From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of McLaughlin, Gail
Sent: 19 November 2008 16:50
I'm wondering if anybody here knows of a way to use analytics data
to help determine a good guess or idea of which users are using
screen readers to access data, or having trouble with
http://www.accessifyforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=3775
The flash method (detect presence of software that hooks into MSAA) may
be of some help if you write a small swf that then pings Google
Analytics or similar. But worth noting this recent article
http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?p=61
More
Was just wondering. I always use Yahoo's reset.css file to reset elements,
but I have just noticed there is a CSS parse error in it (purposely put
there for browser selecting).
I used the reset.css file in a web development assignment at uni and am
worried that I will lose marks.
The marking
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:45 AM, James Jeffery
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Was just wondering. I always use Yahoo's reset.css file to reset elements,
but I have just noticed there is a CSS parse error in it (purposely put
there for browser selecting).
I can't see any parse errors in
20 input, textarea, select Parse Error {*font-size:100%; 20 input,
textarea, select Parse error - Unrecognized ;}
Test it: http://mi-linux.wlv.ac.uk/~0802390/reset.css
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:57 AM, Matthew Pennell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 10:45 AM, James Jeffery
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 11:06 AM, James Jeffery
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
20 input, textarea, select Parse Error {*font-size:100%; 20 input,
textarea, select Parse error - Unrecognized ;}
Test it:
http://mi-linux.wlv.ac.uk/~0802390/reset.csshttp://mi-linux.wlv.ac.uk/%7E0802390/reset.css
You may want to check out JAWS - it's one of the most popular screen readers
and there is a free version you use to see how it works on a site.
http://www.freedomscientific.com/fs_products/software_jaws.asp
Here's a tip that may help, but isn't tested, screen readers act like link
text browsers,
Dude, I didn't say that was the high pass filter. I said that was the error
in the reset.css. The high pass filter is a different issue unrelated to the
Yahoo
reset stylesheet.
Also, if you look at the source code for reset-min.css you will see it isn't
nothing to do with the fonts stylesheet and
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 12:42 PM, James Jeffery
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dude, I didn't say that was the high pass filter. I said that was the error
in the reset.css. The high pass filter is a different issue unrelated to the
Yahoo
reset stylesheet.
Ah, sorry - I must have read your
Rob -
What I would interpret that to mean is that, by clicking on the link
in the footer, the visitor will be presented the content either
without any graphics or without any graphics or CSS. If it were
merely a matter of the CSS being removed, that shouldn't be a
billable item. However,
Rob Enslin wrote:
I'm involved in a CMS-based website project where the supplier has
provided me with a breakdown of costs - before I sign it off.
One of the items highlighted in the breakdown is a footer-accessed link
for a text-only version. The supplier claims it's the same technology
Betsie does a lot more than just display the page without styles. It was
designed to improve the accessibility of the crappy websites that were the
norm a decade ago, and it is less useful on a website that is coded properly
but it still has some value. The technical spec is at
I have, rather unfortunately, entered into an argument with a couple
colleagues about the future of HTML/XHTML/XML. So, I was wondering, based on
everyone's expertise level here who is right.
I say that in the years coming, maybe 20 years from now, who knows, but
eventually HTML and XHTML will be
Steve Green wrote:
You can do a lot of what Betsie does using CSS but the one thing you
can't do is replace the images with their 'alt' attributes.
Unless you set your user agent to do that, because presumably that's
something you'd need on all sites, not just one particular one.
P
--
Brett Patterson wrote:
I say that in the years coming, maybe 20 years from now, who knows, but
eventually HTML and XHTML will be replaced by XML.
The other two say differently, more along the lines that they will never
do away with HTML or XHTML.
So...that being said who is right?
...
I say that in the years coming, maybe 20 years from now, who knows, but
eventually HTML and XHTML will be replaced by XML.
XHTML _is_ XML
The other two say differently, more along the lines that they will never do
away with HTML or XHTML.
Even if HTML will be replaced by something it
OK. For the last almost 24 hours, I have been trying to get the link to the
results posted on the server to work, but have failed miserably. The results
were made public to subscribers of the newsletters they mail out every
month. They have not yet decided to use the Internet to mail out the
Agreed. If you've got a user agent that does what you need, Betsie doesn't
really add anything. If you don't have access to your own machine (and none
of us do all of the time) then it does perform a useful function for some
people.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Steve Green wrote:
You can do a lot of what Betsie does using CSS but the one thing you
can't do is replace the images with their 'alt' attributes.
CSS is quite capable of that.
The following works fine in Opera 9.62 (the only browser I've bothered
to test for this proof of concept).
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 3:40 PM, Steve Green [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can do a lot of what Betsie does using CSS but the one thing you can't
do is replace the images with their 'alt' attributes.
Does this solve some problem?
--
--
Christian Montoya
christianmontoya.net
Yes it does. It allows the creation of a text-only version for people who
need one but don't have a suitable user agent on the machine that they
currently have access to.
Steve
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Christian Montoya
Sent: 20
Yes, of course you can do stuff like this, although it gets pretty ugly and
bloated if you have a lot of images. The point of Betsie is that it can be
retrofitted to existing websites without the need to modify any code.
It also caters for people who are working on a machine that is not
Hi Patrick,
Appreciate the feedback - thought as much, but always worth checking
with the pros.
Best,
--Rob
On 20 Nov 2008, at 20:39, Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Rob Enslin wrote:
I'm involved in a CMS-based website project where the supplier has
provided me with a
I see where you're coming from, but the logical extension of your argument
is that there are never any instances where it is necessary to use images to
convey information. That is certainly often the case, but can we say
'never'?
You are not always able to make sites as semantically pure as you
Hi,
could used named ampersand character codes.
http://www.yourhtmlsource.com/text/specialcharacters.html
eg lsquo;SOAPrsquo;
On Wed, November 19, 2008 4:05 pm, James Jeffery wrote:
Never had a problem with character encodings on web pages, but since I
reinstalled the OS on my iMac I have
Good morning
Re-designing a site for a client who wants to use the same header image
from his old site. This is an animated gif with rippling water. Am I
right in thinking an animated gif will not optimise?The pic is 1.21
MB ! The optimised version is 24.2 kb but alas, no moving
You could try and redo the frame rate on it so that its not as smooth, which
the client may not like, but it will cut down the file size. Or maybe look
for a royalty free FLASH version that's similar. That would be much smaller.
No matter what you try to explain to some people they just don't get
Re-designing a site for a client who wants to use the same header image
from his old site. This is an animated gif with rippling water. Am I right
in thinking an animated gif will not optimise?The pic is 1.21 MB ! The
optimised version is 24.2 kb but alas, no moving water.
I just read
Thanks Frederick and Chris - that's very interesting. Will see what I
can do.
Lyn
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL
I had to do this once in the past... and in the end I split the animation up
into its individual frames, optimized each frame to within an inch of its
life, then re-built it as an animation. Cut the file size down to 10% of
the original size.
I recall that I did screen-shots of every 'frame' of
I had to do this once in the past... and in the end I split the
animation up into its individual frames, optimized each frame to
within an inch of its life, then re-built it as an animation. Cut the
file size down to 10% of the original size.
That sounds good, if a lot of work.
Thanks
Lyn
Do you think it's a service I should be paying for? Although not expensive,
I'm wondering why the 'functionality' needs to be highlighted at all?
Surely, it's the same as saying we'll charge you separately for css or html
markup?
I'm naturally cynical/suspicious about what suppliers claim in
Just tell the client that you can charge them for a full day of your time to
fix it, or they can just have a still version for free. Let them make the
decision for you ;-)
On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 9:58 AM, Lynette Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
I had to do this once in the past... and in the
Christian Montoya wrote:
You'll have telepathic computer displays before _real_ XHTML replaces HTML.
link rel=stylesheet type=text/css media=mind href=...
Ha! Nice one.
A while back, I stopped using XHTML strict and switched to HTML 4.01
strict DTD's.
Personally, I think HTML 4.01 strict
Micky Hulse wrote:
Christian Montoya wrote:
You'll have telepathic computer displays before _real_ XHTML replaces
HTML.
link rel=stylesheet type=text/css media=mind href=...
Ha! Nice one.
A while back, I stopped using XHTML strict and switched to HTML 4.01
strict DTD's.
Personally, I
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 7:46 PM, David Pietersen
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I had to do this once in the past... and in the end I split the animation up
into its individual frames, optimized each frame to within an inch of its
life, then re-built it as an animation. Cut the file size down to 10%
I made the same decision. I still follow HTML and XHTML, but anything I do
(and have a choice about) is always HTML 4.01 Strict. I think it makes more
sense than XHTML 1.0 Strict at this point since we can't really use real
XHTML yet. It seems to defeat the purpose if you are using a Strict
To follow up on Micky, Christian and Rimantas, here's the latest info on
HTML 5:
HTML 5 Draft Recommendation — 20 November 2008:
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/
The Web Developer's Guide to HTML 5 - W3C Editor's Draft 19 November 2008
(written by my colleague,
Frank Palinkas wrote:
To follow up on Micky, Christian and Rimantas, here's the latest info on
HTML 5:
Thanks for those links! :)
Cheers,
Micky
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe:
If you have Adobe Photoshop you probably also have Adobe ImageReady.
You can use ImageReady to edit and optimise animated gifs.
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe:
40 matches
Mail list logo
