Re: [WSG] another form question

2008-11-04 Thread David Dorward
tee wrote: 1) wrap the input inside 'label' is bad practice - so I have not done that for years. No it isn't. Using the for attribute is best practise, but there is no harm in doing both (unless you need the elements to be separate for styling purposes). 2) learned that 'button' is better

[WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread Todd Budnikas
Wondering if people have insights into the length of a url for an article, and whether or not it is recommended to complete the name of an article in the url. For instance: http://egovau.blogspot.com/2008/10/do-collaborative-online-groups-need-to.html The name of this article is Do

RE: [WSG] Standards and Adobe Contribute

2008-11-04 Thread Kieren T
What puts me off about about Contribute is the cost; very few of my clients are willing to pay that amount of cash. There aren't many open source alternatives to choose from, I'm currently riding with SnippetMaster ( do a search), one or two bugs, but all in all an excellent, web based

Re: [WSG] Standards and Adobe Contribute

2008-11-04 Thread Joe Ortenzi
Hi Several people are misunderstanding why some of us are challenging the use of Contribute (please note, challenging, not refusing) and why a consultant might discover (please note: discover, not insist) where a CMS might be a better solution for the client in the long run and better

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread Bruce
Todd Budnikas wrote: Wondering if people have insights into the length of a url for an article, and whether or not it is recommended to complete the name of an article in the url. For instance: http://egovau.blogspot.com/2008/10/do-collaborative-online-groups-need-to.html The name of this

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread James Ellis
..and if you are truncating url paths based on a page title at a certain point, you'll end up with some odd urls sooner or later.. e.g example.com/blog/why-xyz-browser-sucks.html when your title is: Why XYZ browser sucks less than ABC browser RFC 2616 (HTTP/1.1) doesn't set a maximum length on

[WSG] Re: [WSG Announce] Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 is a Proposed Recommendation

2008-11-04 Thread Shawn Henry
Thanks for spreading the word, Russ. Here's some more perspective on the situation: * With real world implementations WCAG 2.0 steps closer to expected December 2008 publication blog post http://www.w3.org/QA/2008/11/with_real_world_implementation.html * WCAG 2.0 moves to last stage for

[WSG] Sophia Lee is out of the office.

2008-11-04 Thread Sophia Lee
I will be out of the office starting 05/11/2008 and will not return until 10/11/2008. I will respond to your message when I return. If your matter is urgent, please call me on the mobile, 0448 010 941. *** List Guidelines:

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread Joe Ortenzi
other than making sense and having a strong connection with the page the content is on, there is no direct reason, other than being a bit sensible about it, I wouldn't advise testing out the 2048 characters. On 05/11/2008, at 9:32 AM, James Ellis wrote: RFC 2616 (HTTP/1.1) doesn't set a

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread silky
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:21 AM, Joe Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: other than making sense and having a strong connection with the page the content is on, there is no direct reason, other than being a bit sensible about it, I wouldn't advise testing out the 2048 characters. of course there

RE: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Chris Vickery
More reasons to keep 'em short: 1. Makes it easy to quote URL (maybe over the phone) 2. I've seen a few email or publication programs break URLs where there's a line return, so breaks the hyperlink 3. Makes layout difficult for desktop publishers and marketing ie.

RE: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Bucci, Justin
May also be worth considering the use of an alias URL that redirects the user to the desired location on the page. They're good for referencing URLs in non-electronic media as they're more descriptive, easier to remember, and easier for the user to correctly type into their browser's address bar.

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Todd Budnikas
i completely agree with Justin, and all points from just about everyone who responded, so thanks. A follow-up question is then do you paraphrase an article title into a url, or just chop it? /music/a-fresh-and-powerful-new-cd-from-the-most-influential/ or /music/influential-musician-new-cd/

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread silky
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Todd Budnikas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i completely agree with Justin, and all points from just about everyone who responded, so thanks. A follow-up question is then do you paraphrase an article title into a url, or just chop it?

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Bruce
From: silky [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 9:27 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 1:06 PM, Todd Budnikas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i completely agree with Justin, and all points from just

RE: [WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread John Horner
Just a quick note that if you're going to shorten Do collaborative online groups need to be successful to make a URL, it would be better, from the SEO viewpoint, to cut out the common words, do, need, to etc. So, your URL would be collaborative-online-groups-successful.html not

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread Joe Ortenzi
I said no direct reason, but you point is a good reason to consider short URLs but this is not always possible, but yes, typablity is a good thing too. On 05/11/2008, at 11:27 AM, silky wrote: On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:21 AM, Joe Ortenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: other than making sense

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Joe Ortenzi
Sorry for being a bit off topic but. I think you missed a point about friendly URLs For each of these examples you state, you really don't want to burden your marketing team with urls like your example:

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices

2008-11-04 Thread Andrew Brown
Wait so would it make more sense to include keywords in your link for you main navigation? so instead of about I would make it about-andrew-brown? On 4-Nov-08, at 11:21 PM, Joe Ortenzi wrote: I said no direct reason, but you point is a good reason to consider short URLs but this is not

RE: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Ashley Butler
Please stop emailing me! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe Ortenzi Sent: Wednesday, 5 November 2008 3:30 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] Sorry for being a bit off topic

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Brett Patterson
What? On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 11:39 PM, Ashley Butler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please stop emailing me! -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Joe Ortenzi Sent: Wednesday, 5 November 2008 3:30 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject:

RE: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Chris Vickery
Yes o.O ...aren't we saying the same thing? Keep the url short and to the point. Sorry... I exaggerated the example URL to illustrate the point. Ashley try the unsubscribe if you don't want to get emails... http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm -Original Message- From:

Re: [WSG] URL length best practices [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED]

2008-11-04 Thread Hassan Schroeder
Joe Ortenzi wrote: the long and friendly URL is really for the final page, which should not bury a full product list so deeply and should be titled /product_list.html anyway. Uh, how about more properly '/product_list' (or '/product-list') -- your customers don't care about the underlying

Re: [ADMIN] Thread closed - unsubscribe request [WSG]

2008-11-04 Thread Lea de Groot
This thread is closed. Please don't reply any further to this unsubscribe request. If you need to discuss it, the address to use is at the bottom of the message. Lea -- Lea de Groot WSG Core Member *** List Guidelines: