Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Keep it up and you'll get your page size back up to nested table levels ;-) I was expecting a response like that. As I said, it is over the top, but it is an idea of how far things can go if you try too hard to pursue semantics. Sometimes the goal post is a little too far away, and we can only g

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 31 May 2007, at 05:28:57, Blake wrote: In a way I could almost take Katrina's thinking a little further wrap each fieldset in an tag as part of an unordered list of fieldsets, and insert an additional fieldset into each exisiting li. Like so... Keep it up and you'll get your page size back

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 5/27/07, Katrina <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: In some sense, the label and input are thematically related. Interesting idea, and in a way I agree. However I still think, in combination with fieldsets and appropriate form elements, that a ul is an appropriate way to mark up form controls. For e

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On Wed, 30 May 2007 23:16:11 +1000, John Faulds wrote: > what if you have a form > control that's not really related to anything else? Do you put it in > a fieldset by itself? Then what do you do about the legend when in a > lot of cases it'll simply be duplicating what's in the label? > > For

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

I had a very similar issue with my feedback form. Eventualy I split it into three fieldsets: your feedback, your details, and a privacy statement. http://www.griffith.edu.au/cgi-bin/feedbackform.cgi - Kane [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 30/05/2007 11:16:11 PM: > > It probably shouldn't be used f

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 30 May 2007, at 14:16:11, John Faulds wrote: Sorry to bring this up again but I've been thinking a bit more about this: a fieldset should be used to group related form controls and each fieldset should have a legend, but what if you have a form control that's not really related to anythi

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

It probably shouldn't be used for pairing as you describe, but rather a group of inputs that all share some common-ground. In my case I use them to contain groups of required versus non-required inputs as well as the type of information sought (contact info, etc.). Sorry to bring this up aga

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Katrina wrote: I note that in Mike's example, he using a in order to achieve a block-level style visual. Surely that should be avoidable? http://green-beast.com/gbcf/gbcf_form.php Certainly it would be avoidable using "label { display : block; }" but I wanted

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

better left in the form's main fieldset and not given its own since it's grouped in with the form itself (a whole-form control) so to speak. Cheers. Mike Cherim - Original Message - From: "Katrina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 3:58 AM Sub

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

The label associates the label-text with the input, i.e. their realtionship is already firmly established and needs no other confirmation. The fieldset is to group together multiple inputs: to add stucture in long complex forms. Moreover, if multiple inputs are expected (since this is what the st

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Terrence Wood wrote: On 27/05/2007, at 7:58 PM, Katrina wrote: My point being that fieldset could be used to wrap label and input pairs? No. is to group related controls, not labels and controls. From http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.10 "The FIELDSET element allow

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 27/05/2007, at 7:58 PM, Katrina wrote: My point being that fieldset could be used to wrap label and input pairs? No. is to group related controls, not labels and controls. kind regards Terrence Wood. *** List Guidelines:

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Nick Fitzsimons wrote: While I agree that use of lists, tables or definition lists is mere abuse, a fieldset is for grouping "thematically related controls and labels": So a hypothetical (semantic!) form could/should look somethin

RE: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

> On Behalf Of Sander Aarts > ... English is not my native language adds to my misinterpretation though. Welcome to the club ;) --- Regards, Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/gu

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Hi Stuart, Stuart Foulstone schreef: I don't quite see how you get your possible interpretation. To summarise what it says: 1. for implicit association, enclose the form control in the label. 2. if you use implicit association (i.e. enclose the form control in the label) it can only contain on

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Hi, I don't quite see how you get your possible interpretation. To summarise what it says: 1. for implicit association, enclose the form control in the label. 2. if you use implicit association (i.e. enclose the form control in the label) it can only contain one control element. It is enclosing

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Stuart Foulstone schreef: But, in the W3C recomendations for form labels it gives implicit/explicit labels as two distinct methods (one not using the "for"). (http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/interact/forms.html#h-17.9.1 ) On that page it also says "To associate a label with another control i

Jaws 8 MP3s - was Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

-- Original Message - From: "Nick Fitzsimons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 2:48 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout On 24 May 2007, at 22:01:52, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: See a rea

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Sorry, I meant to say, when the label teg encloses the label text AND the input. However, on checking W3C acessibility guidelines, it appears I may be wrong about this. (http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#forms-labels ) But, in the W3C recomendations for form labels it gives implicit/explici

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Barney Carroll wrote: Stuart Foulstone wrote: Hi, The "for" attribute should NOT be used when the label tag encloses the label text. What are the dangers? Regards, Barney Hello, Its probably not a danger per se for most people but if you ever use a cms that writes out form fields someti

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

David Dorward wrote: > Why not? In response to... Stuart Foulstone wrote: > The "for" attribute should NOT be used when > the label tag encloses the label text. My question exactly. I can't see that it is in any way harmful. Cheers. Mike Cherim **

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Stuart Foulstone wrote: Hi, The "for" attribute should NOT be used when the label tag encloses the label text. What are the dangers? Regards, Barney *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubsc

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 25 May 2007, at 15:40, Stuart Foulstone wrote: The "for" attribute should NOT be used when the label tag encloses the label text. Why not? The specification doesn't appear to forbid it. Does it cause problems in any user agents? -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ http://blog.dorwar

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Hi, The "for" attribute should NOT be used when the label tag encloses the label text. On Fri, May 25, 2007 2:45 pm, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: > Good morning :-) > > I should have expanded my example a little more since I do use the "for" > attribute in labels, even when directly (implicitl

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Good morning :-) I should have expanded my example a little more since I do use the "for" attribute in labels, even when directly (implicitly?) associated: Send us your contact info Fields marked with * (asterisk) are required. * Name: * Email:

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

I think some people dont understand Forms to well. Without a label how will you label what your inputs are to be used for? On 5/25/07, Stephen Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On 25/05/07, Karl Lurman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Im not the biggest fan of a label 'around' an input. To me, it

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 25/05/07, Karl Lurman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Im not the biggest fan of a label 'around' an input. To me, it doesn't make a lot of sense, but I know that its standard practice with a lot of people. I understand that it gives us another means of encapsulating our label/field pair, but again

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Fields marked with * (asterisk) are required. Yep, instructions are definitely the way to go with the 'required'. we might even look at making instructions for the required as a definition list (hahaha just for fun) * Fields whose labels contain an asterisk require a value. Hey, I mean

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Karl Lurman wrote: > How am I going to highlight the label input > pair without a container div? A fieldset? Hello Karl, I will add a div or paragraph to a form if needed. A division in the form normally marked by color or a border is okay (as that slight meaning will be carried by the Div in t

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

The point of my comments, though, was what I have been saying all along. You simply don't need additional structure to put a form on a page. All you need are the form-related elements: Form, fieldset, legend, label, input (varied), and textarea. Using these elements and CSS you can lay out a form

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Hello Mariusz, > substituting with or > with doesn't seem > right to me at all... you can't just swap > them I'm not really saying to swap them. I'm not pro-list or -table for form layout, I was just trying to pair the elements to show that form elements can serve in the same way (as they s

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On Fri, 25 May 2007 02:22:19 +0200, Sander Aarts wrote (responding to Mike at Green-Beast.com) : > > Your demo form is a wonderful example of a web standards compliant and > accessible form > (although I think that placing the label text before the field instead of > above makes > it even more ac

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

.org To wsg@webstandardsgroup.org cc Subject Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout Hello Mike, Mike at Green-Beast.com schreef: If one tries hard enough, it seems anything can be considered a list of sorts. That might be true, but I hope you will agree that it's easier to consider

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

I found these awhile back and was hoping to roll something similar back into my css framework: http://dnevnikeklektika.com/uni-form/ I know that forms are a b*tch to get looking even slightly good on all browsers, but frankly, tables are an old dog and dl's are just younger dogs. Field sets are

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Hello Mike, Mike at Green-Beast.com schreef: If one tries hard enough, it seems anything can be considered a list of sorts. That might be true, but I hope you will agree that it's easier to consider a form being a list than a whole page. A form is a list of controls and their related input

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: A form is a list of controls and their related inputs, but we wouldn't use a list to organize form controls, so we'd use fieldsets/legends, labels and inputs. Using the Q&A scenario which you might use to try and justify the use of a DL to organize a form, let's s

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Sander Aarts wrote: > Does a form not have a sort of Q&A going on then!? Hello Sander, If one tries hard enough, it seems anything can be considered a list of sorts. For example: A web page is a list of headings and content paragraphs, but we wouldn't use a list to layout an entire web page,

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: For a definition list I could only really come up with three examples: 1) A glossary 2) FAQs 3) An interview transcript (when combined with blockquotes). (All have a sort of Q&A thing goin' on.) Does a form not have a sort of Q&A going on then!? I think you gave

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: I think may be some confusion, Mariusz, because so far this discussion has been about putting a form in a separate structure such as a table or dl to contain or organize the form, not about putting a structure (like a table) in a form. It's the latter you seem to

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Mariusz Nowak wrote: > And other way - where it is written in > specs that forms cannot contain tabular > data? I would never use tables for anything > else as for tabular data.. and it may > happen that form constitutes tabular data. > In such case I think we should use > element to structure th

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Bottom line is Yes you Can use a Table if its appropriate, but you cannot use a table to layout your form. As for lists, if its a list, the yes you can contain your form in a list. We are talking about people abusing this and using lists and tables when not needed. On 5/24/07, Mariusz Nowak <[E

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Jamie Collins wrote: You put: Using form doesn't exclude use of list or table To me thats telling me 'oh yes you can use a table or list' The only time i said a table is fine forms is if its a dynamic spreadsheet or a calander. Of course you can use table or list within form as this is what f

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

You put: Using form doesn't exclude use of list or table To me thats telling me 'oh yes you can use a table or list' The only time i said a table is fine forms is if its a dynamic spreadsheet or a calander. Ive demonstrated the use of forms without tables, and when i get time i will create an a

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Jamie, Before i go any further, ill say again, follow the standards set. In my article i quoted a quote from W3C that says, tables should not be used for layout purposes but for tabular data. I think you totally misunderstood my point. Where in my post I suggest that it's ok to use tables for

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Medyk, You clearly dont understand forms, i can tell by the way you said you dont understand what a is for. Before i go any further, ill say again, follow the standards set. In my article i quoted a quote from W3C that says, tables should not be used for layout purposes but for tabular data. Do

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Jamie Collins wrote: http://www.viberate.co.uk/ws/styling-a-form/styling-a-form.html I must say that I disagree with some points stated in these article, shared also with stronger tone in previous posts (that is "Tables for forms

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Ive put together a quick article regarding forms. Ive had to place it on some random server at work for now. http://www.viberate.co.uk/ws/styling-a-form/styling-a-form.html Theres 3 pages in total, the last page goes through 3 methods of creating a form with and without a DL. Its been created fo

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Only have safe sex with wombats they are promiscious and many have a sexual transmitted disease clymidia. You guys are sick today eating roots and leaves, off topic. Tim On 23/05/2007, at 8:37 AM, John Faulds wrote: gay wombat sex is rightly prohibited in Australia Mabye Australia doesn't co

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

there is also the issue of how it will display on a minimal browser not only without table rendering but also without css rendering ... It should still be possible to use the form. .. at the end of the day I think that it what it comes down to - making it work on any browser with any type of d

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Breton Slivka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 23/05/2007 08:14 AM Please respond to wsg@webstandardsgroup.org To wsg@webstandardsgroup.org cc Subject Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout So when is this great festival of telling people what they can't do going to en

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Personally I think that form elements lend themselves to practically all the semantic meaning you need. Labels and input elements are either implicity or explicity linked (ie either labelname.../> or ), and then you have fieldsets as the basic method for containing groups of form elements. I

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Mabye Australia doesn't come across as being that progressive in other parts of the world, but the only state where gay wombat sex would be prohibited is Tasmania. ;) /* Admin */ Folks, I know it's early in Australia and most of us probably haven't had our coffee yet, but please refra

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Sorry, couldn't resist Googling for it: http://www.abc.net.au/catalyst/stories/s721128.htm I know, off (original) topic, but it's been a funny kind of day and I haven't had my fix of wizwebz.co.uk yet... Nick Nick Gleitzman wrote: On 23 May 2007, at 7:36 AM, John Faulds wrote: I doubt th

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

gay wombat sex is rightly prohibited in Australia Mabye Australia doesn't come across as being that progressive in other parts of the world, but the only state where gay wombat sex would be prohibited is Tasmania. ;) -- Tyssen Design www.tyssendesign.com.au Ph: (07) 3300 3303 Mb: 0405 678

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 23 May 2007, at 7:36 AM, John Faulds wrote: I doubt there's any laws in Australia that prohibit me having sex with a wombat - doesn't mean it's something that's OK to do though Damn. ___ omnivision. websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/

RE: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Faulds Sent: 22 May 2007 22:36 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout > Also, Joe Clark said [1]: I think it's just fine and dandy to > use definition

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

So when is this great festival of telling people what they can't do going to end? I'd like to know what you CAN do for forms? this is not a made up problem. Forms are difficult to style. -Breton On 23/05/2007, at 4:58 AM, Jamie Collins wrote: Tables for forms = NO DL for forms = No Its th

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Also, Joe Clark said [1]: I think it’s just fine and dandy to use definition lists to mark up appositional pairs. Such usage is not prohibited by the spec, which implies such usage is permitted. Not arguing for or against some of the uses of DLs, but I've always thought the 'because somethin

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On 22 May 2007, at 20:40:41, Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote: Steve Green wrote: No, a form is not a list of form controls [...] I agree. A form is not a list, nor is it tabular data. I know this was originally a demonstration to show the lesser of two evils, but evil is evil so less wrong st

RE: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

> On Behalf Of Steve Green >  > Definition lists are the new tables. People are just falling over themselves trying to abuse them in all kinds of inappropriate ways. To paraphrase the previous message, a definition list is for lists of definitions I don't agree with this definition. For example, t

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Steve Green wrote: > No, a form is not a list of form controls [...] I agree. A form is not a list, nor is it tabular data. I know this was originally a demonstration to show the lesser of two evils, but evil is evil so less wrong still isn't right. What I don't understand is why there is this

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Tables for forms = NO DL for forms = No Its that simple . On 5/22/07, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Steve Green wrote: > No, a form is not a list of form controls any more than a chapter of a > book is a list of paragraphs or a paragraph is a list of words. A > collection of

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Steve Green wrote: No, a form is not a list of form controls any more than a chapter of a book is a list of paragraphs or a paragraph is a list of words. A collection of form controls is a fieldset. Definition lists are the new tables. People are just falling over themselves trying to abuse t

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

2007 18:10 *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject:* Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout A table is for Tabular Date, a quote from the W3C Documentation: "Tables should not be used purely as a means to layout document content as this may present problems when rendering to non-visual media. Additionall

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

On Tue, 22 May 2007 14:28:02 +1000, Joshua Street wrote: > My vote generally goes in for tables. Use th cells appropriately and there's > a clear > relationship there. Definition lists are semantically on par, but often > harder to > implement/require effort to make them *look like a table* (whic

RE: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

llins Sent: 22 May 2007 18:10 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout A table is for Tabular Date, a quote from the W3C Documentation: "Tables should not be used purely as a means to layout document content as this may present problems when rendering to n

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

o justify a definition list can equally apply to a table. CSS can usually achieve anything you want visually. Steve -- *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Jamie Collins *Sent:* 22 May 2007 08:46 *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org *Subject

RE: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jamie Collins Sent: 22 May 2007 08:46 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout Kane, exactly what i was going to say. And in no way, and i mean by no way should you use tables for forms, unless its ment for tabular date, the only way i can

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Kane, exactly what i was going to say. And in no way, and i mean by no way should you use tables for forms, unless its ment for tabular date, the only way i can ever see this being possible is if you were to create a spreadsheet that allows the user to input details. Thats the only real use i can

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

My view: Use HTML for content Use CSS for presentation Use tables only for tabular data WCAG 1.0 has the following guidelines applicable to this question. 3.3 Use style sheets to control layout and presentation. 5.1 For data tables, identify row and column headers. 5.3 Do not use tables for lay

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

Using the   for layout is the worst of the ideas and should not be considered for the final form. Tables, while frowned upon / argued over / etc, are still the most reliable way to layout COMPLEX forms, for simple forms you don't need tables at all. Do a search for accessible CSS form layouts

Re: [WSG] dl v table for form layout

My vote generally goes in for tables. Use th cells appropriately and there's a clear relationship there. Definition lists are semantically on par, but often harder to implement/require effort to make them *look like a table* (which is what people expect when filling out forms, on paper or on the w