Things are definitely better now than they once were in the world of
browsers.
Sure, we have a number of IE's of varying inability to deal with plus a
bunch of others.
Sure, we're constantly in a state of "it doesn't work on everything yet".
Sure, not one tool we use can be relied on 100% of the time.
But....
We finally have an environment where standards can flourish. Browser
competition exists again. So much so that Microsft had no choice but to
join in. This is good.
We have new toys like CSS3 that create enough excitement that browsers
are scrambling to handle them.
While I've been continuously disappointed for the last decade on
standards adoption etc, I remain optimistic that the future is bright.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Web Designer / Developer/
--------------------------------------
Sites by Joe, LLC
/"Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design"/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: j...@sitesbyjoe.com
On 10/20/10 12:11 PM, cat soul wrote:
Well, you certainly busted wide open a huge can of worms, Joseph, and
I salute you for it.
the one comfy thing in that, to me, is the "no IE" part.
Starting with clean HTML is easy enough, but everything else is
squarely in the "don't count on it" category..revealing the lick and a
promise nature of CSS and Jscript...not that they are not worthy
tools; they simply can't be counted upon to be properly supported...
but neither can HTML, which, IIRC, is the reason for CSS.
Yanno, folks...I am smelling the need for some kind of revolution
here...That "standards" do not work reliably doesn't help anyone..not
client, not end-user, not author/designer/developer.
Please don't groan, but my background is in Print. Luckily, I never
had to write PostScript. Illustrator, PS, Quark, and later InDesign
all do a fine job of it.
but just imagine if I DID have to write the post script, and to know
variations for every single printing device?!?!
IMHO, we need some kind of lingua franca that works for all of these
electronic gizmos once and for all...
but...things have been set in motion, and perhaps it's going to remain
a bucket of stinky fish guts into the foreseeable future.
cs
On Oct 20, 2010, at 8:16 AM, Joseph Taylor wrote:
Good questions. I have yet to see definitive answers for most of
these questions.
I've been thinking on this constantly as I try to alter my work flow
to a format that will please all the devices.
Some things haven't changed:
Start with clean HTML that'll work on ANYTHING including JAWS etc.
Build upwards with your CSS from IE6 to modern browsers (or downwards
from modern browsers to IE6)
Use javascript to add behaviors to your HTML/CSS in a progressive
fashion.
The touch devices add a new dimension to the workflow. They may
change the way you approach some items on a page (like a multi select
widget) and you now have to pay more attention to the :active
attribute in your CSS as that'll react to a touch vs. :hover - no
biggie, right?
For the most part, the touch devices all use modern browsers which is
pretty cool. I made an iphone version of my site using media queries,
which was a lot of fun to do.
The touch devices open a new horizon - no IE!!!
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Web Designer / Developer/
--------------------------------------
Sites by Joe, LLC
/"Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design"/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: j...@sitesbyjoe.com
On 10/20/10 10:44 AM, cat soul wrote:
Yes, and while we're on the topic of things that won't work on
phones and iPads....is there anything else we need to know about
that also won't play nice with those two handheld platforms?
Is a different design perspective in order now? Do we now design for
the iPad and for phones, and have desktop and notebook users simply
have that as what they see?
or are we back to sniffer scripts and multiple versions of our pages?
cs
On Oct 20, 2010, at 12:44 AM, Kevin Ireson wrote:
An excellent and very up to date point about accessibility.
*From:* tee <mailto:weblis...@gmail.com>
*Sent:* Wednesday, October 20, 2010 1:57 AM
*To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org <mailto:wsg@webstandardsgroup.org>
*Subject:* Re: [WSG] CSS "rollovers" for images?
Caution with the use of hover for such purpose if you also want
touchscreen device user able to use it.
In regards of touchscreen, this article explains it better than I
can do.
http://trentwalton.com/2010/07/05/non-hover/
tee
On Oct 19, 2010, at 1:46 PM, Joseph Taylor wrote:
You could certainly do that with CSS. You'll want to add
javascript to control how the image shows and fades, positioning etc.
For maximum accessibility, have the thumbnail link to the main
image, then have your Javscript/CSS hijack the link and show the
image. Everyone wins.
Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Web Designer / Developer/
--------------------------------------
Sites by Joe, LLC
/"Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design"/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: j...@sitesbyjoe.com
On 10/19/10 4:13 PM, cat soul wrote:
Any thoughts on using CSS hover properties to show larger images?
The scenario I'm envisioning is one where you'd have small
thumbnails of samples, and hovering the mouse over them would
invoke a hover state in which a larger version of that same image
would appear..."Larger" meaning 400x600 pixels, or in that
neighborhood.
Is this not wise from a coding perspective? How about usability?
Do web page visitors not expect this kind of behavior..would it
be confusing to them as to what they're supposed to do, or what
to expect?
I'm wanting to use CSS to do what javascript rollovers do, only
without the javascript.
thanks for any feedback or opinions.
cs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email has been scanned by Netintelligence
http://www.netintelligence.com/email
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
<mailto:memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org>
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
<mailto:memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org>
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
<mailto:memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org>
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
*******************************************************************
