Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
div id=header a href=home.htmimg src=logo.jpg alt=Company name //a h1Company name/h1 /div The problem here seems to be if the logo img also includes the company name... So your company name is showed twice (in the image and in the h1). How about this approach, no need for the company name to show twice: h1a href=/img src=logo.gif alt=Company name //a/h1 Personally I like the logo to show with styles off and if the user has images off then the alt tag provides the text. I would be interested to know how people markup their company logo that don't use an h1 tag, I like the idea of reserving those for the particular page headings but can't really see what to use for the logo instead. Paul. _ http://www.paulsturgess.co.uk ** 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] Placement of company logo
Paul Sturgess wrote: How about this approach, no need for the company name to show twice: h1a href=/img src=logo.gif alt=Company name //a/h1 Personally I like the logo to show with styles off and if the user has images off then the alt tag provides the text. I would be interested to know how people markup their company logo that don't use an h1 tag, I like the idea of reserving those for the particular page headings but can't really see what to use for the logo instead. How about nothing?! (i.e. no heading for this) Perhps I should confess at this point: I have a deep antipathy towards logos, but I know how marketing people love them! ;) Ideally, I aim to do three runs through HTML/CSS when coding up a site: 1. Try and mark-up the whole thing without images 2. Go through and insert images that should be hard-coded - you might call these 'illustrations' (I think Patrick might have been making a point earlier that logos might come under the category of 'illustration') 3. Do all the CSS styling: this covers all aspects of the page which are superfluous / not _absolutely_ required (images which fall into this phase are inserted as background-image) In the 'real world' (TM), however, these steps get mixed together due to commercial pressures (e.g. marketing) or technical restrictions (such as browser bugs; the fact that we only have h1-h6) Pragmatically, I like Patrick's h1a href=/img src=logo.gif alt=Company Name //a/h1 The pros: - you get something meaningful with images off - it prints as an image (which pleases marketing types :D) - alt text scales according to user font-size preferences The cons: - I think that something that is text (i.e. the company name) gets marked up as an image At nature.com, we do something like Patrick's solution, but we just ditch the h1, using only an image tag. We use the document title to spell out what site your on and reserve the h1 for 3 headings in the document: 1 at the top of the content (which helps indicate what the page is actually about), 1 at the top of each of the navigation columns. Because the navigation columns are really separate from the content (belonging to the site as a whole, and not the page content), using 3 h1s here seems the right thing to do (it very rarely is, I think) You then get an outline structure that looks like this: [site title] |- [h1] Page heading |- [h2-h6] any subheadings etc... |- [h1] Main Navigation |- [h1] Extra Navigation IMHO, it isn't ideal - I would prefer just a text h1 for the logo - but it does have the advantage of being a linked logo image that prints and has alt text, whilst preserving heading structures for use elsewhere in the page. Chris DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ** 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] Placement of company logo
Townson, Chris (I think Patrick might have been making a point earlier that logos might come under the category of 'illustration') The cons: - I think that something that is text (i.e. the company name) gets marked up as an image I would argue (without sounding too much like a marketeer or graphic designer) that a logo (particularly if it's not just just text in a specific typeface, but also includes swooshes, ticks, whatver) is more than just a visual representation of text, in the same way that a head and shoulders passport photo of a person is not just a visual representation of the person's name - and nobody would hopefully argue that my photo should be marked up as my name and then image replaced with the photo. It's part of the company's identity, and as such is content - to a certain extent anyway. Patrick __ Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] Placement of company logo
Patrick Lauke wrote: I would argue ... that a logo ... is more than just a visual representation of text, in the same way that a head and shoulders passport photo of a person is not just a visual representation of the person's name Yes - I agree absolutely ... although my full length response to that would definitely risk [sending this discussion] disappearing up it own behind! :D and nobody would hopefully argue that my photo should be marked up as my name and then image replaced with the photo. I think my point here is this: HTML is really a text-based medium. Images have very little meaning, for example, to a screenreader. In practical terms, for HTML as it is today, what would your photo contribute to the content of a page? I recently marked up a page which consisted of information about employees. The design required inserting a photo of each employee next to their description: I used background images for those photos because they were not essential content. What was important was the bit which went: h3John Smith/h3 pJohn works as blah blah blah ... /p (Those h3+p details were also inside a list item for each employee) The point is that sticking in photos as img / here contributed practically nothing to the page. You say that you do not think your photo should not be the text Patrick Lauke replaced by an image: that would imply (quite rightly) that your identity as encapsulated by the photo is not summed up merely by the characters of your name. In that case, what should the alt text for an img / which is your photo be? Would it have to be 1000 words ... ? :D (that's what longdesc is there for, obviously) It's part of the company's identity, and as such is content - to a certain extent anyway. My logic processor returns this as both true and false :D (that's where your extent comes in?) True - philosophically True - for sighted-users in a graphical environment. False - in HTML (taken from a pure code or screenreader perspective), it's just a bit of alt text. as I've admitted though, there _are_ /real reasons/ why you would want an image (such as a logo) hard-coded into the page which you and others have covered in this thread. From my perspective, where possible, I like have code where all required meaning is imparted through text (_and_ have this marked up _as_ text). I think which approach you take depends ultimately upon your goals and emphasis for the site/page in question. C DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ** 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] Placement of company logo
I would argue (without sounding too much like a marketeer or graphic designer) that a logo (particularly if it's not just just text in a specific typeface, but also includes swooshes, ticks, whatver) is more than just a visual representation of text, in the same way that a head and shoulders passport photo of a person is not just a visual representation of the person's name - and nobody would hopefully argue that my photo should be marked up as my name and then image replaced with the photo. It's part of the company's identity, and as such is content - to a certain extent anyway. Patrick Some illustration: http://decaffeinated.org/archives/2005/09/27/logo Please, don't kick me if this is too much off topic :) Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** 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] Placement of company logo
Rimantas Liubertas wrote: Some illustration: http://decaffeinated.org/archives/2005/09/27/logo screenreader level twolink Silhouette Take a look at the eight logos below; I'm betting you're familiar with every one of them. Even if, at first glance, you're a little unsure about a couple, hovering over the graphic to see its title text will no doubt foster a silent revelation... ohhh, yeah. I knew that . GraphicWarner MusicGraphicPepsiGraphicSchwarzkopfGraphicMitsubishiGraphicWindowsGraphicApp leGraphicNikeGraphicAdidas So what is it about these symbols, these miniature signifiers of the corporations and products we interact with in the real world, that make them so recognizable? ... /screenreader I think my question is asked by you at the end of the screenreader output ;) Seriously though: you page demonstrates the how logos can be ideogrammatic - they become instantly associated with a whole host of ideas, phrases etc (usually under the heavy influence of marketing ;D) ... This is one of the reasons, I presume, that Patrick (+ others) have been arguing that logos are genuine content. however - I argue that the issue isn't so clear cut if we take into account (and are concerned about) user environments like screenreaders / text-only browsers: the logos then just become text and, perhaps, should be marked-up as such ... [adopts Darth Vader voice] Text is the true nature of HTML, Luke: you know this to be true :D C DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ** 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] Placement of company logo
... however - I argue that the issue isn't so clear cut if we take into account (and are concerned about) user environments like screenreaders / text-only browsers: the logos then just become text and, perhaps, should be marked-up as such ... ... So shall we get rid of IMG element altogether? Company's name is text, logo is more. Sure it must degrade to the text in non visual environment, but it does not hurt to provide richer experience in not so limited browsers? Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** 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] Placement of company logo
So shall we get rid of IMG element altogether? now, there's an idea ;) get rid of object too whilst we're about it! :D [... starts e-mail to w3c ...] seriously: your page (http://decaffeinated.org/archives/2005/09/27/logo) does provide an example of use of img / which can't really be argued with: the subject of the content is a primarily visual phenomena and you insert images which are examples of this ... an image gallery would be a more generic example. However, _the_ logo which is used for identifying a website: is it more important that it, (a), successfully identifies the site/company name to all users? Or, (b), that that it appears as a graphical element in the design? If you want (a), you could still quite reasonably use Patrick's h1+img suggestion, but you might also want to consider just using text and replacing it. If you want (b), then you have to use an image for practical reasons. Company's name is text, logo is more. Sure it must degrade to the text in non visual environment, but it does not hurt to provide richer experience in not so limited browsers? you're right - I have agreed with this point already. The question is this: isn't that richer experience more a matter of style, rather than content? (In which case it surely belongs in a stylesheet?) C DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ** 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] Placement of company logo
Townson, Chris wrote: I think my point here is this: HTML is really a text-based medium. Images have very little meaning, for example, to a screenreader. Ah, and people call _me_ a purist! ;-) While its foundation or tool set is text, it has included imagery for longer than it did not. After 13 years, I think we have to accept that imagery is part of the web, that the web is the medium and HTML is _one_ of the tools for conveying information on that medium. The trick is to make the _web_ accessible through the use of standards. This is the Web Standards Group, not the HTML Standards Group. In practical terms, for HTML as it is today, what would your photo contribute to the content of a page? I recently marked up a page which consisted of information about employees. The design required inserting a photo of each employee next to their description: I used background images for those photos because they were not essential content. What was important was the bit which went: h3John Smith/h3 pJohn works as blah blah blah ... /p Actually, in a large organisation, with reasonable turnover, the images can be of greater importance than the text. At a place where I regularly contract, the Intranet carries just that sort of page for each employee, which is very useful if you have to find someone for a quick chat but, more importantly, it helps in security so you know whether or not to challenge someone who just got out of the lift on your secure floor. In this case, the photo _is_ essential content, in practical terms. Cheers Mark Harris ** 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] Placement of company logo
Townson, Chris wrote: In that case, what should the alt text for an img / which is your photo be? Would it have to be 1000 words ... ? :D (that's what longdesc is there for, obviously) Drunk and tired (heck, that could be an ALT in itself), but a quick reply: - just because it may be difficult to summarise in words, does that mean an image should not be used? common lowest denominator? - use longdesc or similar where appropriate...the ALT shouldn't have patrick trying to look bad-a$$ if that wasn't the major reason for including the image in the first place - the more volatile values/mood/etc associated with an image/logo may not be conveyed in the ALT, but should permeate the rest of the copy on the page, IMHO. i.e. if a company had a modern/high tech looking logo, it would feel fairly out of place if the text were all very formal and old fashioned. so, to a certain extent, the purpose of the image should be reflected and served (reinforced) by the rest of the page. And with that...I'm off to bed ;) -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] Placement of company logo
On 12/10/05 12:10 AM, Townson, Chris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think my point here is this: HTML is really a text-based medium. Images have very little meaning, for example, to a screenreader. Then why is there an img element? And what about those who can't read but enjoy using the internet for it *visual content*? Let's not exclude pre-schoolers and those with a mental disability like my friend's 21 yr old autistic son who can't read but enjoys surfing the web. And for some sites the main content is visual not text-based, like for a photographer or an artist. I don't buy a photograph or painting because I like its text-based description. Hope Stewart ** 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: *****SPAM***** Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Richard Czeiger wrote: Umm actually you do.. Check out www.courtappearances.com.au to see what I'm talking about. Here's the CSS for that: http://www.courtappearances.com.au/styles/style.css As soon as I read ...you do I knew what hook you were using ;) It's *very* nice ;) Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com ** 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] Placement of company logo
I know we live in commercial, capitalist times ;) ... however, I cannot
agree that a company logo is page content (that warrants a presence in the
HTML) in the true sense:
a logo is essentially 'indexical': it depends for its meaning upon some
other entity (the company) and the context within which it is presented
(their website).
This:
[some graphic]
means nothing and has no semantic value
This, on the other hand:
h1a href=/index.htmlMy Company/a/h1
has obvious meaning!
Whilst I'm not a big fan of image replacement, I do use it for header logos
because it solves two problems in one:
a) You get to use a fancy image in the header - which is _only_ a fancy
marketing device - not content proper.
b) You always have a sensible H1 for which all H2s are genuine subheadings.
One last thing: using image replacement does not mean that you cannot link
that image to the homepage. Using the h1a ... above, just set link to
display:block and replace on that with text-indent:-1000em.
Chris
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Terry Bunter
Sent: 10 October 2005 05:15
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Sorry if this has been discussed before and it may be a little of topic of
this thread but I have always wondered why h1 would be used in the header of
the page for a logo.
I have always thought the h1 element should be the main heading for the
content eg.
h1About Us/h1
pcontent.../p
This way the highest level heading is always unique to the section of the
website you are visiting.
Cheers
TB
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Richard Czeiger
Sent: Monday, 10 October 2005 1:43 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
I prefer the following IR:
div id=masthead
h1a href=index.html title=The Company Name Web SiteCompany
Name/a/h1 /div
in the stylesheet:
#masthead h1 {
margin: 0px; padding: 0px;
}
a {
width: Xpx; height: Ypx; overflow: hidden;
margin: 0px; padding: 0px; padding-top: Xpx; background: transparent
url(images/logo.gif) no-repeat top left; }
That way you don't get clear.gif going in your otherwise semantically nice
mark up :o)
R
- Original Message -
From: Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:30 PM
Subject: *SPAM* Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Richard Czeiger wrote:
Doing it this way IS good branding.
It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in
certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will
know what I'm talking about...
Good point.
This Image Replacement method [1] allows this type of control (image
source
and size) and makes the logo clickable.
h1a title=Company home page href=/img src=clear.gif alt=
//aCompany Name/h1
[1] http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/tip.asp
/plug
Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com
**
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
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is
not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error
please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage
mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept
liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not
expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents.
Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents
accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or
its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and
attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan
Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan
Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number
785998
Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS
RE: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Townson, Chris b) You always have a sensible H1 for which all H2s are genuine subheadings. and what, h1img src=logo.jpg alt=Company name //h1 is not genuine? Patrick __ Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] Placement of company logo
Chris Townson wrote: b) You always have a sensible H1 for which all H2s are genuine subheadings. Patrick H. Lauke wrote and what, h1img src=logo.jpg alt=Company name //h1 is not genuine? Semantically, I would say: No, its not This would be due to the point about indexicality I mentioned. Let me put it another way: - Would you use an image as a heading elsewhere (say, an image which contained text)? Aside from semantics, this kind of thing is not recommended for accessibility reasons. Ideally, a heading is something which describes and encapsulates that which comes thereafter. Because an logo is indexical, it alone (usually) describes nothing - it requires a context for that. Nonetheless, because your example has appropriate alt text, it might be possible to argue that there is text present. However, in response to that, I would ask: Is an image tag the correct way (semantically) to mark-up that text? I happen to think that it isn't - it should be done with plain text inside the heading / link tag ... however, I can see your point and wouldn't want to be total pedant on the issue :D at http://www.nature.com/ we do just use an image for our header logo however, that is mainly because we would run out of heading levels on scientific articles otherwise! Chris DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ** 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] Placement of company logo
Townson, Chris This would be due to the point about indexicality I mentioned. This would be the point where I'd say the whole discussion on semantics risks disappearing up it own behind...no offense. You want to do web design, eh? Well, get onto the semiotics and linguistics course for the next 10 years and then we'll talk about it... Ideally, a heading is something which describes and encapsulates that which comes thereafter. Because an logo is indexical, it alone (usually) describes nothing - it requires a context for that. I'd say it defines that what follows belongs to the entity identified by said logo...but I think we may end up in rather philosophical discussions here and lose touch with reality ;) However, in response to that, I would ask: Is an image tag the correct way (semantically) to mark-up that text? A company's identity is more than just its name. The logo, the typeface used, the colours, all play an integral part, imho. Hence an image seems to me the best compromise (until we get sophisticated mechanisms like SVG to work consistently in all browsers). I can see your point and wouldn't want to be total pedant on the issue :D Still good to have a principled discussion though...makes our lives as standardistas soo much more mysterious to the outside world ;) P __ Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] Placement of company logo
This would be due to the point about indexicality I mentioned. This would be the point where I'd say the whole discussion on semantics risks disappearing up it own behind...no offense. none taken :D You want to do web design, eh? Well, get onto the semiotics and linguistics course for the next 10 years and then we'll talk about it... well, it was only 9 years in my case ;D Ideally, a heading is something which describes and encapsulates that which comes thereafter. Because an logo is indexical, it alone (usually) describes nothing - it requires a context for that. I'd say it defines that what follows belongs to the entity identified by said logo...but I think we may end up in rather philosophical discussions here and lose touch with reality ;) I think we could agree that the relationship is symbiotic?! ;) However, the point about reality: there is, of course, a serious and practical point to the discussion - we want people to be able to write clean, 'semantic' code. Also, developers who work with Java, PHP etc etc are required to write 'object'-oriented code. However, in my experience, there are very few people who are any good at identifying what something _is_ in order to mark it up semantically or turn it into an object. The reality is that asking what is the correct way to markup a company logo? _is_ a philosophical question!! :D Is an image tag the correct way (semantically) to mark-up that text? A company's identity is more than just its name. The logo, the typeface used, the colours, all play an integral part, imho. Hence an image seems to me the best compromise (until we get sophisticated mechanisms like SVG to work consistently in all browsers). I agree with your point here completely. However, in pragmatic (;)) terms, with current technology, text is just the only solution which conveys meaning to _all_ users (not just those using graphical browsers on a desktop PC) - and the correct way to markup text is not as an image (i.e. as alt text in your example). Where the other methods are available (colour, font, other visual or audio medium), these can be used by overwriting the default handling of a particular element through CSS, Javascript etc (as long as this does not interfere with the availability of the 'generic foundation'; i.e. the text) QED: Use image replacement for logos (over h1 heading) where possible! Still good to have a principled discussion though...makes our lives as standardistas soo much more mysterious to the outside world ;) Exactly :D there are always 'principles' beneath quotitidan concerns: even endless debates on font-sizes and heading structures ;) C DISCLAIMER: This e-mail is confidential and should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage mechanism. Neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept liability for any statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or one of its agents. Please note that neither Macmillan Publishers Limited nor any of its agents accept any responsibility for viruses that may be contained in this e-mail or its attachments and it is your responsibility to scan the e-mail and attachments (if any). No contracts may be concluded on behalf of Macmillan Publishers Limited or its agents by means of e-mail communication. Macmillan Publishers Limited Registered in England and Wales with registered number 785998 Registered Office Brunel Road, Houndmills, Basingstoke RG21 6XS ** 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] Placement of company logo
... QED: Use image replacement for logos (over h1 heading) where possible! ... I'd say, where necessary... I gradually arrived at this: Logo is important visual/id/navigation element of the page, so I have it in the html as IMG. It is not header of any kind (imho, no need to argue), so it is not placed in H1, which is spared for more appropriate usage — i.e. main header of the page - About us, Products, etc. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/
RE: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Townson, Chris I agree with your point here completely. However, in pragmatic (;)) terms, with current technology, text is just the only solution which conveys meaning to _all_ users (not just those using graphical browsers on a desktop PC) The only problem with having an image of a short piece of text, with proper alt, comes when users need to resize the text, granted. Apart from that, an image with proper alt is just as good to non graphical browsers. There is also the argument that, once users have such low vision that they require screen magnification, even bitmapped images don't necessarily look worse than normal screen magnified text, as even with many current magnification software solutions the software simply blows up the frame buffer (i.e. pixels) once you go over a certain size, if I remember correctly... But yeh...it's maybe not 100% ideal, but it isn't intrinsically bad either. Let's agree to disagree though :) Patrick __ Patrick H. Lauke Webmaster / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] Placement of company logo
Rimantas Liubertas wrote: H1, which is spared for more appropriate usage — i.e. main header of the page - About us, Products, etc. So, wich tag would you use to put your company/site name if you use H1 to mark-up the section name? OK. the site name can be in the title tag, but I think we all want to display it also inside a tag (wich one if not H1?) inside the content (body). I use to display site/company name in H1 and use H2 to section names. So, regarding this thread, I think I would try: div id=header a href=home.htmimg src=logo.jpg alt=Company name //a h1Company name/h1 /div The problem here seems to be if the logo img also includes the company name... So your company name is showed twice (in the image and in the h1). ** 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] Placement of company logo
adam reitsma wrote: oh dear is it just me, or does this TIP method seem like the modern-day version of the spacer gif? There is more to the spacer image... About the hook: An image element can be printed (good thing for a logo) and can even scale. About hiding the text: Unlike Richard's technique, one does not lose the text in the heading when images are off. http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/tip_5.asp Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com On 10/10/05, Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard Czeiger wrote: Doing it this way IS good branding. It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will know what I'm talking about... Good point. This Image Replacement method [1] allows this type of control (image source and size) and makes the logo clickable. h1a title=Company home page href=/img src=clear.gif alt= //aCompany Name/h1 [1] http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/tip.asp /plug ** 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] Placement of company logo
Hope Stewart wrote: There was a thread earlier this year that discussed how images that are presentational and not part of the content should be placed as background images through the css and not coded into the html with the img. This makes a lot of sense. With all sites I've worked on, I'd say that the company logo falls into this presentational category. But I wasn't aware of this concept for my first few sites, so I have some sites where the company logo is part of the html and others where it is part of the css. It is now interesting to compare the two methods and I would argue that, from a marketing point of view, a company logo should not be a background image. This is why: I believe you forgot to mention one thing: Most users expect the logo to be linked to the home page, so in this case it belongs to the (X)HTML markup Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com ** 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] Placement of company logo
Hope Stewart said: With all sites I've worked on, I'd say that the company logo falls into this presentational category. But I wasn't aware of this concept for my first few sites, so I have some sites where the company logo is part of the html and others where it is part of the css. Coca-cola, Marlboro, Lucky Strike, BP, Mobil? (OK, so I watched motor sport in the weekend) All of these companies are in the business of branding commodity products... I doubt anyone can successfully argue that these company logo's are decoration, tho they might try. But back to the point at hand. I always go for getting acutal content to the user above anything else. Why? because odds are that either the user already knows the company, or the user wants to know what the company has to say about themselves. The logo may add credibility, or help build trust, but displaying the logo is not the primary purpose of the page. As an aside, I thought I'd share a technique I've used that encompasses both techniques of hard coding and image replacement. What I have done in the past is hard coded the logo for use with the print stylesheet (logo-on-white) and used image replacement techniques for use onscreen (logo-on-full-color) -- this avoids a bug in early Safari builds which did not download background images for the print style sheet that did not appear onscreen. kind regards Terrence Wood ** 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] Placement of company logo
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 09:51:49 +1000, Hope Stewart wrote: What do others think? I am quite happy to be persuaded otherwise by a sound logical argument/discussion! I have decided to (generally) make the logo part of the html. Its part of the content, the company's branding is an important element of the page. I suppose the argument is extendible to 'then we need to make all the colours etc part of the content too' to which I just say 'nah... overkill' without backing myself up. Its a bit of arbitrary choice, I think, but one that I have made. Probably not a terribly helpful point of view :( warmly, Lea -- Lea de Groot Elysian Systems - http://elysiansystems.com/ Brisbane, Australia ** 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] Placement of company logo
What do others think? 1 vote here for always making the logo a regular img and part of the html markup. reasoning for me is a pretty simple one. its content! :) cheers, pete ~~~ Peter Ottery ~ Creative Director Daemon Pty Ltd 17 Roslyn Gardens Elizabeth Bay NSW 2011 www.daemon.com.au ** 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] Placement of company logo
My thoughts entirely. I would definitely want the company logo as an IMG element. If your company's site was to be viewed without the use of CSS, would you still want the logo the appear? I would. --adam--On 10/10/05, Peter Ottery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do others think?1 vote here for always making the logo a regular img and part of thehtml markup. reasoning for me is a pretty simple one. its content! :)cheers,pete~~~ Peter Ottery ~ Creative DirectorDaemon Pty Ltd17 Roslyn GardensElizabeth Bay NSW 2011www.daemon.com.au** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
On 10/10/05 11:25 AM, adam reitsma [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would definitely want the company logo as an IMG element. If your company's site was to be viewed without the use of CSS, would you still want the logo the appear? I would. Really, really good point! Thanks, I hadn't thought of that. And if images are turned off, at least you'd have the alt text. Hope Stewart ** 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] Placement of company logo
However, there is an argument that has the logo in the CSS particularly for branding purposes. Hear me out... You put the logo in the CSS. Nice and big and branded etc... Then you make a special logo for, oh I don't know, mobile devices. Small, crisp, pixel perfect. Now your users can see both and mobile users don't get frustrated waiting eons for your massive logo to show up on their mobile browser (not that it fits inside the window anyway). Doing it this way IS good branding. It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will know what I'm talking about... You've also got to ask the question, that if people have CSS switched off, it's probably because they don't want to see any non-relevant information (visual or textual) possibly becuase of bandwidth restrictions etc... If you've semantically coded your header with something like: div id="masthead" h1Company Name/h1 /div Then they'll still see thename of your company - which still lets them know who they're dealing with and that that company cares about how they prefer to view the web. That's also good braning (maybe more on the brand personality side of things rather than the brand visual side). R :o) - Original Message - From: adam reitsma To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 11:25 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo My thoughts entirely.I would definitely want the company logo as an IMG element.If your company's site was to be viewed without the use of CSS, would you still want the logo the appear? I would.--adam-- On 10/10/05, Peter Ottery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What do others think?1 vote here for always making the logo a regular img and part of thehtml markup. reasoning for me is a pretty simple one. its content! :)cheers,pete~~~ Peter Ottery ~ Creative DirectorDaemon Pty Ltd17 Roslyn GardensElizabeth Bay NSW 2011www.daemon.com.au**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Now that's a good argument, Richard! And just when I had been persuaded to use img. hm. On the second website I ever made using web standards I do have one logo for browsers and a cut-down version for print. But when I was making the site, I didn't know about putting images in the background using css (I was still trying to figure out the box model, floats, etc). So my work-around (kids, don't try this at home!) was to put both logos in the html in separate divs but display only one by using display:none on the unwanted div. See for example: http://www.harbourmarine.com/products/quick-release-hooks.html http://www.harbourmarine.com/css/print.css http://www.harbourmarine.com/css/products.css Not particularly elegant but it works. Hope Stewart On 10/10/05 12:01 PM, Richard Czeiger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However, there is an argument that has the logo in the CSS particularly for branding purposes. Hear me out... You put the logo in the CSS. Nice and big and branded etc... Then you make a special logo for, oh I don't know, mobile devices. Small, crisp, pixel perfect. Now your users can see both and mobile users don't get frustrated waiting eons for your massive logo to show up on their mobile browser (not that it fits inside the window anyway). Doing it this way IS good branding. It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will know what I'm talking about... You've also got to ask the question, that if people have CSS switched off, it's probably because they don't want to see any non-relevant information (visual or textual) possibly becuase of bandwidth restrictions etc... If you've semantically coded your header with something like: div id=masthead h1Company Name/h1 /div Then they'll still see the name of your company - which still lets them know who they're dealing with and that that company cares about how they prefer to view the web. That's also good braning (maybe more on the brand personality side of things rather than the brand visual side). ** 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] Placement of company logo
Richard Czeiger wrote: Doing it this way IS good branding. It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will know what I'm talking about... Good point. This Image Replacement method [1] allows this type of control (image source and size) and makes the logo clickable. h1a title=Company home page href=/img src=clear.gif alt= //aCompany Name/h1 [1] http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/tip.asp /plug Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com ** 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: *****SPAM***** Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
I prefer the following IR:
div id=masthead
h1a href=index.html title=The Company Name Web SiteCompany
Name/a/h1
/div
in the stylesheet:
#masthead h1 {
margin: 0px; padding: 0px;
}
a {
width: Xpx; height: Ypx; overflow: hidden;
margin: 0px; padding: 0px; padding-top: Xpx; background: transparent
url(images/logo.gif) no-repeat top left;
}
That way you don't get clear.gif going in your otherwise semantically nice
mark up :o)
R
- Original Message -
From: Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:30 PM
Subject: *SPAM* Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Richard Czeiger wrote:
Doing it this way IS good branding.
It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in
certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will
know what I'm talking about...
Good point.
This Image Replacement method [1] allows this type of control (image
source
and size) and makes the logo clickable.
h1a title=Company home page href=/img src=clear.gif alt=
//aCompany Name/h1
[1] http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/tip.asp
/plug
Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com
**
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] Placement of company logo
Richard Czeiger wrote: That way you don't get clear.gif going in your otherwise semantically nice mark up :o) ... but that way you don't get a clickable logo ;) Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com ** 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] Placement of company logo
oh dear is it just me, or does this TIP method seem like the modern-day version of the spacer gif? On 10/10/05, Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard Czeiger wrote: Doing it this way IS good branding. It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will know what I'm talking about... Good point.This Image Replacement method [1] allows this type of control (image sourceand size) and makes the logo clickable.h1a title=Company home page href="" src="" clear.gif alt=//aCompany Name/h1[1] http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/tip.asp/plugThierry | www.TJKDesign.com**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**
Re: *****SPAM***** Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Umm actually you do.. Check out www.courtappearances.com.au to see what I'm talking about. Here's the CSS for that: http://www.courtappearances.com.au/styles/style.css R :o) - Original Message - From: Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:58 PM Subject: *SPAM* Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo Richard Czeiger wrote: That way you don't get clear.gif going in your otherwise semantically nice mark up :o) ... but that way you don't get a clickable logo ;) Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com ** 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] Placement of company logo
Sorry if this has been discussed before and it may be a little of topic of this
thread but
I have always wondered why h1 would be used in the header of the page for a
logo.
I have always thought the h1 element should be the main heading for the content
eg.
h1About Us/h1
pcontent.../p
This way the highest level heading is always unique to the section of the
website you are visiting.
Cheers
TB
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Richard Czeiger
Sent: Monday, 10 October 2005 1:43 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: *SPAM* Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
I prefer the following IR:
div id=masthead
h1a href=index.html title=The Company Name Web SiteCompany
Name/a/h1 /div
in the stylesheet:
#masthead h1 {
margin: 0px; padding: 0px;
}
a {
width: Xpx; height: Ypx; overflow: hidden;
margin: 0px; padding: 0px; padding-top: Xpx; background: transparent
url(images/logo.gif) no-repeat top left;
}
That way you don't get clear.gif going in your otherwise semantically nice
mark up :o)
R
- Original Message -
From: Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Monday, October 10, 2005 1:30 PM
Subject: *SPAM* Re: [WSG] Placement of company logo
Richard Czeiger wrote:
Doing it this way IS good branding.
It's also about controlling HOW you want your logo to appear in
certain context. Anyone that's written a Corporate Style Guide will
know what I'm talking about...
Good point.
This Image Replacement method [1] allows this type of control (image
source
and size) and makes the logo clickable.
h1a title=Company home page href=/img src=clear.gif alt=
//aCompany Name/h1
[1] http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/tip.asp
/plug
Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com
**
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
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
