Fw: [WSG] Site check please - launched it finally!
Just a small point Mike but in the section Webcam you have a spelling error, teh instead of the. Cheers Maureen Beattie Hugh, thanks for your suggestions. I'm sorry that in the rush yesterday I didn't thank you for your input. I've implemented all of your suggestions and I have a better site now as a result. Thanks I notice that on one page now that the fonts are smaller, the flow of text has resulted in some orphan text alongside an image, so I'll have to change the standard image width a bit i think. But broadly speaking, the site is something I am quite pleased with.I should also say that the radio community is far more impressed than this group. I have had a number of gushing testimonials from webmasters at other stations.For the record, I've racked up 67 hours on this project so far, and maybe another 60 or so to go before I'll call it complete and in the maintenance only phase. In addition to the CSS, i've written all my own code. It's fully dynamic, with access going to be given to about 60 people to different parts of the site for different roles. Each can work on their own parts of the site without it appearing in public until it's ready and approved by someone with the right authority level. In addition we're going to be taking 2 web services feeds, and providing half a dozen to other sites.I'm really thrilled with how fast it loads even though it's hosted on a shared environment in the midwest of the USA.Anyway, thanks for everyone's help with this site (it's http://hawkradio.org.au if you're coming in late to the discussion) and I'm still interested in anyone's input about any aspect of the site, as long as it's polite.CheersMike KearAFP WebworksWindsor, NSW, Australia - Original Message From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Subject: Re: [WSG] Site check please - launched it finally!Date: 15/11/04 10:06Michael,Whoops, that was a typo. I should, of course, have written "76% or0.76em".I read somewhere (I'm sure someone on the list will remember where)that 76% works for all modern browsers better than 75%, because of arendering difference in one of the browsers.-Hugh> <<<<> 5) I'd suggest setting your "body" font size to 76% or 0.7em. It> looks>> just a little better at that size.>> It already is .7em, which is only half default size (49% of the total> pixels per character box of the default size).>>>>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts Felix. The size is already at 0.7em because> I> adopted the excellent suggestion of Hugh Todd and changed it.**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list & getting help**Message sent using UebiMiau 2.7.2** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
[WSG] Fw: print page
Hi everybody - my client wants the pages on her site setup so that they print out exactly how they look on the screen. At present the short pages are printing okay but the longer pages are leaving paragraphs out. I would appreciate it if someone could explain how to set this up or point me to a tutorial on the subject. Regards Maureen Beattie * 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] Site Check / Improvements
Sarah I checked on WinIE6 and everything looks to be sitting where it should. I only looked at the first page so far and from what I have seen it is a beautiful site with a simplicity of style that really stands out from the rest. A real advertisement for using standards - congratulations. Maureen Beattie > I would appreciate feedback on the following (personal) site (please > disregard previous posting): > > http://www.bureke.com.au/ (temporary address) > > The main CSS page is at: > > http://www.bureke.com.au/styles/global.css > > The site is valid XHTML 1.0 and CSS. > > I have checked on WIN IE 5.0 and 6, Safari 1.2.2 (Mac), Netscape 7.1 > (Mac), IE 5.2 (Mac), Opera 7.5 (Mac), Firefox 0.8 (Mac). > > A couple of questions: > > 1. Is there a work around to prevent the left hand navigation from > indenting in WIN IE 5.0 (I want to retain the border-bottom, but I > think this is why the browser shows the links indented) ? I notice > Eric Meyer's example > ( http://css.maxdesign.com.au/listamatic/vertical06.htm also has the > same quirk in IE 5.0). > > 2. In IE 5.0 the bottom of #content does not continue to the footer. Any ideas? > > 3. In both IE 5.0 and 6 there seems to be a padding-left problem with > the #rightnav - ie too much space to the left. Any ideas? > > If someone can also check on WIN IE 5.5 and/or any other WIN browsers ??? > > Any other suggestions for improvements in layout, style sheet > formatting, usability etc, would be gratefully received. I would like > the site to also be more accessible - not a great strength of mine, > any help here also appreciated. > > Thanks, > Sarah > * > 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] Fw: Centering Image
I have a two column fluid design with header and footer. On one short page after closing the #main div I want to center a picture across the page under both the nav and main div. On previous pages I have a class "clear" after the main div and before the footer so I placed the image between the two, ie clear and footer with an id of "text-align: center". In IE6 the picture and caption are centered but in Opera, Mozilla, Firefox and Netscape the photo is sitting to the left and the caption is centered. The page can be viewed at http://www.users.bigpond.com/mabcg/philosphy.html (not the permanent address) Any ideas as to the problem would be appreciated. Thanks Maureen Beattie * 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] Javascript and Strict Doctype
Thank you Mark, I knew 'language' was the problem but wasn't sure what to do with it. I am now validating Strict, always a good feeling when you get there. Regards Maureen > Hi Maureen > > The XHTML Strict DTD has this to say about the tag: > > > > id ID #IMPLIED > charset %Charset; #IMPLIED > type%ContentType; #REQUIRED > src %URI; #IMPLIED > defer (defer)#IMPLIED > xml:space (preserve) #FIXED 'preserve' > > > > Tells you a few things about the tag - reading > http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/intro/sgmltut.html#h-3.3 might help you > decipher it. But the key point is that there is no language attribute. > > So if you change