[WSG] CSS Hack?
I may have "crashed" into another I.E. CSS bug that I have used to provide this browser with a particular rule that will not be applied by, for instance, Firefox or Opera. It is a "empty comment hack": html/**/body selector, that seems to be applied only by I.E. 6.x So far I haven't found it documented, maybe I haven't checked enough. Furthermore, my testing browsers are limited to a few running under Windows XP Pro. Can you please take a look and provide me some additional results, or if it is already documented, if possible, so that I can see if it fits my needs? Testing page available at: http://www.cb2web.com/tut_csshack.shtml Thank you in advance. Carlos Simoes ** 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] Awards / Endorsements for quality websites?
Hello Sigurd,Web awards, you said?Some are the kind you're looking for, promoting to a certain extent,standards compliance and accessibility.That may require you some prospection, Google search for "awards for sites"should also provide you some links... the first one is my own.You can also start, for instance, at:http://www.awardsites.comhttp://www.website-awards.nethttp://www.websawards.orgThere's even a book about the subject:http://www.bton.com/glory/index.html... and an ODP (and Google of course) category about it, Web Awards:http://dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/On_the_Web/Best_of_the_Web/Site_Awards/My best,Carlos- Original Message -De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] lapart de Sigurd MagnussonEnvoyé : lundi 18 avril 2005 01:18À : wsg@webstandardsgroup.orgObjet : [WSG] Awards / Endorsements for quality websites?I was wondering if anyone knew of a popular sites to promote semanitc orcompliant (or "good" in general) websites?Furthermore, if there was a site or an award that would be consideredquite an achievement or endorsement for your work?
Re: [WSG] Around We Go
Using one and a http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel5.htm >From Webmates forum (code and CSS posted): http://tinyurl.com/65qr3 Carlos Simoes - Original Message - From: "Chris Kennon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2005 8:33 PM Subject: [WSG] Around We Go This example of rounded corners (http://kalsey.com/2003/07/rounded_corners_in_css/), is elegant and efficient, but 2 years old. I've "googled" til blurry eyed, but have only found contemporary examples with 8 nested divs and other nightmares. Would someone guide me to a standards based solution without all the gif wrapping? CK __ "Knowing is not enough, you must apply; willing is not enough, you must do." ---Bruce Lee ** 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] Odd IE Issue...
I believe the problem is exactly the image size: too small. See: http://cb2web.com/tests/gamerdb/ It uses a nav_back.gif 20x20, GIF, Web Safe colors, 81 bytes: http://cb2web.com/tests/gamerdb/media/nav_back.gif HTH Carlos http://cb2web.com - Original Message - From: "Chris Stratford" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 6:09 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Odd IE Issue... Hey Brian, thanks for the reply - I changed the DTD... No difference at all :( Any more ideas? I will check back in a few hours. need a nap - 5am here :D Gnite! ** 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] Fieldset and no form
Thanks, that's what I thought. I really did not want to use it, and I found somehow strange that the guys at euroaccessibility.org have used it that way. Anyway, thanks again. - Original Message - From: "Terrence Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, December 04, 2004 8:45 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Fieldset and no form No, it is not correct. You need to read the spec. Validators do not alert you if you have left out, that's why it seems like you can use form controls anywhere... but the real question becomes why would you want to when there are so many other tags you can use. Terrence Wood. Cb2 Web Design wrote: > I have a doubt: Is it correct to use fieldset (and legend) without a form, > like you can see at the page below? > > http://www.euroaccessibility.org/tf3_doc/EACTF3TestableStatements.html > > Thank you guys... -- *** Are you in the Wellington area and interested in web standards? Wellington Web Standards Group inaugural meeting 9 Dec 2004. See http://webstandardsgroup.org/go/event24.cfm for details *** ** 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 **
[WSG] Fieldset and no form
I have a doubt: Is it correct to use fieldset (and legend) without a form, like you can see at the page below? http://www.euroaccessibility.org/tf3_doc/EACTF3TestableStatements.html Thank you guys...
Re: [WSG] IE frustrations...
Hi,
I would solve it like this, see:
http://cb2web.com/tests/dontcom/
Briefly, wrapped both content and sidebar divs with something like
#col {
margin:0;
padding:0;
}
... moved the container div up and, I think this was the most important,
changed the order of the sidebar and content divs. Anyway, see source of the
test pages above for further details...
HTH
Carlos
http://carlos.cb2web.com
- Original Message -
From: "Darren Wood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 7:59 PM
Subject: [WSG] IE frustrations...
Hello all,
No one should ever have to ask these sorts of questions..but due to the
pantsness of IE i have no choice
http://dontcom.com
You may notice that the right nav drops down to the bottom of the
document in IE. I've been looking at the CSS for WAY too long so its
all starting to look the same...and thus i cant find the offending bit
of CSS.
Any help you may have would be greatly greatly appreciated.
Thanks in advance,
Darren
http://webdeveloper.co.nz/forum/
http://dontcom.com/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Request: Is it semantically correct?
I agree... Since I want this wrapped with a box with other type of corners, it would be: http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel4.htm CSS: http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel4.css And in order to move the inside that box and use a "top of list" link in the bottom, this is my best shot: http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel5.htm Europe Stats Number of women for 100 men(1995): Europe: 105 women for 100 men World: 98,6 women for 100 men Percentage of girls and boys of less than 15 years old (1995): Eastern Europe: 22% of girls for 24% of boys Western Europe: 19% of girls for 21% of boys Fertility Rate of 15-19 years old women (1990-95): Eastern Europe: 48 births for 1000 women Western Europe: 22 births for 1000 women top of list CSS: http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel5.css Russ, If only I have discovered your definition lists examples a few months ago... Oh well :) Carlos - Original Message - From: "Lea de Groot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 12:55 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Request: Is it semantically correct? > A table would be perfectly semantically correct, and I dont see why it > would make a difference to the width, but if you want to do it table > free, I would prefer something like this: > > Statistics - Europe > > Number of women for 100 men(1995): > Europe: 105 women for 100 men > World: 98,6 women for 100 men > Percentage of girls and boys of less than 15 years old > (1995): > Eastern Europe: 22% of girls for 24% of boys > Western Europe: 19% of girls for 21% of boys > Fertility Rate of 15-19 years old women (1990-95): > Eastern Europe: 48 births for 1000 women > Western Europe: 22 births for 1000 women > > > (thats what I'd do - mind you, this is the 30-second take as I am being > called for breakfast!) > > Lea > -- > Lea de Groot > Elysian Systems - http://elysiansystems.com/ > Brisbane, Australia $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more Get It Now At www.doteasy.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] Request: Is it semantically correct?
I see your point Russ. I need to use it for something like: Statistics - Europe Number of women for 100 men(1995): Europe: 105 women for 100 men World: 98,6 women for 100 men Percentage of girls and boys of less than 15 years old (1995): Eastern Europe: 22% of girls for 24% of boys Western Europe: 19% of girls for 21% of boys Fertility Rate of 15-19 years old women (1990-95): Eastern Europe: 48 births for 1000 women Western Europe: 22 births for 1000 women (see the example at http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel3.htm) Of course, it is tabular data. The point is that I am trying to avoid tables in a narrow side-column of a 3-column layout. Opinion? - Original Message - From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, May 02, 2004 11:06 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Request: Is it semantically correct? This new example is much cleaner code - less divs etc. However, it is hard to tell if it is semantically correct without real content inside. Some may disagree, but I would have to say at present it looks like it is pushing the DL slightly more than it should as there does not seem to be a direct relationship between the dt and the dd. 'Others believe that definition lists can be used to tie together any items that have a direct relationship with each other (name/value sets).' http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/definition/ I think the paragraph is the thing that breaks the direct relationship for me is it's between the heading and the list. This example works as a DL: Fruit pear apple banana This example does not seem to work as well, as the paragraph interrupts the direct relationship. Fruit Here is some fruit pear apple banana Of course, it all comes down to personal opinion! What do others reckon? Russ * 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] Request: Is it semantically correct?
Russ, I have followed your advice regarding the use of divs and classes... Do you think using for this could be better? I've tried and attained the same result using and only one class, see: http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel3.htm Could it be connsidered more correct? Does the bug you noticed remains? CSS: http://cb2web.com/tests/coolboxes3.css Thank you! Carlos - Original Message - From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 10:31 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Request: Is it semantically correct? 'Semantically correct' is one of those tricky questions that gets us all into hot water. On one hand you have code purists who believe that there should be the absolute minimum of extra divs and classes [1]. Anything extra is clogging up the code. There are even purists who believe that any form of background image is wrong. On the other you have people trying to achieve practical solutions for design problems. So, everyone you ask will have a different opinion. The bottom line is to use as few additional divs and classes as possible. And, more importantly, that all presentation (colour, images etc) should be removed from the code - which your example does correctly. Having said that, a few divs can be removed from your example without changing the result, even though it still has the slight bug in the footer that your example does (in mac moz and safari): http://www.maxdesign.com.au/jobs/css/coolbox/ Russ [1] On Tuesday 'Ten questions for Anne van Kesteren" interviews goes live, where he talks about how div's have semantic meaning. > I have been dealing with some ways of having box borders other than the > regular ones... Can you please tell me if this attempt is semantically > correct and if it has too much nested divs? * 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] Request: Is it semantically correct?
Russ, Noa, thank you.
Russ, a very, very clever approach... that a {display: block} really made
the difference!
Thank you again and I look forward for the interview with Anne van Kesteren.
Carlos
- Original Message -
From: "russ - maxdesign" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, May 01, 2004 10:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Request: Is it semantically correct?
'Semantically correct' is one of those tricky questions that gets us all
into hot water.
On one hand you have code purists who believe that there should be the
absolute minimum of extra divs and classes [1]. Anything extra is clogging
up the code. There are even purists who believe that any form of background
image is wrong. On the other you have people trying to achieve practical
solutions for design problems. So, everyone you ask will have a different
opinion.
The bottom line is to use as few additional divs and classes as possible.
And, more importantly, that all presentation (colour, images etc) should be
removed from the code - which your example does correctly.
Having said that, a few divs can be removed from your example without
changing the result, even though it still has the slight bug in the footer
that your example does (in mac moz and safari):
http://www.maxdesign.com.au/jobs/css/coolbox/
Russ
[1] On Tuesday 'Ten questions for Anne van Kesteren" interviews goes live,
where he talks about how div's have semantic meaning.
> I have been dealing with some ways of having box borders other than the
> regular ones... Can you please tell me if this attempt is semantically
> correct and if it has too much nested divs?
*
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
*
[WSG] Request: Is it semantically correct?
Hello list, I have been dealing with some ways of having box borders other than the regular ones... Can you please tell me if this attempt is semantically correct and if it has too much nested divs? Example: http://cb2web.com/tests/testboxmodel.htm CSS: http://cb2web.com/tests/coolboxes.css Thank you in advance for your help and eventual sugestions... Carlos * 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 3-col draft: Request for opinion
Hi Bert, You said: "What about all those nested divs - not as bad as (shudder) nested tables, but is it necessary? " - Not that bad at all, see "Nested DIVs, nested TABLEs, what's the difference?" at (1). Anyway, and this way, I have dealt with the box model problem in IE without hacks (I think). As I told, this was based on something James Ellis posted a while ago at WSG, see (2) and look for "3 column CSS layout with footer that works"; - The metadata is experimental, as I am trying to incorporate Dublin Core Metadata in the design and look for the results (in terms of "searchability"); - The class="normal" is my way of controlling template properties in Dreamweaver, so that some items in the navigation menu, defined in the template, can be changed in the individual pages... for instance, setting the style of the current page corresponding item in the left menu to another background-color and color, as well as suppressing the link to itself. I know, I am not an hand-coder, shame on me :)); You said: "Can't help you on the server issue (other than to make the image bigger so the server WILL serve it) but what is the "background bullet technique? Can't you use a list-style-image?" - Manuel already answered: Yes, that's the reason and the source is that resource (3) that Manuel pointed; Thank you for your feedback, Bert :) (1) http://www.alistapart.com/articles/practicalcss/ (2) http://webstandardsgroup.org/resources/ (3) http://css.maxdesign.com.au/listutorial/introduction.htm My best, Carlos www.cb2web.com - Original Message - From: "Bert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2004 11:41 AM Subject: RE: [WSG] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion Hi Carlos and group I'm new to the Web Standards Group and am not famliar with past discussion topics - hope I'm not speaking out of turn. I'm quite familiar with CSS and XHTML (1.1) but always willing to learn new tricks. > http://www.apex-ethics.com/ One of the things I noticed is the amount of code in the head section - lots of comments (presumably inserted by Dreamweaver) and Meta data. Perhaps I'm ignorant, but is all that code necessary for a site to function? What about all those nested divs - not as bad as (shudder) nested tables, but is it necessary? Also, I see lots of links with class="normal". Would it not be more efficient to set the default link in the container to waht this class represents? In other words, set the style for "#Navleft a" to what your "normal" class currently has. (I tend to use classes only for exceptions) > I am using the "background bullet" technique. Can't help you on the server issue (other than to make the image bigger so the server WILL serve it) but what is the "background bullet technique? Can't you use a list-style-image? Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design www.betterwebdesign.com.au Fast-loading, user-friendly websites * 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 3-col draft: Request for opinion
Hello List, After doing the homework (thanks to James Ellis and an excellent tutorial from him about the subject) I think I have managed to create a "solid" 3-col layout using CSS. It is here: http://www.apex-ethics.com/ (OT) This site belongs to an ethics organization (APEX, Association for Positive Ethical eXchange) from and for site owners and webmasters. It tries to encourage professional practices regarding privacy, copyright and ethics amongst site owners providing goods and services. Feel free to look around, please. Any good soul can provide feedback on IE5/Mac? I was able to test already it in the "the platform from hell" as James called it: IE5.5/WinME. It worked fine. On a side note, did you have any info about some webservers, like this at doteasy.com, not serving images as backgrounds if the images are less than 1Kb in size?! I almost fainted when after uploading the pages, all the bullets were missing. I am using the "background bullet" technique. The "background-image" only worked if the image was bigger than 1Kb. I had to change the url() for the background images, so that I can load them from my domain server, cb2web.com. That's why you will see that in the CSS. Just a matter of time until we move to a new hosting provider, hopefully. But, how can this be set by a server?! Thank you List, Carlos www.cb2web.com - Original Message - From: "Cb2 Web Design" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 3:38 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion > Russ, I'll appreciate if you can send me a screen shoot, please... thank > you! > > Too bad, I was hoping it could hold... > > Any other browser/OS combinations ? > > Thank you all in advance. > > Carlos > > - Original Message - > From: "russ weakley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 2:11 PM > Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion > > > > > Do you think it will hold? Or is it to clumpsy? Can someone tell me > what > > > happens in a IE/Mac environment? > > > > MacIE - breaks badly. Three columns end up one under each other - seems to > > be a width issue. Can send screen shot if needed. > > Russ * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute
Tim said "Check out XHTML target module:". You can see a tutorial about this, posted a while ago at the Webmates forum: http://excellentsite.org/agroup/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=36&foru m=1 Direct link to the tutorial by Eva Lindqvist: http://www.swedishgoldenretrievers.net/targetmoduleinxhtml.shtml Carlos www.cb2web.com - Original Message - From: "Tim Lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 18, 2004 4:41 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute Darian Cabot spoke the following wise words on 18/04/2004 1:29 PM EST: > I would like to open a link in a new window. I used to use target="_blank" > attribute, but that isn't xhtml strict. Can anyone enlighten me on a xhtml > strict method? as I'd like my pages to verify ^^ Check out XHTML target module: http://www.accessify.com/tutorials/standards-compliant-new-windows.asp http://www.webreference.com/xml/column30/ http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_targetmodu le http://www.nic.fi/~tapio1/HTMLKit/Attributes2Mod.php3 The DTD: http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/DTD/xhtml-target-1.mod -- tim lucas www.toolmantim.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion
:) Just find out about BrowserCam some minutes ago ... Thank you Russ! - Original Message - From: "russ weakley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 3:46 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion > Instead of one screenshot, how about 23 screenshots: > http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=55491 > > Click on the small screenshot to see full size versions. > Russ $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more Get It Now At www.doteasy.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] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion
Well, just find out about BrowserCam and used the trial to see the page: http://tinyurl.com/38xrr It seems that IE5.2/Mac is the worst case... :( - Original Message - From: "russ weakley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion > MacIE - breaks badly. Three columns end up one under each other - seems to > be a width issue. Can send screen shot if needed. > Russ $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more Get It Now At www.doteasy.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] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion
Russ, I'll appreciate if you can send me a screen shoot, please... thank you! Too bad, I was hoping it could hold... Any other browser/OS combinations ? Thank you all in advance. Carlos - Original Message - From: "russ weakley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 2:11 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion > > Do you think it will hold? Or is it to clumpsy? Can someone tell me what > > happens in a IE/Mac environment? > > MacIE - breaks badly. Three columns end up one under each other - seems to > be a width issue. Can send screen shot if needed. > Russ > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more Get It Now At www.doteasy.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] CSS 3-col draft: Request for opinion
Hello one and all, I have been trying to create a 3-column layout using only CSS and avoiding fixed widths. I know there are a few ways of doing it, but that's me, always interested in re-inventing the wheel :) My approach can be seen at: http://cb2web.com/tests/geres04/indexppp.htm ... and it will be the starting point for a small website for a little hotel in Lisbon, Portugal. Tested with IE6, IE5.5, Firebird, Firefox, Opera7.23, Opera6.05 @ Win98, WinME and WinXP. No major problems, looks identical in all of the referred. Do you think it will hold? Or is it to clumpsy? Can someone tell me what happens in a IE/Mac environment? Thank you in advance! Carlos Simoes Cb2 Design, Portugal $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more Get It Now At www.doteasy.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] Font size, and how large is large enough?
> When you make both height and width 76.1% of the default, the result is
> less than 58% of the original.
But in the end, it seems to me the user gets the same font size as if 'body
{font-size: 100%;}, given that all the other font-sizes are set above 1em
for regular paragraphs and above 0.9em for footnotes, for instance.
Can you see the test at:
http://cb2web.com/tests/testing.shtml ?
I have tested it in Opera 7.23, IE6 and Firebird and, IMO, the fonts within
the div76 (blue box) and div100 (red box) containers look the same at text
size medium (or 100%) and in fact, for the div76 container, the normal
paragraph is more readable at the "largest" setting in IE6 and the p.note is
still readable at "smallest".
What do you think?
The stylesheet is something like:
#div76 {
font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 76.1%;
...
}
#div76 p{
font-size: 1.1em;
}
#div76 p.note{
font-size: 0.94em;
}
#div100 {
font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 100%;
...
}
#div100 p{
font-size: 0.8em;
}
#div100 p.note{
font-size: 0.7em;
}
#div76 p.smaller , #div100 p.smaller{
font-size: smaller;
}
Carlos
- Original Message -
From: "Felix Miata" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 3:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
> Cb2 Web Design wrote:
>
> > I tend to agree with such suggestion: applying a percentage in the body
and
> > then work with the remaining sizes in ems.
> > I have done that in here:
> > http://www.excellentsite.org/
> > Do you think font size is to small?
>
> It certainly starts out that way. With 'body {font-size: 76.1%;}' what
> you are saying is this:
>
> "I don't have any way to know what size your default is, or whether it
> bears any relationship to what you like or need, so whatever that size
> happens to be, 12px or 18px or 28px or anything else, I'm making it more
> than 42% smaller than your browser preference."
>
> In case you're wondering where the 42% comes from, it's because your
> rule on its face is a height, but implicitly also applies to the width.
> When you make both height and width 76.1% of the default, the result is
> less than 58% of the original.
> --
> "Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only
> a day! No, no, man was made for immortality."
> President Abraham Lincoln
>
> Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
$0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more
Get It Now At www.doteasy.com
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
[WSG] Serving XHTML as application/xhtml+xml
I have been trying to set my server to do it. Without success.
Follows the description of my attempt:
I have created an index.xhtml file, changed the content in it to
"application/xhtml+xml" ( ) and uploaded it.
IE just fails to render it. Time to go to web server. Since I am using
server-side includes, I have added to the .htaccess file the following
lines:
AddType application/xhtml\+xml;qs=0.8 .xhtml
AddHandler server-parsed .xhtml
Options Indexes FollowSymLinks Includes
Now the server knows that xhtml files are to be served as
application/xhtml+xml and SSI are also usable with this extension.
Then, as suggested somewhere, a little browser-sniffing to serve IE and
other browsers not understanding the type application/xhtml+xml must be
done. Again, a few lines were added to the same .htaccess:
RewriteEngine on
RewriteBase /
RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} application/xhtml\+xml
RewriteCond %{HTTP_ACCEPT} !application/xhtml\+xml\s*;\s*q=0
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} \.xhtml$
RewriteCond %{THE_REQUEST} HTTP/1\.1
RewriteRule .* - [T=application/xhtml+xml]
Now, IE is served the xhtml file as text/html and Mozilla is served
application/xhtml+xml. Is it?
You can test both files with IE and Mozilla, for instance:
http://excellentsite.org/index.shtml
http://excellentsite.org/index.xhtml
Could it be this way? If yes, why doesn't IE load the xhtml page ?!
$0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more
Get It Now At www.doteasy.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] Font size, and how large is large enough?
I tend to agree with such suggestion: applying a percentage in the body and then work with the remaining sizes in ems. I have done that in here: http://www.excellentsite.org/ Do you think font size is to small? Carlos - Original Message - From: "russ weakley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 12:15 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough? The x-small and others are refered to as "absolute-size keywords" http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-size-props However, x-small will vary from browser to browser (sometimes quite different) as you can see here: http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=53764 This may not be an issue. But in my opinion, if you must reduce font sizes, applying a percentage on the body will achieve a far more consistent result across browsers. Again, it should be stressed that this is just my opinion. There are lots of differing opinions out there! Russ $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more Get It Now At www.doteasy.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 *
