Re: [WSG] search page vallidation
Marvin, I believe someone mentioned it earlier, but removing the br / tags just prior to the /ul tag should resolve the issues that you are having with xhtml validation. Cheers, Matt *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [ADMIN] THREAD CLOSED [WSG] XSLT: looping through ancestors looking for a specific node
I think the crowd has spoken on this one, clearly this thread should remain OPEN. Humblest apologies to Grant for any embarassment but I think that is all mine :) Perhaps using XSLT as a programming language instead of what it should be used for (see Apache Cocoon) has blurred my ability to see Standards even when it hits me in the face. I'll now go back to my corner... Cheers, -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[ADMIN] THREAD CLOSED [WSG] XSLT: looping through ancestors looking for a specific node
Sorry, Grant, this is off topic for this list. Everyone, if you have a response for Grant please send it off list. Cheers, Matt -- Matt Fellows WSG Core Member http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Structuring CSS
Now that's a question to spark debate! Without leaning one way or another there are a number of different approaches you might try. Have you considered CSS frameworks such as Blueprint CSS[1] or the 960 grid system[2]? These approaches help to standardize your CSS by providing the basic page layout with cross-browser compatible, minimal and semantic markup. You are then left to style (bring life to) the page with the content and look and feel. There is also the old-school developer approach where you get a little more freedom. You start by resetting your css [3], then set all of your basic styles and general classes (which probably differ little across sites) and set your site/section/page/page sub-section specific styles. Traditional developers like this approach because they use their own naming conventions, and often can re-use the base css files. I'm guessing this sort of structuring comes at a cost because a number of requests need to be made to the server. You're certainly right with the cost in terms speed, by increasing the number of CSS files, but what about the cost of development time, readability and re-usability? -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ References: [1] - http://code.google.com/p/blueprintcss/ [2] - http://960.gs/ [3] - http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2007/05/01/reset-reloaded/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Should we design for 800x600 screens?
It probably has been asked before - but the answer is likely to change with time (as monitor sizes vary or normalize) so the question is still as relevant as ever. If you were to ask the question to Jakob Nielson, he would say optimize for 1024x768 [1] and provide a liquid content area. But you really need to look at it from a few angles: - Your intended audience i.e. Intranet users most likely won't be viewing your site on their mobiles or Playstations. But users of a social networking site might. - Screen resolution data. i.e. If you expect 95% of your audience to be using 800x600 then there is a compelling reason to optimize for that adapt to user's needs I agree - adapt to user's needs. However, a liquid layout in my opinion does not always offer that. Liquid layouts are generally a good idea, but are not always perfect. For example, how do you create a liquid layout to cater for a mobile and a widescreen plasma? You might try something like Switchy McLayout found at A List Apart [2], but these different mediums really require tailored content. Adapting to the user's needs in this case means providing different content and maybe even a different interface. To clarify my position though - I would agree with Jakob Nielson in the general sense, keeping my audience in mind. But knowing your user's will give you more insight into what you _should_ do. -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ [1] - http://www.useit.com/alertbox/screen_resolution.html [2] - http://www.alistapart.com/articles/switchymclayout *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Link Help please
It should be href=xxx.css not href(xxx.css) -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Marking up company logo
Out of curiosity, is a logo img at the top of the page more semantically correct when wrapped in a p than when it's just on it's own (ie. not wrapped in anything other than, say, a 'header' div)? Easy! A p tag is supposed to hold a paragraph of text. If it is only holding an image, then there is no need for the surrounding p tag. Some people (including myself) feel uncomfortable with the img floating by itself, so wrapping it in a div id=header or something is a nice alternative. -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Conditional styles not being used on first-run
Sounds like IE6 is caching the original stylesheet. This is entirely expected as it increases performance and responsiveness for the user on subsequent page loads. There is no nice way around it. I'm sure you could use JavaScript of some sort to reload the script but i don't think it is worth it. On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 7:53 PM, Steven Workman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone, I'm having a problem with an element I've created for my current project. It's basically a styled rounded-corner box with a title (it looks like a fieldset but is correctly structured HTML). To get all my padding working correctly I'm using conditional styles for IE6, but some users are reporting that they have to refresh their screens (press F5) in IE before the positioning works correctly! Have any of you heard of this before? Is there a way around it? Any recommendations? Many thanks, Steve Workman PA Consulting Group 123 Buckingham Palace Road London SW1W 9SR United Kingdom Direct dial: +44 207 881 3732 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.paconsulting.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li
Shouldn't have to set a height, the line will wrap automatically (unless you specify not to). Thanks, but as I said, that doesn't work in this case because the li is floating. Do the li's have to float? On Sun, May 18, 2008 at 8:49 PM, Darren Lovelock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, but as I said, that doesn't work in this case because the li is floating. Also I think it is dependant on the the li having a set height value which I cant do either. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Stuart Foulstone Sent: 18 May 2008 10:01 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li I seem to remember someone in a previous thread, about similar problem, suggested using, display: table-cell; vertical-align: middle; On Sat, May 17, 2008 3:39 pm, Darren Lovelock wrote: Hi list, I've been trying to find a solution that will allow me to vertically center all the items in a li. The big problems i've got are that the li's are a non-fixed height and are floating to the left. So that kills the negative http://www.jakpsatweb.cz/css/css-vertical-center-solution.html positioning method and the table-cell http://www.w3.org/Style/Examples/007/center#vertical methods that I've found whilst scouring the web. Does anyone know a method that I can use that doesn't involve using tables? Any help will be greatly appreciated! Regards, Darren Lovelock Munky Online Web Design http://www.munkyonline.co.uk http://www.munkyonline.co.uk/ T: +44 (0)20-8816-8893 *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li
lol I think I will leave this one alone, I think i'm making you're job more difficult instead of the other way around! Please do send through your solution when you find it so I can have that 'light bulb' moment. Cheers, -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li
A demo would be helpful, but have you tried something along the lines
of the following:
div id=footer
ul
lia href=/link1Link1/a/li
lia href=/link2Link2/a/li
...
/ul
/div
div#footer{text-align:center;}
div#footer ul li{display:inline;list-style-type:none; }
Cheers,
--
Matt Fellows
http://www.onegeek.com.au/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li
Sorry Darren - it was late an i was tired! Vertical/Horizontal, Left/Right...
I don't think there is a need to do anything too exciting, the
container of the list should just need a text-align:center.
Is this basically what you are after? I have made the div only 300px
wide so you get the wrapping effect which I think is what is causing
the grief.
div.container{text-align:center; width:300px}
div.container ol li{list-style-type:none; }
div class=container
ol
li class=elem
label for=dnameDisplay Name:/label
input type=text id=dname class=tinput /
/li
li class=desc
pInformation about preview box etc. If it is more than two
lines or ## characters link to./p
spana href=learn more/a/span
/li
/ol
/div
The list items will be centered. If you have multiple columns you can
just place them next to each other.
Or am i still missing something?
--
Matt Fellows
http://www.onegeek.com.au/
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Older Browsers
As much as I agree to what your are saying regarding IE5, it is still ignoring the fact that people are using it, albeit a small proportion. If your client absolutely _needs_ it, then you will have to code for it. I think this has already been mentioned but perhaps if you could get a hold of some server logs/analytics, you might be able to see that only .07% (~500 of about 700,000 on our site) actually use MSIE 5.0. Then you can make the argument that it is not worth it. Cheers, Matt -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] accessible client side form validation
I humbly suggest my own: http://www.onegeek.com.au/articles/programming/javascript-form-validation.php:) Completely unobtrusive and requires only valid XHTML. If you have a little bit of JS knowledge you can easily extend the functionality. Cheers, Matt On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 1:38 PM, Casey Farrell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Does anyone know of a free form validation javascript that is reasonably accessible? I realise that no client-side validation will be completely accessible without a server-side backup, but are there any good ones out there? Thanks, Casey. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Floating model: FF counterintuitive
In your example they should all align with each other (given no width constraints) and that's exactly what happens in FF for me. If you want div 1 to be below the others you will need to do something like this: h2 style=float:left;width:300pxheading/h2 div style=float:left;width:200pxdiv two/div div style=float:left;width:300px; clear:bothdiv one/div On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Jens-Uwe Korff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi group, I have a really easy setting: h2 style=float:left;width:300pxheading/h2 div style=float:left;width:300pxdiv one/div div style=float:right;width:200pxdiv two/div When I imagine this I expect the browser to render the two left-floated elements on the left side and the single right-floated div on the right side, aligned with the heading: +---+ ++ |heading| |div2| +---+ || +---+ ++ | div1 | | | +---+ However, FF aligns the right-floated div with the left-floated div and I cannot convice it to align the former with the heading. IE6 and IE7 render it as I intuitively think it should render. Having faith in FF I believe I'm missing something basic to understand why this happens this way. Anybody solved this without introducing a wrapper div for heading and div1? Thanks, Jens The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or attached files. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] WCAG 2 implementation site
Nice work Mike, I quite like the way you've used hr/ to separate the content for non-css and used display:none in the other case, it chunks the content quite well. I also like the way you have not gone with the basic skip to content link and gone with a quick skip to menu, I have been advocating a similar approach that integrates access key's into these menu's as well. Is there a reason for not using 'accesskey' at all? Cheers, Matt On 3/12/08, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: nice job! has the feel of web 2.0. dwain Web 2.0? Am I looking at the wrong site (http://lflegal.com/)? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] WCAG 2 implementation site
Interesting. Thanks Thierry! On 3/12/08, Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Matt Fellows Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 4:33 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] WCAG 2 implementation site I recall reading somewhere that 'accesskey' is often considered more hindrance than benefit because there are no standardised keys for specific functions and it inevitably ends up conflicting with regular browser shortcuts that keyboard users or screenreader users are likely to wish to utilise. I would have to generally agree with that. What makes matters worse is the fact that there is no really good/standard behaviour that browser vendors actually follow in implementing them. I was referring to point 9.5 in http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/#gl-device-independence when I made the comment, and was interested Mike's perspective for not using them in this circumstance. I guess since there are only three links, accesskeys become trivial as they probably won't save any time anyway. I still think there is a case for accesskey's in many circumstances however unpopular they are, lets not forget about mobile access etc. User defined Access Keys may be a solution: http://tjkdesign.com/articles/user_defined_accesskeys.asp -- Regards, Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com *** 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] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field
Interesting indeed!
Actually Tee I was going to pose the same question to the list
following our discussions the other day :) I would like to get it
right in GValidator so the core doesn't need to be modified by clients
such as yourself.
I would like to see the results of reliable and publicly available
research. Does anyone know of any? A quick Google search doesn't turn
up anything overly exciting or empirical.
Maybe we can do some testing of our own?
So there are actually three interrelated things here: The first is the
semantics of the span class=required*/span element, then there
is the usability and accessibility of it's use.
In terms of usability and accessibility, my initial thoughts would be
that given a sufficiently prominant key just before and in close
proximity to the form, that sighted users should have no problem
identifying which form elements need to be filled in. Users with
screen readers however might have a little more trouble with this
approach, so an approach similar to Russ's suggestion seems like the
best approach.
In terms of semantics, w3c says this about the strong element:
The strong element indicates higher importance for its contents than
that of the surrounding content.
I am unsure as to if it is more important that the label? But I can
see a clear benefit for blind users. So what do we do?
Cheers,
Matt
P.S. Although a while away, we do have these sorts of things to look forward to:
* http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-html5-diff-20080122/#new-attributes
* http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/ARIA2.html
On 2/26/08, russ - maxdesign [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't speak for screen readers since I've never used one my self...
But would there be any reason you couldn't do both and please the
client and the screen reader(assuming it does help them)? a simple
strong* First Name/strong
Just something I thought of :)
Interesting discussion. You could also use more meaningful flags like the
word Required instead of * and style this content in red/bold. This
means that everyone, including screen reader users understand the
implications much more clearly (as long as this information is included
inside the label element.
For example:
label for=details-email
Email span class=required(Required)/span:
/label
Or...
label for=details-email
Email strong(Required)/strong:
/label
Then you could easily style it with something like:
label strong (or label span.required)
{
color: red;
font-weight: bold
text-transform: uppercase;
font-size: 85%;
}
You can even position this required content after the input element
using absolute positioning as Derek Featherstone has proposed.
HTH
Russ
***
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] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field
What about using a fieldset with *legend* if the required fields can be grouped together. Because the legend (required fields) would be read aloud before each label. I thought about this, but I think it makes more sense to have related elements grouped together and in most cases not all of these will be required. For example, many forms ask for personal details such as addresses, phone numbers, work details etc. Not all will be mandatory, but it definately makes sense to group these together. I think it might be a little confusing to enter in details out of order, especially if the form is broken over several pages (have I already entered this information?). Cheers, Matt *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field
In some cases that's an excellent solution (what I've been using for a while) but unfortunately power users will dial down verbosity so much that they will quiet legends as well. A blind power user I know told me * is best. He also told me nothing else is needed, but he's a person and that part my be his opinion. For all-around safety, one of these might be best: Thanks Mike that's really interesting. I would argue, based on the anecdotal evidence you've given, that the following legend is superflous and prevents logical grouping. fieldset legendRequired/legend label for=nameName (required) input name=name label for=emailEmail (required) input name=email /fieldset I am definitely leaning toward the following: fieldset legendPersonal Details/legend label for=nameName span class=required(required)/span/label input name=name label for=emailEmail span class=required(required)/span/label input name=email label for=phonePhone/label input name=phone ... /fieldset Giving in to other's suggestions perhaps the span class=required could become strong class=required :) The benefits here are: * Easily scannable for the regular user * Will be read out for screen readers * Semantically intact * Inputs can be grouped logically * No need for annoying legends Does this seem to be a combination of the general consensus? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field
Thanks Mike. I guess I would prefer verbose and have them fill the form out once than have them have them misinterpret and have to fix errors, which I imagine can be tedious using a screen reader. Is this the case? It would be great if you could keep us posted about any feedback you get in March when the site goes live. For the average user however, what I think I will do is run a few simple A\B tests on some of my sites and log the amount of JavaScript errors for each of the different methods described (there seems to be at least three plausible options). It will take some time to get statistical significance however so it might be a while before I have something useful. Cheers, Matt On 2/26/08, Mike at Green-Beast.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Matt, that the following legend is superflous and prevents logical grouping. fieldset legendRequired/legend label for=nameName (required) input name=name label for=emailEmail (required) input name=email /fieldset I agree, actually. With that example (and the image one I gave) using the word required, in the case of a user listening with a setting that reads the legends (default), would make it too verbose. It'd read: Required Name Required Required Email Required Though I guess there'd be no missing it. ;-) The use of the Required legend seems to work well with the asterisk, with its meaning defined in a non-associated label (one with no for attribute). It's a compromise method. I do have one form on a real-deal AAA WCAG 2.0 site I made (to be officially announced Mar. 11-12th) with this specific configuration. It's open now by invite to a few disabled users/testers and a couple of key WCAG 2.0 Editors, and I got more very positive comments about that particular set-up tonight... a few minutes ago actually. fieldset legendPersonal Details/legend label for=nameName span class=required(required)/span/label input name=name That is a solid method for sure, but there's only one problem and that is to *some* users (default settings) it might sound too verbose. Personal Details Name Required Personal Details Email Required Personal Details Phone The problem is not the technique, yours or mine, or any of the other accessible methods. It's the myriad configurations possible that really challenge us. There are so many variables (not even including those of sighted users) that while there are a number of feasible methods, there seems no perfect one-size fits-all answer. It's all a compromise. Mike *** 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] PNG in IE6
If you have Adobe CS, you can try exporting the PNG image as PNG-8.
Cheers,
Matt
http://www.onegeek. http://www.onegeek.com.aucom.auhttp://www.onegeek.com.au
On 2/21/08, Amrinder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
I looked for the working of .png image in internet explorer and found two
articles.
http://webfx.eae.net/dhtml/pngbehavior/pngbehavior.html
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/pngopacity
I tried using 'filter' according to both these articles but can't got a
way.
Following is the HTML code:
div id=mlogo
div id=extradiv1/div !-- Empty div to display logo--
img src=images/logo_header.gif height=54 width=379 alt=A way
back - logo/
div id=extradiv2/div
/div
The css code for #extradiv1 is:
#extradiv1 {
background-image: url(../images/logo.gif);
background-attachment: scroll;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
background-position: center top;
position:relative;
height: 129px;
width: 120px;
filter:
progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.AlphaImageLoader
(src='../image/logo.png',
sizingMethod='scale');
margin: 0 auto;
}
Please help.
Kind Regards,
Amrinder www.awayback.com
***
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] Best Practice to Offer Different Formats of Documents
As Joe said, I also think icons are a great way for users to quickly scan the page and get a sense of what is going on. There is a nice article [1] that can show you how to automatically style links with little icons depending on the extension of the file it points to if you are interested. Cheers, Matt [1] - http://www.askthecssguy.com/2006/12/showing_hyperlink_cues_with_cs_1.html On 2/16/08, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2/16/08, Joe Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Icons also help people make quick choices and allow you to provide the documents in a tabular format when required. Title of This Lengthy Document [PDF ICON] title=download the PDF: Title_of_This_Lengthy_Document [MSWORD ICON] title=download the Word Document: Title_of_This_Lengthy_Document i also put the size of the document next to the link. this way the visitor know what's coming in the download or the view, because to view a pdf it has to be downloaded first and then opened and by notifying the visitor of the size of the document gives them another choice whether to download, view or by pass the document. dwain -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** 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] hello - [OT]
With no offense intended to the list moderators, I feel the usefulness of this mailing list is diminishing due to an increase in irrelevant and lazy postings. The majority of people on this list are genuine web developers, who care for the future of the Web and the place Web Standards has in it. But there seems to be a small number of people who think they can simply post their problems to this list without consulting any other reference. Basic CSS problems, PHP syntax and even spam help are just a sample of some of these questions that can, and should be either found quickly by a number of popular resources or even a quick search in Google. Instead, they lazily exploit the goodwill of many in this list who are kind enough to visit their site and fix their problems. With the number of these increasing there is no wonder why people are leaving this list (and publicly doing so). Out on a limb here - does anybody else feel the same? If so, do you have a suggestion as to how we can better the quality of the list? Matt On 2/15/08, John Hancock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please can this be closed? It's far off any standards related topic. Possibly the only thing I can see as a relevant part of the 'Web 2.0movement' is the abstraction of the presentational information from data on a page, which isn't being discussed here. If posting an off-topic message, please at least mark it as such so the rest of us can hit the delete button without checking it first for relevant information! Kind regards, John Hancock *Identity* *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Joe Ortenzi *Sent:* Friday, 15 February 2008 6:32 PM *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* Re: [WSG] hello That's art, Kat, design is different. And design is a significant part of the web. On Feb 12 2008, at 22:52, Katrina wrote: kevin mcmonagle wrote: yes its a buzzword mostly but from a design standpoint its also a genre. That's an interesting thought. Is Web 2.0 larger than the web itself? Has it become an art movement/period, in the same way as Modernism, Post-Modernism, Humanism, Impressionism, etc? Kat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** Joe Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.joiz.com *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] an accessible question: server-side vs client-side validation
Hi Tee, What John is saying is that AJAX is JavaScript yes, but it can also make calls to the server (using the XMLHttpRequest object) thus it validates using server-side technologies such as PHP. But what is misleading is that validation using AJAX can be disabled quite easily simply by disabling JavaScript rendering a nice big security hole. That is where the true server-side validation must double-check. Actually, as Mike said you can and should use both. Server-side validation makes the user wait, so using JavaScript is a good thing as it is reactive and keeps the user informed as to what is going on. If you are interested, I wrote a small JS library that may be of use to you. It is a plug'n'play like JS file to automagically validate basic forms which is totally unobtrusive and promotes separation of concerns. To add extra fancy AJAX stuff is a matter of overriding a class and implementing your specific needs. I've still got a bit of work to do on it, but you can certainly get an idea. The url is: http://www.onegeek.com.au/articles/programming/javascript-form-validation.php I'd be happy to help you if you need, just shoot us through an email. Cheers, Matt On 2/12/08, Mordechai Peller [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: tee wrote: Hi, I have a question about server-side vs client-side validation. I always use a same PHP form script that works really great and it's server-side validation using condition and requirement, and I like the feature better than client-side's. A website I was working on, client wants client-side validation, something fancy, something Ajax. I like to stick with this form script because it has a great support for anti-spam; I suppose I can turn off the server-side validation if client-side validation is used, but I am concerned with the accessibility issue - I am particular curious how screen readers treat client-side validation. As important as accessibility is, there is an issues many times more important which is relevant to your question: security. Unless you implement sever-side validation (either in addition to client-side, or instead of), neither yours, nor your visitors data is safe. For example, via SQL injection your database can become an open book to a cracker. *** 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] an accessible question: server-side vs client-side validation
Hi Tee, It sure is, I have actually implemented it locally but a bit of testing is needed. It was more a test-of-prinicple kind of thing that actually turned out useful. So we don't move off topic however, I will reply to your email privately about the library instead of the WSG list. Cheers, Matt On 2/13/08, tee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Matt, thank you very much! Your JS library looks very interesting and I certainly will play with it. I see that the radio group has not been implemented, is this something coming out soon? The web form has radio buttons with multi-selection options. Cheers, tee On Feb 12, 2008, at 2:12 AM, Matt Fellows wrote: Hi Tee, What John is saying is that AJAX is JavaScript yes, but it can also make calls to the server (using the XMLHttpRequest object) thus it validates using server-side technologies such as PHP. But what is misleading is that validation using AJAX can be disabled quite easily simply by disabling JavaScript rendering a nice big security hole. That is where the true server-side validation must double-check. If you are interested, I wrote a small JS library that may be of use to you. It is a plug'n'play like JS file to automagically validate basic forms which is totally unobtrusive and promotes separation of concerns. To add extra fancy AJAX stuff is a matter of overriding a class and implementing your specific needs. I've still got a bit of work to do on it, but you can certainly get an idea. The url is: http://www.onegeek.com.au/articles/programming/javascript-form-validation.php I'd be happy to help you if you need, just shoot us through an email. *** 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] Styling forms
Forms should be marked up as you would anything else; If you are placing a paragraph in the form you should use a p. If you are placing a list inside the form you should use a ul/ol, if you are placing headings inside the form you should use h1-h6 etc. etc. The inputs should be arranged using div's instead of tables of course, unless you are presenting tabular data inside the form. Simple hey! On 2/6/08, Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've been looking at styling forms and I'm seeing some people mark them up as ordered lists and other using paragraphs. What are the arguments for the different markup types. -- Michael Horowitz Your Computer Consultant http://yourcomputerconsultant.com 561-394-9079 *** 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] This IE8 controversy
A great point Casey. MS have taken the first major step in moving towards a standards compliant industry and we, the web designer, are complaining that it's going to break our old sites hacked up for IE6/IE7. The saying says 'we can't have our cake and eat it too', but in fact we can. We have asked for standards compliance and we are getting it. Unfortunately this was inevitably going to happen and it is the users that are punished for doing nothing. As professionals, we need to deal with it much the same way as we dealt with the non-standards compliance of previous versions. The only difference is that we are now moving in the _right_ direction. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Explorer woes with list dropdowns
A JavaScript function that you might be interested in is called the 'Suckerfish' technique. It is a well known problem that IE is difficult at best in these situations so to avoid lots of css hacks etc. you can use a little bit of JS instead. It's accessible, standards compliant and easy to use. There is a nice article about it here: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dropdowns On 1/29/08, Karl Lurman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IE6 doesn't respect the *:hover pseudo selector if I remember rightly... It only supports it for anchors, e.g a:hover You may have to look at a small bit of javascript to 'activate' this behavior. Im pretty sure this is your problem for IE browsers. Karl On Jan 29, 2008 2:52 PM, Shane Helm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello fellow web standard groupies. I have built a dropdown menu using lists. It works in Firefox and Safari but doesn't seem to work in IE6 or 7. Any suggestions? http://www.treasurehillskihomes.com/TESTING/navtest.html Greatly appreciated! Shane Helm www.sonze.com *** 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] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] email abuse (OT)
This is not the appropriate forum to be raising these types of issues. There are plenty of places elsewhere from which you can find more information about spam detection and filtering. My suggestion would be to start with Google, as they are your particular email host. Cheers, -- Matt OneGeek http://www.onegeek.com.au On 12/7/07, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: who would i notify about email abuse. someone is using my gmail address to spam for viagra? any help would be appreciated. dwain -- dwain alford The artist may use any form which his expression demands; for his inner impulse must find suitable expression. Kandinsky *** 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] ***
