Re: [WSG] Facebook downgrading support for IE6

2008-09-02 Thread James Pickering

 Gregorio Espadas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
 I like the IE6Blocker from Chris Coyier, check it out at
 http://css-tricks.com/ie-6-blocker-script/
 
 I made a spanish translation of IE6Blocker, download it from
 http://espadas.com.mx/2008/09/01/bloqueando-internet-explorer-6/
 
 Gregorio Espadas
 http://espadas.com.mx
 
 
 
 On Mon, Sep 1, 2008 at 6:37 PM, Susie Gardner-Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
 
   I came upon this -
  http://www.kryogenix.org/days/2008/08/27/facebook-doesnt-really-support-ie6
 
  If Facebook (or the 'new' Facebook look) is doing this, maybe it will
  really start to move IE6 out the door ...
 
  One can only hope anyway!!
 
  +++
  Susie Gardner-Brown
  blog:  http://susiegb/blogspot.com
  web: http://www.greendoorwebsites.com
 
 
 
 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***

IMO this is very bad idea. Currently 24% of my visitors use MSIE 6.x Browsers.  
 and that represents thousands of users.  I am certainly not going to notify 
them that they cannot access my pages unless they change their Browser of 
choice.  More and and more people this days configure their Browsers (or their 
usage parameters) to suit their viewing preferences -- I think a lot of 
visitors will abandon their visits if those preferences are interfered with.

James
--
Interoperable Web Authoring: http://jp29.org/
Practical Italic Handwriting: http://jp29.org/itdr.htm
Roman Coins of the London Mint: http://jp29.org/plndr.htm
Accessible to People with Disabilities





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] IE6/7 behaviour

2008-06-24 Thread James Pickering
 
 Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
 The combination of declarations you have now is a somewhat new one - to
 me at least. An XML declaration has no place above an HTML DTD in an
 HTML document, and the DTD is incomplete and triggers quirks mode in
 all browsers...
 
 http://gutfeldt.ch/matthias/articles/doctypeswitch/table.html

Indeed, the XML declaration has no place here, and XHTML Markup is being used 
with an HTML 4.01 Transitional (?) Doctype. 

James
--
http://jp29.org/
Semantic Web Page Authoring
Validated: HTML/XHTML/XHTML+RDFa ~ CSS ~ RDF/XML - DC Metadata/RSS Feed




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Mobile phone support of CSS

2008-06-24 Thread James Pickering
 Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
 Hi all,
 
 I'm trying to find a comprehensive list of Mobile phone browsers and
 CSS support. I currently have a Nokia N70 and as far as I can see it
 doesn't support CSS at all. But, perhaps with a stylesheet targeting
 mobile phones it would?!

Hi Paul

I include some information -- accompanied by links -- relating to small screen 
rendering (PDAs, Cell Phones, erc.) on my http://jp29.org/wpointerop.htm page.

James
--
http://jp29.org/
Semantic Web Authoring
Validated: HTML/XHTML/XHTML+RDFa ~ CSS ~ RDF/XML - DC Metadata/RSS Feed




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] html vs. html

2008-06-20 Thread James Pickering

 Alastair Campbell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
.. on Apache at least (and I would assume IIS) you can set the
 mime-type text/html for any file extension, or no file extension. I
 would guess that you can probably set it for a whole directory or
 filepath as well ...

James
--
http://jp29.org/
Semantic Web Page Authoring
...
Validated: HTML/XHTML/XHTML+RDFa ~ CSS ~ RDF/XML - DC Metadata/RSS Feed




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] html vs. html

2008-06-20 Thread James Pickering
Excuse me, on my previous response to  Alastair Campbell I meant to include 
.

Also for  Zeus

James
--
http://jp29.org/
Semantic Web Page Authoring
...
Validated: HTML/XHTML/XHTML+RDFa ~ CSS ~ RDF/XML - DC Metadata/RSS Feed




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] html vs. html

2008-06-18 Thread James Pickering
Alternative to serving XHTML pages via Content Negotiation, I associate (via 
.htaccess) the .htm file extension with HTML  XHTML pages served as content 
MIME type text/html and the .html file extension for XHTML pages served as  
content MIME type application/xhtml+xml. 

James
Semantic Web Page Authoring
http://jp29.org/



 Gregorio Espadas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
 I think the same. Ergo, I always prefered  .html over .htm
 
 Gregorio Espadas
 http://espadas.com.mx
 
 
 On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 11:34 AM, Svip [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  If W3C says so, I cannot see why at all.  Who said a file extension
  should be 3 characters long?  Microsoft!?  Hah, don't make me laugh,
  just because they thought people wouldn't be able to have filenames
  longer than 8 characters and 3 characters for file extensions (known
  as the 8.3 system).  People have later assumed that that is the norm.
  But file types like torrents (.torrent) have proven that it doesn't
  have to be the case.
 
  In my opinion, I prefer .html over .htm, cause the technology is
  called HTML, not HTM, huh?
 
  Regards,
  Svip
 
 
 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 CSS3 - Is it worth using right now?

2008-05-13 Thread James Pickering
From time to time over the past several years I have served web pages as XHTML 
1.0 with content (MIME) type text/html to IE Browsers and with content (MIME) 
type application/xhtml+xml to Browsers that recognize that content type -- via 
Content Negotiation. 

My current Home Page -- http://jp29.org/ -- is served in this manner. I compose 
the great majority of my pages using HTML 4.01 Markup (a few using ISO-HTML) 
and they are naturally served as text/html.

I actually started using Content Negotiation for XHTML documents as an 
experiment to see how the concept worked in practice.

I currently also employ Content Negotiation for my XHTML+RDFa test page -- 
http://jp29.org/rdfaprimerx.php -- there is no Appendix C provision (ala 
XHTML 1.0) for XHTML+RDFa -- if such documents are served as text/html the W3C 
Validator adds the following generic note to the successful validation report 
(quote):

Warning Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type

The document is being served with the text/html Mime Type which is not a 
registered media type for the XHTML + RDFa Document Type. The recommended media 
type for this document is: application/xhtml+xml . The W3C is currently 
serving some of their XHTML+RDFa documents as Content-Type text/html.

James

[


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] RE: Sitemap and accessibility

2008-03-09 Thread James Pickering
There are actually two types or flavors of Site Maps. The first is the type 
that is loaded up to your Web  server and that is used by Search Engines to 
spider   your pages thereby playing a significant role in Page 
rankings. These Site Maps are constructed and formatted according  to strict 
protocols. The Site Map protocol specified by Google: 
http://www.google.com/support/webmasters/bin/answer.py?answer=34575amp;hl=en   
is the classic model.

The second type of Site Map is the one that you load onto your Home page and 
that plays such a prominent role in insuring Web Accessibilty (W3C  
WCA). There is no precise protocol for this type although traditionally such 
Site Maps consist of a Hierarchal list of links to all pages of the site. In 
some cases, depending on the format selected, you can use your Search Engine 
submittal Site Map on your Home page.

James 
Pickering Pages
http://jp29.org/ - XHTML+RDFa (application/xhtml+xml) ~ XHTML 1.0 text/html)
Served via content negotiation according to Browser capability







***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



[WSG] HTML5 Working Draft

2008-01-17 Thread James Pickering
Latest iterations:

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/

Input/Participation is needed - don't miss these opportunities to have your say.

James Pickering
Pickering Pages
http://jp29.org/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Ideas for Corporate Presentation on Web Standards and Semantic Web

2008-01-17 Thread James Pickering
 varun krishnan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
 Hi All,
 
 I work for a company where there are about 1000 employees and We are mainly
 into Web Development.
 
 Im taking a presentation on Web Standards and the Semantic Web next week and
 I want make sure that I put across some really valuable info.
 
 Im a web developer and give a lot of importance to web standards.
 
 can any one you help me with wat i can talk about ?

Hi Varun. Please feel free to use material from my pages:

http://jp29.org/wpointerop.htm (Interoperability)
http://jp29.org/wpowca.htm (Web Content Accessibility)

In the preparation of your presentation -- if you find it appropriate or useful.

James
Pickering Pages: http://jp29.org/
All pages with Validated Markup: http://xrl.us/wdgvalid
Dublin Core Metadata RDF/XML Validation: http://xrl.us/dcmetadata




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Float-less layouts

2008-01-07 Thread James Pickering
A little history relating to floating-box layouts:

http://jp29.org/floatbox.htm

James Pickering
http://jp29.org/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



Re: [WSG] Float-less layouts

2008-01-07 Thread James Pickering
 Geoff Pack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 
 
 Thierry wrote (in the linked article, not his post):
  DIVs are meaningless and cannot represent the structure of a document
 
 Really?
 According to the HTML 3.2 spec, where they first appear:
 DIV elements can be used to structure HTML documents as a hierarchy of
 divisions.
 http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html32#div

Also see the W3C HTML 4.01 Specification:

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/struct/global.html#edef-DIV

James Pickering
Pickering Pages
http://jp29.org/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***