[WSG] 301, 302 and Referer
How do different browsers handle the Referer header when redirecting with a 301 or 302? Thanks. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Encoding odities
David Hucklesby wrote: FWIW - The META content-type is only relevant to pages read from a local file-- for example, when someone saves your page to disk. Not true. I recently had some non-local UTF-8 files where some special characters weren't displaying properly in IE6. When I added the missing meta tag, the problem was solved. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Css validation
Fuji kusaka wrote:
#min-height:300px !important;
This should be:
SomeSelector {min-height:300px !important;}
What SomeSelector is, some selector.
*html #mainContent{
You need a space between * and html
behavior: url(iepngfix.htc) !important;
This will never validated because it's IE only. You'll need to either
ignore this error or put it in a conditional comment.
Also, you're missing a closing brace (}).
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Rogue text appears in IE6.
Ted Drake wrote: Removing comments from source code is a really bad idea for best practices. Other people may have to work on your site and it’s a pain to reverse-engineer code. Without a doubt, comments are good in any non-trivial *source code*, but that doesn't mean they should be served to the client. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] ie7 and firefox
[EMAIL PROTECTED]@R KULEKCİ wrote: which browser is better to try web site. i rarely look my web site in ie. is firefox enough? No, you need to test in multiple browsers. Since even two standards compliant browsers may render the same page slightly differently, you certainly will need to test in IE. While IE7 is better than IE6, which in turn was better than IE5, it still falls short of the compliant browsers (which themselves are really only almost compliant), the only way to know for sure if it renders properly is to test. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] * { display: inline; }
Chris Broadfoot wrote: You have users using *older than* IE5? I often see older browsers in the log, but in such small quantities that they're safe to ignore. Generally speaking, browsers with only a fraction of a percent share are safe to ignore, unless you know a reason not to. Konqueror, for example, isn't very popular, but since the KHTML engine is very good, it merits more attention than it's numbers suggest. Mobile browsers are also good examples since they are likely to grow quickly in popularity (between the iPhone and Google's OHA, I'm very optimistic). *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] * { display: inline; }
Katrina wrote: dwain wrote: ie does not recognize the *. dwain IE 7 does, As do 5 and 6 (before those, don't know and don't care). After all, if IE didn't recognize the asterisk, how would the beloved Star Hack work? *** 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
Matt Fellows wrote: 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. What you describe is what AJAX actually is; however, the term is often misused to include any action or change to the page which doesn't include a page refresh. Whether it's drag-and-drop, or popping up an error message (especially without a JavaScript alert box), that's AJAX, or at least according to most clients. It was my impression that Tee was making that error. So, whether the validation done before leaving the page was done client-side or server-side via (true) AJAX is irrelevant. What is most important is that the data is validated AFTER YOU LEAVE THE PAGE, even if it was already validated before. But what is misleading is that validation using AJAX can be disabled quite easily simply by disabling JavaScript rendering a nice big security hole. Even with JavaScript working perfectly, it's child's play to send whatever garbage (or worse) you want to the server. For example, there's a Firefox add-on, Tamper Data, which allows you to intercept and modify all calls to the server. So the issue of whether or not JavaScript is enabled is irrelevant to that nice big security hole. That is where the true server-side validation must double-check. And that's my bottom line. *** 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
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] ***
Re: [WSG] A Question of Semantics
Christian Snodgrass wrote: I have a small semantic problem that I can't make up my mind about. Basically, I have a list like this: Something: blah blah; blah; blah. The Something: is a different font size, and kind of a header for the list. I can't decide if I should just do a paragraph with Something strong or in a span, or if I should do a header and then the text in a paragraph, with some CSS to make it look properly, or if I should make it some kind of definition or other list. It sounds like a good candidate for a definition list, but without more details, I can't say for sure. Basically, the DD's should describe their DT's. That said, you can take the meaning of describe very loosely. A classic example from the specs is dialog. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] java script with firefox
marvin hunkin wrote: but she noticed, that the links, would not work or show up in firefox. and using text links with a mouseover rollover. got any tips, or tricks, and how to fix this one? Marvin, You're not giving much to work with. Could you post either a link to the offending page or some of its code? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Idiot's guide to JavaScript
Ross Bruniges wrote: As a general rule of thumb if you are looking for online tutorials and examples that are teaching good modern JavaScript go find another one if it tells you to use things like: I generally agree, however: document.write If it's only discussed, but not recommended, it's OK. inline event handlers (like onclick) OK only on an introductory level, but should recommend and explain the better ways. browser sniffing This is OK only as an advanced topic as it's useful only in unusual situations. As a standard practice it shouldn't be used. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] The use of asterisks in forms to indicate required fields
Thierry Koblentz wrote: This has been suggested already, It's hard to keep track, at times. but I don't think it's as clean as using legend. But legend often doesn't work. For example: Name: Address (line 1): Address (line 2): City: If we assume that both a name and a full address are required, as is often the case, it is also often the case that not all the lines available for the address are required. the above snippet would require multiple fieldsets. As a side note, I don't think we'd need to use a class if we consider that only the required fields would have a label containing a span. Including the class in the tag allows for making the required fields visually different (ie, red text). Also, it's very possible that other spans may be present (ie, error text, further instructions, etc.). *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] The use of asterisks in forms to indicate required fields
Paul Novitski wrote:
fieldset
legendRequired:/legend
label for=nameName:br /
input type=text id=name name=name
value= /
/label
...
That would vocalize required name, required email address,
required password, etc.
Interesting; but what if you need (as is commonly the case) non-required
fields interspersed with required ones?
Instead of using a legend, how's about:
label.required span {
position : absolute;
left : -px;
}
label class=requiredspanRequired/span...
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] css type loop
Paul Novitski wrote: Mordechai, please elaborate on this point: how does HTML lose semantic value when ids classes are added? I think of ids classes as being semantically neutral or inert. When used properly, ids and classes add semantic value. (That ids and classes can add value is, in part, the basis for microformats.) For example, id=nav-main, id=footer, class=price all add value. However, there's values in scarcity. When ids and classes are scarce there is an implied value which is imparted because this element has one and that element doesn't. With class=bullet1, class=bullet2, class=bullet3, etc., their value is somewhat diluted. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] css type loop
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Quoting Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I recently had to add numerical bullet point graphics to an OL. Unfortunately there's nothing you can do at this point. CSS 3's nth-child pseudo selector http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-selectors/#nth-child-pseudo would help, but current browser support is negligible or non-existent, if memory serves me right. Nth-child would save on adding all those extra classes, but not the CSS. Also, as you point out, support isn't great. There is some support, though, namely Konqueror. However, the news isn't all bad. The good news is there's a method supported by around 50% of the market, including IE7: direct adjacent (+). Regarding IE6, fortunately its days are numbered and should be gone in no time (at least in geological terms). To get IE6 to play along, you'll need to use JavaScript and a conditional comment. Which is worse: JS for IE6 or all those extra classes and the potential maintenance nightmare saddled with it? I'll leave that for you to decide. Another way to deal with IE6 is to feed it plain numbers. This can be done in at least 3 ways: conditional comments, * html, or overriding the numbers with direct descendant (). *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Safari for Linux
Not actually Safari, but its rendering and JavaScript engine, Webcore. I'm still in the process of building and installing the packages (it's taking a while to compile). What I was wondering is if anyone has any experience with this, and if so, how does it compare to Safari in rendering and JavaScript? For those interested, the files can be found at: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=121646 On a related note, in KDE4, Konqueror I've read that they'll either be moving from KHTML to Webcore or offering either or both as options. Does anybody have anymore info on this? Currently, KHTML is probably better than Webcore in terms of CSS support; will this be a step back for Konqueror or a step forward for Safari? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] commenting javascript in script tags
Michael MD wrote: PC-based browsers are forgiving because that's what most users prefer. I don't think most users know enough to even have a preference. The problem is that if many pages don't render properly, they are more likely to blame the browser that the sites. Strictly speaking, most pages shouldn't render properly. Most users have no clue of the sad state of our industry. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] dfn and a: Which Order?
Semantically, which is better: dfna/a/dfn or adfn/dfn/a My thoughts are the latter, as the dfn is closer to the word or phrase to which it's referring. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] dfn and a: Which Order?
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: In those situations, I always try to reason it out loud to myself... In your example: is this the defining instance of a link, or are you linking a defining instance? I'd think the latter. in your case. My thoughts paralleled that, though your vocalization would probably have saved me some mental effort. Then again, think of all the calories those neurons must have burned; I must have lost a whole gram! No wonder I was thinner back when I used to spend all day playing chess. :) *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] strong v's b , em v's i
Robby Jennings wrote: I've found this list of depreciated tags http://www.html-reference.com/depreciated.htm which lists strong and em as depreciated. I thought the b tag would be depreciated. So which is correct? What should I be using? I know I can just use span tags, and apply css, it's a little clunky to me though. Any thoughts on this would be welcome. The site is wrong, plain and simple. b and i ARE depreciated, while strong, em, and blockquote are certainly NOT. Also, the size and type attributes are also not depreciated. It should be noted that strong and em are not replacements for b and i as the former are semantic and not presentational, while the latter are presentational and not semantic. For example, while the default presentational representation of strong is bold for many languages, it's not the case for all. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] strong v's b , em v's i
Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: On Apr 23, 2007, at 4:23 PM, Mordechai Peller wrote: The site is wrong, plain and simple. b and i ARE depreciated, while strong, em, and blockquote are certainly NOT. Also, the size and type attributes are also not depreciated. deprecated... [1] I knew the spelling didn't look right. That what happens when you rely too much on spell checkers. And no, neither b nor i are deprecated; or strong and em Sure they are; the W3C has it wrong. ;) Seriously though, they are in XHTML, which is what I was thinking. The difference occurred to me only after I replied. Oh well. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] How to mark up a flowchart?
Nick Gleitzman wrote: I have to incorporate a couple of simple flowcharts into the content of a site I'm building, I'm scratching my head about the best way to mark up this info in a semantically meaningful way. A generic example can be seen here: http://www.omnivision.com.au/test/flowchart/ I don't think your example is a generic flowchart as flowcharts can include loops. It is, though, a simple flowchart. As far as markup goes, I think a dl would be best with the dts being the title of the step with an id, and the dds being the descriptions of the step. There would be two types of descriptions: link-less dds with a description of what's happening in that step and linked dds for branching. Flow control in HTML? I guess HTML is closer to being Turing-complete than we thought. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Recommendations for books to take one to the next level
Thank to all who responded. Nick Fitzsimons wrote: Well worth reading, although some would argue that Nielsen can be overly strict in his approach to web usability. I've heard that a lot, he himself state that his finding don't apply all the time and they aren't a substitute for user testing. Difficult to know what level of CSS you're starting from, but there's: Advanced, but thanks anyway. SRT Services wrote: It is also syndicated online, http://joeclark.org/book/sashay/serialization/ , if budget is a concern. It's hard to argue with (legally) free. Although, generally I find it much more difficult to read a lengthy text from a monitor; for read more than a few pages I much prefer paper. Katrina wrote: On my to-read list, and sitting on my desk, is Pro CSS Techniques. How Pro this is though I don't yet know. Roger Johnson, who just reviewed it http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200703/pro_css_techniques_book_review/, wrote: 'Intermediate CSS Techniques' would have been a more appropriate name. Nevertheless, unless you’re already a pro CSS designer, Pro CSS Techniques is well worth its place in your pile of Web books. It seems that at least two of the authors, Jeff Croft and Dan Rubin, agreed. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Recommendations for books to take one to the next level
I know book recommendation have been discussed before, but most of the recommendation have been focused mostly on beginners. While that's very, very important, so much so that it probably deserves to be discussed many more times, what I'm currently interested in are books ranging from intermediate to the advanced. While for advanced level discussions there is no substitute for the Web, it's not as true for intermediate level. True, there are far fewer books targeted at the more advanced, but there are some. Some books which I've had my eye on include: - Prioritizing Web Usability by Jakob Nielsen , Hoa Loranger - Information Architecture for the World Wide Web by Peter Morville , Louis Rosenfeld - Don't Make Me Think: A Common Sense Approach to Web Usability by Steve Krug - Building Accessible Websites by** Joe Clark - Web Accessibility: Web Standards and Regulatory Compliance by Jim Thatcher, Michael R. Burks, Christian Heilmann, Shawn Lawton Henry, Andrew Kirkpatrick, Patrick H. Lauke, Bruce Lawson, Bob Regan, Richard Rutter, Mark Urban, Cunthia D. Waddell - Pro JavaScript Techniques by John Resig For CSS and HTML, nothing caught my eye; they all seemed to basic for what I'm looking for. Sure there are many good books out there and I'm sure I could learn something from many of them, but not enough from any one to justify the expense. On the other hand, there might be one I'm overlooking. Besides, while my motivations for this post are personal (I intend to purchase 2 or 3 in the coming days and others in the months to come), the more who can benefit, the better. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] unobtrusive js help
Bob Schwartz wrote: I am in the process of converting my javascript library to nonobtrusive js. Where could I go for help in converting these? Here, for one place. Can you be more specific about the problems? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Javascript to check for Handheld Devices
Barney Carroll wrote: Excuse my ignorance. It seems then, that all the best opportunities for designers to optimise for small devices and screen readers are being usurped by the developers. Do they really know better? In most cases, sadly they do. The vast majority of sites can't be viewed on mobile devices without help. It seems that there's at least a perception of lack of interest in developing CSS for them. Of course, their lack of CSS support might be why. Which came first: the chicken or the egg? *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] unobtrusive js help
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007, at 14:44:59, Bob Schwartz wrote:
var d=new Date();yr=d.getFullYear();if
(yr!=2003)document.write(copy; +yr); myplace
which gives me: © 2007 myplace
Here's my pathetic attempt:
window.onload = function() {
var para = document.createElement(p);
var txt1 = document.createTextNode(copy; );
var year = new Date().getFullYear();
var now = year;
var txt2 = document.createTextNode()
var txt3 = document.createTextNode( FIFe);
para.appendChild(txt1);
para.appendChild(txt2);
para.appendChild(txt3);
var testdiv = document.getElementById(testdiv);
testdiv.appendChild(para);
}
Not sure how FIFe fits into all this, but...
window.onload = function() {
var year = new Date().getFullYear();
var text = © + year + myplace);
var p = document.createElement(p);
p.appendChild(document.createTextNode(text));
document.getElementById(testdiv).appendChild(p);
}
should do what the original code does. If somebody gets a time machine
up and running and goes back to 2003, well, they'll see the version of
the site from back then anyway, so that's OK :-)
Personally, I don't think that the copyright information should be be
generated client side. But putting that issue aside...
I would shorten it by one line since year isn't needed:
var text = copy; + (new Date()).getFullYear() + myplace);
The parenthesis around new Date() aren't needed, but I thinks it makes
it a little clearer. While there are some parts of the order of
presidents that everyone should know, where new ranks versus .
(they're equal) isn't as important.
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] unobtrusive js help
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
On 1 Mar 2007, at 20:03:30, Mordechai Peller wrote:
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
window.onload = function() {
var year = new Date().getFullYear();
var text = © + year + myplace);
var p = document.createElement(p);
p.appendChild(document.createTextNode(text));
document.getElementById(testdiv).appendChild(p);
}
I would shorten it by one line since year isn't needed:
var text = copy; + (new Date()).getFullYear() + myplace);
Agreed, but I tend to avoid early optimisation when writing examples,
as I think they should go step-by-step to make it easier for people to
follow. On the other hand, I'd completely abandoned that principle by
the last two lines :-)
In principle, I agree, but I also think it's better to give a more
proper example, so long as it remains clear. I wouldn't recommend using
as an example:
window.onload = function() {
document.getElementById(testdiv).appendChild(document.createElement(p).
appendChild(document.createTextNode(copy; + new
Date().getFullYear() + myplace));
}
I'm not sure if I would even write some thing like that, though, it is
tempting at times. ;-)
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
[WSG] Bi-directional text
I need to mark-up a document (XHTML) written in English, but which includes some Hebrew words. I'm trying to decide the following: 1. How should the words be marked-up: span, dfn, or just leave them in the flow? 2. Is the bdo element needed, or just the dir attribute? 3. How should the transliteration and translation be included: title attribute or following in the flow? 4. How's the browser support for bidi? 5. What should be included in the head element? Thanks ** 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] Bi-directional text
Paul Noone wrote: Your greatest problem may be deciding which encoding to use. Probably utf-8. If your English language text will be inlcined to use a broad spectrum of characters I don't understand what you mean. it may be prudent to use images for the Hebrew words That wouldn't be very good for accessibility. put the definition in the alt tag. If I include the definition in mark-up, I'd use a title attribute (but since I'm not planning on using images, the alt attribute isn't an option, anyway). Who are your users?? This will help you decide which approach is best. They most likely can read Hebrew, though not necessarily very well. Similarly, their understanding would also be somewhat limited, though the text would be discussing the word so that would be a problem. What's more of a problem (as far as definitions goes) are Hebrew (and in some cases Yiddish or Aramaic) words written in a transliterated form because they have become a sort of jargon. (Interestingly, there are a few words where to use the English equivalent would hamper understanding because it's more likely that visitors would know the word in Hebrew, but not in English.) ** 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] Unstyling named anchors
Gez Lemon wrote: The name attribute is formerly deprecated for...form...in XHTML 1.0, and deleted from XHTML 1.1. From form, yes, but not from the various form elements such as input /, where it may in fact be required for proper functioning, though valid without. While I'm sure most of you know this, I'm sure that there are some who would read form and think that they could no longer use it with their radio buttons. ** 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] Unstyling named anchors
Paul Noone wrote: I'd tinkered with a[name]:hover but I'm loathe to create a style for this. I don't think hiding them is th eoption either. Why not use a class (a name=... class=named/a) as a[name] doesn't yet work on IE, never mind any browser which doesn't understand jumping to an id. ** 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] clean forms with javascript injected for a site demo
Peter Ottery wrote: I consider this to be definately in the realm of best practices and at a stretch good xhtml practice, in terms of keeping the xhtml markup clean. (ie: i hope very much this isnt too off topic for this list :) If I understand correctly what you're looking for, take a look at: http://www.onlinetools.org/articles/unobtrusivejavascript/ anyone do/done this type of thing or can link to a resource? I tried searching but to no avail. Try searching for: unobtrusive javascript ** 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] javascripts and standards
Jad Madi wrote: I want to start learning coding JS, but as usual I want to stick with the standards, I know there is a lot of tutorials out there, but I'm looking for a book, It's important to realize that JavaScript programing and DOM scripting are two different things. As ist happens, DOM scripting is a common use for JavaScript and JavaScript its the most commonly use language for DOM scripting. JavaScript is a full-fledged, object oriented programing language. (Note: It's not class based as most common OOPs are; rather, it's prototype based.) In the future you're likely to see more and more applications using JavaScript as its scripting language. do you recommend any book about coding with Js without breaking standards? One of the best books on JavaScript is: JavaScript: The Definitive Guide, by David Flanagan (O'Reilly Associates, Inc.) I have the 3rd ed., which is somewhat dated (1998), but still quite good. I've looked at the 4th ed., and it does a good job of bringing the material up to date. While the books is an excellent guide to JavaScript programing, it assumes previous programing knowledge. or what do you think of those books DHTML Utopia Modern Web Design Using JavaScript DOM I've read so good reviews. and Professional JavaScript for Web Developers (Wrox Professional Guides) Don't know. ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
Geoff Pack wrote: Sure. But if you are only testing your own sites, and not surfing the web with them, then it shouldn't be much of a risk. Assuming the site hasn't been hacked, there should be ZERO additional risk beyond just being connected. ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
Peter Ottery wrote: fwiw, I forgot about testing in IE4 about 3 years ago. I still like to make things look ok in IE5.0 but if some text is butting up against the edge of a container due to it not supporting some float issue or something, i dont worry about it. Its usually a better story with IE5.5. Unless the site caters to a very unusual crowd, IE4 should be given either unstyled or slightly styled content. IE5.0 might be worth supporting if doing so is trivial, but otherwise treat it like IE4. It's important to draw the line somewhere. Mosaic, for example, doesn't support CSS or tables, and I'm not sure if it even supports forms. ** 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] But why didn't Eric use positioning
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: The same happens when you use floats inside a container: if you don't have something as the last item of the container to clear them, the container will collapse. That's not always true. If the container is also floated, it DOES expand to contain child floats. ** 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] Avoiding the evil br
Hope Stewart wrote: pstrongAll correspondence should be addressed to:/strongbr / The Secretarybr / Your Clubbr / PO Box 999br / Anytown VIC 3000/p This may be a good case for an address tag: pAll correspondence should be addressed to:/p address spanThe Secretary/span spanYour Club/span spanPO Box 999/span spanAnytown VIC 3000/span /address It could be argued that instead of the spans, this is a rare case where the br /'s are semantic. Also, an hn tag might be better here than the p. Note: If this isn't contact information for the document, then the address tag would be incorrect. Another option is: dl dtAll corr.../dt ddaddress.../address/dd /dl If I were to use an ordered list with list-style-type set to none, would this be semantically correct? The problem with using an ordered list is that it's not a list. ** 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] Avoiding the evil br
Mike Brown wrote: Ok, I'll bite and ask why would you not use br / in the address example above? Aren't the semantics of an address that the different elements are (usually) on separate lines? You answered your own question: Parts of an address are *usually*, but *not always*, written on separate lines. The best tag to use, were currently available, would probably be the l tag from XHTML 2. ** 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] Avoiding the evil br
Terrence Wood wrote: span has absolutely no semantic value, That's not quite true. The spans used in the previous examples do have semantic value: they group together parts of an address. Admittedly, that might not be much, but it's not nothing. ** 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] Avoiding the evil br
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. ** 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] Avoiding the evil br
Lea de Groot wrote: Curiosity - why use a span and apply display: block? Why not just use a div in the first place? What are we gaining that I have missed? It's invalid: !ELEMENT address %Inline; ** 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] Avoiding the evil br
Jon Tan wrote: It's arguable whether address applies to the whole resource or just a document within it, In many cases, the contact information for a document and that of its site are the same. This is especially true on a Contact Us or an About Us type page. ** 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] Top Ten Web Design Mistakes - yeah, right!
Alan Trick wrote: The problem with testing has been argued about. The fact that Nielsen only surveyed his subscribers, most of whom are quite different from Joe User, probably provided different result than if more 'average' testing was done. Except, as has been pointed out, these results echoed older results. Those older results were obtained though a great deal of testing with average users. To put it another way, the experts have beed trained to know what bothers users and that's what they are reporting finding a lot of. ** 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] css variables
Drake, Ted C. wrote: Here’s the deal. I have a main navigation css. I’d like to create an alternate template and instead of replacing the nav.css with a new flavored nav.css, I’d like to put my color rules in a theme css file. Since I've only glanced at the solutions referred to in some of the other post, I might be wrong, but it seems that they all break the caching aspect of CSS as well as requiring the re-parsing of the style sheet each time. There is no need for this to happen. For starters, have mod_rewrite redirect all CSS requests to the template engine and have the desired style sheet as a query string. The style sheet template and values to be inserted can be stored either as files, in a database, or a combination. The engine pulls the time stamp from the template and the values, compares them to the time stamp in the HTTP headers, sets the outgoing headers to reflect if it's sending a style sheet or not, and finally, parses the template only if needed. This technique can be extended (and possibly abused) to take advantage of other header, cookie, or session info. Another option is store frequently accessed style sheets on the server pre-parsed. ** 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] validation error - blockquote
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: You need to have a block level container inside your blockquote...can't just have pure content. So, for instance: blockquote phere's the quote/p /blockquote While that's true for XHTML, it's not the case for HTML. ** 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] Online Resources for HTML Beginners
Nick Gleitzman wrote: In general, you should recommend that they examine the code of well written, semantically correct pages. Sure, but first you have to teach them to recognise such things... Learning what the tags are is easy, especially if you have a chart at hand. Learning how to properly use said tags is somewhat trickier (though not much). Also, an important teaching technique is to use examples (good and bad). ** 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] Online Resources for HTML Beginners
Marilyn Langfeld wrote: Since the questioner specifically asked for online resources I held off a response. But what the heck! I bought O'Reilly's HTML XHTML: The Definitive Guide and love it. Technically speaking, it is available online, just not (legally) for free. AFAIK, all of O'Reilly's books are available through Safari. ** 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] Online Resources for HTML Beginners
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm confident in teaching them the *absolute* basics, but if the people in the class want to go on to be coders, which online resources would you recommend? http://htmldog.com is a good site. In general, you should recommend that they examine the code of well written, semantically correct pages. ** 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] Logic?
Prabhath Sirisena wrote: Makes a lot of sense. Floated elements don't take up any space in the container (i.e. the container will not contain them). That's not 100% true. If, for example, the container is also floated, it will expand to contain the float. ** 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] What not to do for colour blind users
James Ellis wrote: The box below contains a row of random letters. Most of the letters are coloured white, some are highlighted. Please enter ONLY the RED HIGHLIGHTED characters in the order in which they appear in the box below and press GO. If it's only red or white letters on a black background, it shouldn't be a problem in most cases, but it's less than ideal. I believe red appears grey to red/green colour blind people. It depends on the form of color blindness. For someone with total color blindness, then yes, it would appear gray, but this form is very rare. The most common form is red/green. It that case, depending of the severity, reds and greens do appear to have color, but depending on which hue, telling the difference between the two is often very difficult. ** 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] Making a container div the same height as the longest div in it in mozilla browsers.
Ben Wrighton - StraightForward wrote: Works in IE and Opera but in all the Mozilla browsers I've tested in (Netscape, Firefox and Mozilla) the container doesn't wrap around the divs. I know it's something to do with all the divs in the container div being floated. If anyone can tell me how to solve it or point me in the direction of the relevant resource I would really appreciate it. Besides the P.I.E. method others have already linked to, floating the container will also work. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Javascript inserted alt text
Josh Rose wrote: I'm using javascript for an image slideshow, I've written the script and unhappily remembered the alt text. I don't want generic alt text for the whole lot, because the subject changes, so I need to have javascript insert new alt text for each image. As the purpose of alt text is to replace the image when the image isn't displayed, I don't think there will be much value to having it. What might be more useful us are the title or longdesc attributes. Now I'm no javascripter, but I'm guessing it may be a fair bit of work to this? Regardless of which attributes need setting, by using DOM scripting it's really quite simple to do with the setAttribute() method. For example: var img = document.getElementById(SlideShow); img.setAttribute(title, The Picture Title); ** 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] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
Collin Davis wrote: PHP can go hand in hand with Content Negotiation! Check out this link: http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php Read through the article - it explains how it works very well. Since XHTML is merely a reformulation of HTML, you can use the HTTP_ACCEPT header to serve XHTML as application/xhtml+xml to browser that recognize it, and HTML as text/html to those that can't properly recognize XHTML. Also of note, is that the script properly replaces / with when serving HTML. My own feeling is that since text/html is also a valid content type for XHTML, if application/xhtml+xml isn't accepted, I just send it as is with text/html. For the most part, only IE is the issue since every other browser of note accepts application/xhtml+xml, and since IE is so used to eating garbage that it couldn't tell the difference between gourmet food and spam, why bother? On a related note, since the W3C's validator doesn't send an HTTP_ACCEPT header, you should also look at the HTTP_USER_AGENT header as well. While I normally would advise against browser sniffing, I make exceptions for the W3C Validator, the W3C CSS Validator, and the WDG Validator. ** 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] Selectors
Chris Kennon wrote: My anger with MS, particularly IE, deluged again. So I ask has this browser moved from the dark ages, allowing use of the following: Child Selectors Adjacent Sibling Selectors Attribute Selectors As it stands now, they might add them to a future release, though I think having them by the final release of IE 8 is still a long shot. That said, a child selector can be simulated with universal selectors (see http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2005/05/31/universal-child-replacement/). Or should I take a brisk power walk until the ager ebbs away? Don't walk...RUN ** 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] Clash of nested lists
Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote:
The reason I cannot simply put both icons into a
tags is that they have to be separated by more than just space for
accessibility reasons. So this:
a href=/edit title=Editimg src=edit.png alt=Edit //a
a href=/delete title=Deleteimg src=delete.png alt=Delete //a
wouldn't work.
Perhaps
(a href=/edit title=Editimg src=edit.png alt=Edit //a)
(a href=/delete title=Deleteimg src=delete.png alt=Delete //a)
Alternatively, you could use square ([,]) or angled (,)
brackets. In all cases, the containing characters, even without spaces,
semantically separate the edit and delete links from each other, as
well as the main entry.
Another idea is:
lidl
dtEntry/dt
ddEdit/dd
ddDelete/dd
/dl/li
And styled as:
li dd {
border-width : 0 1px;
border : solid #000;
float : left;
margin-right : 5px;
padding : 0 2px;
}
When style, the borders are your printable character, and unstyled,
it's the new-line and the indenting.
**
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] Class Discusion: *{margin: 0; padding: 0} ???
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Cole Kuryakin - x7m wrote:
So...will *{margin: 0 padding:0} in the HTML or Body declaration
block zero
the margin and padding properties for all child elements in one go?
For all elements, yes (not just child elements, written like that).
Additionally, the universal selector has a specificity of zero, so
anything will override it.
**
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] Class Discusion: Centering a Fixed Width Layout
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The basic CSS syntax is as follows:
html
{height: 100%;
margin-bottom: 1px;}
body
{margin: 0;
padding: 0;
text-align: center;
font: normal 12px verdana, arial, sans-serif;
background: #fff;}
#container
{margin: 0 auto;
width: 760px;}
Regarding margins and padding, simpler is
* {margin : 0; padding : 0;}
Zeroing all default margins and paddings helps achieve better cross
browser rendering, as well as lists which are semantically, but not
presentationally, a list (i.e., navigation lists).
For the font size, under normal circumstances, use only percent or ems.
(Were it properly supported, you could also use exs, but afaik, all
browsers just use 2ex=1em.) When pixels are use, IE users cant change
the font size to allow for easier reading. You may also want to increase
the line-height as it too, makes reading easier.
3. Text-align: center set to center the page in Internet Explorer 5.0
5.5
If you have an extra style sheet for IE (hidden using conditional
comments), you might want to put this hack there. Also, don't forget to
reset the alignment.
4. Margins must be set to 0 auto in order to center-align a
fixed-width layout in IE6, Firefox, Mozilla, Netscape and Opera.
You're right about setting left and right to auto, but there's no need
to set top and bottom to 0 (unless you want to).
5. Placing margin: 0 auto in the declaration block for the body rule
doesn't center-align the layout therefore this particluar declaration
must be placed inside an ID and applied to a wrapper or container div.
Wrong; the setting goes in the body in order to center the container in
IE6.
HTH
**
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] Class Discusion: Centering a Fixed Width Layout
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Point of clarification. I understood that margin: 0 auto worked in IE6, but IE 5.0 and 5.5 required the use of text-align: center in the body rule therefore why do I need margin: 0 auto in both the body and container? You don't need to set the margins of the body to auto, just the container. For the text-align it's the reverse. ** 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] Class Discusion: Centering a Fixed Width Layout
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do teach the students about em, keywords and pixels, etc. based font size and allow them to make up their own minds. I understand the issue pertaining to accessibility and zooming text, but my personal preference is using pixels. Fair enough, it's your choice. But why make it more difficult for the user? Say to a user that you don't care if they read the text is a good way to loose return visitors. Admittedly, not many, as most people are used to putting up with the garbage that's out there; but why not rise above field, rather that wallowing the mediocrity? In general, if someone wants to resize the font, it's for a good reason. ** 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] Class Discusion: Centering a Fixed Width Layout
David Laakso wrote: I would *not* recommend using em for font size on the body, as it triggers a re-sizing bug in IE. Don't declare any font-size on the body. And use percent or em thereafter(if even necessary). Or, declare 100.01% percent on the body. And use percent or em thereafter(if even necessary). Good point; it was a slight oversight on my part. One point I'd like to add though, is that there are good reason for using a value other than 100% besides the bug. Since some feel that the default size is too large, so they set it to a lower value. Personally though, I happen to prefer slightly larger text. ** 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] WCAG 1.0 §10.5
Piero Fissore wrote: Someone told me that it doesn't consider those links separated because of the the printed point of the li element. That someone says that in the guideline - at the point 10.5 - they speak about separate adiacent links with PRINTED character: this is true, but I can't believe that is a printed character problem and not a structure problem. And a NEW LINE isn't considered a printed character? ** 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] Standard this
Andy Pieters wrote: Why not include a 'browser-build' selector in css? While it sounds good from a practice perspective, it goes against the whole idea of CSS: A standardized, device independent language for describing the presentational aspects of a document. ** 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] Class -vs- ID
Chris Stratford wrote: What is the advantage of an ID over simply giving something an ID?? Besides the benefits of greater CSS selector specificity than classes and its use as a target for URLs, ids also convey a semantic value which is different than a class and can be referred to via scripting (getElementById). ** 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] ATO - shame shame shame...
Chris Stratford wrote: I can't get my digital certificate without installing IE again... It is GONE! I dont want it. I dont want NN either (its good, but I love my firefox)... Can they force me to download IE to complete my business registration? The site also requires a Java applet to be installed. What's more, the links won't work until the applet finishes loading. In other words, After complaining that Firefox isn't good enough and that Java is required, it tells you to check the minimum system requirements, but it won't let you go there (middle clicking got around that, though). Pathetic doesn't even begin to come close. ** 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] Conditional comments
Kornel Lesinski wrote: Using apache mod_rewrite and PHP you can make all PNG 'files' to actually contain GIF, if requested by explorer. Actually, with the help of filters, IE can render PNGs properly. With that in mind, you can use JavaScript in the header to set a cookie and then have the server check for that cookie. Then if IE caught with out the cookie, give them what they deserve. ** 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] Intro and first question
Chris Moncus wrote: In looking over the W3C's documentation and such I got the hang of it and have been using the Bobby Validator for Section 508 validation ( http://bobby.watchfire.com/bobby/html/en/index.jsp ). I want to make sure that I am doing things correctly though. Could any of you offer your feelings toward Bobby and let me know if there are (opinion) better ones out there? In general, I wouldn't rely on the automated validator. There are several reasons for this, but the most important is that much of the guidelines are partly, if not wholly, subjective. Additionally, there are some known errors. IIRC, Bobby complains if you have an inline onclick without an onkeypress. Never mind that it's better to not use inline JavaScript (which the only type that Bobby can see), onkeypress, unless it's handled very carefully, will actually reduce accessibility. The fact is the onclick is misnamed; a more accurate name would be onactivate since it's triggered by both the mouse and keyboard. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Semantic markup for object dimensions/units
Rimantas Liubertas wrote: p400abbr title=millimetresmm/abbr times; 800abbr title=millimetresmm/abbr times; 200abbr title=millimetresmm/abbr/p Am I the only one thinking about abbr title=millimetresmm/abbr as overkill? Overkill? Maybe the first occurrence. By the time you get to the third you're already into the realm of obsessive-compulsive. But I am from the metric world... Doesn't matter. Metric has been in wide enough use in the US for long enough that if someone has crawled out from underneath their rock for long enough to use a computer, they'll understand what a dimension of mm means. ** 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] making money out of web standards
Wong Chin Shin wrote: Sorry, don't really understand what you mean by your statement below. The XSL document may not be readable but the XML can be set to be as readable and descriptive as we want it to? I think what Kornel meant (with some possible elucidations from me) was that XML/XSLT, while theoretically can be sent directly to the client, in practice is unreliable do to lack of support or incompatible support. The only reliable way to do transformations from XML to XHTML today is to do the transformations server side and send the client only the final XHTML product. ** 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] Critique
Collin Davis wrote: I just redid my personal blog, moving from movabletype to wordpress, and wanted some critique on design. For the most part, the design looks fine, a bit too dark, perhaps, but otherwise fine. From a functional standpoint I do have a couple of criticisms. First, at my default font size, the L, first o, and about a quarter of the second are blocked by the menu. By removing the background color from #menu solves that problem and creates a nice effect. Even if you increase the font size several times it's still OK. Second, at over 123k, the image big for dial-up. As a .jpg I'm sure you can increase the compression without a serious loss of quality. ** 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] Critique
Collin Davis wrote: Header image is now 34KB It is still sharp and much faster to load. I really love how it looks also when the page is resized now - thanks! You're welcome. I think it even looks alright when the text gets overlapped (though fortunately, it takes a lot of resizing before that happens). Too bad Trajan Pro (my absolute favorite font of all time) isn't available on most computers, eh? :) So what? Just insert it at beginning of the list of font names. That way, the other person who has it will also be able to enjoy it. ** 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] Why style to IE?
Collin Davis wrote: I can't speak for everybody, but as the person responsible for designing and creating websites whose sole purpose is to bring new business into the company; my main focus is the majority that comes to our sites. As I though I explained before, and as I'll try to clarify some more below, you may be doing them a disservice. The overwhelming majority (about 70%) of visitors use MSIE 5/6. As I have tried to point out, almost all of them would still get 100% of the styling; if not through CSS alone, then with a little help from JavaScript. For that small percent of IE users who have JavaScript blocked, they'll just get what they're getting now. So while it would be no loss for them, it would be a gain for the rest. If I have to limit myself to certain practices or markup to ensure that those people don't get a unstyled or lightly styled page, then darn right I'm going to. So you limit yourself to what NN4.x and can handle? It was NN4.x and older browsers that the phrase unstyled or lightly styled was directed, unless you consider CSS dumb down to IE standards (admittedly, that usually amounts to no more than a slight margin, but a margin, none the less) to be lightly styled. I'm not going to be the one trying to explain to our owner why somebody is on the phone having problems accessing a part of the site, or trying to explain if we get an email saying our sites are horrible. That would be an interesting reversal; usually we need to explain why a Flash based sight or a sight which relies on JavaScript for functionality would do exactly that. (While I don't think I made it clear yet in this thread, as I have on a number of other occasions, I am a staunch advocate for unobtrusive JavaScript.) That person could be an architect wanting to specify our products to the tune of multiple millions on a project. And if that architect happens to be using NN4.x? So yes, in the pursuit of filthy lucre, There is nothing filthy about pursuit of profit, unless you see its pursuit as an end onto itself. While this could lead to a fascinating discussion of philosophy and ethics, I'm afraid it's also a bit off topic. I'm going to cater to the majority, and the majority is IE. And ignore standards by writing IE proprietary code? Somehow, I would guess not; otherwise you probably wouldn't be a member of this list. In answer to the question in your subject, Why style to IE? my answer is: because that's who visits [my employer's] sites. Sorry, but I don't think you read what I wrote in the body carefully enough. Admittedly, my subject line, while accurate, was intentionally a little misleading. Much of my argument, however, was that that there would be at most no diminution from what they get today, but for probably around 90% there would be an improvement. ** 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] Why style to IE?
Collin Davis wrote: The bashing of head against the proverbial brick wall comes from trying to make my standards-compliant sites work the same in FF/Opera/NN/Safari as they do in IE. I first make sure the sites look and perform the way I want in both MSIE 5 and 6. After that is successful, I then start testing in the other browsers. And there's your mistake. As has been discussed many times on this list and elsewhere, it's much easier and faster to first code to standards and then correct for IE. While I do know ECMA-262 (Javascript), I hate using it. I don't know how well you do or do not know JavaScript, but I suspect that either you don't know JavaScript very well (a common occurrence), or don't like to program (do such people really exist? ;-) ). I have found that the better I come to understand JavaScript, the more I like it; in many ways it is an interesting, powerful little, often misunderstood, language.[1] Lest I be misunderstood (a seemingly common occurrence of late), I was only guessing to what I felt was a likely source for your comment. You are, of course, equally entitled to your own opinion as I am to mine, and no insult is intended. [1] JavaScript:The World's Most Misunderstood Programming Language by Douglas Crockford http://www.crockford.com/javascript/javascript.html I can develop much quicker just using a pure markup+css approach, and have no need for scripting. There's no need to do your own scripting (though that happens to be my preference). All you need to do is plug in Dean Edwards's IE7 http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/. While I haven't used it myself, it's gotten good reviews. I hope that makes my original post clearer. I think you've made your point of view clearer. In no way did I think Mordechai was suggesting an ignoring an IE, but was asking why style to IE specifically, and I was just giving the rationale for doing so. Actually, what I was questioning is why we should limit ourselves to the CSS which IE understands natively when JavaScript can be such a good translator. ** 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] Why style to IE?
Collin Davis wrote: Since IE doesn't recognize :hover apart from anchor tags, I only use :hover on anchor tags. As I have done as well. Though now I'm wondering why not just use an onmouseover, hidden by either conditional comments or conditional compilation, as well? However, if NN4.x was the predominant browser being used to access our sites, I would definitely design and code in such a way that it would work exactly like I wanted in NN4.x. An unusual case which should be dealt with in an unusual manner. My poor attempt at humor, and flashbacks to a fundamental upbringing, and yes, completely off topic While I find debating different religions and philosophies enjoyable and interesting, besides being very off topic, It's often not worth the risk of causing offense. however, making the point that for commercial sites, it's 100% about making money, not about perfect, compliant code. :) Many is the time that people forfeit greater returns tomorrow for a seemingly quicker return today. In the end they often end up loosing money. I don't use any IE proprietary code at all, I didn't suggest that you did, otherwise you probably wouldn't be a member of this list. ** 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] Why style to IE?
Something I've been thinking about: Why do people limit themselves to CSS which IE and handle? Lest I be misunderstood, please allow me to explain. Most of IE's CSS failings can be simulated with JavaScript, so why not take advantage of it? For the most part, for those who wouldn't see the enhancements wouldn't matter for one of several reasons: 1. If they're using a audio browser, screen reader, or text browser, they won't see the styling anyway, so they're not a problem. 2. NN4.x and older are often fed either unstyled or lightly styled content, so it won't be a loss for them so long as you use proper object detection. 3. For those using a modern browse with JavaScript off it shouldn't matter since presumably their browser would be able to handle the pure CSS. 4. For IE with JavaScript blocked, as long as the page renders respectably, for this small segment does it really matter that they don't have all the bells and whistles? 5. For IE with JavaScript turned off, for the most part they are in the same boat as those with JavaScript blocked, except they're there by choice, so as long as accessibility isn't an issue, they shouldn't matter. I've seen stats for JavaScript disabled reaching a high of around 8%-12%. Included in these figures are people from all of the above groups, so I suspect that those of the fourth group (IE with JavaScript blocked), the only ones for whom this is even possibly an issue, are few and far between. While they shouldn't be ignored, there's no reason for them to hold us back either. Again, I'm not suggesting serving them a nonfunctional, nor even an unstyled page, but rather a page which is probably comparable to what they're getting now I know there's a certain degree of revulsion to using JavaScript, but that's because it wasn't used properly. It's a very powerful language, and when combined with the DOM, and used responsibly, it can do many wonderful things. ** 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] Content box not stretching as expected
Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
ideally the content of the page should be truly
centered, but I have been unsuccsessful in making #content the full
width of the page.
In Firefox, #content{right:0} works, but it didn't seem to work in IE
(which is what I unfortunately expected). The best solution, therefor,
is not to used absolute positioning for everything; your layout is
simple enough to easily work without it. Perhaps just position #linklist
and give #content a left margin;
Also, the background color of your images and the content area didn't
match. Ending the background image at the edge of the divider should
solve that problem.
**
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] Unordered list as Path won't wrap
Miles Tillinger wrote: However in situations where the path is extremely long the list will not wrap and breaks my layout, so I've had to float the div so it will wrap. This in turn causes problems with the title if the path information goes beyond one line. I checked both Firefox 1.0 and IE6 and I didn't see the problem. In both cases the path wrapped. I did noticed the when the menu above the path wraps, it breaks the logo. The easiest way to solve that is not to use a split image. Another problem I notices was that the page didn't validate. While it was a relatively minor error and probably has nothing to do with the reported problem, before asking for help you really should try to make sure the page does validate. ** 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] rationalising my refusal to support IE/NS4
Nick Cowie wrote: Get hold of their web logs or from a similar site, you should find the combined IE4/NS4 and earlier browsers account for less than 0.5% of all vistors (it is with our sites) and seeing a sizeable chunk ( a least a third) of those are using NS3, IE3 or NS4.04 (bad javascript) or earlier. Regarding the and earlier browsers, I often wonder whenever I see them listed how many of hem are real? How many are spoofed user agents? How many are people planing games and normally browse with Firefox, et al? And how many really are the best the person has available, for whatever the ration may be? I suppose if you can examine which OS they're using, you may get a big clue. For example, am I suppose to accept as ligitamate Netscape 2 running on an XP machine? ** 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] Need better markup
Ted Drake wrote:
dl
ddimg src=../images/rodriguezLO.jpg alt=Photo of Gina Rodriguez height=108
width=72/dd
dtGina Rodriguez/dt
ddAccount Manager/dd
ddExt. 2412/dd
/dl
Ted, I don't think your dl's are very semantic, though they could (and
should) be. A dl is a list (even a list of one, which works for dl's,
but generally not ul's nor ol's) of pairs: a group of terms followed by
a group of datum. In your example, Gina is paired with her job title and
her extension, which is a very good use a dl (though adding a class
and/or title would probably improve it even more, that's a separate
discussion); however Gina's picture is unassociated data.
Just to restate my general opinion regarding your suggestion of dl's for
Collin's mark-up, I'm in 100% agreement. The only failing here is that
you need to use separate dl's for each item. This will be corrected in
XHTML 2 with the addition of the data item (di)[1] container to group
the dt's and dd's together and provide a much needed CSS hook.
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xhtml2-20040722/mod-list.html#edef_list_di
#salescontacts dt {position:relative; margin: 0; font-weight:bold;}
Just curios, but why position:relative? Is it to rectify an IE float bug?
**
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] images and the dl
Ted Drake wrote: As for the image being a definition term,...why wouldn't it be semantic? I don't know the W3C codes by heart, so I could easily be missing an important part of the puzzle and would be interested in seeing what I am missing. dl ddimg/dd dtName/dt ddTitle/dd ddExt/dd /dl Whether the image should be a term or data is open for debate. While I tend to favor having them as data, there is also a good case for as a term. This, however, isn't the source of my contention. In a dl the dd's must follow their associated dt, not precede them. Andy Clarke has an interesting post on creating an e-commerce site with definition lists. I skimmed it and it looks interesting. Thanks. I don't remember the use of the position relative. Been there; done that. Having artifacts in my CSS has caused me more than one headache. ** 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] images breaking out of their bounding box in MSIE/win
Marco van Hylckama Vlieg wrote: I have a nagging CSS problem I don't understand... I guess a click on a link will say more than a thousand words: While I don't see what the source of the problem, I can put you on the proper path to fixing it. 1. Clean up you errors. Your page doesn't validate. Fix this and it's possible that your problem will be solved. Even if this doesn't solve the problem, it'll make it easier to find. 2. Don't use inline styles. Having all the styles in one place makes them easier to work with and reduces page weight. 3. The text goes in the p, not the image. OK, this has nothing to do with the problem, but it will improve the page semantically, and may help with the search engines. Think about, what, after all, is a paragraph? Yes, I know, as you said, a picture's worth a thousand word, but that doesn't mean it *IS* a thousand words. ** 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] images breaking out of their bounding box in MSIE/win
Todd Baker wrote: Try applying this fix... http://www.positioniseverything.net/easyclearing.html to the .entry selector.. Won't help; IE doesn't understand generated content. Besides, that fix is for non-IE browsers and the problem is in IE. ** 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] Checking in as many browsers as possible
Tim Burgan wrote: Is it necessary to test the same browser on different platforms (e.g. IE6 on Win2000 AND WinXP), or ok to just test all available windows browsers in XP? Believe it or not, sometime yes. I've had different results with IE5 on Win9x and WinXP (In truth, the CSS was a little sloppy and when I fixed it there weren't and noticeable differences). From what I read, the port of IE 5/Mac to OSX didn't go well; it's almost a different browser. ** 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] Checking in as many browsers as possible
JohnyB wrote: I use http://www.browsercam.com, its got practically every UA Well, it's really good and useful service. However if you need to test the styles and edit them on-the-fly, it's a bit difficult. Anyways... it's still a great idea... Doesn't help it you need to test JavaScript or :hover. ** 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] Checking in as many browsers as possible
David R wrote: From what I read, the port of IE 5/Mac to OSX didn't go well; it's almost a different browser. Indeed, you cannot compare IE5/Mac to IE5/Win, they were both developed independenly of each other... they use different rendering engines, and IE5/Mac was the first browser ever to support the entire CSS1 standard. I wasn't comparing Mac to Win, but rather from 68K Macs to the current generation. But like I said, [from] IE 5/Mac not IE 5/Win. So almost is inaapropriate, the term is completely ;) Since in theory, IE 5/Mac 68K and IE 5/Mac OS X are the same browser, I thought almost was appropriate. ** 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] delay in dropdown menu loading in IE
justin randell wrote: i noticed the following post here: http://webstandardsgroup.org/go/resource364.cfm but i think it was intended for the list, so i've posted it. thanks justin Resources css drop down menu loading delay Posted: Thursday 16 December, 2004 By: charlie wu hi, i've wrote a drop down menu with css, but it doesn't work with internet explore, so i added a javascript fix so it works in ie. now the problem is when the site is loading the drop down menu doesn't work till the whole site is loaded. this only happen in ie so i think it's a problem with the javascript. The problem only occurs when web page is newly loaded not in cache. does anyone else had similar problems? more importantly does anyone know how to fix it? thanx Related reading: Three things which should help are using CSS instead of a background image for #top_nav (minor), using valid code (major), and perhaps removing the webstats call (possible the most major problem, but it will need testing to be sure; the documents.write's definitely don't help). As far as moving the script tag into the body, it should be avoided. Just as you remove the presentational code (CSS) from the body, so should the behavioral code be removed as well. ** 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] Nested cites?
Rev. Bob 'Bob' Crispen wrote: I'm beginning to suspect nested cites might make sense sometimes. You may have a point. It's kind of like nested quotes. ** 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] noscript in xhtml1.0 strict
Brian Cummiskey wrote: div script type='text/javascript' src='java.js'/script noscript diva href=nojava.htmlNo JavaScript user link/a/div /noscript /div Even better would be to remove the script tag from the body and put it in the head (with the code itself in an external file). As far as the containing div goes, unless you're grouping the noscript with elements, it's unneeded. ** 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] formatting the a tag
russ - maxdesign wrote:
Start at the beginning. If you want to style every a element on the page,
you can do:
a:link { color: red;}
Not quite true; that will only style anchors which have a href
attribute. If, for some reason you have one without a href (although I
can't think of a good reason to have an anchor without a href for which
there isn't a better, more semantic alternative), it *will not* be styled.
**
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] repositioning markup
Tim Burgan wrote: How are these tags styled with CSS so that there are positioned in and out of order on the page with no relation to each other.. but when viewed in a text browser it viewed in it's original order. It can be done using a combination of floats, positioning, and margins (especially negative margins). Without details of what you want, it's hard to be more specific. ** 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 Transitions Without Flash (URL fixed)
Marilyn Langfeld wrote: On the Mac side, it works correctly in Firefox 1.0, Safari, 1.2.3, Netscape 7.2. The images change in IE 5.2 but no fade; nothing happens (stays on the first image and doesn't advance) in Opera 6.03. Thanks for the feedback. Regarding Opera 6, it either doesn't support setInterval() (which it claims to do) or you have JavaScript disabled (which is my guess). Whatever the case might be, you helped find a bug which I didn't previously noticed because I was using an odd number of images: it skips every other image because setting opacity to 0 is only equivalent to being invisible IF OPACITY IS SUPPORTED! Otherwise, only the front picture is visible. Ironically, fixing the problem would actually simplify the code. Where as now I need to track in which direction I'm fading (front to back of back to front), after I fix it I won't. ** 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 Transitions Without Flash (URL fixed)
Marilyn Langfeld wrote: I just downloaded Opera 7. I thought it was only available for purchase, but see it's available with ads, as 6 is. Tried the slideshow. No transitions, but the slides to move now (is that because you fixed the show) Since I had only uploaded the fixed JavaScript moments before seeing your response, the answer is no. --Java and Javascript both enabled out of the box. Went back to retry 6. Still stuck on slide 1. Since I'm not using Java, its setting shouldn't matter. The lack of fading is due to lack of opacity support. Firefox supports opacity itself, while Safari and older Geckos support KHTMLOpacity and MozOpacity, respectively, and even IE6 has support through a filter. I had thought IE5.5 did, too, so I'll need to look into it some more. Regarding staying on the first image, as near as I can tell from Opera's Web site, V6 lacks sufficient DOM support. Even IE 5.01 supports it enough. For shame, Opera, for shame. At least Opera 7 is better. A note regarding the technique I used: While fading one image from 0% to 100%, the other image goes from 100% to 0%. IMHO, it produces a nicer effect than only fading one of them. ** 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] Video Files
Larry Rappaport wrote: 30 meg is pretty slow even with broadband. Even with a T1 at maximum utilization it would take around 3 minutes; slightly more than the recommended 8 seconds for a page load. ** 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] Netscape 4 - let it die
Kornel Lesinski wrote: Why do you let 8-year-old browser to stop you from making good pages? I agree; it's bad enough we need to cater to IE56. I look forward to when it's enough for the page to look all right in IE 6 and be functional, but not necessarily as good nor as function as it would be in a compliant browser. I bet that 90% of Netscape 4 users are bored webmasters ;) I've for a while thought the NN/IE4 stats weren't real; either bored webmasters or spoofed headers. For the V4.x, I think it's somewhere in between. Whenever some good solution is mentioned hearing but Netscape 4 doesn't support this is unavoidable. I agree that webpages should be accessible to all - they should work without CSS and JavaScript. Impossible--you need to draw the line somewhere. For the time being, I think HTML4 should be the bottom line for most cases. I don't see the reason to cater to 3.2 or earlier. As it happens, most HTML4 pages will render acceptably in an HTML3.2 browser. As for CSS and JavaScript, in most cases, the site should be usable without them. While one shouldn't expect a page to be as usable (otherwise, why would they be used in the first place), they should be difficult to use. Personally I use @import for CSS and use object-detection to gracefully degrade pages. NN4 should be threated as a text browser. It is just too buggy to get anything better. Unless you're on a very tight budget, some light styling might be in order. Object detection should definitely be used where needed. These days web looks so bad in NN4 that one more page looking ugly in this dinosaur doesn't matter. Actually it is even better - it proves that finally user needs to upgrade. c'mon! 6 years isn't a short notice! Any reasonable NN4 user (not necessarily an oxymoron) shouldn't expect pages to look good for them. The bottom line, however, is to check your stats cater to your users. If your site is a NN4 users' group, then by all means carter to NN4 even over modern browsers. ** 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] XHTML and Forums - A Red Rag and the Bull
Steven Clark wrote: Agree or not its a common event nowdays to be accosted by some one-issue madman or another over some standards related issue, not all of them in proper perspective either. I saw one of the threads to which you were referring at webdeveloper.com. I think you would have been better off just pointing out what some of the advantages of XHTML are, such as: future proof, XSLT, and easier debugging. ** 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] a quick target question
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Veine K Vikberg wrote:
So it's not WAI that's unforgiving, but Bobby in its miopic
application of the guidelines (which are, at this stage, already quite
out of date in many areas such as the one discussed here).
There is really a quite simple solution, which is what you should be
doing anyway: separate out the behavioral layer. A very good source is
/Unobtrusive JavaScript
/(http://www.onlinetools.org/articles/unobtrusivejavascript/).
Bobby *DOES NOT* examine external JavaScript files, so it will be none
the wiser. If you think it might be cheating, think again; you're just
protecting it from it's own (well documented) flaws.
Here's your anchor: a href=wharever.com class=popupWhatever.com/a
In an EXTERNAL JavaScript file have:
function addLoadEvent(func) {
var oldOnload = window.onload;
if (typeof window.onload != 'function') {
window.onload = func;
} else {
window.onload = function() {
oldOnload();
func();
}
}
}
function getElementsByClassName(className, node){
node = node||document; // Defaults to document object if no node is
given.
var all = node.all||node.getElementsByTagName('*');
var arr = new Array();
for(var i=0; iall.length; i++){
if(all[i].className == className){
arr[arr.length] = all[i];
}
}
return arr;
}
function addPopUps () {
var i;
var popups = getElementsByClassName(popup);
for (i=0; ipopups.length;i++) {
popups[i].onclick = function (){window.open(this.href);return
false;};
}
}
if (document.getElementByTagName) {
addLoadEvent(addPopUps);
}
Note:* Much of the above I originally adapted from various sources.
While I haven't tested addPopUps, I adapted it from working code I've
written. Also, if needed, getElementsByClassName can be easily adapted
to handle tags with multiple class names by using a regular expression.
**
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] No skipping to content needed?
Ben Curtis wrote: A lot of people put an in-page anchor at the top to skip navigation or skip to main content. Are there any hidden gotchas with simply putting the navigation last and positioning it first? With all the discussion about whether content or navigation first is better for the blind, have you ever stopped and asked? Russ did and posted the following on 6/18/04: Before meeting David I always read that navigation should be last I nthe source. I asked David this when he came to talk to the WSG recently and he said emphatically: The navigation should go before the content. I want to be able to jump around the site and then read the content. If the nav is at the bottom I have to read the content first each time. This proves once again the difficulty of perfect accessibility. There are personal views as to best practices. I'd go with David's view now as I respect his knowledge and experience. As long as we provide skip to content links (which should be visible, not hidden in source) then you cover all bases. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Semantic Breadcrumbs
Kevin Futter wrote: Less important doesn't mean not important. Exactly, which is why I didn't say not important ... ...which is a reason why it is unlike a sentence. The words of a sentence need their organization within the sentence to be useful. You can slice it and dice it however you want, but 'order' does not mean 'hierarchy'. It certainly can, and it works with both type of breadcrumbs. If breadcrumbs show where you are in the site you get: Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 If, on the other had, they show you where you've been, you get: Stop 1 Stop 2 Stop 3 Stop 4 Stop 5 Either way, the order describes a form of hierarchy. Any given unit cannot exist in the same physical or virtual space as any other unit, so it has to displaced from them. This displacement has to be ordered, sometimes arbitrarily; the result is not necessarily a hierarchy, and it is folly to assume that it is so. By definition, breadcrumbs must have an order which either reflects the site informational hierarchy of the a visitor's route since arriving. Take away the order and what you're left with is just another navigation list. Which just goes to show that all breadcrumbs are is a navigation list in a particular order. Order is horizontal integration, hierarchy is vertical integration. As stated above, hierarchy is also an order. If you picture the structure of a site where depth is vertical and pages of equal depth are horizontally apart from one another, vertical is the only meaningful order you're left with. Perhaps, but Web standards semantics are not the same as linguistic semantics, and neither has much to do with the compressed meaning a single word can contain. When marking up a site, all you have to work with are words. How the words relate to their immediate neighbors as compared to the rest of the page are the only tools available to determine which tags would be semantically correct. Time to call a truce? I am unwilling to change my view as I've seen no reason to do so; in fact, I believe even more strongly now in what I'm saying that I did when this discussion began. If you want to leave it at that, I won't object (not that an objection would be worth much, anyway). -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.6 - Release Date: 12/5/2004 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Semantic Breadcrumbs
Patrick Lauke wrote: ...and discussing the finer points of semantics in a markup language as coarse and unsuitable as HTML ends up being a tad futile Futile? Perhaps sometimes. Though I must admit, when there is a good reason to do so (what's a good reason is admittedly subjective) I find splitting hairs to be enjoyable. -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.289 / Virus Database: 265.4.6 - Release Date: 12/5/2004 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
