Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread csslist
its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine. "So now one has to scroll both the window and the inner element in order to get to the content. Cute." Ok smart ass, thats 1 page that has a

Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread csslist
"I could show you a million websites with the background graphic positioned at the bottom of the content."gee, really??? now wayyy!!! I don't recall asking you for your opinon on it and I didn't ask for a site check and unless you are paying the bill for the site then I will listen to the people

[WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Web Man Walking
Title: Dragon Way (Site Check) Hello I have developed a site for a client and all seems fine, compliant, etc. works ace in IE and FF. I dont have a MAC and client is complaining of: 1. Homepage - Text under dolls is not centred 2. Homepage - No logo showing 3. Rest of site - Top bar

Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Rick Faaberg
On 11/25/05 12:45 AM Web Man Walking [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out: I don¹t have a MAC I do. And it's Mac, not MAC. Mac is short for Macintosh. 1. Homepage - Text under dolls is not centred Seems okay in Safari. 2. Homepage - No logo showing If that's the green, phallic sort of thing,

Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread Christian Montoya
On 11/25/05, csslist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: its designed to fit on a 800 x 600 and it fits right down to the bottom of the scroll area, sure the bottom of the reels arent showing and thats fine. This is a 1:1 image of my browser viewport: http://space.rdpdesign.com/reels.jpg Notice the

Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread Christian Montoya
And yet you have offered nothing yet to help with the question, so why answer? You misunderstand. My reason for telling you this is that there is nothing you can do about your problem with the current layout. If the client wants it that way, then that's fine, no need to argue. Just keep in

Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread csslist
First of all I appriciate all help I get and I can take critizism fine when I ask for it. Ok, so if we do it your way on your browser (lets just say..) to read the page you will have to scroll the screen down and so when you want a new link you will have to scroll all the way back up to do it,

Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread csslist
Then I appologize Christian, This is due like today and I'm really growchy but it's what they want and if it needs changed then we change it. I was opposed to the idea just like you are now but it's grown on me and I kinda like it. But you gotta remember we are targettting their main audience

Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread Christian Montoya
And too add to that, their stats say well over 90% of their web site users are using a screen resolution of 800 x 600 screen resolution != viewport size this is a common mistake among developers. I just explained to you that my screen resolution is 1280 x 768 which is much bigger than that,

Re: [WSG] menu suggestions and problems

2005-11-25 Thread csslist
yes I know that But you are not getting it, which is fine, you don't have too, I do. We know some or a lot of people it wont fit which is a given. But your option is to make them page scroll and mine is to window scroll so that they DON'T have to scroll all the way up to use the menu. Does that

Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Jon Tan
Dragon Way (Site Check)Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 8:45 AM, Web Man Walking wrote: I don't have a MAC and client is complaining of: 1. Homepage - Text under dolls is not centred Safari - exactly the same as FF/Win IE5.2/Mac: not present 2. Homepage - No logo showing Safari - exactly the

RE: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Web Man Walking
Hello Thanks for the input... IE5.2/Mac: Slow as hell (over a minute). Definitely not a connection issue as all other browsers are fine. Something is causing IE5.2 to struggle when rendering your code. Suggest they're using IE5.2/Mac to test unfortunately. Thanks Jon. I thought I was going

Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Mark Harris
Web Man Walking wrote: IE5.2/Mac: Slow as hell (over a minute). Definitely not a connection issue as all other browsers are fine. Something is causing IE5.2 to struggle when rendering your code. Suggest they're using IE5.2/Mac to test unfortunately. Thanks Jon. I thought I was going nuts.

[WSG] Menu issue

2005-11-25 Thread Marko Mihelcic - founder of mcville.net (http.//www.mcville.net)|(http://board.mcville.net)
I'm having some Menu issue on my site in the Internet Exlopere (grrr) :P Try to browes to some article and expaned the ajax menu - in IE it goes a bit on the main center content/article : http://www.mcville.net Cheers ** The discussion list for

RE: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Web Man Walking
What are you using as an editor? I noticed a meta I haven't seen before: meta name=MSSmartTagsPreventParsing content=true / Does that indicate FrontPage or something MS-based? http://www.html-reference.com/META_name_MSSmartTagsPreventParsing.htm Point out to your client that IE5.2 is so flakey

Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Vincent Hasselgård
Hi, If you tell your client to visit www.msn.com with his Mac IE5.2 browser then he'll get the message that his browser is out of date and that he should change it to another browser like FireFox or Safari. So even Microsoft tells Macusers to change to another browser than Internet Explorer. I

[WSG] xhtml doctypes and charsets

2005-11-25 Thread The Snider's Web
Hi Everyone, I am going to delurk to ask a question :) I have been using html 4.01 transitional on my sites and have slowly branched out to xhtml. However, I remember that there has been some discussion on other lists about the 'dangers' of using xhtml. Here is what I have seen used, what

Re: [WSG] xhtml doctypes and charsets

2005-11-25 Thread The Snider's Web
Oops! Not sure what happened there...but after that doctype below the charset would be: meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html; charset=UTF-8 / I usually use the charset=iso-8859-1. Hopefully that will make sense! I guess I am wondering what the current debate is about xhtml, after

RE: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Web Man Walking
All sounds good. Spec does mention IE/FF but client not the best English speaker and not too attentive to details :-) Now I have some facts I can back up my points when we meet to discuss. Thanks for all your help. I hope I can repay the favour one day. E. -Original Message- From:

Re: [WSG] xhtml doctypes and charsets

2005-11-25 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun
The Snider's Web wrote: I have been using html 4.01 transitional on my sites and have slowly branched out to xhtml. However, I remember that there has been some discussion on other lists about the 'dangers' of using xhtml. I know of no dangers with html 4.01 reformulated to proper

RE: [WSG] BOM and charset declaration in CSS

2005-11-25 Thread Paul Noone
Cheers, Gene. After reading the exhaustive W3C tutorial on encoding I wound up not delcaring it in the CSS after all. I'm also using Source Edit (a free Windows hex/text editor) to delete the invisible single character entity that Notebook and other editors like to insert at the start of file.

[WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Chris Kennon
Hi, I've adopted the philosophy, drop down menus are a surrogate for detailed Information Architecture. Sub-navigation should be introduced on internal pages to navigate sub-sections. Before passing this along to clients as mantra, I thought seeking the advice of the participants of the

Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Christian Montoya
On 11/25/05, Chris Kennon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I've adopted the philosophy, drop down menus are a surrogate for detailed Information Architecture. Sub-navigation should be introduced on internal pages to navigate sub-sections. Before passing this along to clients as mantra, I

Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Jay Gilmore
I am with you on that. I don't feel that dropdowns are as user friendly as they could be. I think people should be directed to the information they are using by providing descriptive top level navigation, contextual linking and logical 2nd level navigation within the context of the related

Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Jon Tan
Chris Kennon wrote: I've adopted the philosophy, drop down menus are a surrogate for detailed Information Architecture. Sub-navigation should be introduced on internal pages to navigate sub-sections. Agreed under the assumption that you're not referring to navigating by select box. I

[WSG] Positioning Image problems

2005-11-25 Thread Kevin Arrowsmith
I have to problems at the moment which have me stumped, both to do with positioning images. The first is at http://www.carrollwaterservices.co.uk the kinetico reinventing water image is fine when the site is initially loaded but when he goes to another page and then comes back to it not

RE: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Stephen Stagg
Just to stop this thread from being too one-sided, I disagree. While I do agree that care should be taken, it depends on the content that is being portrayed and the levels of hierarchy involved. On a relatively simple site structure, drop-downs can serve to reduce screen clutter while allowing

Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Al Sparber
From: Jon Tan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Friday, November 25, 2005 3:46 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus] Chris Kennon wrote: I've adopted the philosophy, drop down menus are a surrogate for detailed Information Architecture. Sub-navigation

[WSG] Re: University textbook or other resources?

2005-11-25 Thread Laura Carlson
I've been asked if there are useful university-focused textbooks or other resources suitable for teaching accessible web design. As Lloyd and Matthew mentioned Joe Clark's Building Accessible Websites, New Riders Publishing, 2002 is well worth considering. I have been using it for the web

[WSG] Class

2005-11-25 Thread Stephen Kortz
Hi all, I am a bit confused about: style. Take the following statement: body style=margin-top; 200px From my reading, I understand that this html element, style has been deprecated. Is this true or have I misinterpreted the information? Second, how would I go about replacing this html version of

Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Chris Kennon
Hi, When you say contextual linking you’re referring to sub-navigation appropriate to each sub-section? C On Nov 25, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Jon Tan wrote: IMO, they are often used instead of good contextual links, ** The discussion list

=?iso-8859-1?Q?Re:_[WSG]_Re:_University_textbook_or_other_resources??=

2005-11-25 Thread tonyzeoli
There are two magazines out of the UK that sometimes offer tutorials that you can use in the classrom. One is called WebDesigner and the other is called Practical Web Projects http://www.paragon.co.uk/wd/index.htm http://www.paragon.co.uk/pwp/index.htm If you want to teach web design from a

Re: [WSG] Casual Friday[Drop-Down Menus]

2005-11-25 Thread Chris Kennon
Hi, Never mind! I knew them as breadcrumbs. C On Nov 25, 2005, at 2:35 PM, Chris Kennon wrote: Hi, When you say contextual linking you’re referring to sub-navigation appropriate to each sub-section? C On Nov 25, 2005, at 12:46 PM, Jon Tan wrote: IMO, they are often used instead of

Re: [WSG] Class

2005-11-25 Thread James O'Neill
Stephan, I do not know if it desprecated but if you want to use it you can add the following to your CSS declarations: body { margin-top; 200px; } however you may want to go with body { margin-top: 12em; } so it scales with fluid designs (or use percentages). Jim On 11/25/05, Stephen Kortz

Re: [WSG] Class

2005-11-25 Thread Gene Falck
Hi Stephen, You wrote: I am a bit confused about: style. Take the following statement: body style=margin-top; 200px From my reading, I understand that this html element, style has been deprecated. Is this true or have I misinterpreted the information? I see this part has been answered

Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Lea de Groot
On 25/11/2005, at 9:29 PM, Mark Harris wrote: Point out to your client that IE5.2 is so flakey it might as well be in sanskrit and that and smart people using Macs will be using Safari or Firefox ;-) No, IE5.2 is the browser of choice for OS9 (and I assume lower! :( ) users. I don't

Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Lea de Groot
On 26/11/2005, at 1:25 PM, Mark Harris wrote: I only started using a Mac on OSX so I didn't know that. Will Firefox run on OS9? Good question. http://www.mozilla.org/download.html says: Looking for software for Mac OS 9? Due to the lack of developer interest, build machines, compilers and

Re: [WSG] Dragon Way (Site Check)

2005-11-25 Thread Felix Miata
Lea de Groot wrote: On 26/11/2005, at 1:25 PM, Mark Harris wrote: I only started using a Mac on OSX so I didn't know that. Will Firefox run on OS9? Good question. http://www.mozilla.org/download.html says: Looking for software for Mac OS 9? Due to the lack of developer interest,