Re: [WSG] Site check requested :: Lecoat
Rick Lecoat wrote: I'm recreating a table-based site that I did a few years back, rebuilding it (hopefully) to web standards and making it as accessible as I can. http://sandbox.sharkattack.co.uk/novaRebuild/working.html Rick, It is working far better than when you wrote for a check a week or so ago. It is, imo, a little daunting to arrive on it at 116.5 dpi-- the font start point (at which one might begin to scale the fonts) for the content text is very tiny; and, the value contrast a little weak. I am not so sure the top links are really necessary as this is a keyboard function for most experienced users. And whether the coda information should be the same font-size as the content text is yet another matter of opinion, as is whether it should be there in the first place (I think I'd opt for deleting everything but privacy). Some IE users, myself among them, run all versions of that browser in accessibility mode at text-size largest with font-sizes ignored-- your page /may/ wish to accommodate same. Best, ~dL -- http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested :: Lecoat
On 31/10/07 (14:19) David said: Rick, It is working far better than when you wrote for a check a week or so ago. It is, imo, a little daunting to arrive on it at 116.5 dpi-- the font start point (at which one might begin to scale the fonts) for the content text is very tiny; and, the value contrast a little weak. I am not so sure the top links are really necessary as this is a keyboard function for most experienced users. And whether the coda information should be the same font-size as the content text is yet another matter of opinion, as is whether it should be there in the first place (I think I'd opt for deleting everything but privacy). Some IE users, myself among them, run all versions of that browser in accessibility mode at text-size largest with font-sizes ignored-- your page /may/ wish to accommodate same. Best, Thanks for that David. Plenty of good points, and nothing that I disagree with. Currently, this is a site that slightly falls between two stools; I'm updating it away from tables-based layout but since the client hasn't actually requested any sort of redesign (I'm doing it as a surprise goodwill gesture), I'm trying to keep the look and feel as close as I can to the original, even if I no longer consider that 'look' to be necessarily the best solution. So type sizes, if I was redesigning from scratch, would indeed be larger, and some colours might be different. And I wouldn't use a semi- fixed height design, that's for sure. Certainly, this is not an accessibility-perfect site, and I fully accept that. It's more of an exercise for me -- practise, if you like, for someone just getting on the web standards bus, just learning about elastic layouts, and just making the jump from GoLive to the world of hand-coded-from-the-ground-up. I was interested by your comment about the 'top' links; I find them useful on sites even as a fully-abled mouse-using web user, especially where there is lots of scrolling going on. But then I've never really been a big user of the page-down and home/end keys on the keyboard (techniques that I suspect are possibly more common amongst people who use word processor software on a regular basis -- just my speculation) so you may well be right about the redundancy of those links. I'm going to remove the Access keys I think; since I put them in place I've read quite a lot of stuff to the effect that they are generally more trouble than they're worth. BTW, I don't know when you viewed the site in Explorer, but if it was between this morning and this afternoon it was in a hell of a state, due to a change I'd made; I had not realised that Explorer ignores media- specific @import commands, eg: @import url(styles.css) screen; So for much of today the site was looking, well, unstyled in IE. That's fixed now but I'm not sure how to specify media types when most of my stylesheets are referenced by @import rules from inside a single stylesheet called import.css. If I assign a media type to import.css, will that propogate down to the stylesheets that are imported within it? -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested :: Lecoat
Rick Lecoat wrote: [...] I'm not sure how to specify media types when most of my stylesheets are referenced by @import rules from inside a single stylesheet called import.css. You can leave the @import without a media type, and use @media wrappers around the entire set of relevant styles in each stylesheet... http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/media.html#at-media-rule I always do it this way, and leave old browsers with unstyled pages in the process. You can of course then also use IE/win's @import bug to feed IE/win some additional styles... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_12.html ...in case it needs any, and/or you can use the bug to keep IE/win from seeing styles that upsets it. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested :: Lecoat
Rick Lecoat wrote: On 31/10/07 (14:19) David said: Rick, It is working far better than when you wrote for a check a week or so ago. If I assign a media type to import.css, will that propogate down to the stylesheets that are imported within it? Rick, I see Georg Sortun has answered your style sheet import question. I seem always to skate on thin ice with regard to matters of opinion: I would delete the re-set style sheet , giving one rather than two style sheets to import. Target only what needs to be targeted-- less bloat, easier maintenance, better learning experience, and more... But in the end, it is your call. Not mine. Best, ~dL -- http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested
Hi Rick, I loaded up your page, facinated by your achievement for a semantic structure, it looks good, however I'm getting validation errors for the DOC type, the img tag and trimming empty on 2 span tags, Did you get the same? William Rick Lecoat wrote: Hi; I'm recreating a table-based site that I did a few years back, rebuilding it (hopefully) to web standards and making it as accessible as I can. Currently it's one static page and the links largely don't go anywhere, but I would appreciate feedback from the list before I proceed with more pages. http://sandbox.sharkattack.co.uk/novaRebuild/working.html It's really my first stab at a semantic markup, fully-CSS, accessible site; it's also my first ever attempt at an elastic layout, so be merciful. Many thanks! *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested
Looks good on my iPod! Tom On 30 Oct 2007, at 12:38, willdonovan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick, I loaded up your page, facinated by your achievement for a semantic structure, it looks good, however I'm getting validation errors for the DOC type, the img tag and trimming empty on 2 span tags, Did you get the same? William Rick Lecoat wrote: Hi; I'm recreating a table-based site that I did a few years back, rebuilding it (hopefully) to web standards and making it as accessible as I can. Currently it's one static page and the links largely don't go anywhere, but I would appreciate feedback from the list before I proceed with more pages. http://sandbox.sharkattack.co.uk/novaRebuild/working.html It's really my first stab at a semantic markup, fully-CSS, accessible site; it's also my first ever attempt at an elastic layout, so be merciful. Many thanks! *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested
Rick, the site looks good. visually i would maybe slow down your animated gif a bit, or include the company name or slogan or something and have it stop after going through once or maybe looping just a couple of times and fall to rest on the name/slogan/whatever. it's a bit fast and i found the constant movement to be a slight distraction. just a thought. looks outstanding for a first effort! On 10/30/07, willdonovan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Rick, I loaded up your page, facinated by your achievement for a semantic structure, it looks good, however I'm getting validation errors for the DOC type, the img tag and trimming empty on 2 span tags, Did you get the same? William Rick Lecoat wrote: Hi; I'm recreating a table-based site that I did a few years back, rebuilding it (hopefully) to web standards and making it as accessible as I can. Currently it's one static page and the links largely don't go anywhere, but I would appreciate feedback from the list before I proceed with more pages. http://sandbox.sharkattack.co.uk/novaRebuild/working.html It's really my first stab at a semantic markup, fully-CSS, accessible site; it's also my first ever attempt at an elastic layout, so be merciful. Many thanks! *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested
On 30/10/07 (13:38) willdonovan said: I loaded up your page, facinated by your achievement for a semantic structure 'Fascinated' is one of those worryingly ambiguous terms... ;-) it looks good, however I'm getting validation errors for the DOC type, the img tag and trimming empty on 2 span tags, Did you get the same? Thanks for the check-over William; weirdly I'm not getting those validation errors, either from Web Developer Toolbar or the W3C validator itself. What is particularly odd about that is that I thought that I *did* have one glitch to fix (brought on by a change made to the page since I originally posted the URL to the group), but it has apparently evaporated into the ether. Very odd. The mystery error was indeed on the img tag, and stemmed from the fact that I misunderstood how a longdesc attribute works -- I had put regular text in there like an alt attribute, whereas I believe that it should be a URL pointing to a descriptive document. (My description -- a repetition of the text displayed in the animated gif -- was a few characters too long for a regular alt text). The wrongly conceived longdesc is still in place, however, so I don't know why the validation error has vanished, unless the original error report was a mistake. Are you using a different validator to me? http://tinyurl.com/2y7pnf -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested
On 30/10/07 (14:09) JonMarc said: Rick, the site looks good. visually i would maybe slow down your animated gif a bit, or include the company name or slogan or something and have it stop after going through once or maybe looping just a couple of times and fall to rest on the name/slogan/whatever. it's a bit fast and i found the constant movement to be a slight distraction. just a thought. And a perfectly good thought, at that. In this case I'm trying to keep the look and feel of the site as close as CSS will allow to the existing tables-based version that the client likes (and has been living with for a couple of years), so I'm leaving as many elements unchanged as possible, and that will include the gif speed, at least for now. Also, the speed of the gif does vary according to the computer it's being viewed on; high spec machines will let it whizz through its frames, but on some machines (eg girlfriend's iBook) it crawls past. looks outstanding for a first effort! Ah, now THAT just made my day. Thank you. -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Site check requested :: Lecoat
Rick Lecoat wrote: Hi; I'm recreating a table-based site that I did a few years back, rebuilding it (hopefully) to web standards and making it as accessible as I can. Currently it's one static page and the links largely don't go anywhere, but I would appreciate feedback from the list before I proceed with more pages. http://sandbox.sharkattack.co.uk/novaRebuild/working.html It's really my first stab at a semantic markup, fully-CSS, accessible site; it's also my first ever attempt at an elastic layout, so be merciful. Many thanks! No offense intended. Always a good idea to do a little /brutal/ power testing (and most of the time, if not all the time, I am not able to live up to my own expectations): Left column float drop IE6.0 text-size largest in accessibility mode in IE6.0; and, unusable in IE7.0 text-size largest in accessibility mode. Header and top-navigation disappear under chrome at min font-size 24 in Firefox/Mac in a short window. Some say jump links are not necessary if the primary content is followed by the secondary content, is followed by the navigation... And so on... Best, ~dL -- http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
