Re: [WSG] ServerSide Includes and Divs
Helmut Granda schrieb: I discovered something weird today. When I was creating my layout that contains includes for some reason my rules would not work properly only if the layout was like this. -- code starts Main Layout div id=’header’ Include ‘header.php’; /div div id=’content’ Include ‘content.php’; /div div id=’footer’ Include ‘footer’; /div --End of Main Layout --Sample Include //header.php div class=’tagline’Blah/div div class=’logout’Logout/div -- end of code BUT! If I did this… --code starts Main Layout Include ‘header.php’; div id=’content’ Include ‘content.php’; /div Include ‘footer’; ---End of Main Layout If you do it in this way, make sure you defined the div´s in the footer: *The index.php/main-layout:* --- require ‘header.php’; div id=’content’ require ‘content.php’; /div /require ‘footer*.php*’;/ ---End of Main Layout *The footer.php: -- * div id=footer ?php . ? /div Hope to helped you out. All the best, Soeren --Sample Include //header.php div id=’header’ div class=’tagline’Blah/div div class=’logout’Logout/div /div --end of code As you can see as long as I added my “header” wrapper in the “header.php” the rules would work fine, but if I didn’t then the rules would break. Has anyone experienced this? Is there any specific reason why rules would fail with includes? TIA ...helmut ** 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 sued over non-accessible site
I saw the Target Sued story over on Cnet (http://tinyurl.com/b3u29). What was amazing to me was the response from a Mr Troy Gaddis in the talkback section (bottom of above page under the title This is Absurd. Here's a highlight: Why do people with disibilites think they DESERVE compensation for such things. I can definetly understand the actual physical store front for being able to accomodate for wheelchair entrances and such, but, this is america, and seeing as how they are not owned by the government, they should have their website designed any way they like. ANYONE who does web programming or development (I do) knows that complying with these would be difficult, and in some situations, impssible. Especially if navigation menu's are written in _javascript_ or Flash... Regards :: PAUL SkyRocket Design Co
Re: [WSG] Target sued over non-accessible site
On 2/11/06, Paul Ross [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I saw the Target Sued story over on Cnet (http://tinyurl.com/b3u29). What was amazing to me was the response from a Mr Troy Gaddis in the talkback section (bottom of above page under the title This is Absurd. Here's a highlight: Why do people with disibilites think they DESERVE compensation for such things. I can definetly understand the actual physical store front for being able to accomodate for wheelchair entrances and such, but, this is america, and seeing as how they are not owned by the government, they should have their website designed any way they like. ANYONE who does web programming or development (I do) knows that complying with these would be difficult, and in some situations, impssible. Especially if navigation menu's are written in JavaScript or Flash... Sounds like he has no idea how simple it is to make a website accessible. But that's not the big deal here. If you look at all the comments at Cnet, you'll see that a lot of people agree with Mr. Gaddis... which brings to light a bigger social problem behind the fight for accessible websites; a lot of people, at least in the U.S., just don't care about making accommodations for people with disabilities. There isn't any convincing them otherwise, because you can't make them compassionate; all we can do is hope that the Target lawsuit inspires a precedent for accessibility so that people like Mr. Gaddis have no choice but to consider making websites accessible. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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 sued over non-accessible site
Christian Montoya wrote: Sounds like he has no idea how simple it is to make a website accessible. But that's not the big deal here. If you look at all the comments at Cnet, you'll see that a lot of people agree with Mr. Gaddis... which brings to light a bigger social problem behind the fight for accessible websites; a lot of people, at least in the U.S., just don't care about making accommodations for people with disabilities. There isn't any convincing them otherwise, because you can't make them compassionate; all we can do is hope that the Target lawsuit inspires a precedent for accessibility so that people like Mr. Gaddis have no choice but to consider making websites accessible. I think the reaction against enforced accessibility in cases like this is more to do with that word : enforced. It amounts, rightly or wrongly, to a violation of one's right to 'do as one chooses'. The objections cited, such as the sarcastic suggestion that we sue the radio because the deaf can't hear it, does actually make a valid point and highlights the senseless extremes that one could go to. Far better to approach the problem by emsuggestingem/ that it's a 'good idea' to do x and y because the resulting site can be visually identical but more accessible. Screaming and shouting and making money for lawyers is just fanaticism, and considerably discouraging. The answer, like in so many cases, is in education, not in applying a straight jacket! Just my 2p's worth. Bob McClelland www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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 sued over non-accessible site
Far better to approach the problem by emsuggestingem/ that it's a 'good idea' to do x and y because the resulting site can be visually identical but more accessible. Screaming and shouting and making money for lawyers is just fanaticism, and considerably discouraging. The answer, like in so many cases, is in education, not in applying a straight jacket! Bob, on the surface your point is good. But in practice, in the real world out there, it doesn't work :( Don't get me wrong, I agree with you, education is a key element, and really should be looked at as part of a whole package. That is, it should be *one* of the many steps and tools used to reach the goal of accessibility. Having done advocacy for accessibility for over a decade, I can tell you that there are situations (many more than I wish) where you just *know* there's no amount of education or being nice that will work. You have to try it, but you know that in the end, the *only* thing that the business will understand is to hit them in the wallet, and hit them hard. One of the problems here is that the Americans with Disabilities Act is often perceived as a brick mortar law. That is, a law that applies to building and up to a point, services, which is rather tangible. In fact, the ADA is a civil rights law, to ensure access. If you look at the ADA under the one light, it's easy to assume that it can't possibly apply to the internet. But if you look at it under the right light, it's obvious that it does (or should in any case). At which point does one's right to do as one chooses start stepping on another one's right to access services? Would we even *have* this discussion if people being refused access to websites were black and the refusal was because they are black? (note, I'm using black in an international context, not all blacks are African-American, and not with the intent to offend). I'll stop before I go on and on and ramble, this *is* a bit of a pet topic of mine. Feel free to contact me in private to continue it if it's not appropriate to this WSG list :) Nic ** 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 sued over non-accessible site
At which point does one's right to do as one chooses start stepping on another one's right to access services? I believe there is no right to access services. Any such aberration of 'rights' that necessarily violates the legitimate rights of others is destructive to our liberty. The question regarding any so called right is: At whose expense?. If there is an answer, you have unmasked why it is illegitimate. True rights exist in and of themselves without cost to others. Furthermore, the right to do as one chooses does not allow you to violate the rights of others! While I build and advocate accessible web sites to the best of my ability, the idea of issuing or advocating force against another at no expense to myself makes me fear the future. I believe any such laws should be rescindered. Stuart Sherwood ** 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 sued over non-accessible site
On 2/12/06, Stuart Sherwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At which point does one's right to do as one chooses start stepping on another one's right to access services? I believe there is no right to access services. Any such aberration of 'rights' that necessarily violates the legitimate rights of others is destructive to our liberty. The question regarding any so called right is: At whose expense?. If there is an answer, you have unmasked why it is illegitimate. True rights exist in and of themselves without cost to others. If a site is providing information or services to the public, then the public have a right to be able to access those services. Providing access to all of the public does not impinge on the rights of any other sector of that public. Accessibility and usability go hand in hand and improvements made to accessibility generally benefit all users, not just those with disabilities. I believe education is the key. Many site owners rely on the advice of their site designers and don't have a clue what Standards are, let alone what needs to be done to make a site accessible to the widest possible audience. Target were advised of the problems with their site ten months ago and chose not to fix them. The question that really intrigues me is that of where the responsibility actually lies? With Target (ultimately), with the Amazon engine that generates their site, or with the designers of the site themselves? It is certainly an interesting case. Education and asking nicely for fixes doesn't always work. Theodore Rooselvelt had the right idea, Speak softly and carry a big stick - unfortunately, as long as the ADA is seen to be a bricks and mortar law, it will not be a very effective stick. Lynne Pope ** 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 sued over non-accessible site
Designer wrote: The objections cited, such as the sarcastic suggestion that we sue the radio because the deaf can't hear it, does actually make a valid point and highlights the senseless extremes that one could go to. The nature of radio itself is purely the transmission of audio signals. Making it accessible to deaf audiences would not be possible unless the medium itself was changed beyond recognition. The web, however, does not require such a fundamental change in the medium to be accessible to blind users. On the contrary, the fundamental building blocks of the web, HTML markup, have been designed (or at least expanded) with accessibility in mind. I can't speak for US law, but certainly the DDA in the UK has a fundamental tenet of reasonable adjustments running through it. Is it reasonable to, say, demand from a car manufacturer that their vehicles should blind people to drive? No. Is it reasonable to expect a multi-million business to make simple changes to their site to allow blind visitors to shop on there (also in the light of the fact that, for many of those visitors, it's easier to shop online than having to go to physical stores)? Well...yes. Far better to approach the problem by emsuggestingem/ that it's a 'good idea' to do x and y because the resulting site can be visually identical but more accessible. That assumes that fundamentally people are good and do things without laws. I could also suggest that it's not right to discriminate against different races, religions, etc...but certain people will just ignore those suggestions unless there are enforced consequences. Screaming and shouting and making money for lawyers is just fanaticism, and considerably discouraging. The answer, like in so many cases, is in education, not in applying a straight jacket! If I understand the issue correctly, Target have already been informed about their site's shortcomings previously, and have simply chosen to ignore those concerns. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] Opera 8.5 css
Hi all, I have a site that is pretty close to pixel-perfect in IE Firefox. However, with Opera 8.5 I have run into problems with the layering of floats. It seems 8.5 is not recognising 'position: relative; z-index:n;' in the float layer. Does anyone know if this is a recognised bug? If it is, could you please direct me to a workaround? Thanks. Lynne ** 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] Opera 8.5 css
Lynne Pope wrote: ... It seems 8.5 is not recognising 'position: relative; z-index:n;' in the float layer. Does anyone know if this is a recognised bug? If it is, could you please direct me to a workaround? It is a recognized Opera bug - which is fixed in Op9 previews... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_chaos_03.html No really good fixes around, AFAIK. This is the closest I know of... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_chaos_05.html regards 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 **
[WSG] accessible drill-down into a nested list
I'd like to hear from folks who've used screen-readers: What are the best ways to drill down into a nested list? Consider a nested menu that's marked up as an unordered list (UL). Select an item in the top-level menu and the page reloads with a second-level menu of items opened up within the selected top-level item. Select a second-level item and the page reloads with a menu of third-level items opened up within the selected second-level item. In a visual menu it's usually sufficient simply to open up these sub-menus. Because the parent menu remains the same, our gaze immediately jumps to a new sub-menu that's appeared the screen. We don't have to re-read menu items we've already read, because we can tell at a glance what parts of the menu we've already seen and what parts are new. However, it must be a very different experience using a screen-reader. When the page reloads, I assume the screen-reader begins reading the menu from the beginning again. The user would have to listen for a new sub-menu, but without really knowing for sure whether a new sub-menu had appeared. If this is the scenario, then browsing with a screen-reader must require a great deal of patience as you wait through the repetition of the menu each time in order to discover the new list of sub-options. Tell me if this would be a better scenario: When you select a menu item, the page reloads with a set of breadcrumbs that spells out the history of selected menu items, such as: portfolio : music : compositions After the breadcrumb list comes the current sub-menu, in this example a list of compositions. Somewhere else on the page, perhaps last in the markup, would be the full menu including all menu items at each selected level. A jump to navigation link early on the page could get you there quickly. Please let me know if this scenario would work for you, and if not what other menu functionality would best suit the screen-reader environment. If this description isn't clear, let me know and I'll prepare a live demo. Thanks, Paul ** 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 sued over non-accessible site
Nic wrote: At which point does one's right to do as one chooses start stepping on another one's right to access services? Would we even *have* this discussion if people being refused access to websites were black and the refusal was because they are black? I really don't see the point you are trying to make here. There is no difference between refusing access to someone based on physical/mental disability (those that require assistive technology) and someone based on their race, culture, religion, etc. It's unnecessary discrimination either way. -- Lachlan Hunt http://lachy.id.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 sued over non-accessible site
There is no difference between refusing access to someone based on physical/mental disability and someone based on their race, culture, religion, etc. It's unnecessary discrimination either way. Lachlan, that was, actually, my point. Only people don't recognise that refusing access to someone with a disability is the same as refusing access to someone on the basis of their race, culture, religion, etc. If we replaced the issues of disabilities with that of, say, race, this discussion would not happen, because (at least I hope) most people would recognise the issues as being discrimination. To draw a paralel with a physical access issue, in the US, in the 60's, african americans wanted to get to ride at the front of the bus. In 2005, people with disabilities can't even get ON the bus. But transit companies can throw all kind of excuses at people with disabilities and reasons why they can't make their system accessible. If they refused access to their bus to someone who's black, because he's black, or a mother with a child, because she has a child, we'd see that as the discrimination it is. Discrimination is discrimination, no matter what excuses you wrap around it. And while for some people it's difficult to see the relationship between that type of discrimination and non-accessible websites, the fact remains, if you don't provide access, you're discriminating. And that is, in more and more countries, against the law Is that a bit clearer? :) Nic ** 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] accessible drill-down into a nested list
Paul Novitski wrote: When the page reloads the screen-reader begins reading the menu from the beginning again. Correct. The user would have to listen for a new sub-menu, but without really knowing for sure whether a new sub-menu had appeared. Correct. browsing with a screen-reader must require a great deal of patience as you wait through the repetition of the menu each time in order to discover the new list of sub-options. Correct. the page reloads with a set of breadcrumbs that spells out the history Essentially you are repeating information already available through the browser history, and it still doesn't inform the user that there is a new menu if that is your goal. Also, breadcrumbs are most commonly links to parent directories in the site hierarchy, so there may be some issues here - you might need to test it with real users. After the breadcrumb list comes the current sub-menu If you are talking about unnesting the sub-menu then, yes, this is good. Some screen readers don't announce the end of a list so the whole concept of nesting is lost. See also link at end about structural labels. Somewhere else on the page, perhaps last in the markup, would be the full menu including all menu items at each selected level. A jump to navigation link early on the page could get you there quickly. As a develpoer I prefer a noun form for navigation (e.g. main navigation, page content) and drop the verb (e.g. skip to, jump to) there are some reports of screen reader users not understanding the purpose of skip links and thus ignoring them. Please let me know if this scenario would work for you I recommend reading Hudson, Weakley and Miller's work on source order and structural labels: http://www.usability.com.au/resources/source-order.cfm kind regards Terrence wood. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
