Re: [WSG] Is Mac IE 5 Support (Worth) It ?
Remember that few people are as 'browser-aware' as we developers. Most people just want to get on with their lives and businesses. The technology they use to do so should be, ideally for them, transparent. So for now, yes, I test and hack where necessary for IE5. To not do so is to effectively replace the question with 'Is Mac support worth it?' IE5.x/Win probably returns similar stats to IE/Mac in most site logs. Do we ignore it as a target browser, too? Nick Up until very recently even as an OSX convert, I was still using IE. Although I still use IE, I also use Safari and Firefox (rapidly becoming my favorite). * 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] A California meeting? was Brisbane July Meeting - Report
If there were a california meeting, my vote goes for L.A. Sacramento, is well, Sacramento. Not exactly my idea of a place to visit and spend an extra day. San Francisco is great, but expensive. L.A. is more central, has plenty of room, and can be affordable. Of course, if my job covered the trip I wouldn't mind a trip to SF. I'm in San Diego, which is a great place for a meeting, but too far for our SF and Sacramento(sorry about the above slight) members. L.A. or San Diego might also be better for our Arizona and Nevada people. Ted Near S.F. can be affordable. The price ranges are the same as in L.A. Plus the public transit is better in S.F. than L.A. which might be easier for out of town visitors. * 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] Trouble with safari
On Wednesday, May 5, 2004, at 23:54 US/Pacific, russ - maxdesign wrote: Be more specific please. What is problem? Russ There is no visible navigation in Safari. * 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] My first CSS project---correction
I also looked at the page at (1280x1024) and the text is overlapping the photo. Is that intentional? Hi! I tested your website and it's looking nice ;) One problem though, I viewed the about us in 1024 X 768 resolution and it looked fine, however, in anything less (e.g. 800 X 600) the padding was a bit overwhelming! (_) The paragraph became a bit to skinny. Apart from that it was clear and concise. I like it (^_^) Darian Cabot hello again! I have recently redesigned my business web site using CSS. I was looking for some feedback. http://www.virtualtasks.com The biggest obstacle I ran into was on the about us Page. I am wondering if I over used the padding command. * 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] hiring a standards-savvy designer
Hi guys, [snip] So what am I actually asking? I'm interested in what you guys consider reasonable to expect from a graphic designer who also does some overflow html. What would you be looking for? What would you ask in the interview? Thanks for any ideas, K. -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.smoljak.com You should make up a test that starts with typical graphical elements that your company uses and perhaps a hand drawn mock up of a page. Have them design first in fireworks or whatever your graphic design tool of choice is the layout and then ask them to create a rough HTML of it. Then you can look at all the files during the remainder of the interview and have them explain their methodology. I've done similar tests to hire folks and it has worked really well in finding the skill sets I have wanted. * 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 ?
The blue box's fonts size correctly (using IE 6 here at work). The red
box, the small font is larger than the middle font.
*
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] Hiding styles message to certain browsers
I know... but I can't get around the Mac IE bugs and it makes things even harder as I do not have a Mac to check against those bugs. Rather Mac IE and NS users see a plain text page than a broken design page. So got to hide the styles till I am able to buy me a Mac but by that time maybe Mac IE will no longer be used :D As a Mac user, I would much rather see a buggy style sheet than no style sheet at all. If you were to leave a way to contact you and I came across your site with that in place, you would get an email complaining about it. With Regards Jaime Wong ~~ SODesires Design Team http://www.sodesires.com ~~ ---Original Message--- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 03/24/04 07:22:18 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Hiding styles message to certain browsers I am thinking of hiding my stylesheets from Mac IE and Netscape Jamie Agrr... You'd be leaving most of us creative people out in the cold! Leo * 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 *
Netscape 4.7x Re: [WSG] Hiding styles message to certain browsers
Hmm your comment is interesting. Interesting as in it makes me want to rethink the need to hide stylesheets or not to. There are many sites out there (be it professional or personal sites) hiding stylesheets from older browsers for e.g. the most common is Netscape 4x. Wouldn't Netscape 4x users feel the same way as you then? Older Netscape users may very well feel the same way. I know from first hand experience that many large corporations still only support Netscape 4.7x varieties for security reasons, either real or percieved, meaning that Netscape is the mandatory email reader, news reader and browser. These very same companies use style sheets in their web design and expect them to work (at least gracefully, if not perfectly) with Netscape. * 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] Color Blindnesss
Somewhere out there, I lost my link to it in an old HDD crash, there is a site that allows you to test your site using the various perceptions people with various types of color blindness suffer from - it was actually quite handy. But there is other sites out there now that atleast let you choose or test the color schemes - though not as useful as the site reader. Brian Here's a site I use: http://www.vischeck.com/vischeck/ Cheers 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 *
Re: [WSG] CSS Shorthand for color
The short hand will only work for web safe colors. That being said... 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A 10 B 11 C 12 D 13 E 14 F 15 F is the most on a color channel can be. 0 is the most off a color channel can be. The color channels are: R G B (red, green, blue) and the color mixing is additive. So as you add color, you get closer to white. In short hand white is: #FFF and black is #000. Red: #F00 Green: #0F0 Blue: #00F Yellow: #FF0 Purplish: #F0F Etc. 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 *
Re: [WSG] css from photoshop file?
I have always written standards compliant css for a site around a clients recommendations as to colours and position of logos etc. Now I've been asked: You'd be fine doing the templates from supplied photoshop files? I guess this would mean replicating the look of a PSD file with css code? Would this kind of client expect standards compliant css or rigid WYSIWYG works in IE code, any tips to ensure that the result will be decent css are appreciated. Neerav The types of clients I have worked with who asked that question were most concerned that it looked like their PSD file. If you can do it with compliant CSS, then go for it. Before you begin, you should find out what sort of browsers/computers they'll be testing the site on. * 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] Overcoming Rejections
I've worked for companies that have websites that are so far afield of web standards that using something standard will break their web pages. This happens most often with web based content management systems. In those cases, it is best just to work with the company's standards rather than the real world standards. For smaller companies, the rejections are often reservations based on a lack of knowledge of current standards or a fear of the standards being too complex to work with for making simple updates. In that case it's a matter of educating the client. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] text and graphic on one line
On Saturday, Mar 13, 2004, at 02:13 US/Pacific, Jaime Wong wrote:
I use these for some fancy header.
.icon-Gal
{
background-image : url(icon_gal.gif);
background-repeat : no-repeat;
background-position : 125px;
padding-top : 1em;
border-bottom : 1px dotted #448687;
padding-left : 3px;
}
You can preview it at this page - the headers on the left column.
This page doesn't seem to be loading right on IE running on OSX. The content is pushed far right leaving the white area empty. I'm assuming that the white area is reserved for the content?
OR
.blog-EntryDateHeader
{
font-family : Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size : 1.3em;
font-weight : bold;
color: #BBB8A0;
letter-spacing : 2px;
text-transform : capitalize;
padding-left : 50px;
background-image : url(rule_entries.gif);
background-repeat : no-repeat;
background-position : left bottom;
}
This is the Entry's date header at
This page crashes the browser completely while your first javascript library is loading.
Hope it helps in giving you more ideas. Not sure if it is a good way though because I normally just play around with my css and so happens that this works.
With Regards
Jaime Wong
Re: [WSG] New CSS site
Hi Peter, The design appears to be clean. The site loads fast for me. My only wee critique is that the gray font color doesn't have much contrast compared to the background colors used. If it were a bit darker it would be easier to read. Otherwise, I'm going to enjoy reading through the site. Cheers Sarah http://www.cinema4duser.com Comments and crits most welcome. Peter * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] New CSS site
CSS is great that way. The text is easier to read now. Cheers Sarah On Thursday, Mar 11, 2004, at 20:28 US/Pacific, Universal Head wrote: Now THIS is why I love CS - I've just increased the contrast a little. Easss Peter On 12/03/2004, at 3:13 PM, Sarah Sammis wrote: If it were a bit darker it would be easier to read. Universal Head Design That Works. 7/43 Bridge Rd Stanmore NSW 2048 Australia T (+612) 9517 1466 F (+612) 9565 4747 E [EMAIL PROTECTED] W www.universalhead.com
