Googlebot and
Slurp as examples, they dont parse CSS or script, they want content
within the HTML and thats it. Most hidden elements, i.e. white text on
white background or display: none; for example contain spammy keywords which
will be parsed and ignored as appropriate.
Rule: write grammatically correct and verbose content
and them search engines will lap it up, regardless of how you present it. Thats
my experience anyway.
--
Eddie.
http://blog.tn38.net/
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
Of Dragan Simonovic
Sent: 20 July 2005 08:39
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Two questions:
SEO document structure and font resizing
And what this mean for
SEO
body, html {display: none!important;} ?
On 6/1/05, David
Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
body, html {display: none!important;}
RE: [WSG] Base tag and the selecting of body text in IE
It's an IE bug/feature. A nuisance I have to admit. The BASE tag though??? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Foskett Sent: 20 July 2005 10:29 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Base tag and the selecting of body text in IE Hi y'all, I've a quick question about the base tag and the selection of body content text. Try selecting body content text on this page in IE6: http://stageaclearn.ngfl.gov.uk/ The site uses a base tag: base href=http://stageaclearn.ngfl.gov.uk/content_files/acl/pages/home.htm; / Yet if the tag is removed the body text becomes selectable. Has anyone come across this issue? Is there a solution? Regards Mike Mike Foskett Web Standards, Accessibility Testing Consultant Multimedia Publishing and Production British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (Becta) Milburn Hill Road, Science Park, Coventry CV4 7JJ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 02476 416994 Ext 3342 [Tuesday - Thursday] Fax: 02476 411410 www.becta.org.uk ** 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] Base tag and the selecting of body text in IE
Not a name exactly but youre entitled to make one up if you wish. Ive had this problem before but a while back. Try: base href="" instead of base href="" / and see how you go. Eddie http://blog.tn38.net/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Mike Foskett Sent: 20 July 2005 15:06 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Base tag and the selecting of body text in IE Ed, do you have a link or a name explaining this IE feature / bug? Regards Mike Mike Foskett Web Standards, Accessibility Testing Consultant Multimedia Publishing and Production British Educational Communications and Technology Agency (Becta) Milburn Hill Road, Science Park, Coventry CV4 7JJ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel: 02476 416994 Ext 3342 [Tuesday - Thursday] Fax: 02476 411410 www.becta.org.uk
RE: [WSG] Two questions: SEO document structure and font resizing
I would like to assume
that if anyone fell for that, someone would give them a slap. ;)
Edward Clarke
ECommerce and Software
Consultant
TN38 Consulting
http://blog.tn38.net
Creative Media Centre
17-19 Robertson Street
Hastings
East Sussex
TN34 1HL
United Kingdom
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Drake, Ted C.
Sent: 20 July 2005 16:20
To: 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'
Subject: RE: [WSG] Two questions:
SEO document structure and font resizing
Wasn't the original css ( * html body
{display;none;} ) meant as a joke to hide all content from IE users?
I would simply hate to see someone plop
that into their code and scratch their head for the next hour trying to figure
out what went wrong.
Ted
what does body{display:none;} do for
SEO? then the answer is not very much.
Taking Googlebot and Slurp as examples, they
don't parse CSS or script, they want content within the HTML and that's it. Most
hidden elements, i.e. white text on white background or display: none; for
example contain spammy keywords which will be parsed and ignored as
appropriate.
Rule: write
grammatically correct and verbose content and them search engines
will lap it up, regardless of how you present it. That's my experience anyway.
--
Eddie.
http://blog.tn38.net/
And what this mean for SEO
body, html {display: none!important;} ?
On
6/1/05, David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
body,
html {display: none!important;}
RE: [WSG] Learning The DOM
Mark's site is useful too. http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/ Eddie. http://blog.tn38.net/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Kennon Sent: 18 July 2005 19:29 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Learning The DOM Hi, As many of you, more skilled than I, carry the burden of spreading good practices, I'm calling upon you for resources for learning the DOM. I've an understanding of Javascript, ECMA-script and ACTIONSCRIPT for FLASH (I know I said the F word). So all that can please direct me to the appropriate URI's CK ___ An ideal is merely the projection, on an enormously enlarged scale, of some aspect of personality. -- Aldus Huxley ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
