Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
On 7 Sep 2007, at 00:39, Felix Miata wrote: On 2007/09/06 20:42 (GMT+0100) Tony Crockford apparently typed: so, what happens if a user has their default font set larger than the browser default in this case? Can't happen. Browser default == user default. :-p You *know* I meant manufacturer browser default... so what happens if a user has altered the browser default to a larger size. does body: 100% mean that all other measurements are then derived from the users, larger font setting? if so am I safe setting body: 100% and then setting text elements using ems? if i check in a range of sizes (IE smallest - IE largest) on a range of screens and the design doesn't break - is that okay? I'm sure it is. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
On 7/9/07 (07:50) Tony said: I've been using CSS for seven years or more and I'm trying to adopt best practice in a pragmatic way, which means I can't deliver my clients sites with excessively large fonts - they are trying to design interfaces that look attractive and create income for their business. I'm trying to ensure the sites they get are as accessible as possible, we have to meet somewhere in the middle. On a side note, I can't help but notice that almost every site that has been cited as a reference for reasons why default text size should not be tampered with has a very minimal level of 'design styling'. For example: http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/2S/font.htm http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20020819.html http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/bigdefaults.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/essence.html Now, I'm not going to dispute that these are very accessible sites from a type-size perspective. And, yes, they present their information without unnecessary distraction. But I can also guarantee that if I took a 'design' like that of any of those sites to a client, said client would be out the door and off to my competitors faster than I could say Accessibility. Maybe it's just coincidence. But none of those sites telling me that I can create perfectly nice-looking, commercially viable designs using default text sizes have actually put their design-money where their mouth is. *That does not make the points they raise wrong*, but it means that it feels a bit like having my dress sense criticised by someone wearing a dirty t-shirt and torn sweat pants. -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
On 07-Sep-07, at 3:01 PM, Rick Lecoat wrote: On 7/9/07 (07:50) Tony said: I've been using CSS for seven years or more and I'm trying to adopt best practice in a pragmatic way, which means I can't deliver my clients sites with excessively large fonts - they are trying to design interfaces that look attractive and create income for their business. I'm trying to ensure the sites they get are as accessible as possible, we have to meet somewhere in the middle. I have been reluctant to add anything to this discussion, because I suspect I do not understand a lot of what is happening in terms of the usability studies; I also must admit that the DPI comparisons have confused me. The first point I'd like to bring up, is that, as a 'web-designer', one is often asked to create a website, not necessarily for the / users/ of the afore-mentioned site, but for the /client/. There are a number of ramifications that arise out of this situation, one of the first I suppose is that there is a divergence between what would be best for the users, and what one has been asked to do. I'm sure many of us have been in this situation - I may know that there is a large body of information that suggests that one /should/ design using default text-sizes as a base - but no amount of convincing is going to work with the client. Where there are significant amounts of money involved, I don't know whether I have the luxury - definitely not at present - to say 'I'm sorry, I can't work with you'. But none of those sites telling me that I can create perfectly nice- looking, commercially viable designs using default text sizes have actually put their design-money where their mouth is. Try the Chelsea Creek Studio: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ I particularly like this one: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/site/gustave/index.html It is possible, and I don't see why it shouldn't be possible to work with larger text-sizes and yet arrive at an aesthetic solution. In summary, to my somewhat incoherent soliloquy: - One cannot always design to accepted best practices (in this case, default text sizes), where ones autonomy is restricted - Designing using these best practices does not need to result in a 'minimal level of design styling', or an un-aesthetic solution Do forgive me if I have missed the point completely, I frequently do. Best, - Rahul. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
I suggest to use for the default lang the language which starts the body: the first word is english or chinese? And for each section that is in the other language (that not is the default) you should specify the other language. I hope it will be hopefull. -- Diego La Monica Web: programmazione, standards, accessibilità e 2.0 Brainbench certified (transcript ID # 6653550) for: RDBMS Concepts; HTML 4.0 W3C HTML WG IWA/HWG Member Responsabile liste IWA Italy ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) Web Skill Profiles WG Member ( http://skillprofiles.eu ) phone +390571464992 - mobile +393337235382 MSN Messenger: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Skype: diego.la.monica - ICQ #: 249-460-264 Web: http://diegolamonica.info On 07/09/07, Tee G. Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am working on a bilingual site (chinese/english) that needs to pass at least WCAG AA, the site is UTF-8 charset and I didn't use lang attribute in the meta because it's a bilingual site. and I am getting this error on Priority 3 Verification Checklist: 4.3 Identify the primary natural language of a document. * Rule: 4.3.1 - Documents are required to use the META element with the 'name' attribute value 'language' in the Head section. o Note: This rule has not been selected to be verified for this checkpoint. * Rule: 4.3.2 - The HTML (Root) element must use the 'lang' attribute. o Failure - The HTML (Root) element does not use the 'lang' attribute. What do you propose I should do to make the 'failure' goes away? Thanks! tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
I did read about this somewhere, I thought the guidelines touched upon it. Patrick Lauke wrote: Tee G. Peng I am working on a bilingual site (chinese/english) that needs to pass at least WCAG AA, the site is UTF-8 charset and I didn't use lang attribute in the meta because it's a bilingual site. [...] What do you propose I should do to make the 'failure' goes away? Is every page on your site in both chinese and english, all in one page? If so, as long as you're marking up the changes when you move from the chinese to the english section of your page, I'd say you can pick one or the other as the nominal language for the whole page. P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor Enterprise Development University of Salford Room 113, Faraday House Salford, Greater Manchester M5 4WT UK T +44 (0) 161 295 4779 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.salford.ac.uk A GREATER MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
Tee G. Peng I am working on a bilingual site (chinese/english) that needs to pass at least WCAG AA, the site is UTF-8 charset and I didn't use lang attribute in the meta because it's a bilingual site. [...] What do you propose I should do to make the 'failure' goes away? Is every page on your site in both chinese and english, all in one page? If so, as long as you're marking up the changes when you move from the chinese to the english section of your page, I'd say you can pick one or the other as the nominal language for the whole page. P Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor Enterprise Development University of Salford Room 113, Faraday House Salford, Greater Manchester M5 4WT UK T +44 (0) 161 295 4779 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.salford.ac.uk A GREATER MANCHESTER UNIVERSITY *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
On 7/9/07 (11:50) Rahul said: Try the Chelsea Creek Studio: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ I particularly like this one: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/site/gustave/index.html Yes, both fine designs. (I was simply pulling my example sites from the list of those that had been proffered up-thread as information sources about default sizes being best). It is possible, and I don't see why it shouldn't be possible to work with larger text-sizes and yet arrive at an aesthetic solution. I agree that it should be (and clearly is) possible to create reasonably aesthetically pleasing [1] designs using default text sizes. I found it ironic, however, that the sites telling me to use default sizes failed so spectacularly to provide an aesthetically pleasing solution [2] themselves. Do forgive me if I have missed the point completely No, you hit it bang on I think. Thanks for your views! -- Rick Lecoat [1] A very subjective judgement call, of course. [2] Again, that's subjective. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] Browser Check
Browser check for the following site: http://www.condometropolis.com/buy_orlando_condos.php?Name=action=searchSubmit=Browse+All+Condos!first=yes I've checked on IE 6 and Firefox 2.0.0.9. One strange thing is that the absolutely positioned divs in the relative container aren't were they should be in Firefox. Mostlikely Firefox has it right and IE doesn't. How could I fix the slight shift in position? Thanks, Jorge *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
I am working on a bilingual site (chinese/english) that needs to pass at least WCAG AA, the site is UTF-8 charset and I didn't use lang attribute in the meta because it's a bilingual site. and I am getting this error on Priority 3 Verification Checklist: 4.3 Identify the primary natural language of a document. * Rule: 4.3.1 - Documents are required to use the META element with the 'name' attribute value 'language' in the Head section. o Note: This rule has not been selected to be verified for this checkpoint. * Rule: 4.3.2 - The HTML (Root) element must use the 'lang' attribute. o Failure - The HTML (Root) element does not use the 'lang' attribute. What do you propose I should do to make the 'failure' goes away? Thanks! tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
On 7 Sep 2007, at 00:03, Felix Miata wrote:
Don't what? Don't understand your instruction? Don't believe your
instruction? Don't let you try to instruct them? Don't look at the
good example sites you offer them? ? ? ?
yes to all of those.
most real world clients I am aware of are being driven by different
desires than accessibility.
I have been an accessibility evangalist for many years, but the real
world is a wrld compromise and conformity. they believe what they
want to believe, the see what they see and what feels right to them
is what they want.
Do they understand that it's good business to treat customers
right, which on the WWW means big, easy-to-read text?
http://www.lighthouse.org/accessibility/top-10/
I have trouble reading that site.
first off, with a window set to 1024x768 on my 30 dell on OS X this
line:
6. The fastest growing market segment is Americans age 50+. In fact,
every seven
is over seven inches long, which makes it hard to scan - each word
becomes discrete letters if you understand me...
if I remove my reading glasses, the text is so large and contrasty
that I get double vision blurring. my glasses correct my astigmatism.
so in my case I want text that's readable with my glasses on, not
text sized so large I can't scan it.
I wonder how many of these studies took into account that most web
users with poor vision, use some means of corrective device?
body {font-size: medium !important;}
That simplicity cannot work on sites where fonts are set on
particular elements, or via class ids or names. Anything much
beyond that one rule is beyond the capability of any besides web
design professionals accustomed to
routine use of CSS.
I've been using CSS for seven years or more and I'm trying to adopt
best practice in a pragmatic way, which means I can't deliver my
clients sites with excessively large fonts - they are trying to
design interfaces that look attractive and create income for their
business. I'm trying to ensure the sites they get are as accessible
as possible, we have to meet somewhere in the middle.
and talking of UI, why are we fighting for 16px fonts in browsers
when most UI text is much smaller?
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***
Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
On Fri, September 7, 2007 11:50 am, Rahul Gonsalves wrote: Try the Chelsea Creek Studio: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ The text size may be OK but the lack of contast in the page header definitely fails accessibilty standards. Stuart *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Font sizing: top down or bottom up
On 7/9/07 (07:50) Tony said: and talking of UI, why are we fighting for 16px fonts in browsers when most UI text is much smaller? I believe that the reasoning here draws a distinction between UI elements and 'content'. UI elements become familiar through their unchanging nature (every time I pull down the Image menu in photoshop it looks the same as last time, unless I've upgrade photoshop inbetween). Content, by contrast, is by nature unfamiliar. The more familiar the text in question, the less help the reader requires. -- Rick Lecoat *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Browser Check
Jorge, The site looks good. You might want to start by fixing the 246 validation errors in your HTML just on that pageno offense intended. The other pages have similar issues too. (Firefox 2 on Mac) There are a couple nested tag closure issues, which could well be your problem with the positioning. Most of the complaints are about ampersands in your URLS not being coded as amp; Joseph R. B. Taylor - Sites by Joe, LLC Keep it Clean, Simple Elegant (609) 335-3076 http://sitesbyjoe.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Browser check for the following site: http://www.condometropolis.com/buy_orlando_condos.php?Name=action=searchSubmit=Browse+All+Condos!first=yes I've checked on IE 6 and Firefox 2.0.0.9. One strange thing is that the absolutely positioned divs in the relative container aren't were they should be in Firefox. Mostlikely Firefox has it right and IE doesn't. How could I fix the slight shift in position? Thanks, Jorge *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***begin:vcard fn:Joseph Taylor n:Taylor;Joseph org:Sites by Joe, LLC adr:;;408 Route 47 South;Cape May Court House;NJ;08210;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Designer / Developer tel;work:609-335-3076 tel;cell:609-335-3076 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://sitesbyjoe.com version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: [WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
Patrick, Diego Jixor, thank you. Is every page on your site in both chinese and english, all in one page? Some pages contain two languages and that was the reason I thought 'lang=en' isn't quite appropriate. I guess I must draw the dice and pick one. According to WCAG 1.0: 4.3 Identify the primary natural language of a document. [Priority 3] For example, in HTML set the lang attribute on the HTML element. In XML, use xml:lang. Server operators should configure servers to take advantage of HTTP content negotiation mechanisms ([RFC2068], section 14.13) so that clients can automatically retrieve documents of the preferred language. Techniques for checkpoint 4.3 Is this 'clients' refers to normal browsers (Opera, Firefox for example) or Screen reader (including Apple's VoiceOver)? If the later, I don't think there is Screen reader that can speak both Eastern Asian language and English (except one make by Indian, Japanese or Chinese then there is hope :) I heard Chinese has one but only work for PC ). Up till this point, the whole purpose of lang attribute is at fault. Will WCAG2 amend this or perhaps introduce a new attribute for bilingual site? tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
Some pages contain two languages and that was the reason I thought 'lang=en' isn't quite appropriate. ... Up till this point, the whole purpose of lang attribute is at fault. Will WCAG2 amend this or perhaps introduce a new attribute for bilingual site? Hi Tee, Personally I think it is an accessibility issue to mix two languages on the same page. I am just curious why you did that. If it is a requirement, you can identify a particular block as being in a different language by using the lang attribute on that one block. Then use the lang attribute on the html tag to identify the main language of the page ( http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#changes-in-lang ) . I currently am working on a multilingual site myself. It is not live but you can see it at ( http://lafermerie.neighborwebmaster.com ). The links on the lower right allow you to switch between languages. I am using UTF-8 and setting the lang attribute based on the currently selected language. Regards, Kepler Gelotte *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
Hi Kepler, Personally I think it is an accessibility issue to mix two languages on the same page. I am not sure about this, I don't find it an issue at all, due to my background it's actually a rather common thing to read/speak two different langagues in a single conversation/page. If you ever watch Bollywood movie, you will see that it's very common too. Heck! Even those Booker prize winners Indian writers have to insert a few Hindi here and there. Do French in Quebec do this? UTF-8 makes it possible to have two totally different languages put on one page, and website no longer is a mono-language rule it all, based on this logic, I think one really can't argue it's an accessibiility issue if a website contains two languages in one page, as long as the nature of the site has this needs based on its culture and custom preferences. I am just curious why you did that. Well, I guess this is arguable if I really need it. I guess I don't need to but I have a good reason for doing it - I am redesigning my web design service site (+ blog), and I want to target a particular audiences that are both English/Chinese capable and comfortable with using both and have the preferences to give the business to one who is capable of both languages. To do this, I need to demonstrate that to them - it's just a matter how one go about doing it, and yes, serving one version for English and the other for Chinese is one way to go. However, say, in the home page and other pages I want to show blog entries that have English and Chinese articles in certain block, it makes more sense to have two languages in one page instead of two different pages specifically for English and Chinese. There is also this possibility that a site needs two languages in one page, for instance, a site offers language learning. If it is a requirement, you can identify a particular block as being in a different language by using the lang attribute on that one block. Then use the lang attribute on the html tag to identify the main language of the page ( http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#changes-in-lang ) . Thanks for the pointer. This no doubt is a good way. I currently am working on a multilingual site myself. It is not live but you can see it at ( http://lafermerie.neighborwebmaster.com ). The links on the lower right allow you to switch between languages. I am using UTF-8 and setting the lang attribute based on the currently selected language. Wow!! Powered by Zencart! I know it's not ready for production environment, but did you check the Magento? tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] lack of 'lang' attribute fails WAI
Wow!! Powered by Zencart! I know it's not ready for production environment, but did you check the Magento? Yes, I did look at Magneto briefly. I like their checkout screen much better than ZenCart's checkout process, but when I saw it was still Beta I decided I needed something more stable. Regards, Kepler *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
[WSG] XHTML+Voice
Has anybody done this on your (and client) site yet? It's showing up on Opera site, so I reckon it's supported for 9.50 Alpha? And Safri Beta 3 too? http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/xhtml-voice-by-example/ tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Browser Check
On 9/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Browser check for the following site: http://www.condometropolis.com/buy_orlando_condos.php?Name=action=searchSubmit=Browse+All+Condos!first=yes Sorry to be off-topic, but is that domain name set in stone? Reading it left to right can be confusing. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML+Voice
On Sep 8, 2007, at 9:32 AM, Tee G. Peng wrote: It's showing up on Opera site, so I reckon it's supported for 9.50 Alpha? And Safri Beta 3 too? http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/xhtml-voice-by-example/ That page doesn't work as described on Safari, seen from here (latest WebKit nightly build -OS X) and Safari3.03beta - both OS X and WinXP). But Mac OS X 10.4 (and esp. Safari) has build in screen reading technology: VoiceOver. Turn VoiceOver on (command F5), and you can have the page read to you. See [1] for a quick howto. No need for special (x)html code. iCab also has this option (from the View menu). Firefox and Camino nightly trunk builds will have support for VoiceOver in the future (currently you'll need to make a custom build from the Gecko 1.9 trunk to enjoy it. Basically, it works, but there are still rough edges. In a Camino build, it only works on the chrome part at the moment, not on the content part.). I tried that page in Opera 9.5 alpha, but it didn't seem to make any noise. But maybe I'm missing a setting somewhere. I haven't read much about that issue, yet. Opera 9.5a also seem to have basic support for VoiceOver (again, chrome only, as far as I could test). [1] http://www.456bereastreet.com/archive/200505/ voiceover_and_safari_screen_reading_on_the_mac/ Philippe --- Philippe Wittenbergh http://emps.l-c-n.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] XHTML+Voice
Hi Philippe, a quick question before I forgot to ask. A bit off-topic: yes I use VoiceOver sometimes; the built-in voice options are awful, so far Vicki is the only one I can listen for more than 15 mintues. I'd been wanting to purhcase a pleasant voice sample but don't know where to look. Anybody knows about this? Hopefully Leapord will improve. tee *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] Browser Check
Yep, it's set in stone. They have nearly 3k unique visitors per month. I guess it's really not affecting the traffic. Jorge Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9/7/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Browser check for the following site: http://www.condometropolis.com/buy_orlando_condos.php?Name=action=searchSubmit=Browse+All+Condos!first=yes Sorry to be off-topic, but is that domain name set in stone? Reading it left to right can be confusing. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.net *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
