I've only started using web standards this year. This list has been an invaluable source of knowledge (thanks everyone -- keep it up!). There was a thread earlier this year that discussed how images that are presentational and not part of the content should be placed as background images through the css and not coded into the html with the <img>. This makes a lot of sense. With all sites I've worked on, I'd say that the company logo falls into this presentational category. But I wasn't aware of this concept for my first few sites, so I have some sites where the company logo is part of the html and others where it is part of the css. It is now interesting to compare the two methods and I would argue that, from a marketing point of view, a company logo should not be a background image. This is why: When you watch a page load in your browser, it's a bit like watching dominoes falling: you see a cascade of the page elements fall into place and come to rest. How fast this happens depends on the speed of your internet connection. When the company logo is coded into the html, it is often one of the first images to load and it is in-your-face while everything else is loading. But when the logo is a background image, it is one of the last things to load. From a marketing point of view, this is not desirable. What do others think? I am quite happy to be persuaded otherwise by a sound logical argument/discussion!
Cheers, Hope Stewart ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
