Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues

Bert Doorn wrote: I code in xhtml Strict and serve it as text/html. My code is future-proof, valid and well structured. Future proof from what? Do you really think any browser will ever drop support for HTML4? If I code in HTML4, there is less "need" for writing properly structured docum

Re: [WSG] Re: UK Government Web Accessibility

"Edward Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've just been informed of a BBC article referencing the UK Government and accessibility. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4478702.stm The stats claimed are actually a lot sharper than I'd imagine but I can see why this is the case. The act

Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues

<...> > I code in xhtml Strict and serve it as text/html. My code is > future-proof, valid and well structured. If I code in HTML4, > there is less "need" for writing properly structured documents. Too bad if quality of code depends on choice between HTML and XHTML. > If at some point in the fu

Re: [WSG] Re: the basics of Firefox (was RE: [WSG] BBC E-mail: Overhaul for Firefox web browser)

Adam Morris wrote: If I uninstall everything, will I lose all my bookmarks, prefs etc.? No, you won't, that's not how it works. However, as has been said several times on this list, this is not a Firefox support list. Look up information about the profile folder, how to backup your bookmark

Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues

Rimantas Liubertas wrote: It is pretty easy to check, all we need is some online tool which, given an url can resend page's content with application/xhtml+xml. Then grab those XHTML pages and see what happens. Try Hixie's content-type proxy. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/cgi/content-type-p

Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues

2005/12/2, Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Rimantas Liubertas wrote: > > It is pretty easy to check, all we need is some online tool which, given an > > url > > can resend page's content with application/xhtml+xml. Then grab those > > XHTML pages and see what happens. > > Try Hixie's content-t

Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues

On 12/2/05, Rimantas Liubertas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 2005/12/2, Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Rimantas Liubertas wrote: > > > It is pretty easy to check, all we need is some online tool which, given > > > an url > > > can resend page's content with application/xhtml+xml. Then grab t

Re: [WSG] Mambo & Accessibility

Lloyd wrote: Guys, Thanks for all the feedback! Backend is important as one of our content providers is blind. Does anyone know much more about Joomla? They are possibly prepared to upgrade (As they see this is just the same thing). I want to know whether its possible to do this with either Mam

Re: [WSG] Mambo & Accessibility

Plz dont send me any mail onword.. otherwise i'll.!!1  On 12/1/05, Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi Guys,I have been asked to work on a web site and Mambo is the current CMSbeing used. They want to, if possible, keep Mambo as they're CMS but upon inspe

Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues

Christian Montoya wrote: 2005/12/2, Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Try Hixie's content-type proxy. http://software.hixie.ch/utilities/cgi/content-type-proxy/content-type-proxy Is this a trick? at the bottom of the page prevents it from handling xml. Any sort of xml. Now how am I going to

Re: [WSG] XHTML Issues

On 12/2/05, Christian Montoya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 12/2/05, Rimantas Liubertas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 2005/12/2, Lachlan Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > Rimantas Liubertas wrote: > > > > It is pretty easy to check, all we need is some online tool which, > > > > given an url > >

[WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...

Following some of the very interesting UK .gov mails of late, I've been involved in a fierce debate about serving XHTML 1.0 STRICT either as application/xhtml+xml or text/html, content negotiation and the like - whether, in fact, the world is ready for XHTML etc Gurus argue for and against - at be

Re: [WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...

Cameron Edwards wrote: Following some of the very interesting UK .gov mails of late, I've been involved in a fierce debate about serving XHTML 1.0 STRICT either as application/xhtml+xml or text/html, content negotiation and the like - whether, in fact, the world is ready for XHTML etc While I d

RE: [WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...

> Cameron Edwards > Following some of the very interesting UK .gov mails of late, > I've been > involved in a fierce debate about serving XHTML 1.0 STRICT either as > application/xhtml+xml or text/html, content negotiation and the like - > whether, in fact, the world is ready for XHTML etc Hmm..

Re: [WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...

Patrick Lauke wrote: (imagine your grandmother with her IE6 going to her local council website - after you finally got her to use the "interweb" - to find information on some opening times or whatever, only to be presented with a "Open / Save as..." dialog). Patrick, I'm a grandmother -- albei

RE: [WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...

> Daisy > Could we drop the sexist (it's never a grandfather!), ageist digs at > people who simply had the misfortune to be born 10, 20, 50 > years too early? Fair enough, my sincere apologies. In my defence, the example was actually based on a real life example from a colleague of mine. Repla

RE: [WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...

Patrick/Lachlan - many, many thanks for your input... ...clashing as it is in some regard. :o) I'd still prefer to deliver my site as XHTML 1.0 STRICT - if I serve it merely as text//html then I'm still covering the bases somewhat while elements of the world at large play catch-up. My mark-up w

Re: [WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...

Patrick Lauke wrote: Daisy Could we drop the sexist (it's never a grandfather!), ageist digs at people who simply had the misfortune to be born 10, 20, 50 years too early? Replace my previous statement with something non-gender/non-age specific phrase to signify users who may have a average c

political correctness (was RE: [WSG] UK Government Web standards - IE and serving issues...)

> Lachlan Hunt > I'll be sure to make sure all my future examples use > "non-technologically inclined, gender indeterminent homo sapien" > instead. Sure it's a mouthful, but we mustn't be sexist. You can go overboard on political correctness, certainly...but Daisy's comment is very valid in my

Re: [WSG] Mambo & Accessibility

Hi all,   We used Textpattern for http://www.bustahouse.com/ and http://www.selfcateringshetland.com/   It's a really nice solution for putting together sites. My main concern with Textpattern is teaching clients how to use it, as the sections/categories model is sometimes a little tricky for them

Re: [WSG] editor

On Thu, 01 Dec 2005 21:38:31 -0500, Steve Clason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'd suggest avoiding WYSIWYG editors (Dreamweaver, Frontpage, etc.) FrontPlague, yes - avoid it. DreamWeaver 8, i'd think about. It's pricy (compared to NotePad and TextEdit), sure, but it has excellent CSS support

[WSG] Oracle/Peoplesoft and accessibility/standard code

Hi, I am getting the total run around here from developers on Oracle/Peoplesoft and I was hoping someone on this list could help. My couple questions: - Does anyone know of an accessible PeopleSoft built application? - Has the issue of PeopleSoft generated code been an issue or is the respon

Re: [WSG] Standards and Aesthetics

+ discussion at -- Jan Brasna aka JohnyB :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com ** The

Re: [WSG] Re: UK Government Web Accessibility

accessibility is an optional extra or it's the usual "yeah, everything we do is accessible". You know it isn't. Not neccessarily. If the producer is working with standards and approaching his task responsively, it should be included in his "best practise". Micro-perfection of HTML tags and

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)

[Lori wrote] I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards conforming web pages using XHTML and would like to know what HTML editor you folks that are light years ahead of me would recommend? [Lachlan wrote] Since you're new, you might want to stick with HTML4 Lachlan, here is a clas

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)

<...> > Lachlan, here is a classic example of a person new to Web Standards asking > for a > recommendation about which editor to use and instead you embroil this person > in a > debate over MIME types. Do you think this is a healthy environment for > newcomers to > learn about Web Standards? Wh

[WSG] Site check and review please

Hi, We have alpha launched itoot.net yesterday, please give me your opinion, feedback, criticism Thank you in advace. -- Regards Jad madi Blog http://jadmadi.net/ Web standards Planet http://W3planet.net/ ** The discussion list for http://webs

[WSG] Layout Check Please

Guys, I'm on a PC with Firefox 1.5, IE 6.0 and Opera 8.5. Everything looks okay so far, but I was hoping some of you mac / linux guys could take a peek at this layout please. http://sausalito.sitesbyjoe.com/default.asp Thanks so much, Joe Taylor http://sitesbyjoe.com ***

Re: [WSG] Site check and review please

On 12/2/05, Jad Madi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > We have alpha launched itoot.net yesterday, please give me your > opinion, feedback, criticism Looks good, no issues. That is to say, no issues with design and performance. The about page could use some revisions. The quotation marks aren't pretty

Re: [WSG] Layout Check Please

Guys,  I'm on a PC with Firefox 1.5, IE 6.0 and Opera 8.5.  Everything looks okay so far, but I was hoping some of you mac / linux guys could take a peek at this layout please.http://sausalito.sitesbyjoe.com/default.asp Joe,Took a look at it with a few browsers in OS X 10.4.3, everything looks good

Re: [WSG] Layout Check Please

I'm running Mac OSX 10.2. It checks out on Firefox and Safari but on IE your content is all over the place. (All browsers are most current versions.) -- Dan Smith Lucid Realm Design www.lucidrealmdesign.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 12/2/05, Joseph R. B. Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Guys, I'm

Re: [WSG] Layout Check Please

My only little comment is to either make the font size fo the nav bar a little bigger or to bold the text. The size of the font seems kind of hard to read verses the background.On 12/2/05, Patrick Haney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Guys,  I'm on a PC with Firefox 1.5, IE 6.0 and Opera 8.5.  Everythi

Re: [WSG] Layout Check Please

Can you please send me a screenshot of that chaos? If you care to, my email site [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you everyone! I wonder whats going wrong with IE/Mac? Joe Taylor http://sitesbyjoe.com Lucid Realm Design wrote: I'm running Mac OSX 10.2. It checks out on Firefox and Safari but on IE

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)

Here is Hickson's reasoning as taken from http://www.hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml 1. Authors write XHTML that makes assumptions that are only valid for tag soup or HTML4 UAs, and not XHTML UAs, and send it as text/html. 2. Authors find everything works fine. 3. Time passes. 4. Author decides to sen

Re: [WSG] Re: the basics of Firefox (was RE: [WSG] BBC E-mail: Overhaul for Firefox web browser)

ok ok ok... don't get your knickers in a twist! I'll shut up about FF now!!xOn 02/12/05, Lachlan Hunt < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Adam Morris wrote:> If I uninstall everything, will I lose all my bookmarks, prefs etc.? No, you won't, that's not how it works.  However, as has been saidseveral times o

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)

Vlad Alexander (XStandard) wrote: Lachlan Hunt wrote: Lori Cole wrote: I am new to (trying to learn how) constructing standards conforming web pages using XHTML and would like to know what HTML editor you folks that are light years ahead of me would recommend? Since you're new, you might want

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)

Lachlan Hunt wrote: Yes. Why should we attempt to hide the truth from them, especially when they're just starting out and they need to lose/avoid any bad habits and mistakes as quickly as possible. Yours is a fringe and pedantic opinion, and you're being ridiculously harsh on XHTML. I'm gl

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)

2005/12/2, XStandard Vlad Alexander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > So Rimantas, you have written invalid XHTML, served it as XML and then blamed > XHTML > because your Web site broke. Your assumption is wrong :) >If you had written invalid HTML 4 and some User Agents had > not parsed it correctly, would

Re: [WSG] Newcomers and Web Standards (was editor)

Lachlan, you have been on this list long enough to know that when you make extreme statements such as "since you're new, you might want to stick with HTML4" or "IE does not support XHTML", that debate will ensue. This is not what newcomers to Web Standards need. A better approach would have been

[WSG] liquid widths

Im only starting to play around with liquid layouts. I like this 3 column example that uses min widths. For non-mozilla browsers it uses horizontal rules to set the min scaling of the boxes. It then hides these from browser that support min width, it seems a bit reduntant to me but. http://ww

Re: [WSG] editor

Hi Lori Welcome to the list HTML Tidy is a third party tool, rather than an editor. It comes in very handy when you want to convert some code to standards compliant code. Your best introduction to Tidy is probably via the Firefox extension @ https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?appl

Re: [WSG] Oracle/Peoplesoft and accessibility/standard code

Hi You could try running it through HTML tidy... or maybe you could write your own frontend to their backend? Do you have some example pages? Cheers JamesOn 12/3/05, Jesse Rodgers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi,I am getting the total run around here from developers onOracle/Peoplesoft and I was h

Re: [WSG] editor

Could you pretty please elaborate on "rubbish"? I mean, I know what you're saying, but I am curious as to what code Frontpage and Dreamweaver puts out that is rubbish. I've seen it said so many times, but no one ever elaborates. Many thanks, Artemis Original Message From: Lac

Re: [WSG] editor

I'm confused lol. My personal site is XHTML and I don't get any popup box when viewing in IE. What is this used for? Why would the average personal site need it? If you could explain in "beginner speak", I would greatly appreciate it :) Artemis Original Message From: Lachla

Re: [WSG] Oracle/Peoplesoft and accessibility/standard code

Hey, Oh the code is horrid. No question. What I am being told is that Peoplesoft/Oracle are *working on it* and there is nothing the developer using the tools can do. Drill down into a discussion with a development team and you find out that if they do change the way the HTML is then when/if

Re: [WSG] editor

Artemis wrote: Could you pretty please elaborate on "rubbish"? I mean, I know what you're saying, but I am curious as to what code Frontpage and Dreamweaver puts out that is rubbish. I've seen it said so many times, but no one ever elaborates. Many thanks, Artemis Artemi