Re: [WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: WSG Digest (Out of Office)

2007-08-24 Thread Robert O'Neill
I will be out of the office until Monday 3rd September.

You can contact the web team directly on 5836 or via the email group
'web development'.



***  IMPORTANT NOTICE ***
***  NHSBSA DISCLAIMER ***

This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it, including replies and 
forwarded copies subsequently transmitted (which may contain alterations), 
contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.

The content of this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended
recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the person
authorised as responsible for delivery to the intended recipient(s), please 
note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this e-mail
or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Help Desk at
the NHS Business Services Authority, Prescription Pricing Division via e-mail 
to [EMAIL PROTECTED] including a copy of this message. Please then delete this 
e-mail and destroy any copies of it.

Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses.
However, you do need to validate this e-mail and any attachments to it for 
viruses, as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be 
transferred by way of this e-mail.

This e-mail is from the NHS Business Services Authority whose principal office 
is at Bridge House, 152 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 6SN. 

Switchboard Telephone Number :- +44 (0)191 232 5371



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



Re: [WSG] talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Robert O'Neill


I made the comparison to the construction industry because:

1. we are both in the business of building things

and 

2. the standards used benefit the end user.

A 'brickie' lays bricks in one of a number of standard methods using standard materials. The benefit of this is that the house shouldn't fall down on top of you under agreed environment conditions. 

The other intrinsic link betwen the two industries is legislation. Health and Safety Law has driven many of the standards introduced into the building trade, and they have become a legal requirement before a brick is laid. 

Accessibility leglisation will drive standards for websites just as they do access to shops, businesses, and government buildings. I do not condone nor ever wish for a central agency telling us how we must design our sites, we should retain some form of artistic license just as architects, shop front designers, and window dressers do. However I am totally in favour of a central agency regulating how the sites are actually constructed. 

Whether 'illegal' websites are persued by law as much as dangerous buildings is in truth unlikely. Bad buildings kill, bad web sites are just a pain to some, but that doesn't make me any more comfortable with the idea of constructing a site with tag-soup, both morally, ethically, or legally.





 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/12/2005 17:52:38 
The other problem with the validation logos is that they don't always mean that the page is valid. In my experience, a large number of sites with these logos don't serve valid code and fail the test that they link to. I think that this analog with the construction world is not really satisfactory as the need for, and potential repercussions of, standards and 'validity' and compliance when building a house is much greater than when just serving data. BEFORE I get shot down in flames for blasphemy, I DO think that web standards are important and I agree that XHTML should not be abused. BUT when a website fails, no-one gets injures (except maybe the mainainter if they have a violent boss :) ). I don't think that any suitable analogy can really be used for this case because the potential benefits of Semantics and good data presentation are immense and unique, but only for large data sources. There is a reason why LaTeX isn't taught to 16 year-olds in schools to do essays with, it may produce nice, accurate, readable layouts but to spend the time and effort trying to beat it into people is counter-productive. StephenRobert O'Neill wrote: If I wanted new windows in my house I'd buy from the BS Standard  compliant company every time, wouldn't you ?  The thing is though, if I click on the BS Standard logo it can't prove  to me that the company is actually compliant , however in our  industry, we as web designers can use our W3C logos to prove the  point, by linking them to the validators.  Some might find this argument slightly flaky as a BS Standard is an  acknowledgment of quality rather than validity. The problem we have  though is that until the consequences of legislation fully kick in  (DDA etc) we are still being allowed to regulate ourselves and W3C  !
validation seems to be the only option available.  So I'll continue to add W3C validation logos to my sites until an  official Govt. Standard is set. Considering the UK Government bases  most of its current web standards (eGIF, NHS Standards etc) on W3C  recommendations, I'll hopefully be in a decent position should that  ever happen.  Rob O.   [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/12/2005 16:42:46  I thought of a number of points relating to this standards issue... The icons by w3c and others are meaningless and are a problem. They  need to have meaning to the reader. The average web visitor doesn't  even know that the W3C exists, let alone that they make  recommendations or determine structure and validity. When I first  moved into the realm of writing better code (still honing skills) I  didn't know what they were.In order to create meaning it has to  represent actual value, ROI or benefit to users and buyers of our  services. We, as developers need to be talking, not to the individual business  owner but to business leaders in each segment and show them, not tell  them how this will benefit them. I belong to several business forums and nowhere are you going to see a  discussion of web standards and accessibility as most of these people  don't know what that don't know. They all feel that how a site looks  determines quality. Like it or not -- the only measure of the success of a website is the  return on investment or an increase in profits or some other metric.  If a business can achieve that with tag soup they are going to be  happy. But most small business owners don't even consider this point.  They just want a website, so they hire a firm that has websites they  like to lo!
ok at or that look good. We as an industry need to band together and make standards mean  something that business owners can't live without. No FUD 

Re: [WSG] talking points for standards

2005-12-07 Thread Robert O'Neill


Yes, the key to this argument/discussion is whether your site offers a service to the general public. As suggested earlier we cant expect someone hosting his/her home page on Geocities to follow web standards, but anyone offering services online bears a moral responsibility to make those services available to as many people as possible, regardless of whether they are a minority of your target audience or not, and, at least in the UK, a legal responsibility.



 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/12/2005 15:10:48 
I was being specific and not defining the situation well, my bad. In the UK it is against the law to provide an inaccessible service. Therefore ONLY in the field of Accessibility, it is within the rights of any disabled person to demand that any UK site should be accessible. In practice, it means at least passing the WAG 1 test. I don't think that Managers and "The-people-who-control-the-money" do believe that not following standards will cost them and publicising web standards is still a big issue.StephenDuckworth, Nigel wrote: Stephen Stagg:   A better way to force the implementation of Accessibility standards would be to set up a group, or just urge disabled  people, to sue companies and web hosts who serve inaccessible  sites. Once people and customers realize that getting it  wrong will cost them, I'm sure that they will soon mend  their ways.  Wow. Isn't one of the arguments for web standards that "getting it wrong will cost you"? Obviously not enough in your estimation. I do believe that standards and accessibility are beneficial but that's a question that each individual, designer and business should decide for themselves. No one has the right to force them to conform [1]. In my opinion such "we know what's good for you" arrogance only harms the standards movement.  Regards,  -Nigel [1] http://nigelduckworth.com/publishing/?p=3 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list  getting help ** **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list  getting help**

***  IMPORTANT NOTICE ***
*** PPA DISCLAIMER***
This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it, including replies and forwarded copies subsequently transmitted (which may contain alterations), contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.
The content of this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the person authorised as responsible for delivery to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this e-mail
or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Network Team at the Prescription Pricing Authority via e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] including a copy of this message. Please then delete this e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to validate this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses, as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be transferred by way of this e-mail.
This e-mail is from the Prescription Pricing Authority whose principal office is at Bridge House, 152 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 6SN. Switchboard Telephone Number :- +44 (0)191 232 5371



Re: [WSG] talking points for standards

2005-12-06 Thread Robert O'Neill


If I wanted new windows in my house I'd buy from the BS Standard compliant company every time, wouldn't you ?

The thing is though,if I click on the BS Standard logo it can't prove to me that the company is actually compliant , however in our industry, we as web designers can use our W3C logos to prove the point, by linking them to the validators. 

Some might find this argument slightly flaky as a BS Standard is an acknowledgment of quality rather than validity. The problem we have though is that until the consequences of legislation fully kick in (DDA etc) weare still being allowed to regulate ourselvesand W3C validation seems to be the only option available.

So I'll continue to add W3C validation logos to my sites until an official Govt. Standard is set. Considering the UK Government bases most of its current web standards (eGIF, NHS Standards etc) on W3C recommendations, I'll hopefully be in a decent position should that ever happen.

Rob O.

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/12/2005 16:42:46 
I thought of a number of points relating to this standards issue...The icons by w3c and others are meaningless and are a problem. They need to have meaning to the reader. The average web visitor doesn't even know that the W3C exists, let alone that they make recommendations or determine structure and validity. When I first moved into the realm of writing better code (still honing skills) I didn't know what they were.In order to create meaning it has to represent actual value, ROI or benefit to users and buyers of our services. We, as developers need to be talking, not to the individual business owner but to business leaders in each segment and show them, not tell them how this will benefit them. I belong to several business forums and nowhere are you going to see a discussion of web standards and accessibility as most of these people don't know what that don't know. They all feel that how a site looks determines quality. Like it or not -- the only measure of the success of a website is the return on investment or an increase in profits or some other metric. If a business can achieve that with tag soup they are going to be happy. But most small business owners don't even consider this point. They just want a website, so they hire a firm that has websites they like to look at or that look good. We as an industry need to band together and make standards mean something that business owners can't live without. No FUD just a commitment by a segment of our industry that support web standards and that promotes the benefit to business consistently and continually. We need to stop preaching to the choir and build broad awareness that business is getting short changed but "design" firms who do website design are playing jack of all trades (although I would argue that web firms cannot be mutually exclusive to marketing). We need to create an environment that will make decision makers say to themselves, "Where can I get me a standards-based, accessible!
 site?"This whole argument of licensing and regulation is ridiculous because like most regulations there will be segments of the industry that lobby to keep eligibility for the standards to an absolute low or argue that this standard is designed to be protectionist. Why don't we make it that the tag soup chefs have no choice but get on board by creating client demand for clean efficient code.Strictly on the topic of this thread, one point I make to clients is that the code will be easily edited by anyone in the future and will require no special software to modify and therefore cost less to maintain. I don't usually get into these discussions with clients though because my local competitors can't even make good looking tag soup -- so I win be default. That will eventually change.All the best,Jay



Jay GilmoreDeveloper/ConsultantAffordable Websites and Marketing Solutions for Real Small Business.SmashingRed Web  MarketingP) 902.529.0651E) [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ric  Jude Raftis wrote: 
You are absolutely correct Andreas. Bit the same as an Australian Safety Standard, or Certificate of Electrical Compliance and the myriad of other bits of pieces of terminology and standards that we live with every day. But if we don't educate the public, how will they ever learn. The tag soup coders certainly won't tell them! I certainly don't think it's about designers "stroking" their egos. If it's compliant then tell the world, the visitors but MORE importantly.tell the client! Make them proud to have the icon on their site. Regards, Ric Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: 
These icons with "AAA", "W3C", "HTML", "XHTML" on it only confuse most users. So often in usability tests I have heard users ask me: "What does this mean"? ** 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: Future.....(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)

2004-07-08 Thread Robert O'Neill


While your giving a history lesson, do you know when Sun first introduced Java Server Pages. Just need to check someone in not telling fibs on their CV.



Please visit the PPA Website at: www.ppa.org.uk

Rob O'NeillWeb Team ManagerPrescription Pricing AuthorityBridge House152 Pilgrim StreetNewcastle Upon TyneNE1 6SN

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

tel: (0191) 203 5246ext: 5246

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 08/07/2004 13:45:15 
Now why did you go and do that? Now I have to give someone else a historylesson this week._javascript_ was created in 1994 by the Netscape Communications Corporation. CSS was created in 1996 and released as a specification December 17, 1996. DHMTL was created in 1996 when CSS was released. There are many that think_javascript_ or JScript allowed the creation of DHTML. Regrettably, that wasnever the case. If you visit any of those DHTML scripting sites you'llnotice they do not include any form of CSS._javascript_ cannot change HTML, only CSS can change HTML. Therefore, CSSmakes HTML dynamic. DOM was created in 1998.[quote]"Dynamic HTML" is a term used by some vendors to describe thecombination of HTML, style sheets and scripts that allows documents to beanimated. The W3C has received several submissions from members companies onthe way i

n which the object model
 of HTML documents should be exposed toscripts. These submissions do not propose any new HTML tags or style sheettechnology. The W3C DOM Activity is working hard to make sure interoperableand scripting-language neutral solutions are agreed upon.[quote]So, any shop or company that uses hack-programmers claiming to know DHTMLand they want to give me a bunch of _javascript_, I simply tell them to take ahike off a short pier.There are a few things we cannot do with CSS that we can do with _javascript_,but certainly validating a form prior to submitting is not dynamic HTML.Neither is providing a clock. Nor _javascript_ menus. Use CSS for menus andyou got it made in the dynamics of HTML.Lee Robertshttp://www.roserockdesign.comhttp://www.applepiecart.comPS: I'll let someone else change the subject if they like.-

Original Message
-From: Scott Barnes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2004 12:50 AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: Future.(was: Re: [WSG] iFrames vs Scrolling Divs)Lee Roberts wrote:Scott wants to know who voted the W3C the ruling authority.That was me! 20 years on the *net gave me that right. Oh so you were the one? heheheheSeriously, though, who voted the ISO or IETF to be authoritative enough to establish rules for people using the Internet and World Wide Web, oh yes there is a difference? Who established the rules for the World Wide Web which ethical designers and developers attempt to follow?If web development is your job, don't you think you should be good enough to follow the rules established? If you were a construction builder wouldn't you have to f

ollow rules?
As for iframe, I don't like it either. I've used it once, but the page it was pulling in was a flash communications presentation for my radioshow.As for frames, they were the most ignorant thing ever created. Personally, they should be allowed to exist today, but for some reason we can't get rid of them by some developers. Well, to answer that i dare you to walk into any web-based enterprise thathas a DHTML intranet, and say the following words:"Get rid of IFRAMES, and use something else"Wear some padding, as the fall from the window could be high.heheSeriously, lets get into the whole iframe use. 508 stuff, not up to speedon, but most DHTML based applications would be a luxury to get 508compatible. SOE are a saviour to the DHTML breed, and while i try to make asmuch as my applications close to being accessible  with usability it justdoesn't happe

n.IFRAME = Inter
nal frame, if we are to emulate the client-top generation ofsoftware within a browser, its the one little trick we have left. As forusing them on the web? well i used them many years ago for my personal site,simply because it was easy at the time (mind my site is horrible, needsbad need of update/doover). Making an actual public website today,seems to be one big juggling act imho, and i'm glad i'm not really requiredto be a public facade developer and more a SOE.You have to keep in mind, there are two main clusters using the web browser/ html language. Internal Corporations and Public Users, while one thingworks for one, ther other percentage works for another etc.The real problem with frames is people don't know how to use them in the first place. Second, they lack any real features for accessibility. For SEO purposes they are really bad.Frames were allowed in the beginning becaus

e browsers didn't have v
ery good caching abilities. Now that they do, you don't need them. They won'thelp. That or i'd put it in another 

[WSG] My CSS not multi browser - help needed

2004-07-01 Thread Robert O'Neill


Hello all, this is my first attempt at moving from tables to CSS for layout: http://www.ppa.org.uk/test/afc/no_tables/home.htm

Looks as expected in IE6 but navigation does not float as expected in Opera and in Mozilla the footer moves to the top of the page. Any help, advice, or guidancewould be greatly appreciated.

The stylesheet controlling the layout is http://www.ppa.org.uk/test/afc/no_tables/css/layout.css

Thanx in advance.



Please visit the PPA Website at: www.ppa.org.uk

Rob O'NeillWeb Team ManagerPrescription Pricing AuthorityBridge House152 Pilgrim StreetNewcastle Upon TyneNE1 6SN

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

tel: (0191) 203 5246ext: 5246



***  IMPORTANT NOTICE ***
*** PPA DISCLAIMER***
This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it, including replies and forwarded copies subsequently transmitted (which may contain alterations), contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.
The content of this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the person authorised as responsible for delivery to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this e-mail
or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Network Team at the Prescription Pricing Authority via e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] including a copy of this message. Please then delete this e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to validate this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses, as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be transferred by way of this e-mail.
This e-mail is from the Prescription Pricing Authority whose principal office is at Bridge House, 152 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 6SN. Switchboard Telephone Number :- +44 (0)191 232 5371



Re: [WSG] print headers/footers

2004-04-26 Thread Robert O'Neill



Just a quick note to all UK designers out there (can't speak 
for other countries), if you design with 'most of our visitors' in mind be 
afraid, very afraid. A printed page with headers and footers stating 
Disabilities Discrimination Act 1995 could be heading your way soon. 


Unless your designing an Intranet or a network site that is 
not available to the public, design your site with everybody in mind, regardless 
of what your user reports tell you. 

One of the main reasons for standards is accessibility to 
all.





Please 
visit the PPA Website at: www.ppa.org.uk

Rob O'NeillWeb Team ManagerPrescription Pricing AuthorityBridge 
House152 Pilgrim StreetNewcastle Upon TyneNE1 6SN

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

tel: (0191) 203 5483ext: 5483

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/26/04 03:02pm I 
should have added that I'm looking for something that works in IE for 98 as 
the lowest common denominator... That's what most of our visitors 
use.BarbBarbara Dozetos wrote: Hi all 
-- Me again, working on a print style sheet. Is there some 
way to  control the headers and footers that are automatically added to 
a page  printed from a browser? Can I add something to the line 
where the  page numbers are? Barb-- 
Barbara Dozetos   
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Physician's Computer Company Marketing 
Team1 Main St., Ste 7  
 802-846-5532Winooski, VT 
05404*The 
discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor 
some hints on posting to the list  getting 
help* 


***  IMPORTANT NOTICE ***
*** PPA DISCLAIMER***
This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it, including replies and forwarded copies subsequently transmitted (which may contain alterations), contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.
The content of this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the person authorised as responsible for delivery to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this e-mail
or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Network Team at the Prescription Pricing Authority via e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] including a copy of this message. Please then delete this e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to validate this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses, as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be transferred by way of this e-mail.
This e-mail is from the Prescription Pricing Authority whose principal office is at Bridge House, 152 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 6SN. Switchboard Telephone Number :- +44 (0)191 232 5371




[Maybe Spam] RE: [WSG] print headers/footers

2004-04-26 Thread Robert O'Neill



It was not Barbara's features I was highlighting (please don't 
take that the wrong way), just the fact that generally designing a web site for 
a majority, inherently means you are discriminating against a 
minority.

Minorities rule in a court of law.




Please 
visit the PPA Website at: www.ppa.org.uk

Rob O'NeillWeb Team ManagerPrescription Pricing AuthorityBridge 
House152 Pilgrim StreetNewcastle Upon TyneNE1 6SN

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

tel: (0191) 203 5483ext: 5483

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/26/04 03:53pm  
In this particular case though, I'm assuming the styling that Barbara is 
after is only an "extra" feature, some eye candy, and that the printouts still 
make sense on browsers that don't support print styles...so, as well meant as 
the warning was, let's not lose sight of the real issues. If I say "our 
site is designed to look nice in browsers that support standards-compliant 
code", for instance, I'm not discriminating against users of old/alternate 
browsers as long as it degrades gracefully and still makes sense without the 
styles... Of course, if Barbara was hoping to put essential information 
in purely CSS generated headers/footers, which would not appear in browsers 
which don't support print styles, then yes, your point is valid... P 
 -Original Message-  From: Robert O'Neill [ mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Sent: 26 April 2004 15:26  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
 Subject: Re: [WSG] print headers/footers
Just a quick note to all UK designers out there (can't speak for other 
countries), if you design with 'most of our  visitors' in mind be 
afraid, very afraid. A printed page with headers and footers stating 
Disabilities  Discrimination Act 1995 could be heading your way soon. 
  Unless your designing an Intranet or a network site that is 
not available to the public, design your site with  everybody in mind, 
regardless of what your user reports tell you.   One of the main 
reasons for standards is accessibility to all. 
* The discussion 
list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ 
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm 
for some hints on posting to the list  getting help 
* 


***  IMPORTANT NOTICE ***
*** PPA DISCLAIMER***
This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it, including replies and forwarded copies subsequently transmitted (which may contain alterations), contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.
The content of this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the person authorised as responsible for delivery to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this e-mail
or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Network Team at the Prescription Pricing Authority via e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] including a copy of this message. Please then delete this e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to validate this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses, as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be transferred by way of this e-mail.
This e-mail is from the Prescription Pricing Authority whose principal office is at Bridge House, 152 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 6SN. Switchboard Telephone Number :- +44 (0)191 232 5371




RE: [Maybe Spam] RE: [WSG] print headers/footers

2004-04-26 Thread Robert O'Neill



Doh! article URL

http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=129919liFlavourID=1






I think we will have to wait for some decent case law before 
we fully realise how this will effect web designers. A recent article in 
computer weekly 'Ignoring disabled 
web access will lead to legal action, warns DRC' illustrates that this 
might not be too far away..





Please 
visit the PPA Website at: www.ppa.org.uk

Rob O'NeillWeb Team ManagerPrescription Pricing AuthorityBridge 
House152 Pilgrim StreetNewcastle Upon TyneNE1 6SN

email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

tel: (0191) 203 5483ext: 5483

 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 04/26/04 04:35pm 
However, if it comes to court, the case will - in my mind anyway 
- have to be made about specific features that are or aren't discriminating, and 
not (just) general principles. As I said - and I don't think we're disagreeing 
here, just want to spell it out - you *can* design for the majority, as long as 
you ensure that your design degrades gracefully and meaningfully for the 
minorities. Otherwise, you just end up design to the lowest of the lowest common 
denominators, and we may as well just do unstyled html 2.0 or 
something.PPatrick H. 
LaukeWebmaster / University of Salfordhttp://www.salford.ac.uk 
Original Message- From: Robert O'Neill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: 26 April 2004 16:16 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: 
[Maybe Spam] RE: [WSG] print headers/footers It was not 
Barbara's features I was highlighting (please don't take that the wrong way), 
just the fact that  generally designing a web site for a majority, 
inherently means you are discriminating against a minority.  
Minorities rule in a court of 
law.*The discussion 
list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor 
some hints on posting to the list  getting 
help*

***  IMPORTANT NOTICE ***
*** PPA DISCLAIMER***
This e-mail and any attachments transmitted with it, including replies and forwarded copies subsequently transmitted (which may contain alterations), contains information which may be confidential and which may also be privileged.
The content of this e-mail is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient(s), or the person authorised as responsible for delivery to the intended recipient(s), please note that any form of distribution, copying or use of this e-mail
or the information in it is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received this e-mail in error please notify the Network Team at the Prescription Pricing Authority via e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] including a copy of this message. Please then delete this e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
Further, we make every effort to keep our network free from viruses. However, you do need to validate this e-mail and any attachments to it for viruses, as we can take no responsibility for any computer virus that might be transferred by way of this e-mail.
This e-mail is from the Prescription Pricing Authority whose principal office is at Bridge House, 152 Pilgrim Street, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, NE1 6SN. Switchboard Telephone Number :- +44 (0)191 232 5371