Re: [WSG] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Adam Morris]

I've found a 'bodge' using the faux column thing. Repeated a "wrapper"
background image for the body and it covers a multitude of sins!On 9/28/05, Joseph R. B. Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I noticed one other thing worth mentioning on the charismalab site.Your container div with the background gets cut off at the bottom of the
first page length (in Firefox using 1024x768 resolution).  I haven'tgone through your CSS as I'm supposed to be working right now, but I'mguessing that you have at least one height in the chain from html to the
content set to 100%. (screen shot enclosed)You may want to try going backwards in your document and set anythingthat div is nested in to be 100% as well including adding a declarationfor html itself set to 100%.  That should fix that.
>
HELP! I've just done a site for http://www.charismalab.com>
. Everything is great for> Windows PC, Firefox,>**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] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Adam Morris]

Yes, I noticed that too and was trying to sort it out earlier today without any success whatsoever. Thanks for the advice!
On 9/28/05, Joseph R. B. Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I noticed one other thing worth mentioning on the charismalab site.Your container div with the background gets cut off at the bottom of thefirst page length (in Firefox using 1024x768 resolution).  I haven'tgone through your CSS as I'm supposed to be working right now, but I'm
guessing that you have at least one height in the chain from html to thecontent set to 100%. (screen shot enclosed)You may want to try going backwards in your document and set anythingthat div is nested in to be 100% as well including adding a declaration
for html itself set to 100%.  That should fix that.>
HELP! I've just done a site for http://www.charismalab.com>
. Everything is great for> Windows PC, Firefox,>**The discussion list for  
http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**-- ADAM x

Re: [WSG] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Joseph R. B. Taylor]

I noticed one other thing worth mentioning on the charismalab site.  
Your container div with the background gets cut off at the bottom of the 
first page length (in Firefox using 1024x768 resolution).  I haven't 
gone through your CSS as I'm supposed to be working right now, but I'm 
guessing that you have at least one height in the chain from html to the 
content set to 100%. (screen shot enclosed)


You may want to try going backwards in your document and set anything 
that div is nested in to be 100% as well including adding a declaration 
for html itself set to 100%.  That should fix that. 




HELP! I've just done a site for http://www.charismalab.com
. Everything is great for
Windows PC, Firefox,



**
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] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Rob Mientjes]

On 9/28/05, Reeka Jean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But doesn't that depend on what you're using the bold tag for? There are
> times, for instance - when you might want something to appear bold
> visually, but it wouldn't need to be spoken louder/emphasized for a
> screen reader, which - if I'm not mistaken, reads  differently
> than it would normal text.
> 
> Same thing for  and  If you're just making it itallic
> for no other reason than visual, and you don't want it to be emphasized
> in a screen reader - there's no reason to use .

The problem lies in the fact that HTML should not deal with how it
looks. HTML can only convey meaning and structure (and content,
obviously), not looks or visuals.

Anyway. Depends on the situation how much you can play around with it.

It _always_ depends ;)

-Rob.
N���.�Ȩ�X���+��i��n�Z�֫v�+��h��y�m�쵩�j�l��.f���.�ץ�w�q(��b��(��,�)උazX����)��

Re: [WSG] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Reeka Jean]

I've read in several places that yes, screen readers ignore < b > and < 
i >. However, as I don't have a screen reader, nor do I know any 
facilities with one that I could use for testing purposes - I really 
have absolutely no idea. lol.


Christian Montoya wrote:


Oh, it *is* valid. I was mistaken... I'll have to remember that.

How do screen readers handle < b > and < i > ? Do they really ignore 
those tags? Just wondering because I know screen readers tend not to 
follow the rules.



**
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] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Christian Montoya]

Oh, it *is* valid. I was mistaken... I'll have to remember that. How do screen readers handle < b > and < i > ? Do they really ignore those tags? Just wondering because I know screen readers tend not to follow the rules. 

Re: [WSG] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Reeka Jean]

But doesn't that depend on what you're using the bold tag for? There are 
times, for instance - when you might want something to appear bold 
visually, but it wouldn't need to be spoken louder/emphasized for a 
screen reader, which - if I'm not mistaken, reads  differently 
than it would normal text.


Again, I'm a girl, and as such, I like to make things look somewhat 
pretty... Like, If I'm typing up something about me, I would put 
Name: Erica Jean... instead of Name: Erica Jean 
because there's no reason for the "Name" to be emphasised in any way. 
The bold tag is there only to make it LOOK a bit different. And if I'm 
writing up a profile, or filling out a silly LJ questionarre thing I'm 
not going to write out Name: for every line. 
lol. That's just a waste of time and character space. ^^


Same thing for  and  If you're just making it itallic 
for no other reason than visual, and you don't want it to be emphasized 
in a screen reader - there's no reason to use .


Just my point of view on the whole matter :)

Brian Cummiskey wrote:


Christian Montoya wrote:

I don't think  is valid. Just do another span, with { 
font-weight:bold; }



 tags are still valid in xhtml1.0 strict, but they don't posess any 
semantic value, which is why moving to  is the preferred mark-up.

**
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.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**

Re: [WSG] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Brian Cummiskey]

Christian Montoya wrote:
I don't think  is valid. Just do another span, with { 
font-weight:bold; }


 tags are still valid in xhtml1.0 strict, but they don't posess any 
semantic value, which is why moving to  is the preferred mark-up.

**
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] IE MAC just won't play ball!

[Christian Montoya]

I don't think  is valid. Just do another span, with { font-weight:bold; }And yes, the DL is much better. 
On 9/27/05, Drake, Ted C. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:















Hi Adam

 

I just sent a message about your linking
colors and then looked at your source code. Here's another suggestion I
would make for you.

 

The Energetics of Charismastrong><
br> Delegates are introduced to <
span class="orange">Charismaspan>labspan>'s system of transformation through unique principles, methods and techniques for the management of personal energy (Charisma).li>

 

 

Becomes 

 



 The Energetics of
Charisma 

 Delegates are
introduced to Charismaspan>labstrong>'s system of transformation through unique
principles, methods and techniques for the management of personal energy
(Charisma).



 

CSS

Dt {background: (your orange square)
no-repeat 0 0; padding-left:10px; font-weight:bold;}

Dd{padding-left:10px; margin:5px 0;}

Dl span {color:orange;}

 

 

It could be further argued that your using
strong may be wrong for the icon since you don't really want to scream
lab at people. Since it is purely decorative, you could wrap it in a
 set.

 

Part of the journey through
standards-based development is realizing where things could be written cleaner
and more semantic markup used.

 

I still think the orange charisma looks
too much like a link.

 

Good luck

 

Ted

 














On 9/24/05, Adam
Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote: 

HELP! I've just done a
site for http://www.charismalab.com.
Everything is great for Windows PC, Firefox, Safari BUT the client is looking
at the site on her Mac OS 9 IE 5 and it's not right. I've use the import to use
a separate style sheet which helped massively but there are some things that I
just can't seem to make work! I've downloaded the classic mac IE and can't see
what she sees .eg. apparently, the nav line on the bottom of each page breaks
off and starts a new line (!) and I've given up on trying to make the wrapper
stretch 100% so I'm going to simply give each page a separate wrapper and give
it a fixed length, but things still aren't right... can ANYone see where I'm
going wrong??? 
the mac ie css is http://www.charismalab.com/ie51.css

Thanks... 
Adam




 












-- 
ADAM x 






-- 
ADAM x