Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
Thanks all for your assistance!
:-)
--ZacharyOn 10/3/05, Alan Trick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just looked at the page in a text browser (links) and there's a coupleof anoying issues.1. This is not bad, but a bit of an anoyance. There is a notice aboutnot having _javascript_. This appears at the top of the page. I don't
think this is really neccisary. If you really want it, put it at thebottom of the page.2. The links on the front page for VBdoodle and Web Design don't show upbecause of the lack of CSS support. Mabye this was intentional, but it
would be nice if you had it like it was for the third box or something.3. The links for validation appear right at the top. I understand whythey're there (and it looks pretty cool in css browsers). I don't know
if there would be any simple way to have this put at the bottom fortext-browsers, but it would be nice if you could because they're not themost important links on your site.For the most part though, things look fine though. It sure beats most of
the sites on the internet.Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Hopkins Programming wrote: @All - Still need suggestions on the WAI conundrum.
http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/ Well, I think you should definitely put some descriptive text in those links, as my text-only browsers can't even see that there are links there at the moment. Don't think that qualifies for 'AAA'...
Something like - 'learn more about wb doodle' - 'learn more about web design' would solve that. An 'off screen' technique will make it work with CSS off. .off-screen {position: absolute; top: -9000px; left: -9000px;}
However, since such a link-text should also work as a substitute for an alt-attribute--with images off, maybe better leave the text on screen and use a variant of
http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_chaos_14.html Should satisfy WAI-checkpoints and will work no matter what -- and may even be useful for visitors. Georg**
The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help**-- ==
The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
On http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/products/vbdoodle/ the text in the 'VB DOODLE' box is overfollowing. This is on Firefox 1.0.7 Gentoo Linux. My guess is that this is an issue with fonts because my default font is not that ugly monster (:P) known as Times New Romans. Fonts tend to be quite an issue because the fonts on one system are often different (in size and style) that the ones on another. It's not a serious issue, but if you could avoid fixed heights that would be nice. Hopkins Programming wrote: Hey guys, If you wouldn't mind checking out my website, http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/, I would greatly appreciate it. There is one thing in particular I would like help with - On the homepage, the 3 large images are divs w/background images, and display:block hyperlinks. It works fine, but it fails WAI WCAG 1.0 Priority 2 Checkpoint 13.1 - Create link phrases http://webxact2.watchfire.com/themes/standard-en-us/help/HIDD_WDContent_G34.html that make sense when read out of context. I know it can be fixed by changing my p's to span's and moving them inside the hyperlinks, but is that something I should do? The text in the p's is good, but I don't think it's worthy of being in a hyperlink. Would it be best to create a short sentence to go in the hyperlinks that briefly describes the page the user will get when the link is clicked, or ? Any assistance on this matter would be greatly appreciated. You're welcome to poke around for other problems (I know have a few sementic naming issues in my CSS) because I always like feedback. Thanks a bundle guys! --Zachary Hopkins * Reference Links: Website: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/ W3C WCAG: http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ -- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
@Alan - I'm still working on the subsequent pages. The home page is all ive updated at the moment. Thx for the heads up. @All - Still need suggestions on the WAI conundrum. Thanks all! ---ZacharyOn 10/3/05, Alan Trick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/products/vbdoodle/ the text in the'VB DOODLE' box is overfollowing. This is on Firefox 1.0.7 Gentoo Linux.My guess is that this is an issue with fonts because my default font is not that ugly monster (:P) known as Times New Romans. Fonts tend to bequite an issue because the fonts on one system are often different (insize and style) that the ones on another. It's not a serious issue, but if you could avoid fixed heights that would be nice.Hopkins Programming wrote: Hey guys, If you wouldn't mind checking out my website, http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/, I would greatly appreciate it. There is one thing in particular I would like help with - On the homepage, the 3 large images are divs w/background images, and display:block hyperlinks.It works fine, but it fails WAI WCAG 1.0 Priority 2 Checkpoint 13.1 - Create link phrases http://webxact2.watchfire.com/themes/standard-en-us/help/HIDD_WDContent_G34.html that make sense when read out of context.I know it can be fixed by changing my p's to span's and moving them inside the hyperlinks, but is that something I should do?The text in the p's is good, but I don't think it's worthy of being in a hyperlink.Would it be best to create a short sentence to go in the hyperlinks that briefly describes the page the user will get when the link is clicked, or ? Any assistance on this matter would be greatly appreciated.You're welcome to poke around for other problems (I know have a few sementic naming issues in my CSS) because I always like feedback. Thanks a bundle guys! --Zachary Hopkins * Reference Links:Website: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/W3C WCAG: http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/ -- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help** -- ==The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
Hopkins Programming wrote:
@All - Still need suggestions on the WAI conundrum.
http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/
Well, I think you should definitely put some descriptive text in those
links, as my text-only browsers can't even see that there are links
there at the moment. Don't think that qualifies for 'AAA'...
Something like
- 'learn more about wb doodle'
- 'learn more about web design'
would solve that.
An 'off screen' technique will make it work with CSS off.
.off-screen {position: absolute; top: -9000px; left: -9000px;}
However, since such a link-text should also work as a substitute for an
alt-attribute--with images off, maybe better leave the text on screen
and use a variant of http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_chaos_14.html
Should satisfy WAI-checkpoints and will work no matter what -- and may
even be useful for visitors.
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
I just looked at the page in a text browser (links) and there's a couple
of anoying issues.
1. This is not bad, but a bit of an anoyance. There is a notice about
not having javascript. This appears at the top of the page. I don't
think this is really neccisary. If you really want it, put it at the
bottom of the page.
2. The links on the front page for VBdoodle and Web Design don't show up
because of the lack of CSS support. Mabye this was intentional, but it
would be nice if you had it like it was for the third box or something.
3. The links for validation appear right at the top. I understand why
they're there (and it looks pretty cool in css browsers). I don't know
if there would be any simple way to have this put at the bottom for
text-browsers, but it would be nice if you could because they're not the
most important links on your site.
For the most part though, things look fine though. It sure beats most of
the sites on the internet.
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Hopkins Programming wrote:
@All - Still need suggestions on the WAI conundrum.
http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/
Well, I think you should definitely put some descriptive text in those
links, as my text-only browsers can't even see that there are links
there at the moment. Don't think that qualifies for 'AAA'...
Something like
- 'learn more about wb doodle'
- 'learn more about web design'
would solve that.
An 'off screen' technique will make it work with CSS off.
.off-screen {position: absolute; top: -9000px; left: -9000px;}
However, since such a link-text should also work as a substitute for an
alt-attribute--with images off, maybe better leave the text on screen
and use a variant of http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_chaos_14.html
Should satisfy WAI-checkpoints and will work no matter what -- and may
even be useful for visitors.
Georg
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
Hopkins Programming wrote: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/ Your px sized containers aren't giving their content enough room to fit: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/hopkinsp1.png If you set height in em's vertical inadequacy shouldn't happen. -- Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
I can change those. But, the backgrounds are set not to repeat vertically. So would it be better to a) Let the text flow into empty white space; b) set a bckgound color and let it flow into that; or c) let the background repeat? Also, just how far up should I assume a user may set their text? Although I design for in Firefox/Opera, I always make sure the text can size properly, given IE's +2 -2 operation. But should I go further? Thanks! --ZacharyOn 10/2/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hopkins Programming wrote: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/Your px sized containers aren't giving their content enough room to fit: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/hopkinsp1.pngIf you set height in em's vertical inadequacy shouldn't happen.--Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409Felix Miata***http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**-- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
You can't just measure it by IE's +2 and -2, because for users with widescreen displays, the default is something like +1. This is because widescreen Windows XP runs at 120 dpi rather than the standard 96 dpi, and to compensate for small text, the text is automatically set to be larger. Therefore it's best to not assume that all users start from font-size:medium. I can change those. But, the backgrounds are set not to repeat vertically. So would it be better to a) Let the text flow into empty white space; b) set a bckgound color and let it flow into that; or c) let the background repeat?I think choice b is the best one.
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm says: use plain text email Hopkins Programming wrote: On 10/2/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hopkins Programming wrote: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/ Your px sized containers aren't giving their content enough room to fit: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/hopkinsp1.png If you set height in em's vertical inadequacy shouldn't happen. I can change those. But, the backgrounds are set not to repeat vertically. So would it be better to a) Let the text flow into empty white space; b) set a bckgound color and let it flow into that; or c) let the background repeat? B should work, but depending on the background images, which I haven't examined, C might be OK too. I doubt A would be attractive. Also, just how far up should I assume a user may set their text? The 28px setting in that 1792x1344 screenshot is not contrived. It's directly proportional to the 16px common brower default observed at the median 1024x768 resolution. 1344 / 768 X 16px = 28px. That makes the fonts on my 1792x1344 screen exactly the same physical size on any given size display as those using 16px at 1024x768, except that due to the far higher pixel density for any given size mine have a far superior quality even without anti aliasing or hinting. Although I design for in Firefox/Opera, I always make sure the text can size properly, given IE's +2 -2 operation. But should I go further? To say IE has a +2 -2 range isn't the whole story. Medium is actually 12pt, not 16px, though by default they happen to be the same thing. Doze users have the option to change font size system wide, and it is on this base that we find IE font sizes. Once they choose large (120 DPI, the OEM default on many laptops) or larger (there really is no fixed limit, though 200% is the largest that is easy to select), the base range is increased quite a bit, as you can see in this chart in the left table: http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/absolute-sizes-IE6.html -- Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
Ok guys, I've reworked some of the heights and background images to allow for extended text resizing. I think I got all of the big stuff, does it look work ok for you now Felix? --ZacharyOn 10/2/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm says:use plain text emailHopkins Programming wrote: On 10/2/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Hopkins Programming wrote: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/Your px sized containers aren't giving their content enough room to fit:http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/hopkinsp1.pngIf you set height in em's vertical inadequacy shouldn'thappen. I can change those. But, the backgrounds are set not to repeat vertically. So would it be better to a) Let the text flow into empty white space; b) set a bckgound color and let it flow into that; or c) let the background repeat?B should work, but depending on the background images, which I haven'texamined, C might be OK too. I doubt A would be attractive. Also, just how far up should I assume a user may set their text? The 28px setting in that 1792x1344 screenshot is not contrived. It'sdirectly proportional to the 16px common brower default observed at themedian 1024x768 resolution. 1344 / 768 X 16px = 28px. That makes the fonts on my 1792x1344 screen exactly the same physical size on any givensize display as those using 16px at 1024x768, except that due to the farhigher pixel density for any given size mine have a far superior quality even without anti aliasing or hinting. Although I design for in Firefox/Opera, I always make sure the text can size properly, given IE's +2 -2 operation. But should I go further? To say IE has a +2 -2 range isn't the whole story. Medium is actually12pt, not 16px, though by default they happen to be the same thing. Dozeusers have the option to change font size system wide, and it is on this base that we find IE font sizes. Once they choose large (120 DPI, theOEM default on many laptops) or larger (there really is no fixed limit,though 200% is the largest that is easy to select), the base range is increased quite a bit, as you can see in this chart in the left table:http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/absolute-sizes-IE6.html--Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409Felix Miata***http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**-- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
Hopkins Programming wrote: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/ Ok guys, I've reworked some of the heights and background images to allow for extended text resizing. I think I got all of the big stuff, does it look work ok for you now Felix? You're still not giving several things enough space: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/hopkinsp2.png -- Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Site Review: hopkinsprogramming.net/
Ok, For the moment being, I am going to ignore the links in the top right corner and the fieldset in the bottom left. What do you think about the WAI issue? Keep the p's and add in a small span of text inside the link, or put all of the p text into a span and use that? --zacharyOn 10/2/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hopkins Programming wrote: http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net/ Ok guys, I've reworked some of the heights and background images to allow for extended text resizing. I think I got all of the big stuff, does it look work ok for you now Felix?You're still not giving several things enough space:http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/hopkinsp2.png --Be quick to listen, slow to speak.James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409Felix Miata***http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/** The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help**-- == The best way to predict the future is to invent it. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.hopkinsprogramming.net
