RE: [WSG] TARGET in 4.01 Strict

2006-02-15 Thread Jona Decker
Lachlan Hunt wrote:


For what reason are they annoying?  You can't just say something is
annoying because you think something else is better, you have explain
what it is about it that is annoying, and perhaps the issue could be
addressed to improve the method without resorting to popups.


I'll tell you what I found annoying...and I'm sure I'll get pounded for
pointing this out. If the viewport isn't the right size you do not see
this expanded text. So you click on the help question mark, and
seemingly nothing happens. 

I had a captive audience when this discussion started...my visiting
Mother. One of those senior users who isn't particularly savvy. I
fired up a non-maximized window on my laptop, experienced it for myself,
and asked her to take a look at the page.

She was absolutely flummoxed by the invisibility of the help text, and
presumed something was broken. 

The first time she opened a popup, awhile back, she was surprised. She
was surprised by just about everything, to be frank. She learned from
her first popup. But her expectation, when she clicks on help, is for
*something* to happen. With the viewport the wrong size, it does not
with this method.

Jona


**
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] .htm include file into another .htm

2006-01-18 Thread Jona Decker
You wrote:


Using standards, which is the best way to achieve this:

1.   !--#include virtual=/included.htm --

2.   !--#include virtual=included.htm --

3.   !--#include file=included.html --


I don't think the way you include has anything to do with standards.
*What* you include does...that is, whatever you include will be rendered
by the server when the page is requested, and delivered to the browser. 

If the contents of your include are not valid, your page will not be
valid. And if you're a purist, you'll want to put the include call flush
left, and maintain your indents within the include file, so that the
generated code looks pretty too. :)

As to which is more correct? It depends on the server. Apache prefers
the virtual setting, while file is more typical for IIS. Relative paths
aren't enabled in IIS6 by default for security reasons. Both are happy
to include things within an include (e.g. include the SSI directive for
current year next to the copyright symbol in a footer include) but IIS
requires asp code to be included as an asp page, so that it is rendered
in the right order.

As has been mentioned, in the right environment you could also use php's
require or include.

But I do agree with the previous poster...the included file isn't (or
shouldn't be) an html file. It should be a text snippet of html with or
without other server directives. If you include an actual html file
complete with header/body elements you'll definitely have problems
validating. Most people use .txt, .inc, .ssi, or .asp* as extensions for
these files.  (*for IIS versions older than 6, because source code would
be shown in the browser if you typed in the include address, but not if
you used .asp)

SSI on Apache:
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/1.3/howto/ssi.html#whataressi

SSI on IIS:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Active_Server_Pages:Basic_ASP_Syntax

Jona
Web Services
MEA
**
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] More on character encoding

2005-11-23 Thread Jona Decker
I am assuming there are other web developers in Exchange environments
that might have some insight into a problem I'm having. It's
standards-related, I promise.

We're a company that utilizes an Exchange server for mail and
scheduling. We have lots of email addresses and lots of email
distribution groups. Our Net Admins have established a naming convention
for distribution groups that enforces a desired sort in Outlook. Here is
a recent example:

%Company Code-Cross-Functional Team (Distribution Group)

My problem mostly revolves around this fairly new cross-functional
team naming convention. You may have noticed the problem already. The
group name starts with a percent sign. That means their email address
starts with a percent sign. If everyone stayed completely within Outlook
for email generation, that'd be just fine...Outlook doesn't care. But
webpages with mailto links that fire up a mail client, even Outlook,
*do*. And cross-functional teams in our company are small enough that
they want to link to their email address in simple mailto links on their
various webpages.

The percent sign is an escape character. On its own, a mail client (even
Outlook) looks two characters beyond the percent sign and tries to
figure out what character you really meant. Since in my case, this is
usually %ME it's outside of the conventions for escaped characters.
Outlook interprets %ME as ?.

I don't believe that using a percent sign in an email address is best
form. But my opinion doesn't matter. I'll need to use standards
published by recognized bodies of knowledge to make my case. The W3C
helps a little, calling a percent sign a reserved character not for use
in URIs. IANA establishes that mailtos are indeed URIs in RFC2368. This
is helpful in establishing that mailto is a URI scheme, but this RFC
also suggests escaping the escape (%25) to make a percent sign. IETF in
its RFC3986 suggests the same thing but reads a little more ominous
about using percents. Gah! Are there any other resources people are
aware of that may help me make this argument using standards rationale?

Jona
**
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 (eCommerce)

2005-08-17 Thread Jona Decker
Thierry Koblentz wrote:


- Is a DL the right markup for the FAQ and Directions pages?


I think a definition list is the most semantically correct markup for an
FAQ. If you look at the w3 documention on lists it says that DLs
...consist of two parts: a term and a description which is pretty
close to the structure of an FAQ/FQA. The definition term is posed as a
question, e.g. What sets the Gold Membership apart from silver or
bronze? and the definition description would answer that, further
defining the term. Maybe that's a stretch but I think it's the best fit
we've got within our toolset. 

I'm not sure a definition list is the best choice for directions because
they have an order by necessity. So I would consider an ordered list,
beaten into submission with style. Normally. BUT the way you are
delivering directions on this site eliminates confusion as to ordering
since you used a narrative style. 

I'm not sure it's any *less* correct than the use of a DL for the FAQ.
After all, you are defining the term store location from 280 and
answering with a definition of place. (It's not that disimilar from a
legal description of land in the U.S., for example Southwest Quarter of
the Southwest Quarter of Section 18, Township 27, Range 16 except a
tract out of the Northwest corner thereof, described to-wit...). That's
*defining* but also directional. Seems like your directions are too.

Jona

**
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] Image Thumnail Advice

2005-07-02 Thread Jona Decker



You wrote:


3. paste the capture into 
PhotoShop
4. Transform/Scale the image from it's 
captured size (760 pixels x 550 pixels) down to a165x 115 pixel 
thumbnail


First, don't use 
transform/scale. Use the Image...Image Size command. It should already be set 
correctlyto 72 dpi, constrain dimensions (checked), resample...bicubic 
(checked). If not, make it so.

Now, resize in 
steps. If you're starting with 760, half it. Now resize again at least once 
more. I'd probably divide the max dimension intothree or 
fourand resize it progressively down.

Next apply an 
Unsharp Mask (Filter...Sharpen...Unsharp Mask). Somewhere between 50 and 100% 
should do the trick. Every once in awhile there is value to sharpening after 
each resize. It depends on the image. You could also use bicubic sharpen but 
honestly I usually see better results with a sharpen only applied on the final 
image.

Alternately, 
if you're trying to include thumbnails of screenshots in a print portfolio (?), 
go toImage...Image Size and change the resolution to 
300.Keepthe constrain dimensions checked, but this time change the 
resample dropdown to"Nearest Neighbor" (checked). This last part will 
avoid anti-aliasing. Key is saving it as a TIF or similar at this 
point...If you "save for web..." you'll end up back at 72 
dpi.

Jona
Web 
Services
MEA


RE: [WSG] Making PDF and Word files accessible

2005-06-03 Thread Jona Decker
Mary Krieger wrote:


If you copy and paste the text into the 'content' part of your standard
page,  the line breaks will show you where the paragraph and headings
are. 
I'm using Homesite so I just select and repeat the similar code ( first
p, then h1, h2 etc) from one end of the document to the other.


Depending on your version of MS Office, copying from displayed text may
bring in a bunch of inline styles. Yes, even pasting into a text
document! Ack!

So, I usually save Word files as plain text (no line breaks) first.

Next I use a good text editor with regular expression searching (I use
TextPad, there are many others) to wrap text chunks in paragraph tags
(e.g. ^is the beginning of a line, $ is the end, \n is carriage return,
etc...)

And last, I do a search and replace for weird apostrophes, quotes,
dashes, etc...


Generally the only thing missing them is the the use of bold and italic
within the text (not part of the heading structure) and any tables or
lists within the text.


If you save as text, you'll still have tabs and funky characters for
lists, which can also be regular expression searched and replaced with
the right tags. I actually create a batch action for each contributor
role that regularly sends me Word documents, which does most of the
standard searches one after another (and in the right order, which I can
screw up if it's been awhile) with the press of a hotkey. This allows me
to include foreign characters for certain contributors, em dashes for
others, different list designators for Macs vs. PCs, etc...

The newest Acrobat (7 Pro) also exports to plain text quite
effectively...not just RTF. It ostensibly offers an html w/css option,
but uses inline styles extensively, so the plain text route is more
efficient.

Jona Decker
Madison, WI USA

**
The discussion list for  http://webstandardsgroup.org/

 See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 for some hints on posting to the list  getting help
**