Re: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
What is ecma? Standards organisation: http://www.ecma-international.org/ of which... http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-262.htm ...is the standard for ECMAScript scripting language which is essentially javascript standardised. Flash's actionscript is also based on it. Nick * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Subject: [WSG] Looking for a little peer review(Nelson)
Nelson: I took a look at your site - www.stop design. If I click on View -larger or largest, the text from the right side of the page enlarges and spills onto the text in the middle of the page. It does not look really bad but it does cause a bit of a reading problem. I don't know if text size in % (e.g. 85% ) instead of text size 10px (or whatever) has anything to do with it but I wonder... i.e. 85% of larger might be significantly different from 85% of smaller. I am using IE 6 with windows 2000. ...a thought Doreen Cowan
Re: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Trying to conform to Priority 2 for that. I must have done something wrong with the JS in my html. I'll try again. With Regards Jaime Wong ~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 04/19/04 04:24:10 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible Jaime Wong wrote: > Hi Kristof I tried doing that in the html but the JS fails to work. I think > I need to change the JS itself but I do not know how to. These are the > common image JS DW which I have in my JS file. Odd, I just tried it in my copy of DW and it worked. Are you shure you're not expecting too much? The only extra "accesability" you'll gain is that when you use the tab key to select links. Tab, first link focussed, the image changes to the 'over' state, tab, it goes back to the 'normal' state, next image changes, ... That's it. If that didn't happening for you, you probably got it wrong. If that ain't enough, well what can I say ... rollovers are boring? -- Kristof * 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] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Just like what you see here http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/popups/demo2.html :)
With Regards
Jaime Wong
~~
SODesires Design Team
http://www.sodesires.com
~~
---Original Message---
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 04/19/04 07:44:14
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Heya Jaime,
define multi rollovers?
Benjamin
>
>
> Hi Benjamin
>
> What is ecma?
>
> Can what you proposed be used for multi-rollovers?
>
> I could use Meyer's
http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/popups/demo2.html
> but not sure if it is stable enough for projects.
>
>
>
> With Regards
> Jaime Wong
> ~~
> SODesires Design Team
> http://www.sodesires.com
> ~~
>
> ---Original Message---
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: 04/18/04 22:07:19
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
>
> The only way I can think of doing it off the top of my head is to use some
> ecma and css
>
> onState"
>
> offState"
>
>
> ..onState{
> background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_onState.gif) no-repeat top left
> }
>
> ..offState{
> background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_offState.gif) no-repeat top left
> }
>
> and change the background image
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jaime Wong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 8:59 PM
> To: WSG - CSS List
> Subject: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
>
>
> Dreamweaver' common set of JS for rollover images are using
'onmouseover' i
> e. MM_swapImage JS.
>
> I wanted to make it more accessible by using ' but I do not know
> how to work around it so that the JS will work.
>
> Does anyone know where I could get some resources on this?
>
>
> With Regards
> Jaime Wong
> ~~
> SODesires Design Team
> http://www.sodesires.com
> ~~
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
>
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
> .
>
Benjamin
Life through a polaroid
www.lifethroughapolaroid.com
*
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] target="_blank" substitute
Well isnt that what makes life's rich tapestry so interesting. We make choices, and we live with whatever flows from that, good or bad. As they say in the home of my favourite kind of music - bluegrass - "you go to your church and i'll go to mine, and we'll walk along together."What counts is whether or not the site succeeds at what it's supposed to do. If it's supposed to sell things, and it does, terrific. If it's supposed to inform, and it does, terrific. If it's supposed to support software, and it does, excellent! If not, BOO!!CheersMike KearAFP WebworksWindsor, NSW, Australia - Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: "wsg" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: RE: [WSG] target="_blank" substituteDate: 19/04/04 12:12Hi Michael> Navigating anywhere in Microsoft's site is a nightmare. You go down a maze> of links until its almost impossible to work your way back where you came> from.Is this an argument against the usefulness of the back button (or thenavigation metaphor entirely)? If Microsoft chose to open links in newwindows you'd end up with a mess of windows, rather than a messyhistory. This is not an improvement.Microsoft's site is poorly designed. How is this relevant to theargument? :)> In my case, I get someone into my site, and I don't want to see them heading> off again by just clicking on a tool my site gives them to leave.Not only are you working against the navigation metaphor, you're workingagainst yourself when you force links to open in new windows. Example:1. User finds your site, browses around it, finds external links.2. User clicks link, fresh new window is opened.3. User is done with your site, and closes your window.4. User browses site opened in new window, realises there was somethingelse they wanted to use your site for.5. Uh oh. Is your site so great that they're going to do the work to getback to it (by Googling for it, or braving their history), or are theyjust going to go some place else?If a user really wants to open a new window for a link, she can:right-click, Open in New Window, or middle-click if it's available. Ifyou're forcing new windows to open when links are clicked, there is noway for the user to choose to open the links in the original window andmaintain the metaphor. You are taking a meaningful choice away from theuser.Granted, there are pros for the behaviour that you're arguing for -- butthere are so many cons!Cheers,--Andrew Taumoefolau*The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list & getting help* Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2 * 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] target="_blank" substitute
CB2 Wow thanks for that GREAT link! As soon as I read how to pull it all off, I set it up on my site! www.neester.com/tdir Looks the same, works teh same, validates the same... but it validates with target="_blank" thanks a lot! Chris Stratford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Http://www.neester.com Cb2 Web Design wrote: Tim said "Check out XHTML target module:". You can see a tutorial about this, posted a while ago at the Webmates forum: http://excellentsite.org/agroup/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=36&foru m=1 Direct link to the tutorial by Eva Lindqvist: http://www.swedishgoldenretrievers.net/targetmoduleinxhtml.shtml Carlos www.cb2web.com - Original Message - From: "Tim Lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 4:41 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute Darian Cabot spoke the following wise words on 18/04/2004 1:29 PM EST: I would like to open a link in a new window. I used to use target="_blank" attribute, but that isn't xhtml strict. Can anyone enlighten me on a xhtml strict method? as I'd like my pages to verify ^^ Check out XHTML target module: http://www.accessify.com/tutorials/standards-compliant-new-windows.asp http://www.webreference.com/xml/column30/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_targetmodu le http://www.nic.fi/~tapio1/HTMLKit/Attributes2Mod.php3 The DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/DTD/xhtml-target-1.mod -- tim lucas www.toolmantim.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help * * 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] target="_blank" substitute
Hi Michael > Navigating anywhere in Microsoft's site is a nightmare. You go down a maze > of links until its almost impossible to work your way back where you came > from. Is this an argument against the usefulness of the back button (or the navigation metaphor entirely)? If Microsoft chose to open links in new windows you'd end up with a mess of windows, rather than a messy history. This is not an improvement. Microsoft's site is poorly designed. How is this relevant to the argument? :) > In my case, I get someone into my site, and I don't want to see them heading > off again by just clicking on a tool my site gives them to leave. Not only are you working against the navigation metaphor, you're working against yourself when you force links to open in new windows. Example: 1. User finds your site, browses around it, finds external links. 2. User clicks link, fresh new window is opened. 3. User is done with your site, and closes your window. 4. User browses site opened in new window, realises there was something else they wanted to use your site for. 5. Uh oh. Is your site so great that they're going to do the work to get back to it (by Googling for it, or braving their history), or are they just going to go some place else? If a user really wants to open a new window for a link, she can: right-click, Open in New Window, or middle-click if it's available. If you're forcing new windows to open when links are clicked, there is no way for the user to choose to open the links in the original window and maintain the metaphor. You are taking a meaningful choice away from the user. Granted, there are pros for the behaviour that you're arguing for -- but there are so many cons! Cheers, -- Andrew Taumoefolau * 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] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Heya Jaime,
define multi rollovers?
Benjamin
>
>
> Hi Benjamin
>
> What is ecma?
>
> Can what you proposed be used for multi-rollovers?
>
> I could use Meyer's
http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/popups/demo2.html
> but not sure if it is stable enough for projects.
>
>
>
> With Regards
> Jaime Wong
> ~~
> SODesires Design Team
> http://www.sodesires.com
> ~~
>
> ---Original Message---
>
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: 04/18/04 22:07:19
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
>
> The only way I can think of doing it off the top of my head is to use some
> ecma and css
>
> onfocus="this.className="onState"
>
> onblur="this.className="offState"
>
>
> ..onState{
> background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_onState.gif) no-repeat top left
> }
>
> ..offState{
> background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_offState.gif) no-repeat top left
> }
>
> and change the background image
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jaime Wong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 8:59 PM
> To: WSG - CSS List
> Subject: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
>
>
> Dreamweaver' common set of JS for rollover images are using
'onmouseover' i
> e. MM_swapImage JS.
>
> I wanted to make it more accessible by using 'onfocus=' but I do not know
> how to work around it so that the JS will work.
>
> Does anyone know where I could get some resources on this?
>
>
> With Regards
> Jaime Wong
> ~~
> SODesires Design Team
> http://www.sodesires.com
> ~~
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
>
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
> .
>
Benjamin
Life through a polaroid
www.lifethroughapolaroid.com
*
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] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Jaime Wong wrote: Hi Kristof I tried doing that in the html but the JS fails to work. I think I need to change the JS itself but I do not know how to. These are the common image JS DW which I have in my JS file. Odd, I just tried it in my copy of DW and it worked. Are you shure you're not expecting too much? The only extra "accesability" you'll gain is that when you use the tab key to select links. Tab, first link focussed, the image changes to the 'over' state, tab, it goes back to the 'normal' state, next image changes, ... That's it. If that didn't happening for you, you probably got it wrong. If that ain't enough, well what can I say ... rollovers are boring? -- Kristof * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
[WSG] Looking for a little peer review
Nelson, Content of the right sidebar spills over into the center obscuring part of the text. MS internet explorer 6. on Win98SE with text set to "largest". Oops! Just tried it with largest text in IE 6.0 SP1 on Win98SE, I got the same problem, the right sidebar spills into the center. Different text sizes seemed fine in firfox 0.8 and netscape 7.1 (and of course Opera). Darian Cabot Thanks Brewnetty and Darian for pointing that out. I have explicitly set the text size for my h3's in px, and that seems to be helping the issue, though I have no OS earlier than Win2k to check it with. What are people's opinions about how best to combat this sort of problem with IE/Win and its text resizing function? Mozilla/Safari etc don't resize text the same way and so don't break the structure quite as severely. IE was bursting the right-sidebar to the left, whereas Safari extends it to the right when the text is too large. Is there any prevailing wisdom on this issue? Nelson --- www.nelsonford.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] target="_blank" substitute
Tim said "Check out XHTML target module:". You can see a tutorial about this, posted a while ago at the Webmates forum: http://excellentsite.org/agroup/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=36&foru m=1 Direct link to the tutorial by Eva Lindqvist: http://www.swedishgoldenretrievers.net/targetmoduleinxhtml.shtml Carlos www.cb2web.com - Original Message - From: "Tim Lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 4:41 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute Darian Cabot spoke the following wise words on 18/04/2004 1:29 PM EST: > I would like to open a link in a new window. I used to use target="_blank" > attribute, but that isn't xhtml strict. Can anyone enlighten me on a xhtml > strict method? as I'd like my pages to verify ^^ Check out XHTML target module: http://www.accessify.com/tutorials/standards-compliant-new-windows.asp http://www.webreference.com/xml/column30/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_targetmodu le http://www.nic.fi/~tapio1/HTMLKit/Attributes2Mod.php3 The DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/DTD/xhtml-target-1.mod -- tim lucas www.toolmantim.com * 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] target="_blank" substitute
Darian Cabot spoke the following wise words on 18/04/2004 1:29 PM EST: I would like to open a link in a new window. I used to use target="_blank" attribute, but that isn't xhtml strict. Can anyone enlighten me on a xhtml strict method? as I'd like my pages to verify ^^ Check out XHTML target module: http://www.accessify.com/tutorials/standards-compliant-new-windows.asp http://www.webreference.com/xml/column30/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_targetmodule http://www.nic.fi/~tapio1/HTMLKit/Attributes2Mod.php3 The DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/DTD/xhtml-target-1.mod -- tim lucas www.toolmantim.com smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
RE: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Hi Benjamin
What is ecma?
Can what you proposed be used for multi-rollovers?
I could use Meyer's http://www.meyerweb.com/eric/css/edge/popups/demo2.html but not sure if it is stable enough for projects.
With Regards
Jaime Wong
~~
SODesires Design Team
http://www.sodesires.com
~~
---Original Message---
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 04/18/04 22:07:19
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
The only way I can think of doing it off the top of my head is to use some
ecma and css
onState"
offState"
..onState{
background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_onState.gif) no-repeat top left
}
..offState{
background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_offState.gif) no-repeat top left
}
and change the background image
-Original Message-
From: Jaime Wong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 8:59 PM
To: WSG - CSS List
Subject: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Dreamweaver' common set of JS for rollover images are using 'onmouseover' i
e. MM_swapImage JS.
I wanted to make it more accessible by using ' but I do not know
how to work around it so that the JS will work.
Does anyone know where I could get some resources on this?
With Regards
Jaime Wong
~~
SODesires Design Team
http://www.sodesires.com
~~
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
*
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] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Hi Kristof I tried doing that in the html but the JS fails to work. I think I need to change the JS itself but I do not know how to. These are the common image JS DW which I have in my JS file.
function MM_preloadImages() { //v3.0 var d=document; if(d.images){ if(!d.MM_p) d.MM_p=new Array(); var i,j=d.MM_p.length,a=MM_preloadImages.arguments; for(i=0; i if (a[i].indexOf("#")!=0){ d.MM_p[j]=new Image; d.MM_p[j++].src="">}
function MM_swapImgRestore() { //v3.0 var i,x,a=document.MM_sr; for(i=0;a&&i}
function MM_findObj(n, d) { //v4.01 var p,i,x; if(!d) d=document; if((p=n.indexOf("?"))>0&&parent.frames.length) { d=parent.frames[n.substring(p+1)].document; n=n.substring(0,p);} if(!(x=d[n])&&d.all) x=d.all[n]; for (i=0;!x&&i for(i=0;!x&&d.layers&&i if(!x && d.getElementById) x=d.getElementById(n); return x;}
function MM_swapImage() { //v3.0 var i,j=0,x,a=MM_swapImage.arguments; document.MM_sr=new Array; for(i=0;i<(a.length-2);i+=3) if ((x=MM_findObj(a[i]))!=null){document.MM_sr[j++]=x; if(!x.oSrc) x.oSrc=x.src; x.src="">}
With Regards
Jaime Wong
~~
SODesires Design Team
http://www.sodesires.com
~~
---Original Message---
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 04/18/04 22:04:18
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Jaime Wong wrote:
>
> Dreamweaver' common set of JS for rollover images are using 'onmouseover' i
> e. MM_swapImage JS.
>
> I wanted to make it more accessible by using 's _javascript_ here]
DW puts the straight into the html, right?
Then this is what you've got:
This is what you need to add:
I guess that should work.
--
Kristof
*
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] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
The only way I can think of doing it off the top of my head is to use some
ecma and css
onfocus="this.className="onState"
onblur="this.className="offState"
.onState{
background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_onState.gif) no-repeat top left
}
.offState{
background: url(yourimageslocation/btn_offState.gif) no-repeat top left
}
and change the background image
-Original Message-
From: Jaime Wong [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 8:59 PM
To: WSG - CSS List
Subject: [WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Dreamweaver' common set of JS for rollover images are using 'onmouseover' i
e. MM_swapImage JS.
I wanted to make it more accessible by using 'onfocus=' but I do not know
how to work around it so that the JS will work.
Does anyone know where I could get some resources on this?
With Regards
Jaime Wong
~~
SODesires Design Team
http://www.sodesires.com
~~
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
*
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] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Jaime Wong wrote: Dreamweaver' common set of JS for rollover images are using 'onmouseover' i e. MM_swapImage JS. I wanted to make it more accessible by using 'onfocus=' but I do not know how to work around it so that the JS will work. [insert rant about DW's javascript here] DW puts the onmouseover="" straight into the html, right? Then this is what you've got: onmouseover="a" onmouseout="b" This is what you need to add: onfocus="same as a" onblur="same as b" I guess that should work. -- Kristof * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
[WSG] Making Dreamweaver's Rollover JS accessible
Dreamweaver' common set of JS for rollover images are using 'onmouseover' i e. MM_swapImage JS. I wanted to make it more accessible by using 'onfocus=' but I do not know how to work around it so that the JS will work. Does anyone know where I could get some resources on this? With Regards Jaime Wong ~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~ * 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] target="_blank" substitute
> Many clients have been told time after time that "for external links you > should always open a new window" this is going to be a problem for quite > a while, until we can convince people this is not necessary, I believe > that this or Justin's way of dealing with external links is a practical > solution to a very real client problem. I absolutely agree. If we're talking about *having* to do it then we do it. But if we're talking about best practices it's a different matter. Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com * 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] target="_blank" substitute
Patrick - A practical example which will serve to illustrate my point. Go to the Microsoft.com site, and decide whether to install any update. (Choose any of them, they're all just as bad as each other.) In order to install this update, you have to have this other update installed. Oh... do I have that installed? Better click on that link to read what it was about. Nope. Never heard of that one. But before I can install that update, I have to have this other one installed. Have I got that one installed? Who the hell knows. Better click on this link to find out what this previous update was all about. But there are implications with installing that update, because there's a link to read this before installing this update. Click on that link. Now where are you? Can you install that first update or not? Navigating anywhere in Microsoft's site is a nightmare. You go down a maze of links until its almost impossible to work your way back where you came from. You mention the 'back' button. What about alt-tab? I use that far more than 'back'. The issue is not as clear-cut as you seem to say. I'm not saying my way is the 'right' way and others are 'wrong'. Just that it's like most things on the web- there are several ways to do anything and pros and cons for each. In my case, I get someone into my site, and I don't want to see them heading off again by just clicking on a tool my site gives them to leave. Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Griffiths Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 8:20 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute > You're right, Patrick, but life is a series of compromises. I spend a lot > of effort in getting users to my site, and I don't want to go sending them > away again with a link on my site. If they want to click on a link > external to my site, they get a new window so their existing window stays in > my site. > > It's not accessible, that's true, but if they stay inside my site, no new > windows open. And I'm not going to go sending 97% of users out of my site > with a link, just so 3% can have an accessible access to that one or two > links. > OK. Let's forget about accessibility for a moment then. The back button is one of the most commonly used navigational tools. By opening new windows you disable that feature. You're hindering usability and actually making it more effort for people to come back to your site. It's just not possible to lock people into your site. If they want to go away from it, they're going to. If they want to come back to it, that's great but keeping your site in the background isn't going to help that at all - they know they should be able to reach it by a 'click' or two of the back button. Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com * 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] target="_blank" substitute
I agree. My intention for opening links in new windows was for a very few links. Only the feature website of the month as a sample to vistors. Oh, and I will be giving the viewer the option to open the link in a new window or in the current window, so no suprises there. Thanks for all the help! > You're right, Patrick, but life is a series of compromises. I spend a lot > of effort in getting users to my site, and I don't want to go sending them > away again with a link on my site. If they want to click on a link > external to my site, they get a new window so their existing window stays > in > my site. > > It's not accessible, that's true, but if they stay inside my site, no new > windows open. And I'm not going to go sending 97% of users out of my site > with a link, just so 3% can have an accessible access to that one or two > links. > > We're talking about a minority of links on the site that lead outside the > site, and a minority of users who are affected. So I think it's a fair > compromise, to make external links less accessible. > > One of the most important aspects of a site's success is getting traffic > and > keeping it in the site, and we ought not to lose sight of that in our > pursuit of accessibility. What use is a fully accessible site that gets > pulled down because it's a failure on economic or other grounds? > > > Cheers > Mike Kear > Windsor, NSW, Australia > AFP Webworks > http://afpwebworks.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Patrick Griffiths > Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 7:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute > >> This is both an accessible and valid method: > > Valid yes, but accessible? > I click on a link. I look at the page. I try to click on the back > button. "What? Why doesn't this work? Oh. Because it's opened in a new > window". Close window. Return to the site (and page) I want to be on. > This whole malarkey makes the site less accessible for me, let alone for > a person who can't actually see what's going on. > > [snip] > > > Patrick Griffiths (PTG) > http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ > http://www.htmldog.com > > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * 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] target="_blank" substitute
Hi Patrick I think Michael is right, sometimes in life you have to do stuff that isn't perfect. In my example I had a TITLE attribute in the A link saying that it would open a new window - someone with a screen reader would hear that the link would open a new window, if they have disabled JavaScript then it wouldn't open a new window but just go straight to the URL anyway. Many clients have been told time after time that "for external links you should always open a new window" this is going to be a problem for quite a while, until we can convince people this is not necessary, I believe that this or Justin's way of dealing with external links is a practical solution to a very real client problem. Cheers Jeff Lowder Accessibility 1st Website: www.accessibility1st.com.au Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Griffiths Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 7:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute > This is both an accessible and valid method: Valid yes, but accessible? I click on a link. I look at the page. I try to click on the back button. "What? Why doesn't this work? Oh. Because it's opened in a new window". Close window. Return to the site (and page) I want to be on. This whole malarkey makes the site less accessible for me, let alone for a person who can't actually see what's going on. > onkeypress="window.open(this.href);return false;" title="opens in new > window">new window If you are going to use JavaScript though, this will do: new window onclick is invoked by keyboard action too. Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help * * 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] target="_blank" substitute
> You're right, Patrick, but life is a series of compromises. I spend a lot > of effort in getting users to my site, and I don't want to go sending them > away again with a link on my site. If they want to click on a link > external to my site, they get a new window so their existing window stays in > my site. > > It's not accessible, that's true, but if they stay inside my site, no new > windows open. And I'm not going to go sending 97% of users out of my site > with a link, just so 3% can have an accessible access to that one or two > links. > OK. Let's forget about accessibility for a moment then. The back button is one of the most commonly used navigational tools. By opening new windows you disable that feature. You're hindering usability and actually making it more effort for people to come back to your site. It's just not possible to lock people into your site. If they want to go away from it, they're going to. If they want to come back to it, that's great but keeping your site in the background isn't going to help that at all - they know they should be able to reach it by a 'click' or two of the back button. Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com * 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] target="_blank" substitute
You're right, Patrick, but life is a series of compromises. I spend a lot of effort in getting users to my site, and I don't want to go sending them away again with a link on my site. If they want to click on a link external to my site, they get a new window so their existing window stays in my site. It's not accessible, that's true, but if they stay inside my site, no new windows open. And I'm not going to go sending 97% of users out of my site with a link, just so 3% can have an accessible access to that one or two links. We're talking about a minority of links on the site that lead outside the site, and a minority of users who are affected. So I think it's a fair compromise, to make external links less accessible. One of the most important aspects of a site's success is getting traffic and keeping it in the site, and we ought not to lose sight of that in our pursuit of accessibility. What use is a fully accessible site that gets pulled down because it's a failure on economic or other grounds? Cheers Mike Kear Windsor, NSW, Australia AFP Webworks http://afpwebworks.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Griffiths Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 7:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute > This is both an accessible and valid method: Valid yes, but accessible? I click on a link. I look at the page. I try to click on the back button. "What? Why doesn't this work? Oh. Because it's opened in a new window". Close window. Return to the site (and page) I want to be on. This whole malarkey makes the site less accessible for me, let alone for a person who can't actually see what's going on. [snip] Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com * 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] target="_blank" substitute
I'm using that one too.
But I had another script that needed to be run when the page loaded,
and then the scripts collided, so to speak.
So I had to call the functions from instead, which works fine.
Martin
On 18/4-2004, at 5.53, Justin French wrote:
On 18/04/2004, at 1:29 PM, Darian Cabot wrote:
This is probably obvious...
I would like to open a link in a new window. I used to use
target="_blank"
attribute, but that isn't xhtml strict. Can anyone enlighten me on a
xhtml
strict method? as I'd like my pages to verify ^^
The solution I've settled upon is to include rel='external' instead of
target='_blank' on all tags. Then I link a small JS file in the
head of all my pages, which is this:
function externalLinks()
{
if (!document.getElementsByTagName) return;
var anchors = document.getElementsByTagName("a");
for (var i=0; i
{
var anchor = anchors[i];
if (anchor.getAttribute("href") && anchor.getAttribute("rel") ==
"external")
anchor.target = "_blank";
}
}
window.onload = externalLinks;
This is all basically a straight copy from an article I found on
http://www.sitepoint.com a few months back.
---
Justin French
http://indent.com.au
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
*
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] target="_blank" substitute
> This is both an accessible and valid method: Valid yes, but accessible? I click on a link. I look at the page. I try to click on the back button. "What? Why doesn't this work? Oh. Because it's opened in a new window". Close window. Return to the site (and page) I want to be on. This whole malarkey makes the site less accessible for me, let alone for a person who can't actually see what's going on. > onkeypress="window.open(this.href);return false;" title="opens in new > window">new window If you are going to use JavaScript though, this will do: new window onclick is invoked by keyboard action too. Patrick Griffiths (PTG) http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ http://www.htmldog.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
