Re: [WSG] Was given a shocker this week ...

2009-04-06 Thread Geoff Deering
Geez, if only I was so lucky to get such an easy project... this is project from heaven compared to most of what comes my way Geoff Mike Kear said the following on 7/04/2009 2:42 AM: You might be amused to learn about the site I was given to rebuild this week. It was built by a

Re: [WSG] Website Directory Structure - Best Practice

2006-03-18 Thread Geoff Deering
to discuss usability issues with standards based developers on this list, but maybe that is a topic for another list or forum. Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail

Re: [WSG] .net question

2006-03-16 Thread Geoff Deering
kvnmcwebn wrote: hello, i just went to a lot of trouble style a form, fieldsets, legends and all. The visual studio programmer whos taking over the next phase says it will be coverted into tables. we can't control database content all we can do is contain it that was his argument. why

Re: [WSG] Do you still support 4.0 browsers?

2006-02-27 Thread Geoff Deering
implementation, but your design may degrade gracefully on older browsers. The content should still be accessible. -- Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail

Re: [WSG] AIMIA Awards

2006-02-27 Thread Geoff Deering
Kat wrote: Gday, I find this list filled with dynamic, inspirational people. I come away being motivated and energised. I love youse guys. :) Today, I came across AIMIA (Australian Interactive Media Industry Association - http://www.aimia.com.au/) that are having their 12th Annual AIMIA

Re: [WSG] Converting the heathen: never again

2006-02-26 Thread Geoff Deering
to be a fundamental overhaul of the approach and system, you are basically told to STFU by everyone, not because of lack of credibility of your argument, but because it is stepping on too many toes. There is more than simple reasoning at play here. -- Geoff Deering - Geoff

Re: [WSG] Converting the heathen: never again

2006-02-26 Thread Geoff Deering
Lea de Groot wrote: On 27/02/2006, at 4:08 PM, Ben Buchanan wrote: Not to mention the fact that the people who implemented those bohemoths can't always separate standards advice from personal vilification - no matter how polite, rational, independently verfiable... I think its important

[WSG] CSS Liquid Design Header

2006-02-22 Thread Geoff Deering
Hi, Can any one point me to a good example of how to do a css header with a background image 100% wide, while having two distinct images on the far left and right and they behave in a liquid manner as the browser window is resized, so that both images maintain being far left and far right.

Re: [WSG] CSS Liquid Design Header

2006-02-22 Thread Geoff Deering
russ - maxdesign wrote: Do you mean like this? http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/liquid-background/ Russ I wish it was that simple. I need something like #headerbanner { color: ; background: #1C3959 url(/images/banner.jpg) repeat-x top; display: block; height:

Re: [WSG] CSS Liquid Design Header

2006-02-22 Thread Geoff Deering
Charles Eaton wrote: On Feb 22, 2006, at 4:50 AM, Geoff Deering wrote: I wish it was that simple. I need something like How's this: http://www.eatons.net/test2/test3/index.html Note: Float in your setup worked against the nature order of how computers read code, top down - left

Re: [WSG] CSS Liquid Design Header

2006-02-22 Thread Geoff Deering
Tom Livingston wrote: On 2/22/06 5:04 AM, Geoff Deering [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can any one point me to a good example of how to do a css header with a background image 100% wide, while having two distinct images on the far left and right and they behave in a liquid manner as the browser

[WSG] Feedback on ISO Standard Version of Access For All Metadata

2006-02-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Original Message Subject:reminder about new standard... Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 23:12:50 -0700 From: ozewai [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: ozewai [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mailing List Information, including unsubscription instructions are

Re: [WSG] Google and HTML5

2006-01-25 Thread Geoff Deering
the presentation structure. (IMHO) I'd prefer to see a direct jump into the xml world (which would drag the soupsayers into the standards world). Maybe it's time for a better semantic language. Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list

Re: [WSG] Correct MIME types for non-standard file formats

2006-01-23 Thread Geoff Deering
Peter Levan wrote: Is there a good reference site that lists correct MIME types for various file formats? or is there a general rule to follow for non-standard file types? Specifically I'd like to know what MIME type should be used for SPSS portable (.por) files and in the past I've seen

Re: [WSG] what cms system

2006-01-18 Thread Geoff Deering
Romeo-Adrian Cioaba wrote: try joomla.org http://joomla.org. Joomla is the best open source CMS in the web. i'm working with it for over 1 year and all my clients were happy with it :) Does it handle standards based templates okay now? It used to insert it's own code in the Mambo days.

Re: [WSG] CSS Driven?

2005-12-12 Thread Geoff Deering
russ - maxdesign wrote: I don't know about anyone else but I often use angry mobs to control my web pages - though it is hard to get them to exhibit blind hate. :) Russ Could I please request a tutorial on this method please Russ... - Geoff

Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-10 Thread Geoff Deering
Lea de Groot wrote: On 10/12/2005, at 1:53 PM, Brian Cummiskey wrote: I wonder how many visits google gets in a day... Probably in the billions - plenty of people have it as their homepage. Of course, there'd be a lot of caching happening... Lea

Re: [WSG] *Why* doesn't Google validate? was New logo scheme was talking points for standards

2005-12-10 Thread Geoff Deering
have a position of authority. The only way to do it (so far) is to lead by example, and when there is enough evidence of good standards design implementation, then these large organisations may be willing to adapt best of practices. Geoff Deering

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards

2005-12-03 Thread Geoff Deering
cut down version of TopStyle Pro (http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/tslite/) Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting

Re: [WSG] Mambo Accessibility

2005-12-02 Thread Geoff Deering
to work with them on that. So I think there's the opportunity to work with and provide feedback to bring these products up to a standard where we can maybe*enjoy* good web content management tools. -- Geoff Deering ** The discussion

Re: [WSG] Standards and Aesthetics

2005-12-01 Thread Geoff Deering
://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/benefits/ http://www.webstandards.org/learn/reference/web_standards_for_business.html etc, etc. --- Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http

Re: [WSG] Standards and Aesthetics

2005-12-01 Thread Geoff Deering
to live in the countryside, no broadband, it's a good reminder just how frustrating some sites can be to use on dialup, a frustration rarely experienced with sites properly implementing standards. Geoff Deering

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-18 Thread Geoff Deering
. --- Geoff Deering ** 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] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-18 Thread Geoff Deering
important it is an issue the both UAAG and WaSP should drive home to user agent developers. - Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-17 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering Okay, so if this was implemented in user agents, what would be your educated estimate of percentage of users who would configure this and therefore avoid this problem of interpreting the incorrect state of form controls? I'd estimate

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-17 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering I'd estimate it to be roughly the same as the percentage of users that have reconfigured their OS to use different default colours which would make them get confused by *judiciously* styled form controls. And what percentage

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-16 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering Secondly, by this recommendation you are actually addressing the flip side of the problem I am trying to address. The case you are addressing here is 1) A recommendation of how to deal with styles that may conflict with a form element

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-16 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: No, I don't feel we are. This recommendation does not address the problems raised by this specific issue, according to my understanding. So I would very much appreciate if you could explain in thorough technical detail and functionality how

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-15 Thread Geoff Deering
knowledge that is here, but it would be a challenge just to structure it. -- Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-15 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering The problem is that web designers are now implementing designs that convey meaning to form controls, that they are not intending to imply in their design, Which, again, is a sign of a bad designer, and a problem that should be solved

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-15 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: How do you know what device configuration is receiving your design? Because if you do not, and cannot be absolutely sure your design is not clashing with this principle, you cannot *ensure* you have succeeded. But that is true of pretty much

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: With all due respects this is the way default graphical user interface on operating systems are designed to function. From page 158 of The Windows Interface Guidelines for Software Design; But we're talking about

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
Hassan Schroeder wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: This also leads to another problem, in that if users configure their operating system to a custom scheme, unwittingly the web designer may be indicating to the user that a field may be read only even if it is not grey. How does the designer

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: So I cannot see how your argument applies, to me, it doesn't stand up. A designer should not implement a design element where their design falsely indicates to the user that the form control is in another state than it is actually

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: You find these types of web environments mostly on intranets. For a lot of people in large organisations, these are primary interfaces they have to work with. To neglect to address this issue correctly could easily impact the integrity of data

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
of communication of the true state of the interface, the designer has failed to provide the correct interface. -- Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
in their design, and I am seeing this spreading at a rapid rate, and before to long, this will degrade the user experience because of purely visual design degrading the inherent meaning of a standard interface between user and form element state. -- Geoff Deering

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
them but not today could be useful to someone. Cheers, Rebecca Yes, that's it, in the given context, it has implicit meaning, given the data set it is being applied too. --- Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-14 Thread Geoff Deering
data set, as can be the case, then I think that is a better option. But it comes to money, try convincing the web manager, the Ex Director of It and all the rest of them... Good luck. --- Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
holders are not good usability, because the forms themselves should be designed well enough to represent the data sets required. I think it can add to all sorts of cognitive problems in complex screens. Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Jonathan O'Donnell wrote: Leaving it there can be a problem. I have seen a demonstration (at a Melbourne WSG meeting, no less) where the agent placed the cursor at the end of the place-holding text without reading it. There is a real danger that the user will enter text without knowing

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
there is a lot of read only data, then they will be confused by this because this type of design breaks the standard by which GUI's function. If this type of design continues, it will only confuse users more. -- Geoff Deering

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
. It is a much better practice to group all these fields together. Not only is it better accessibility practice, I feel it offers better usability by design. -- Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Derek Featherstone wrote: On 11/14/05, Geoff Deering wrote: Why can't the braille software detect an empty form element and inform the user it requires data? Is this an authoring tool problem or a problem with the way standards are prescribed? Agreed, Geoff. We really do need

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Bert Doorn wrote: Geoff, I know exactly what you mean with the greyed out fields. Came across it myself only yesterday - a form where all inputs had a grey background. It wasn't until I clicked in one of them that I realised the field was not disabled. Yes, someone please, who writes for

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: *Another* thing I see that is happening in design a lot lately is that input fields are in greyed background by design, not function. What this is telling the user is that that field is *read only*. That is the standard way operating systems

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Derek Featherstone wrote: Agreed. Putting them after *visually* and leaving them before in source order, and as part of the label can be really useful - its semantically meaningful, can be emphasized (using label em /em/label) as shown in the second example on that page is useful. You

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: I think it is quite simple, don't use any scale of grey at all. Grey is reserved for meaning *read only*. With all due respect, that sounds a tad too draconian for my tastes...and it's exactly the kind of talk that will make web *designers

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: This makes kind of good argument for *not* styling form inputs at all, and leave it to the OS. On most of my OS X browsers, disabled form fields are not really greyed out, but rather use opacity reduction to indicate read-only. Philippe --- I agree with this

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Terrence Wood wrote: Philippe Wittenbergh said: This makes kind of good argument for *not* styling form inputs at all, and leave it to the OS. On most of my OS X browsers, disabled form fields are not really greyed out, but rather use opacity reduction to indicate read-only. A quick

Re: [WSG] Accessibility: Default placeholders

2005-11-13 Thread Geoff Deering
Graham Cook wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: Mandatory data fields, Required data, fields that require correct data after validation should all be grouped together with a *fieldsetlegend*. This informs all users of the requirements of that data. Leave fields that do not meet this criteria outside

Re: [WSG] Naked metadata

2005-11-05 Thread Geoff Deering
as possible, because most users are just not interested in this level of site QA, unless it is an important component of the job. Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail

Re: [WSG] Avoiding the evil br

2005-10-09 Thread Geoff Deering
Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote: Hi Hope, There is nothing evil about the br element unless one is using it for visual effect. In your example, you are using br correctly. For addresses, you might want to use the address element instead of p. Regards, -Vlad http://xstandard.com I

Re: [WSG] Avoiding the evil br

2005-10-09 Thread Geoff Deering
Mordechai Peller wrote: Graham Cook wrote: If BR is good enough for W3C, it's good enough for me. Refer: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/address.html Sure, back in March 1995 when HTML 3.0 was released as a recommendation. It hasn't changed.

Re: [WSG] Font-size em and reseting within

2005-08-25 Thread Geoff Deering
Lea de Groot wrote: On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:51:00 -0700, Janelle Clemens wrote: If you are using em with font-size is there is a way to clear the font-size of a box element (stop the inheritance)? No, not really. I normally get around this by only setting font-size in two places, as

Re: [WSG] Font-size em and reseting within

2005-08-25 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: I'm just wondering how people handle the IE text resizing problem, where IE handles percentages much more accurately than em? You can safely use ems as long as your highest font size is something else, like %. For instance, as long as you have

Re: [WSG] Accessibility, the possibilities

2005-08-24 Thread Geoff Deering
Stuart Sherwood wrote: Are any of the validation tools: Bobby, Cynthiasays, Watchfire...more respected then the others? Regards, Stuart. You can use any of these, and all of them, but you should combine them with your own knowledge base and common sense. I also use Marc Gueury's HTML

Re: [WSG] Accessibility, the possibilities

2005-08-23 Thread Geoff Deering
Stuart Sherwood wrote: Hi All, First, I'd just like to check I understand something correctly. Validation for WAI AAA = WCAG 1.0 Priority 3. Is this correct? Ok, we can validate for: * W3C HTML/XHTML * CSS * WAI * Section 508 And I've recently learnt about accessibility checks

Re: Staying on topic (was RE: [WSG] Accessibility, the possibilities)

2005-08-23 Thread Geoff Deering
John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote: There are in fact checkpoints under all three Priorities which require brain intervention - they simply cannot be tested mechanically. Try running a page through something like Cynthia says (http://www.cynthiasays.com) will quickly show you what needs to be

Re: Staying on topic (was RE: [WSG] Accessibility, the possibilities)

2005-08-23 Thread Geoff Deering
John Foliot - WATS.ca wrote: There are in fact checkpoints under all three Priorities which require brain intervention - they simply cannot be tested mechanically. Try running a page through something like Cynthia says (http://www.cynthiasays.com) will quickly show you what needs to be

[WSG] Evaluating Web Sites for Accessibility with Firefox (article on Chris Pederick's FF ext Web Developer toolbar)

2005-08-23 Thread Geoff Deering
. -- Geoff Deering ** 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] Longhorn Avalon - seismic shift for web standards?

2005-07-15 Thread Geoff Deering
offered as a web standards approach as opposed to tag soup will always offer superior advantages when do well. Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm

Re: [WSG] HTML Codes - Characters and symbols

2005-07-12 Thread Geoff Deering
is stuffed into your brain, you can use something like Tidy (http://tidy.sourceforge.net/) to do these conversions for you. Many good web tools have a tidy interface, you just have to make sure you keep up to date with the most recent version of Tidy. Regards Geoff Deering

Re: [WSG] help or web standards group?

2005-07-11 Thread Geoff Deering
Lea de Groot wrote: On Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:26:22 +1000, Richard Czeiger wrote: Perhaps there should be two lists - one for discussing standards/accessibility/best practice and one for how do I fix my float/site check please. Having multiple lists also starts lots of flame threads on

Re: [WSG] help or web standards group?

2005-07-11 Thread Geoff Deering
Jason Foss wrote: If I can chip in too - I don't have a problem with newbie posts, nor more advanced posts. But I don't even open Help Needed type subject lines. A descriptive subject line is all that's needed; you can quickly decide if you want to read or get involved in the thread. My 2c,

Re: [WSG] help or web standards group?

2005-07-11 Thread Geoff Deering
Joshua Street wrote: There's a minor problem with this, though I agree with your core argument. Newbie posts requesting site reviews can't very easily bear a descriptive subject line when all they want is advice on semantics/markup and best practises. There isn't a core problem they want

[WSG] Call for Review: Working Draft of WCAG 2.0

2005-07-01 Thread Geoff Deering
Apologies for cross posting, but here's your chance to provide feedback on the W3C WCAG 2.0 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2005JulSep/.html Regards Geoff ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See

Re: [WSG] Dumbing Down Validation in WCAG

2005-06-20 Thread Geoff Deering
letter of protest written or individual voice their public concern over this to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some

Re: [WSG] small and big : accessibility usage?

2005-06-15 Thread Geoff Deering
, which isn't a true semantic markup, it's presentational. I like Tim Bray's discussion on Descriptive markup as opposed to Semantic markup. http://www.tbray.org/ongoing/When/200x/2003/04/09/SemanticMarkup Geoff Deering ** The discussion

Re: [WSG] Character encoding (HTML Tidy)

2005-06-05 Thread Geoff Deering
Gene Falck wrote: Tidy is one of the programs I have been thinking of getting, so I would like to hear about any bugs and bug fixes. Regards, Gene Falck Tidy has evolved from it's beginning with Dave Raggett. Like many tools, it's great when you learn how to use it, and to work with

Re: [WSG] Character encoding

2005-06-04 Thread Geoff Deering
Matt Thommes wrote: What benefits or problems avoided do you perceive by doing this and what other characters are you escaping? Lea, I'm not sure why I always escape the dash - perhaps because I can??? :) I am assuming the dash will someday cause me problems, so I just escape it now, to

[WSG] FYI: Web Accessibility Engineer position open at W3C/WAI

2005-06-02 Thread Geoff Deering
From memory, this position has come up time and time again over many years. I don't know if it has ever been filled. Original Message Subject:Web Accessibility Engineer position open at W3C/WAI Resent-Date:Thu, 02 Jun 2005 03:52:57 + Resent-From:[EMAIL

[WSG] EDS embracing Web Standards

2005-05-25 Thread Geoff Deering
Had cause to visit the EDS.com web site tonight. I used to work for them years ago. They had one of those absolutely horrible corporate sites last time I visited, but shock horror... http://www.eds.com/site/standards.aspx AMAZING. Regards Geoff Deering

Re: [WSG] best way to approach markup of an address

2005-05-22 Thread Geoff Deering
Lea de Groot wrote: On Mon, 23 May 2005 06:48:55 +1000, Geoff Deering wrote: The first is correct, but address should only be used when referencing the author of a document. http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html3/address.html http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/html-spec/html-spec_5.html#SEC5.5.3 It's

Re: [WSG] best way to approach markup of an address

2005-05-22 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: The first is correct, but address should only be used when referencing the author of a document. Arguably, though, if these are the contact details of the company whose site you're on, then it *is* correct (as they would, in the wider sense

Re: [WSG] make poverty history website

2005-05-20 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: And now I just realised that the original question was not about accessibility, but about specifications in general (such as the XHTML/CSS/etc ones). In which case, even more of a reason why the W3C can't release a spec for Flash: it's not their technology. They can't

Re: [WSG] W3C and Flash

2005-05-20 Thread Geoff Deering
encourage them to meet W3C UAAG, so that we can then use them and incorporate them into our web content with full confidence that they meet web standards and accessibility guidelines. Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http

Re: [WSG] make poverty history website

2005-05-20 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering It's actually the other way around, companies and organisation developing technologies are encourage to develop them according to W3C recommendations. That still does not detract from the fact that the Flash format is not a W3C technology

Re: [WSG] make poverty history website

2005-05-20 Thread Geoff Deering
Patrick Lauke wrote: Geoff Deering True, but that does mean that the W3C is in a position to release a spec for the *format*. I can't see what the point is. The W3C has no control over Java or many other technologies that are proprietry or closed, but that does not stop them

Re: [WSG] Playing a sound file - what is the best way?

2005-05-17 Thread Geoff Deering
Mike Foskett wrote: I completely agree, use Flash. I'd say the same for video too, for the same reasons. Why: One solution multiple platforms. Saturation on all computers is over 90%. That's more than any browser. What data is this statistic based on? Regards Geoff Deering

Re: [WSG] Playing a sound file - what is the best way?

2005-05-17 Thread Geoff Deering
Tom Livingston wrote: On Tue, 17 May 2005 14:13:50 -0400, Mike Foskett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Stat based on these figures from Macromedia: I might add that these are merely posted on MM's site. The study was independent. http://www.macromedia.com/software/player_census/flashplayer/ There

Re: [WSG] Playing a sound file - what is the best way?

2005-05-17 Thread Geoff Deering
Kay Smoljak wrote: On 5/18/05, Geoff Deering [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1) I have never come across a browser, which installed with Macromedia Flash pre-installed. IE6 comes with Flash player pre-installed. All versions, or a specific implementation/installation? Geoff

Re: [WSG] Playing a sound file - what is the best way?

2005-05-17 Thread Geoff Deering
Kay Smoljak wrote: On 5/18/05, Geoff Deering [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IE6 comes with Flash player pre-installed. All versions, or a specific implementation/installation? I can't say for sure, but my feeling is that it's all versions. Well, I have installed WinXP (initial

Re: [WSG] mutli language websites

2005-05-16 Thread Geoff Deering
this is hardly ever used, if so, why not? Regards Geoff Deering ** 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] mutli language websites

2005-05-16 Thread Geoff Deering
Robin Berjon wrote: The problem IME is that when you use it you have to also provide a way for the user to pick her language which will override the negotiation (I've been accessing the Web a lot from computers localized in Japanese recently, and they're probably not sending Accept-Language

Re: [WSG] mutli language websites

2005-05-16 Thread Geoff Deering
sam sherlock wrote: I am using ip2couuntry class in PHP to decide the default lanuage. Thanks to Evandro who sent me a link to his site in Portugese and English. The site in question does not use the language attribute as inteneded (as far as I understand) all Lan attributes are set to en for

RE: [WSG] Re: XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11

2005-02-08 Thread Geoff Deering
better user agent support arrives in the future, and the customer requires a redesign, will we be able to leave the HTML/XHTML as is, and just modify the CSS, or will it require an overhaul of both? Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list

RE: [WSG] Re: XHTML Strict alternative to ol start=11

2005-02-08 Thread Geoff Deering
) being more accessible than HTML (and particularly transitional) is a myth. Conscientious coders can use exactly the same approach (tableless etc) in both. Please explain why you would use a transitional DTD where a Strict one is valid and works just as well? Regards, Geoff Deering

[WSG] FW: The list cms@webstandardsgroup.org is a private list

2005-02-02 Thread Geoff Deering
Can someone please clarify what is going on with the CMS list? I've been away for a few months, and off list. I've resubscribed to this one, but get the error/rejection below when I try to subscribe to the CMS list. I emailed info@webboy.net with the problem this morning at 8.45am. No reply.

RE: [WSG] standards and meta tags

2005-02-02 Thread Geoff Deering
-Original Message- From: Patrick Lauke From: designer After looking at the site mentioned by Anthony (relating to standards and local government) I noticed a lot of meta tags on that site [ http://www.salford.gov.uk ] which I haven't seen before [...] Forgive my ignorance

RE: [WSG] about.com's Web standards article

2004-10-10 Thread Geoff Deering
Back about a year ago about.com were using Movable Type for all there sites. So they should be in complete control of their code. If they wanted to save money on bandwidth why don't they gzip up all their pages and configure the server to send those to user agents who handle them, which, I think,

[WSG] Mac Tools Kit for Web Standards Developer

2004-10-08 Thread Geoff Deering
. On Windows I mainly use TopStylePro. Appreciate any Mac software tips for standards based development - Regards Geoff Deering ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some

RE: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?

2004-10-08 Thread Geoff Deering
Paul Connolley wrote: Geoff Deering wrote: I am talking about CSS applied to HTML and the rendering of the CSS as applied to the parsing of the document. But still, strictly speaking, an XML based document is bound to be more semantically correct because it is well formed

RE: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?

2004-10-08 Thread Geoff Deering
are dumb, it's just that for all the content out there, there are only small portions of it that can be stored and analysed semantically, so there is not much point in doing that regarding ROI. And I don't agree with a lot of the way the W3C are handling the semantic web. - Geoff Deering Dean

RE: [WSG] Re: Is XHTML harmful?

2004-10-08 Thread Geoff Deering
From:Of Alan Milnes Ian Hickson is _not_ saying XHTML is harmful, he is saying that serving up XHTML with the wrong MIME type is bad. I've read the article and what I don't understand is that if it is so bad why is it acceptable to the Validator? I write my pages in XHTML with a XHTML

RE: [WSG] Mac Tools Kit for Web Standards Developer

2004-10-08 Thread Geoff Deering
From: Kristof Rutten Hi Geoff, I've 'switchted' sides in March of this year and haven't returned to my old Win-platofrm ;) Yes, I suspect it could happen to me too, especially when you have the best of both worlds; Mac front end, and *nix backend, although I really do like GNOME and KDE.

RE: [WSG] Mac Tools Kit for Web Standards Developer

2004-10-08 Thread Geoff Deering
I have a 19 and 21 for development, so I'll just KVM the iBook (can't afford a Powerbook) Thanks Upon a little test run, the live preview of the code (literally 'as you type') is neat. This looks like it might be a pain for a small screen though. I have a 17 Studio Display, and i wasn't fond

RE: [WSG] Mac Tools Kit for Web Standards Developer

2004-10-08 Thread Geoff Deering
From: Andy Budd Not forgetting Style Master http://www.westciv.com/style_master/ Andy Budd Yeah, I was waiting for that one to come up. Thanks Geoff ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See

RE: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?

2004-10-07 Thread Geoff Deering
Chris Bentley wrote: Are there any parsers out there you explicitly trust to get it right every time? I don't. I know of one, http://validator.w3.org/. Are you say though that User Agents are generally better/fast at parsing/rendering valid XHTML than they are valid HTML? No, that is

RE: [WSG] Is XHTML harmful?

2004-10-06 Thread Geoff Deering
I think there are valid arguments for both sides of this. This is also where I agree with the approach of the Apache/Cocoon advocates in that you serve up the solution which be suits the user agent. As standards developers we are working in an imperfect world and it's what frustrates us all.

  1   2   >