Re: [WSG] IE team says no to hacks
Christian Montoya wrote: I'll probably be using conditional comments for the next five years, and everytime I use them I think to myself, this would just be easier if IE worked the same as FF/Opera/Safari. It sure would, but would IE be 'MSIE' then? :-) Besides, I think someone will have to fix and stabilize FF/Opera/Safari a bit more before we regard their rendering as 'standard'. At the moment they are just 'so much better' than IE. The rest of your comment sounds just fine. 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] IE team says no to hacks
On 10/13/05, Peter Firminger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you've gone against all sane advice and used CSS hacks then you knewexactly what you were in for with future browsers and potential problems.Don't look at me. I don't want to see an M$ bitch session develop here while Microsoft areseemingly trying very hard do the right thing (at last). Obviously we haveto wait and see what the final release does.I respect MS for what they are doing. I just want them to go about it the best way. At that point, I really hope you're (general) not going to charge yourcustomers if you have to fix up bugs (hacks) that you knowingly induced into their websites if you didn't make it clear to them at the time that hackingmay require rectification in the future.I've never had a client. :-) Sorry for the smug told you so, but many people including myself have madethis very clear over the whole life of WSG. You only have yourself to blame.Are you trying to make anyone cry? -- - C Montoyardpdesign.com ... liquid.rdpdesign.com ... montoya.rdpdesign.com
Re: [WSG] Browser Stats
hi all, it may be that FF sucks sometimes a bit, the application-size is already reaching 40mb on my system, anyway - it is still the best solution for a browser, except for O 8.5 - that one has the facilities to get better maybe ... but FF is the icon and the symbol for Open Source getting really important, and there are countries (like finnland), with more than 35% user using FF ... i love FF (is going to be ALWAYS2005/10/13, Rick Faaberg [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 10/12/05 10:43 PM Helmut Granda [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent thisout: it seems like FF is loosing terrain, is w3schools accurate? It's accurate in my case.On Mac, I think FF pretty well s*cks - what with stuck menus and stalls andall that sort of thing. I went back to Safari after about 2 weeks on FF.Don't know about Windows at all. Rick**The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help** -- Software is like Sex - it's better when it's free ... (Linus Torvalds)
Re: [WSG] IE team says no to hacks
If you don't use CSS hacks you have 2 options. 1. Avoid CSS that is buggy in a browser. 2. Use other hacks like conditional comments. (Conditional comments *are* hacks, there just intentional ones) Number 1 is simply not an option unless your willing to look like useit.com or something. Number 2 is hardly any better because when future browsers come out either they will have fixed their CSS implementations (and then life is happiness and glee) or they won't. With CSS it's likely that you will have to do touchups but with conditional comments you have to write another css file all together. Also I don't want an M$ bitching session either. IE7 may not be perfect, but it's a step towards interopability and standards (which is a really big thing for Microsoft). I think we should encourage it all we can. Peter Firminger wrote: If you've gone against all sane advice and used CSS hacks then you knew exactly what you were in for with future browsers and potential problems. I don't want to see an M$ bitch session develop here while Microsoft are seemingly trying very hard do the right thing (at last). Obviously we have to wait and see what the final release does. At that point, I really hope you're (general) not going to charge your customers if you have to fix up bugs (hacks) that you knowingly induced into their websites if you didn't make it clear to them at the time that hacking may require rectification in the future. Sorry for the smug told you so, but many people including myself have made this very clear over the whole life of WSG. You only have yourself to blame. Peter previously comment=I'm really sick of html emails on this list I second :) It sounds more like they are taking a stand against the designers who tried to work around those buggy problems. They aren't cleaning up their own act, just making it harder to hack around them. IE 7 still has some of the quirky implementations that make older versions of IE so difficult to design for. /previously ** 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] Chinese food and web standards
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 14:34:35 +0930, Katrina wrote: May I ask you which college/uni teaches web development? I believe Craig is a TAFE student in Brisbane, but I could be mistaken. warmly, Lea -- Lea de Groot Elysian Systems - http://elysiansystems.com/ Brisbane, Australia ** 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] Browser Stats
Helmut Granda wrote: . . . it seems like FF is loosing terrain, is w3schools accurate? No they're not, in fact I think there is a note about how they are no accurate on the page there. Or is there anyother place that I can check what the general public is using. There are 3 kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics. While you might be able to get a bit of an idea from looking at different sources you should take everything with a grain of salt. Even on the best sites you probably looking at _at least_ 5% to 10% margin of error, so a change in 2% is pretty much meaningless. Rick Faaberg wrote: On Mac, I think FF pretty well s*cks Very true, I've used firefox on my sister's Mac and it's a pig. It was still better than safari for me because of the extentions and other stuff I can't live without, but a pig nonetheless. Apparently the've done a lot to fix that in 1.5, well see. In my experience Firefox runs a lot better on linux, and even faster on Windows. A lot of the stuff that firefox does on linux it could really improve. I think the reason that it's like that is because most of the main developers use windows and they're trying to appeal to the mainstream (i.e. Windows users). I assume the case is the same for Mac, only worse. ** 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] Redesign of a danish library website - help/comments
Web page designed by clueless person. Film at 11. Personally I think both designs have issues. The font size is too small on the first one, and in the second one its a good size but it overflows eveywhere. And don't go in to the code behind it all. Kids these days :P Felix Miata wrote: Soren Johannessen wrote: Next week bibliotek.dk [Denmark] (url http://bibliotek.dk) is going to redesign their website In bibliotek.dk you will find records of all items published in Denmark as well as all items found in the Danish public research libraries. There is a beta version ready http://proto.bibliotek.dk/ - This was a chock/surprice to see such a bad redesign in 2005 from a web standards point of view. I am going to write a review article (sorry this article is going to be in Danish) what's wrong with this new redesign.My major findings and what is wrong is [...] You're right about having a lot wrong. This shows just a few problems (it is worse farther down, or when zoomed): http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/soren1.png The text is too small, and it often doesn't fit into the spaces allotted for it. The text is (too small) via relative sizing, but the space for it to fit is frequently set with px for container height or line-height, and overflow: hidden to go with it. The result is a lot of hidden or overlapping text when the user's browser is using uncommon settings. ** 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] Browser Stats
In my experience Firefox runs a lot better on linux, and even faster onWindows. A lot of the stuff that firefox does on linux it could really improve. I think the reason that it's like that is because most of themain developers use windows and they're trying to appeal to themainstream (i.e. Windows users). I assume the case is the same for Mac,only worse. I think of it more as, on Mac there is a decent browser (safari). So there isn't much need for FF there. Whereas PC users really need FF. -- - C Montoya rdpdesign.com ... liquid.rdpdesign.com ... montoya.rdpdesign.com
Re: [WSG] Is a colon after a form label necessary?
Hi Gail. i was just thinking about this last night. After recently reading Eat Shoots and Leaves i've become more aware of punctuation and how it aids in the rhythm of words, and phrases, and thus comprehension. it would seem to me that a colon would help a screen reader user. and your reference below, (a snip right below) speaks to that. imho, as they say, it should be one of the things gleaned from your references! and thanks for posting all those references. Pay attention to punctuation Screen readers use punctuation cues to modulate the tone and measure of the reading, e.g., a colon will cause the screen reader to pause; ... for myself, i will use it. best regards, Donna McLaughlin, Gail G wrote: We are establishing Web standards for forms and are debating this. Here’s what I have gleaned based on reading the references cited below. 1. Colons are hard to see on a screen. (Reference 1.) 2. W3C does not state a requirement for a colon after a label. 3. WAI recommends identifying a label with a LABEL tag and does not mention using a colon. (Reference 3.) 4. 508 Standards Information for Standards does not mention using a colon for labels. 5. Microsoft Active Accessibility (MSAA) software might require the colon. (Reference 2.) 6. According to Microsoft, screen-review utilities might use a colon to identify a control. (Reference 4.) I suspect that using a colon after a label is a carry over from paper forms. Microsoft may need the colon. I do not know what “screen review utilities” are. Are they html validators? Are they accessibility validators? What say you all? --- Reference 1. William Horton in his book “Designing and Writing Online Documentation” recommends avoiding colons and semicolons because they are hard to distinguish on a screen. --- Reference 2. Wright State University http://www.wright.edu/web/access/standard_n.html (n) When electronic forms are designed to be completed on-line, the form shall allow people using assistive technology to access the information, field elements, and functionality required for completion and submission of the form, including all directions and cues. WSU Web Accessibility Guidelines WSU Information Ensure that the user may interact with the form with a preferred input (or output) device, such as a mouse, keyboard, voice or head wand. If a form control can only be activated with a mouse or other pointing device, someone who is using the page without sight, with voice input, or with only a keyboard will not be able to use the form. * Use explicit labels as outlined in the 508 Standards Information for Standard (n). * Provide a phone number the Web visitor can call to verbally supply the requested information. An e-mail address should also be included. * Preface each form element with a descriptive name followed by a colon. The Microsoft Active Accessibility (MSAA) software calls each form element by the word prior to and on the same line as the form element. Example: label for=firstFirst Name:/lablel INPUT TYPE=text name=firstname id=first -- Reference 3. Sarah Horton, Accessible Design Guidelines http://www.dartmouth.edu/~webteach/resources/download/guidelines5.pdf Pay attention to punctuation Screen readers use punctuation cues to modulate the tone and measure of the reading, e.g., a colon will cause the screen reader to pause; a period will produce a cadence and pause. Be liberal with punctuation as these pauses and cadences greatly enhance the readability of your text. Without punctuation the reader continues without pause or change in inflection, so unpunctuated phrases run together into one long and jumbled sentence. Also, avoid using text to convey visual information, such as using a “” or “/”symbol as navigation to show the path to the user’s current location. The screen reader will read the symbol literally rather than interpret the visual meaning you wish to convey. Label form fields If you simply place a form field on a page and do not have a label associated with it, users who are read Web pages will have no way of knowing what the field is there for. Associate labels with their form fields by positioning them together on the page and by using the LABEL tag to associate the label text with its form field. Note that you need to include the ID attribute in your INPUT tags whenever you use the LABEL tag. Use LABEL to associate fields with their labels Example: LABEL FOR=firstnameFirst name: /LABELINPUT TYPE=text NAME=firstname ID=firstname LABEL FOR=lastnameLast name: INPUT TYPE=text NAME=lastname ID=lastname
Re: [WSG] Is a colon after a form label necessary?
Yes, but it also depends on the context. Remember that the input does not nessisarily follow the label. And in some situations, a colon might not fit (visually). Alan Trick Zach Inglis wrote: It makes things easier to associate in my opinion. At the end of the day its just punctuation... like using a full stop to separate content. It may help too when the CSS is turned off. Zach Inglis ** 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] Chinese food and web standards
On 10/12/05, Craig Rippon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Genuine question: Is this because they visit, it doesn't work, and they don't come back, forever losing them as a customer? Probably not. Linux users tend to be running either a Gecko-based browser (Mozilla, Firefox, Galeon and Epiphany being the most popular) or Konqueror, and due to the ease of keeping applications at the latest versions on most modern Linux distributions, they tend to be running recent versions. BrowserCam's installation of Konqueror (and most other Linux browsers) is a version that's nearly three years old, so out-of-date that I'm surprised they continue to offer it. Since Gecko-based browsers render (nearly) identically on all platforms, there's no need to worry on that count, and recent versions of Konqueror have made a number of improvements to KHTML as well as rolling in fixes and updates from Apple, which means that Konqueror's rendering is very close to Safari's for most purposes -- enough so that I use Konqueror as a poor man's Mac at times. And the converse is true; if, like many designers, you have access to a Mac, you can use Safari as an indicator of your compatibility with Konqueror. And for what it's worth, the site mentioned above renders as expected for me in Firefox 1.0.7 and Konqueror 3.4.0, and those are the latest versions available for the Linux distribution I use. -- May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house. -- George Carlin ** 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] Browser Stats
On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 02:58 -0400, Christian Montoya wrote: I think of it more as, on Mac there is a decent browser (safari). So there isn't much need for FF there. Whereas PC users really need FF. It's also worth remembering Opera have recently released their browser for free (as in beer), so that's now a viable alternative to suggest for places where there aren't many alternatives (i.e. Windows -- err... i.e. as in id est/that is, not... oh, forget it!). Josh Street -- - C Montoya rdpdesign.com ... liquid.rdpdesign.com ... montoya.rdpdesign.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] Chinese food and web standards
On 10/12/05, Paul Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: but there should be something similar which uses the KDE desktop. Knoppix uses KDE from (rather rusty) memory http://www.Knoppix.org It does. There's also a KDE version of Ubuntu called Kubuntu: http://kubuntu.org/ -- May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house. -- George Carlin ** 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] clean forms with javascript injected for a site demo
I need to demonstrate the design/structure of a website that will later house dynamic content - but at the moment it is plain static xhtml/css templates. In particular I'd like to highlight the site search facility and how searching for different terms can give you very different results. I'd like to keep the xhtml markup completely clean though - so i dont want to temporarily hardcode form submit details into a bunch of pages. The idea is to link to a javascript file in the head of the page that automagically enables the search box for the purposes of a walkthough demo, so if you searched for car you'd go to search_results_1.html and if you searched for truck you'd go to search_results_2.html. The site would only be demo'd by me - so I'd know what terms could be entered. The idea then being when it comes time to cut the pages up and implement them into a CMS the only thing that needs to be done is to rip out the link to that javascript. The other benefit is while design of the templates continues I have clean untouched form elements that are easy to work with and do global find/replaces etc as all instances of the form will be the same across multiple pages. I consider this to be definately in the realm of best practices and at a stretch good xhtml practice, in terms of keeping the xhtml markup clean. (ie: i hope very much this isnt too off topic for this list :) anyone do/done this type of thing or can link to a resource? I tried searching but to no avail. cheers, pete ~~~ Peter Ottery ~ Creative Director Daemon Pty Ltd 17 Roslyn Gardens Elizabeth Bay NSW 2011 www.daemon.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] Browser Stats
Here are some other browser stat resources for what they are worth... http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm http://www.webreference.com/stats/browser.html http://www.echoecho.com/ http://www.thecounter.com/stats/ Stuart Sherwood www.re-entity.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] IE team says no to hacks
Peter Firminger wrote: If you've gone against all sane advice and used CSS hacks then you knew exactly what you were in for with future browsers and potential problems. ... Sorry for the smug told you so, but many people including myself have made this very clear over the whole life of WSG. You only have yourself to blame. Since you don't yet know how many CSS bugs will be fixed in IE 7 you really don't have any cause to be smug yet. If the IE team fix the CSS hacks and also fix the bugs the hacks are used to work around (as I think they originally mentioned they would), then the hack users will be fine. And if not, then it's no worse than having to update your conditional statements anyway. Because I bet you don't yet know which of your conditionals will have to change to !--[if lt IE 7] and which to !--[if IE] cheers, Geoff (who uses very few hacks btw, so I'm not defending myself here) ** 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] IE team says no to hacks
On 10/13/05, Peter Firminger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you've gone against all sane advice and used CSS hacks then you knew exactly what you were in for with future browsers and potential problems. A hack is a hack is a hack. Calling a hack a conditional comment doesn't magically make it something else. And conditional comments don't have any more forward compatibility than any other hack; if I use, say, if IE gte 6 to get the supposed forward compatibility of conditional comments, and IE7 introduces bugs that aren't in IE6, then I'm traveling up the waterway without a paddling implement. My only option, then, is apparently to code a separate ruleset for each and every version of IE (and possibly each Windows Service Pack, depending on how MS decides to go with bug fixes) and use conditional comments keyed to those specific versions. The nightmare of maintainability thus created will make the dark ages of separate Netscape and IE code look like a walk in the park by comparison. So. How, exactly, is this a step forward again? Sorry for the smug told you so, but many people including myself have made this very clear over the whole life of WSG. You only have yourself to blame. So long as there are bugs in any browser which require hacks in order to get certain parts of CSS or any other standard to work in that browser, forward compatibility will be a serious problem. All the smugness and I told you so comments in the world won't make it otherwise. -- May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house. -- George Carlin ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Cross platform weirdness in FF WAS Re: [WSG] Chinese food and web standards
On Thu, 2005-10-13 at 03:16 -0400, James Bennett wrote: Since Gecko-based browsers render (nearly) identically on all platforms, there's no need to worry on that count snip I thought I'd take this opportunity to hijack a thread and ask about a weird problem I've been having with Firefox on Windows vs. Firefox on Linux. Both running 1.0.7, both with Chris Pederick's Web Dev toolbar installed. I haven't got access to a Mac with Firefox, but it's possible that'd render in a similarly incongruous fashion. The site in question is at http://www.joahua.com/rawideasmakeover/ - not mine, I redid it to prove a point re: web standards to someone - and the rendering inconsistency is in the height of the Hosting services div: div class=short h3// hosting services/h3 img src=gfx/home_hosting.jpg alt= / pCompetitive hosting for your site with multiple redundancies, regular back ups and problem resolution to keep your business online./p pa href= class=more// more/a/p /div being the source. (Yeah, markup isn't pristine, but I was in a hurry.) That div _should_ extend far enough down to make its right border appear to be shared between the two cells... which it does in Firefox/Lin without any dramas. Scale text up and down, it copes fine, no breakages. Back over to Windows, however, and the event services cell appears to move upwards, and the right border doesn't extend far enough down anymore. I suspect this has something to do with fonts... font: 1em/1.1em Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; is what's in use. I just discovered I can break the layout in a similar fashion by forcing Verdana (btw, the font family I'm using is just based on the existing site: to those who care about nice typography, it's not my fault!)... but why would Win/Firefox use Verdana over Arial (both are installed)? For the record, IE/Win renders correctly (in the desired fashion, that is), as does Opera/Lin and Konqueror/Lin. Is this a bug? Any ideas? Slightly perlexed, Josh -- Joshua Street http://www.joahua.com/ +61 (0) 425 808 469
[WSG] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
Hi all! Various great sites give instructions on how to create faux columns for fixed-width designs and how to do it for liquid designs. But what happens if I have a navbar with a fixed width floating left, and a liquid content with two columns floating right? To make it a bit more clear: http://pillango.mage.hu/anf/site/htm12.htm The border you see next to the left navbar is a background image. What I need is the same looking border between the other two columns, set at a percentage width to 'shrink' with the page if necessary. But when I try to place a background image in the content div, it simply won't repeat on the y axis. What am I doing wrong? Any hints welcome, Titanilla ** 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] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
Does this help?http://www.ilovejackdaniels.com/design/faux-columns-for-liquid-layouts/-- - C Montoya rdpdesign.com ... liquid.rdpdesign.com ... montoya.rdpdesign.com
Re: [WSG] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
On 10/13/05, Titanilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The border you see next to the left navbar is a background image. What I need is the same looking border between the other two columns, set at a percentage width to 'shrink' with the page if necessary. But when I try to place a background image in the content div, it simply won't repeat on the y axis. What am I doing wrong? Change your background GIF to a 2px by 7px graphic, instead of 210px wide as at present. Then, use background-position to put it in place. You can specify that as an em value to make it work well with fluid layouts. HTH, Josh -- Joshua Street [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[WSG] Counters support?
I discovered a page today that's all about counters and printing things here: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/CSS:Getting_Started:Media#Action:_Printing_a_document I didn't think Firefox supported counters, though... I'd read that Opera did (but later checked that and apparently it's partial/incorrectly implemented - see http://nanobox.chipx86.com/browser_support_css.php#support-css2propsbasic-content ). Does anyone know if Firefox does/doesn't support this, and, if it doesn't yet, is it on the list for Deer Park? Not so much for production sites, but I've built pages just to generate content before that was printed to PS then to PDF... and this would be really useful for me there (e.g. for generating numbered, printed content in a run-once context). Regards, Joshua Street http://www.joahua.com/ +61 (0) 425 808 469
Re: [WSG] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
Christian Montoya wrote: Does this help? http://www.ilovejackdaniels.com/design/faux-columns-for-liquid-layouts/ Not quite, I've known it already. See, the problem is I've got a design which is half fixed, half liquid. These techniques are either for fixed pages (with one fixed background image) OR for liquid ones (with one background image set at percentages), but I can't figure out a solution that works simultaneously for both. Titanilla ** 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] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
Joshua Street wrote: Change your background GIF to a 2px by 7px graphic, instead of 210px wide as at present. Then, use background-position to put it in place. You can specify that as an em value to make it work well with fluid layouts. HTH, Josh I'm not sure I understand you right. The image that I have now is OK, it's fixed and it works nicely. I just need another one for the right column, and it needs to be liquid, but I don't seem to be able to mix the two kinds (fixed ANd liquid) of background images on one page. T ** 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] Counters support?
On 13 Oct 2005, at 8:34 pm, Joshua Street wrote: I discovered a page today that's all about counters and printing things here: http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/CSS:Getting_Started:Media#Action: _Printing_a_document I didn't think Firefox supported counters, though... I'd read that Opera did (but later checked that and apparently it's partial/incorrectly implemented - see http://nanobox.chipx86.com/browser_support_css.php#support- css2propsbasic-content ). Does anyone know if Firefox does/doesn't support this, and, if it doesn't yet, is it on the list for Deer Park? Firefox 1.5beta (aka DeerPark) does indeed support counters according to the (current) CSS 2.1 draft. Opera 8.5 and (I think) 8.02 supports that syntax as well. And iCab 3.0. Check bug 3247 which implements it in Gecko https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3247 There was a recent article on ALA where the subject was mentioned more in detail in the comments. http://alistapart.com/articles/multicolumnlists Philippe --- Philippe Wittenbergh http://emps.l-c-n.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 **
[WSG] Web page check
First off the site was designed before Firefox and was my first site. Now I have been seeing things were Firefox is displaying somethings differently then IE which is fine except one thing. On http://www.jimjacobe.com/ClassDescriptions.html I have listed classes for an instructor, items 2, 4 and 5 (some others farther down have the same issue) have text positioned incorrectly in Firefox but look correct in IE, specifically the content starting An in the first two problem areas. If someone can look at this and tell me what needs to be done to fix this. Not necessarily looking for the fix code wise but more of is this a syntax issue or something I simple did wrong and IE is doing its thing to fix things. Thanks for taking the time to look at this page and if possible provide some feed back Kevin
Re: [WSG] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
Titanilla wrote:
Joshua Street wrote:
Change your background GIF to a 2px by 7px graphic, instead of
210px wide as at present. Then, use background-position to put it
in place.
I'm not sure I understand you right.
Keep existing background-image where it is.
Add a trimmed down version of existing background-image - 2px wide (just
border), and position it in #content.
#content
{
padding-top: 1em;
margin: 0 2em 0 240px;
background-image: url(border-reduced.gif);
background-repeat: repeat-y;
background-position: 73% 0;
}
Now all you have to do is to make #content stretch down to footer.
http://www.positioniseverything.net/easyclearing.html is a good option
with your existing markup / css. Put it on #content.
That's it, apart from that IE/win is acting up and need some corrections.
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] IE team says no to hacks
That's not really true, Alan. A site without CSS hacks does not necessarily have to be ugly. I develop table-less ASP.NET sites using CSS and I have never used a single CSS hack or conditional comment, yet my sites are still clean, good-looking and functional in the leading browsers (IE, FF, Safari, and Opera). -- Francesco Sanfilippo Web Architect and Software Developer http://www.blackcoil.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] 402-932-5695 home office 402-676-3011 mobile Professional web developer and Internet consultant with 10 years experience. Specializing in ASP.NET, C#, SQL Server, CSS/XHTML, and digital photography. Founder and developer of URL123.com - now serving 2 million clicks per month. On 10/13/05, Alan Trick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you don't use CSS hacks you have 2 options. 1. Avoid CSS that is buggy in a browser. 2. Use other hacks like conditional comments. (Conditional comments *are* hacks, there just intentional ones) Number 1 is simply not an option unless your willing to look like useit.com or something. Number 2 is hardly any better because when future browsers come out either they will have fixed their CSS implementations (and then life is happiness and glee) or they won't. With CSS it's likely that you will have to do touchups but with conditional comments you have to write another css file all together. Also I don't want an M$ bitching session either. IE7 may not be perfect, but it's a step towards interopability and standards (which is a really big thing for Microsoft). I think we should encourage it all we can. Peter Firminger wrote: If you've gone against all sane advice and used CSS hacks then you knew exactly what you were in for with future browsers and potential problems. I don't want to see an M$ bitch session develop here while Microsoft are seemingly trying very hard do the right thing (at last). Obviously we have to wait and see what the final release does. At that point, I really hope you're (general) not going to charge your customers if you have to fix up bugs (hacks) that you knowingly induced into their websites if you didn't make it clear to them at the time that hacking may require rectification in the future. Sorry for the smug told you so, but many people including myself have made this very clear over the whole life of WSG. You only have yourself to blame. Peter previously comment=I'm really sick of html emails on this list I second :) It sounds more like they are taking a stand against the designers who tried to work around those buggy problems. They aren't cleaning up their own act, just making it harder to hack around them. IE 7 still has some of the quirky implementations that make older versions of IE so difficult to design for. /previously ** 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] IE team says no to hacks
On Oct 13, 2005, at 12:55 AM, Geoff Pack wrote: If the IE team fix the CSS hacks and also fix the bugs the hacks are used to work around (as I think they originally mentioned they would), then the hack users will be fine. And if not, then it's no worse than having to update your conditional statements anyway. Because I bet you don't yet know which of your conditionals will have to change to !--[if lt IE 7] and which to !--[if IE] This is only true in certain circumstances when the hack does not make use of a deliberate feature that is not changed. For example, this scenario is common: - IE 5.x has a natural box model problem - put IE 6 into quirks mode so it emulates this problem - use * html to fix the problem in both IE5.x and IE 6 Now, we know that IE 7 will support quirks mode and will not support * html. New problem. In fact, a problem made more difficult by deliberately putting IE 6 into quirks mode, perhaps with a comment before the DOCTYPE, because this is a deliberate feature in IE. How many of these developers put that comment in a server-side include function, so they can remove it easily? My guess is none, even the ones that put all of their CSS calls in some sort of include. A better, more forward-thinking approach would be: - IE 5.x has a natural box model problem - IE 6 and IE 7 in standards mode do not have this problem - use conditional comments with [if lt IE 6] to fix the problem in IE5.x - use conditional comments with [if lt IE 7] to fix other IE 6 problems - use conditional comments with [if lt IE 8] to fix other IE 7 problems Then you place whatever is needed into whichever stylesheet is appropriate. As a general rule, Only hack the dead. The only safe bug to exploit is one that is fixed in ongoing generations of the product, or will never be fixed because the product is dead. All other necessary targeting should use features, not bugs. (Some may ask what the difference is. The answer: features are supported.) On Oct 13, 2005, at 7:27 AM, Francesco Sanfilippo wrote: That's not really true, Alan. A site without CSS hacks does not necessarily have to be ugly. I develop table-less ASP.NET sites using CSS and I have never used a single CSS hack or conditional comment, yet my sites are still clean, good-looking and functional in the leading browsers (IE, FF, Safari, and Opera). However, if you read about the Slashdot upgrade problem in the blog post, you'll see a point that is tough to navigate around without targeting browsers: 1. HTML validator requires a legend tag inside a fieldset (although I can't find that requirement in the spec) 2. HTML spec does not declare whether an empty element should render or not (according to the blog post -- not sure about this) 3. IE and Gecko choose to render empty elements differently. It would seem to me then that without targeting browsers you cannot achieve the goal layout in both of these browsers unless you drop all fieldsets, forms, etc. The spec is not complete. If you bump into one of these un-specified areas, then it seems your layout is subject to the will of the browser makers. Sometimes this is ok. Sometimes this means the client goes shopping for a new developer. -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** 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] IE team says no to hacks
Ben Curtis wrote:
As a general rule, Only hack the dead. The only safe bug to exploit
is one that is fixed in ongoing generations of the product, or will
never be fixed because the product is dead. All other necessary
targeting should use features, not bugs. (Some may ask what the
difference is. The answer: features are supported.)
Agreed, although I'm not sure if the dead are in need of much hacking if
we care about the living.
Regarding IE7, note that the following scenario is also quite common,
and isn't creating any new problems:
- IE 5.x has a natural box model problem (not that I care anymore)
- put IE 6 into quirks mode so it emulates this problem (and behaves better)
- use * html to fix the problem in both IE5.x and IE 6 (not really
needed, but is quite convenient)
- Use !--[if lte IE 6]
- Use an ?xml declaration to keep IE6 in quirks mode, and rely on the
fact that IE7 will skip the xml prolog [1] and use the doctype - as it
should. Time to upgrade the W3C site on that point[2], I think.
Then we can introduce our !--[if IE 7] commented/hacked/cheating
stylesheet to get around all the old and new bugs and shortcomings.
Should be pretty future-safe.
Now, we know that IE 7 will support quirks mode and will not support
* html.
Oh, but it will - in quirks mode[3].
New problem. In fact, a problem made more difficult by deliberately
putting IE 6 into quirks mode, perhaps with a comment before the
DOCTYPE, because this is a deliberate feature in IE.
It may become a problem, but only to those who have used 'comments' as
switch.
However, if you read about the Slashdot upgrade problem in the blog
post, you'll see a point that is tough to navigate around without
targeting browsers:
That case is easiest solved as was suggested in the original IE-blog.
legend {display: none;}
Shouldn't make much of a difference across browser-land.
Georg
[1]http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/09/15/467901.aspx
[2]http://www.w3.org/International/articles/serving-xhtml/
[3]https://blogs.msdn.com:443/ie/archive/2005/09/02/460115.aspx
--
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] IE team says no to hacks
MS have fixed the * html hack for IE7, which isn't a bad thing provided the rest of the engine comes up to scratch. I think the article acutally makes a pretty good case for throwing IE into quirksmode and developing for one (lousy, but reasonably predictable) version of IE instead of four (5, 5.5, 6, 7). Which is what I have done for the last few sites I've built. You don't even need a hack to do it, just include an xml declaration, a comment or blank line as the first line in your page. kind regards Terrence Wood Alan Trick said: I personally think that this will be unrealistic for the time being. But it's nice to hear that the IE team is starting to take a stand agains the problems their buggy software created. ** 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] Is a colon after a form label necessary?
A colon is often used to delineate a key:value pairs (e.g. mail headers [RFC822]). Perhaps the convention to use this for labels: form controls grew out of this before the intorduction of the label element? Now that we have actual label elements that we can associate with form controls, this type of representation is purely optional. -- Terrence Wood email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] phone: +64-4-8033354 mobile: +64-21-120-1234 McLaughlin, Gail G said: We are establishing Web standards for forms and are debating this. Here¹s what I have gleaned based on reading the references cited below. 1. Colons are hard to see on a screen. (Reference 1.) 2. W3C does not state a requirement for a colon after a label. 3. WAI recommends identifying a label with a LABEL tag and does not mention using a colon. (Reference 3.) 4. 508 Standards Information for Standards does not mention using a colon for labels. 5. Microsoft Active Accessibility (MSAA) software might require the colon. (Reference 2.) 6. According to Microsoft, screen-review utilities might use a colon to identify a control. (Reference 4.) ** 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] Need more help Was: [css-d] List with hover background images
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 00:58:47 -0400, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
However, if I write...
#faphomecontent a.subcatlink{display: table; display: inline-block; ... }
regards
Georg
Thanks Georg, but this doesn't appear to do anything for me. I still
trigger the link and hover when my cursor is over blank space within the
href block.
Christian,
As for having a URL, I mentioned in my first post that I cannot post the
actual page. If needed, I can make a test page, but not sure how soon I
can do that...
--
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
**
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] Web page check
try putting a float:left into your div.classdescriptions. worked for me in FF.On 10/13/05, GALLAGHER Kevin S [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: First off the site was designed before Firefox and was my first site. Now I have been seeing things were Firefox is displaying something's differently then IE which is fine except one thing. On http://www.jimjacobe.com/ClassDescriptions.html I have listed classes for an instructor, items 2, 4 and 5 (some others farther down have the same issue) have text positioned incorrectly in Firefox but look correct in IE, specifically the content starting "An" in the first two problem areas. If someone can look at this and tell me what needs to be done to fix this. Not necessarily looking for the fix code wise but more of is this a syntax issue or something I simple did wrong and IE is doing it's thing to fix things. Thanks for taking the time to look at this page and if possible provide some feed back Kevin
Re: [WSG] Meta Keywords?
The response: The purpose of the inclusion of Meta Keywords is to cater for older search engines that are still using meta tags. The Meta Keywords tag allows [ClientName] to define which search terms are important to their web page. Yahoo actually uses the meta keywords tag to see if a site should be included in a subset of results. -- On 10/7/05, John Allsopp wrote: Get them to ask Hitwise to justify the recommendation, based on anything other than handwaving and superstition. I'd be interested in their response :-) I think it is safe to say that we would *all* be interested in their response, if they prepare one at all... Cheers, Derek. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
ADMIN - THREAD CLOSED Re: [WSG] Meta Keywords?
On Fri, 14 Oct 2005 10:51:49 +1000 (EST), Martin Jopson wrote: The response: Thank you for finalising the info - we were all hanging out to hear what nonsense they would claim :) The thread is still closed, guys! Offlist, if you want to discuss it! warmly, Lea WSG Core Group ** 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] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
It can be done, but only if the content of the nav div will never be taller than any other div first you need div to hold the nav and content divs lets call that the holder: div id=holder style= float: left; /* need to hold floats */ background-color: #e8e8e8; /* gives nav grey background */ background-image: url(../images/LM_back.gif); /* a 1px 1600px wide gif with the first pixel black and the rest white to clearly delineate between nav and content */ background-repeat: repeat-y; background-position: 201px 0; div id =nav style= float: left; width: 200px; nav content /div div id=content style= float: right; width: auto; background-image: url(../images/LL_back.gif); /* a 1px 600px wide gif with the first pixel black and the rest white (or different colour to clearly delineate between centre and right content */ background-repeat: repeat-y; background-position: 67% 0; div id=center style= float: left; width: 66%; center content here /div div id=right style= float: right; width: 32%; right content here /div /div /div It should work, i did something similar before moving along to a full elastic model using ems - it evolved to sligthly different structure: http://www.docep.wa.gov.au/lr/default.html Nick This email is from the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection and any information or attachments to it may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply mail to the sender informing them of the error and delete all copies from your computer system, including attachments and your reply email. As the information is confidential you must not disclose, copy or use it in any manner. ** 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] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
I wrote: It can be done, but only if the content of the nav div will never be taller than any other div It should read the nav div can not be longer (taller) than the longest (tallest) of centre or right div. I will see if I can pump out a working example to my blog in the next day or so. Nick nickcowie.com This email is from the Department of Consumer and Employment Protection and any information or attachments to it may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply mail to the sender informing them of the error and delete all copies from your computer system, including attachments and your reply email. As the information is confidential you must not disclose, copy or use it in any manner. ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
I am interested in the current opinion of the relevance of css hacks for explorer 4.0.x 5.0.x specifically in regards to the Box Model Hack. I understand the problem associated with the box model in ie4 5 but have begun to question the need for hacks in your css for these browser versions. In an attempt to design for versions of ie 6.0 I attempted to download versions 5.0 and 4.0. Fisrtly ie4 is no longer on the microsift explorer download page and has to be sourced elsewhere. Secondly if you have a later version of ie on your system it wont install an earlier version anyway. This leads me to think that anyone using ie 4 or 5 have either had to make an effort to remove a later vesion of ie to install the earlier version or has not updated their browser. And in order to actually test in ie 4 o r 5 I'll need to install it on another machine. I know this is sounding like a lame excuse for not designing for ie6 but at what point do we stop disigning for minority users who (given the fact that microsoft loves to remind to update its products) have most likely chosen to not update or dont have internet access and therefor wont be viewing your site anyway. I have a great interset in making degradeable cross platform/browser sites but dont want to get so bogged down in hacks that code becomes disorderly and problemetic, especially when ie7 is released. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? I realise its an old issue and remember having discussions with fellow students at Uni a few years ago. But with the implementations in ie6 and the ones to come in ie7 perhaps its time to finally stop worrying about ie 4/5 ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
Standalone versions of IE 4 and IE 5 are available at http://browsers.evolt.org/?ie/32bit/standalone. These will work even if you have a later version of IE installed. cheers, Geoff. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Rhys Burnie Sent: Friday, 14 October 2005 1:52 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] css for ie4/ie5 I am interested in the current opinion of the relevance of css hacks for explorer 4.0.x 5.0.x specifically in regards to the Box Model Hack. I understand the problem associated with the box model in ie4 5 but have begun to question the need for hacks in your css for these browser versions. In an attempt to design for versions of ie 6.0 I attempted to download versions 5.0 and 4.0. Fisrtly ie4 is no longer on the microsift explorer download page and has to be sourced elsewhere. Secondly if you have a later version of ie on your system it wont install an earlier version anyway. This leads me to think that anyone using ie 4 or 5 have either had to make an effort to remove a later vesion of ie to install the earlier version or has not updated their browser. And in order to actually test in ie 4 o r 5 I'll need to install it on another machine. I know this is sounding like a lame excuse for not designing for ie6 but at what point do we stop disigning for minority users who (given the fact that microsoft loves to remind to update its products) have most likely chosen to not update or dont have internet access and therefor wont be viewing your site anyway. I have a great interset in making degradeable cross platform/browser sites but dont want to get so bogged down in hacks that code becomes disorderly and problemetic, especially when ie7 is released. Does anyone else have an opinion on this? I realise its an old issue and remember having discussions with fellow students at Uni a few years ago. But with the implementations in ie6 and the ones to come in ie7 perhaps its time to finally stop worrying about ie 4/5 ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
Rhys wrote: But with the implementations in ie6 and the ones to come in ie7 perhaps its time to finally stop worrying about ie 4/5 you're the only one that can take on that issue and make a decision for *your* site. Different sites require different decisions. Examine your logs and weigh them up against the site objectives (user + business). fwiw, I forgot about testing in IE4 about 3 years ago. I still like to make things look ok [1] in IE5.0 but if some text is butting up against the edge of a container due to it not supporting some float issue or something, i dont worry about it. Its usually a better story with IE5.5. [1] give an example of ok to your client early on and explain why spending 99% of your time on 1% (percentages always make your argument sound good ;-) of their audience is not spending their money in the right place. cheers, pete ~~~ Peter Ottery ~ Creative Director Daemon Pty Ltd 17 Roslyn Gardens Elizabeth Bay NSW 2011 Web: www.daemon.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] css for ie4/ie5
But they may make your system vulnerable as they are not patched. There's a very good reason Microsoft doesn't publish these for developers or anyone else. Not at all recommended on any machine you care about. P Standalone versions of IE 4 and IE 5 are available at http://browsers.evolt.org/?ie/32bit/standalone. These will work even if you have a later version of IE installed. cheers, Geoff. ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
Sure. But if you are only testing your own sites, and not surfing the web with them, then it shouldn't be much of a risk. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Peter Firminger Sent: Friday, 14 October 2005 2:18 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] css for ie4/ie5 But they may make your system vulnerable as they are not patched. There's a very good reason Microsoft doesn't publish these for developers or anyone else. Not at all recommended on any machine you care about. P Standalone versions of IE 4 and IE 5 are available at http://browsers.evolt.org/?ie/32bit/standalone. These will work even if you have a later version of IE installed. cheers, Geoff. ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
Peter Firminger wrote: Not at all recommended on any machine you care about. Just for my own peace of mind tho - they're only a security issue when you have launched the program right? so if i'm launching them (old standalone IE5 5.5) once a month to *only* test pages that I've created - I'm not leaving my system open to some rogue security breaching action right? pete o ** 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] css for ie4/ie5
Yeah, the main risk is in the OS/Browser integration thing. And, since those versions are standalone, they're safer than IE6... plus your usage patterns for it will be different.On 10/14/05, Peter Ottery [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just for my own peace of mind tho - they're only a security issue whenyou have launched the program right? so if i'm launching them (old standalone IE5 5.5) once a month to *only* test pages that I'vecreated - I'm not leaving my system open to some rogue securitybreachingaction right?-- Joshua Street http://www.joahua.com/+61 (0) 425 808 469
[WSG] Footer Navigation
Hi all, I am interested to know what you think of duplicating navigation in the footer of a page. I have a client who has requested it, but I do not, as a rule, include duplicate links - I seem to recall there were some accessibility issues with duplicate navigation links for screen readers. What are the pros and cons regarding usability vs accessibility? Is there a relevant standard I could quote here? Thanks in advance Sarah :) -- XERT Communications email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: +61 2 4782 3104 mobile: 0438 017 416 http://www.xert.com.au/ web development : digital imaging : dvd production ** 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] faux columns for fixed AND percentage width
Nick Cowie wrote: I will see if I can pump out a working example to my blog in the next day or so. Thanks Nick and Georg for your suggestions. I guess there must be multiple ways of making it work, I just could find any of them. CSS has breathtakingly creative ways of supporting design, but I'm still at a discovering stage and sometimes I can't see the forest for the trees :) Regards, Titanilla ** 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] Footer Navigation
I think this practice is a remnant of pre-accessibility days where navigation options that were provided as images were duplicated as plain text links in the footer to aid people with images turned off etc. With judicious use of alt tags I don't believe this is something that is still necessary. On 10/14/05, Sarah Peeke (XERT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all,I am interested to know what you think of duplicating navigation in thefooter of a page. I have a client who has requested it, but I do not, as a rule, includeduplicate links - I seem to recall there were some accessibility issueswith duplicate navigation links for screen readers.What are the pros and cons regarding usability vs accessibility? Is there a relevant standard I could quote here?Thanks in advanceSarah :)--XERT Communicationsemail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]office: +61 2 4782 3104 mobile: 0438 017 416http://www.xert.com.au/web development : digital imaging : dvd production**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help **-- Regards,William D. Bartholomewhttp://blog.bartholomew.id.au/
