On Jan 30, 2009, at 12:43 AM, William Donovan wrote:
Hang on,
did I miss something or is this completely OT (off topic).
Bible's, Gutenberg, print type faces...
Web Standards...?
Nahhh It's all about type faces that are easier to read on the
web and understanding why some are better
Not to mention optimum line lengths, amount of whitespace, justification
...
It is unfortunately far too common to assume that lessons learned
centuries ago are no longer relevant, just because they weren't digital.
Actually, that was one of the big changes then: type was inherently
fixed-width,
Sorry—got carried away. (:
On 30/01/2009, at 4:43 PM, William Donovan wrote:
Hang on,
did I miss something or is this completely OT (off topic).
Bible's, Gutenberg, print type faces...
Web Standards...?
William Donovan
mobile: 0403 263 284
---
Simon Pascal Klein
Graphic Web Designer
Thanks for your replies everyone.
I'm not explaining the problem well, so I've created a demo page:
http://paulcollinslondon.com/temporary/test.html
If you take a look at it in IE7 and Firefox, you should be able to see the
difference. The first li is taller than the second one, causing the
On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 23:48 -0500, Rick Faircloth wrote:
According to statistics supplied by w3schools.com, as of Jan 08
approximately 95% of users had JS enabled.
Check out http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
and look towards the middle of the page for the stats.
Just to
IMO stats from tech sites are not very representative of the
general intarwebs user base.
Exactly, only this can mean the opposite of what you state:
more tech savy users know how to turn Javascript off, unlike
the general public.
Regards,
Rimantas
--
http://rimantas.com/
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 10:59 PM, Dave Hall w...@skwashd.com wrote:
I would suggest that w3schools attracts a more switched on user than
say Live Search, YouTube or myspace/facebook/insert social network here.
Stats from those types of sites are what I would be more interested in
seeing.
Good
On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:05 PM, Rimantas Liubertas riman...@gmail.comwrote:
Exactly, only this can mean the opposite of what you state:
more tech savy users know how to turn Javascript off, unlike
the general public.
One other thing to bear in mind is that we are mostly thinking of users
Agreed - people certainly aren't getting any smarter as far as web
technologies go. Particuarly as the web is now viewed as a common commodity
that virtually everyone has access to. In the old days, it was more or less
used exclusively by tech savvy users; it was very far from the plug and play
Well if a sysadmin is going to block js, then he/she will probably
block facebook as well
PS: I've been on this list for a while but only recenly started
reading them!
James
--
James Milligan
Lake Internet Services
On 30 Jan 2009, at 12:29, kie...@humdingerdesigns.co.uk wrote:
Agreed -
Another point to note is that many mobile phones have JavaScript enabled
so this figure may increase with the expected rise in mobile popularity.
*** Sorry - that should have said disabled not enabled **
***
List Guidelines:
Another point to note is that many mobile phones have JavaScript enabled
so this figure may increase with the expected rise in mobile popularity.
*** Sorry - that should have said disabled not enabled **
I actually see mobile browsing rising in popularity when browsers on gadgets
are full
Was about to say! Very true, but the iPhone is proving a popular
combination, especially with unlimited data on contract, and JS is
turned on by default. There is an option to turn it off, but I doubt
many would do so.
PS I'm using an iPhone all the time now, typing this message one one!
On Fri, 2009-01-30 at 13:07 +, James Leslie wrote:
Another point to note is that many mobile phones have JavaScript enabled
so this figure may increase with the expected rise in mobile popularity.
*** Sorry - that should have said disabled not enabled **
not just many ... actually I
I will be on leave until Monday 09 Feb. For any urgent enquiries please contact
Lin VanOevelen (620 75466) or Matthew White (620 53549).
---
This email, and any attachments, may be confidential and also privileged. If
you
2009/1/27 Patrick H. Lauke re...@splintered.co.uk:
As good as it is to hear anecdotal evidence from expert users such as list
members here, I'd say it's much more important to bring some actual live
user stats to the table.
Last time I checked JS stats (around 12 months ago) at the site I work
16 matches
Mail list logo
