Re: [WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize resize?

[Thomas Thomassen]

Add some padding at the bottom of the content with the same size as the 
absolutely positioned element. That should prevent the preseeding content to 
not overlap. You might have to do some position and size adjustments to make 
it all fit again after you add the padding.




--
From: "tee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 11:00 AM
To: 
Subject: [WSG] possible to make absolute position moves down with fontsize 
resize?


Lately I have coded many templates that clients wanted an element that 
aligns horizontally and has it stayed at the bottom of a content  block. 
The only way I could think is using absolute position, but it  creates an 
overlapping problem with font size resize. I am curious if  there is a 
technique that I am totally unaware of (already googled and  visited the 
archive of css-d).


example ($xx/month):
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/s/raz_compare_plans.html

Thank you!


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] XHTML 1.1 & CSS3 - Is it worth using right now?

[Thomas Thomassen]

You can still do that with XHTML 1.0 sent as html/text. I've done that 
several times when I've made desktop gadgets to extract data from my site. 
The parsers doesn't care if the page is sent as html/text instead of 
xml/text.


I don't see any point of using XHTML 1.1 unless you use it's modular nature.


- Original Message - 
From: "Vlad Alexander (XStandard)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 4:57 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 & CSS3 - Is it worth using right now?


HTH wrote:

...server has to do content negotiation in order to send
text/html with one doctype (HTML or XHTML 1.0) to IE users and
application/xhtml+xml/XHTML 1.1 to everyone else. That means
you're generating two copies of all of your content
Assuming your are not writing static pages, you only need to generate one 
copy of content in XHTML 1.1 format and then serve it as any version of HTML 
as you like.


HTH wrote:

Furthermore, content negotiation itself is some work to
get done correctly

At most, maybe 10 lines of code. Please see:
http://xhtml.com/en/content-negotiation/

Simon wrote:

Does anyone use XHTML 1.1 and does it provide any benefits?
The benefits are on the content production side. If you author your content 
in XHTML, you can parse it with an off-the-shelf XML parser and make 
modifications to your content en-masse. This gives you control over your 
content.


Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
XStandard XHTML (Strict or 1.1) WYSIWYG Editor



 Original Message 
From: Nikita The Spider The Spider
Date: 2008-05-12 8:36 PM

On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi,

 Does anyone use XHTML 1.1


Of the doctypes that my validator Nikita saw in one sample period,
just slightly over 2% were XHTML 1.1. It's worth noting that most, if
not all, were sent with the wrong media type.

http://NikitaTheSpider.com/articles/ByTheNumbers/#doctypes


and does it provide any benefits?


Well, compared to what? HTML 4.01 Strict, XHTML 1.0 Transitional or
XHTML 1.0 Strict?


 Is there a reason why not many sites adopt this Doctype and is there any
 point using right now if your site is 1.0 Strict?


One big impediment to using XHTML 1.1 is that it must be sent with the
application/xhtml+xml media type which makes IE6 choke. That implies
that the server has to do content negotiation in order to send
text/html with one doctype (HTML or XHTML 1.0) to IE users and
application/xhtml+xml/XHTML 1.1 to everyone else. That means you're
generating two copies of all of your content unless you're willing to
refuse IE users. Does this sound appealing yet?

Furthermore, content negotiation itself is some work to get done
correctly, even ignoring the cost of generating both two versions of
one's content.

Given the extra work required to support XHTML 1.1, there would have
to be some pretty darn compelling reasons to use it, and those reasons
just aren't there for most people. There's quite enough people who
question the use of XHTML 1.0 over HTML (I'm one of them), let alone
XHTML 1.1.

About XHTML and media types:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/#summary

HTH







***
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] XHTML 1.1 & CSS3 - Is it worth using right now?

[Thomas Thomassen]

If you do content negotiation to send html/text and XHTML 1.0 to IE and 
application/xhtml+xml XHTML to anyone else then you're effectivly using 
XHTML 1.0 html/text as you'd never be able to make use of the modular XML 
nature of XHTML 1.1.


- Original Message - 
From: "Nikita The Spider The Spider" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:36 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] XHTML 1.1 & CSS3 - Is it worth using right now?



On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Simon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hi,

 Does anyone use XHTML 1.1


Of the doctypes that my validator Nikita saw in one sample period,
just slightly over 2% were XHTML 1.1. It's worth noting that most, if
not all, were sent with the wrong media type.

http://NikitaTheSpider.com/articles/ByTheNumbers/#doctypes


and does it provide any benefits?


Well, compared to what? HTML 4.01 Strict, XHTML 1.0 Transitional or
XHTML 1.0 Strict?


 Is there a reason why not many sites adopt this Doctype and is there any
 point using right now if your site is 1.0 Strict?


One big impediment to using XHTML 1.1 is that it must be sent with the
application/xhtml+xml media type which makes IE6 choke. That implies
that the server has to do content negotiation in order to send
text/html with one doctype (HTML or XHTML 1.0) to IE users and
application/xhtml+xml/XHTML 1.1 to everyone else. That means you're
generating two copies of all of your content unless you're willing to
refuse IE users. Does this sound appealing yet?

Furthermore, content negotiation itself is some work to get done
correctly, even ignoring the cost of generating both two versions of
one's content.

Given the extra work required to support XHTML 1.1, there would have
to be some pretty darn compelling reasons to use it, and those reasons
just aren't there for most people. There's quite enough people who
question the use of XHTML 1.0 over HTML (I'm one of them), let alone
XHTML 1.1.

About XHTML and media types:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-types/#summary

HTH


--
Philip
http://NikitaTheSpider.com/
Whole-site HTML validation, link checking and more


***
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] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS

[Thomas Thomassen]

Or, instead of using a class to reset the layout to original, why not set a 
class for the elements you actually are styling?
When I use use INPUT elements I allways add a class related to what kind of 
input element it is and only refer to the class in the CSS. Recently I've 
started to use attribute selectors instead as it'll simply fall back to default 
UI elements if the UA doesn't support it.

I'm not sure if you will be able to reset a form element to use the OS UI once 
you've assigned.

-Thom



From: Matthew Pennell 
Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2008 3:00 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
Subject: Re: [WSG] Reset the styles on a submit button with CSS


On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 1:52 PM, Paul Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

  My issue is that the submit buttons now have this styling also in
  certain browsers. I'd like to give them a class and set them back to
  their original look, but background:none; doesn't work. Is there a way
  of doing this does anyone know?


Not quite what you asked, but have you considered using the  element 
for your submit button instead of an input? Removes this kind of annoyance.

-- 

- Matthew 
***
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] Full flash websites

[Thomas Thomassen]

I've not done any full Flash websites. For reasons of accessibility and the 
loss of browser navigational tools. But I have been playing with an idea; 
use XHTML as data source for the site instead of plain XML. That way you 
build a site with all the accessibility and features of HTML with Flash as a 
layer on top.



- Original Message - 
From: "Joseph Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Monday, May 05, 2008 10:34 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Full flash websites



I've used flash sites that have been poorly done - confusing interfaces
etc.  Awful Experience.

I've used flash sites that have been built well.  Excellent experience.

Accessible?  Not really, but...

If you're providing a fall-back HTML version you're covered.

Joseph R. B. Taylor
/Designer / Developer/
--
Sites by Joe, LLC
/"Clean, Simple and Elegant Web Design"/
Phone: (609) 335-3076
Fax: (866) 301-8045
Web: http://sitesbyjoe.com
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Michael Persson wrote:
The company I worl with has a big love for full flash websites and we 
have

produced some very nice but heavy and slow ones.

What do you people, professionals and hobby standardists think about full
flash websites?? where is the usability and accessibility for flash in
general??

I am personally and professionally against them as they cut of the
usabiity, have bad accessibility and for me the navigation most often i
very difficult and difficult to use.

Michael Persson



***
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]
*** 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] transitional vs. strict

[Thomas Thomassen]

Could be technical if you want to allow your pages to be parsed with XML 
parsers. I've done that in the past because I made some software to fetch data 
from my site.

-Thom



From: Andrew Maben 
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 4:14 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
Subject: Re: [WSG] transitional vs. strict


On Apr 30, 2008, at 9:59 AM, Joseph Taylor wrote:


  stick with HTML 4.01 Strict while the work is completed on (X)HTML5



IMHO (and given the depth and breadth of the replies to my original post I'm 
feeling very humble right now, as well as extremely grateful to you all) -  I 
do think that given the current state of the art this is the best approach, at 
least for me. But, indeed, let's not get into XHTML vs. HTML - I understand and 
respect the XHTML proponents' viewpoint, but in the end isn't it a choice based 
on personal taste?


Andrew










***
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] IE8 beta's a nightmare

[Thomas Thomassen]

If there isn't any doctype you won't have to worry. IE8 will use the old 
render engines for that.


--
From: "Jens-Uwe Korff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2008 10:07 AM
To: 
Subject: RE: [WSG] IE8 beta's a nightmare


Hi Thom,

finally someone who addressed my original question ;-)

We'd tested a few sites, build over the last 18...24 months, and I'm not
sure about how much IE-only styles there are. I guess the doctype is
mainly XHTML Transitional if at all.

I hope once IE8 is out of beta we'll have more joy...

Cheers,

Jens

-Original Message-

My own experience was that IE8 was rendering surprisingly well. I use
conditional comments to fix IE issues, however they where targeting IE
lte 7 so IE8 wasn't getting any fixes. But it didn't need to. That's
with strict XHTML doctype. Haven't tried any other.

-Thom

The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying 
files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, 
any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this 
e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to 
copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated 
without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received 
this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail 
or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the 
accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or 
attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax 
does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or 
attached files.



***
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] IE8 beta's a nightmare

[Thomas Thomassen]

My own experience was that IE8 was rendering surprisingly well. I use 
conditional comments to fix IE issues, however they where targeting IE lte 7 
so IE8 wasn't getting any fixes. But it didn't need to. That's with strict 
XHTML doctype. Haven't tried any other.


-Thom

--
From: "Jens-Uwe Korff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2008 9:10 AM
To: 
Subject: [WSG] IE8 beta's a nightmare


Hi community,

we just did some testing of our sites in IE8 beta and got some ahhhs and
ohhhs - not because of its standard compliance, rather because all sites
seem to be broken: logos disappeared, elements misplaced, Google maps
blown up, etc.

Did anyone do some more testing with IE8?

Do we know any better release date than "mid year"?

Thanks,

Jens

The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying 
files is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, 
any use, dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this 
e-mail or any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to 
copyright. No part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated 
without the written consent of the copyright owner. If you have received 
this e-mail in error please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail 
or telephone and delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the 
accuracy or completeness of any information contained in this e-mail or 
attached files. Internet communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax 
does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message or 
attached files.



***
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] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml

[Thomas Thomassen]

As for PDFs I find it ok that they open in a new window. As a personal 
preferance.


But for regular links I feel that it's best leaving them alone. I've seen 
many novice computer users get confused when a link opens in a new window as 
they don't allways realise they're now navigating in a new window. When they 
want to navigate back to where they where they find that the back button 
suddenly doesn't work and they fumble trying to find their way back.


-Thom


- Original Message - 
From: "Nancy Gill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml


I see your point, Thom.  The exception, IMO, is when you link to a PDF .. 
the Acrobat Reader takes over the window and the only way to go back in the 
same window is to use the back button in the browser .. not very good 
practice, IMO.  Most people would just close the reader thinking they would 
be back on the page they left .. and they're not.  I have seen many 
questions from people who have done just this and lost the place they 
wanted to be.


In other cases, I do see your point that users want to control those 
things .. although I wonder how many people would know how to do that. 
Not everyone who uses the internet is all that websavvy.


Nancy

- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Thomassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 10:01 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml


Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour. I for one find 
it very annoying when sites force open a new window. If I want to 
navigate a link I open the link up in a new tab. Forcing the link to open 
up in a new window doesn't make me stay on the site, it just makes me 
click extra to close the page that I navigated from. If a site constantly 
pops open windows I often just leave it.


I argue that it's best to leave the user to control these things as 
people have very different habbits.


-Thom


- Original Message - 
From: "Nancy Gill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml


I totally agree .. in fact just having this conversation elsewhere.  How 
can javascript be more accessible when those most concerned with 
accessibility will probably turn it off anyway?  Makes no sense to have 
this removed .. I open new windows all the time .. for PDFs .. for links 
that go offsite, etc.


Nancy

- Original Message - 
From: "Michael Horowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 8:44 AM
Subject: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml



I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml

Why not.  I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with 
javascript.

http://weblogtoolscollection.com/archives/2004/01/02/targetblank-xhtml-10-strict-conversion/

--
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1345 - 
Release Date: 3/26/2008 6:50 PM







***
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]
***



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1345 - 
Release Date: 3/26/2008 6:50 PM







***
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] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml

[Thomas Thomassen]

Sure, there are cases where you would wish to open a new window. But I 
wouldn't compare a website and a web application, or desktop application.
For websites I don't see the need to pop up windows left and right because 
the links lead off-site. This is something that's often done with the intent 
of keeping the user on the site. However, that won't help if the user is 
really done at that site, just  creates extra steps for the user to do so.


Frames and popup windows is fine features to use in web based applications. 
I'll agree to that. I've used it when making some HTA applications myself. 
But as I said, it's a different fish from websites.


-Thom

- Original Message - 
From: "Hassan Schroeder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 6:59 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml



Thomas Thomassen wrote:

Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour.


Making assumptions about users' needs and behavior is your job as
a designer/developer. Which is not to say everyone makes the best
possible decisions. :-)

Not everything built with (X)HTML is a brochureware site; people
build browser-based applications, and sometimes even full-fledged
frame use makes sense (e.g. JavaDoc, for one).

As far as opening windows -- click on the Help menu item in your
browser or another desktop application right now, and tell me if
the help screen takes over your entire application window space,
or, just possibly, *opens a new window*. Wow. Maybe this *is* an
acceptable behavior *for some circumstances*.

Horses for courses...
--
Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webtuitive Design ===  (+1) 408-621-3445   === http://webtuitive.com

  dream.  code.


***
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] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml

[Thomas Thomassen]

Poping up windows makes assumtion of the user's behaviour. I for one find it 
very annoying when sites force open a new window. If I want to navigate a 
link I open the link up in a new tab. Forcing the link to open up in a new 
window doesn't make me stay on the site, it just makes me click extra to 
close the page that I navigated from. If a site constantly pops open windows 
I often just leave it.


I argue that it's best to leave the user to control these things as people 
have very different habbits.


-Thom


- Original Message - 
From: "Nancy Gill" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 5:03 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml


I totally agree .. in fact just having this conversation elsewhere.  How 
can javascript be more accessible when those most concerned with 
accessibility will probably turn it off anyway?  Makes no sense to have 
this removed .. I open new windows all the time .. for PDFs .. for links 
that go offsite, etc.


Nancy

- Original Message - 
From: "Michael Horowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 8:44 AM
Subject: [WSG] a target=” blank” not part of xhtml



I just read how a target=”_blank” is not part of xhtml

Why not.  I can't imagine its better practice to replace it with 
javascript.

http://weblogtoolscollection.com/archives/2004/01/02/targetblank-xhtml-10-strict-conversion/

--
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***



--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1345 - 
Release Date: 3/26/2008 6:50 PM







***
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] Why is deprecated?

[Thomas Thomassen]

Mike at Green-Beast.com has an interesting article about semantic use of  
and  at http://green-beast.com/blog/?p=222


Though it doesn't mention anything of . It's harder to argume the 
semantic value of . Underlining a work is often done to emphasize a word 
or phrase, where  or  should then be used. Though they can be 
styled to be underlined, underlining would make the elements look like a 
hyperlink and confuse the user.


And I don't know of any situation where it's a typographic situation to 
underline a word.


-Thom

- Original Message - 
From: "Kepler Gelotte" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 5:28 AM
Subject: [WSG] Why is  deprecated?



Hi,

I am just curious if anyone can explain why the  tag has been 
deprecated

while  and  are still allowed.

Thanks in advance.

Best regards,
Kepler Gelotte
Neighbor Webmaster, Inc.
156 Normandy Dr., Piscataway, NJ 08854
www.neighborwebmaster.com
phone/fax: (732) 302-0904



***
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] Semantic markup for a person's name or business name

[Thomas Thomassen]

Semantic markup for a person's name or business nameThe  element is 
intended to provide contact information for the author of the HTML document, 
not any address.
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/global.html#h-7.5.6

-Thom
  - Original Message - 
  From: Cole Kuryakin 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 5:56 AM
  Subject: [WSG] Semantic markup for a person's name or business name


  Hello All -

  I've been reading a book by Andy Clarke which has a few pages related to 
micro-formats.

  He uses the example of marking up an address tag similar to the below using 
classes (note that br's are mine for formatting):


  

  101 Some Street, 

  Some Sub division

  Alameda, 

  California, 

  94501

  United States of America

  

  But. what if you want to include a person's name (or a business name) ABOVE 
the address tag? The only thing that comes immediately to mind would be 
John Smith but that doesn't seem correct. Or, should one use an 
additional span above the address block like this: John Smith?


  So the whole thing might look like this:


  John Smith

  

  101 Some Street, 

  Some Sub division

  Alameda, 

  California, 

  94501

  United States of America

  



  Interested in all opinions as well as if there is any current "standard" 
which addresses this particular issue. 


  Cole



  ***
  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] and in lists

[Thomas Thomassen]

Thanks. Got a link to where I can follow that incase there's response?

I'm wondering if I've muddled up my explanation of the problem, by dragging 
in how I discovered and such. Perhaps I should have taken some more time 
explaining it more clearly? In general I feel I've been confusing people.


-Thom


- Original Message - 
From: "Keryx Web" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 8:24 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG]  and  in lists



Thomas Thomassen skrev:

I posted a comment about it in the W3C public HTML discussion group, 
hoping it'd be picked up and amend HTML5's specification to allow this. 
However, there's yet been any response. Is there any other place I could 
air this issue in hope of it getting heards by the authors of the next 
HTML specs?


I have sent a copy of your original message to the WHATWG list. Let's see 
if they are more alert.



Lars Gunther


***
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] and in lists

[Thomas Thomassen]

For instance, you have a checklist of things to do. It could be a list of 
bugs in a software you make. You have the list availible on your site so the 
users of the software can see the list of issues you are working on.
As you fix bugs you remove them from the list. You mark up the list item 
describing the bug with  to indicate that the bugs has been removed 
from the list. It's still visible to the users as by default browsers will 
render content within a  with a strikethrough.


Another example would can be seen here: 
http://thomthom.net/storage/markup/html/dochistory/subversion.html
It's a sample script where you can go back and view a previous version of 
the code.


I probably confused people in my initial post when I talked about how I came 
across it and that in that particular case I used display: none; to hide it. 
The main intent with the post was the general concept of marking up list 
items as being removed, edited. I didn't mean that I wanted to hide it from 
the viewer, but rather indicate the the item was for instance obsolete, as 
in the example of the bug list.


Hope this makes it clearer.

-Thom

- Original Message - 
From: "Thierry Koblentz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 7:57 PM
Subject: RE: [WSG]  and  in lists



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On

Behalf Of Thomas Thomassen

Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 10:58 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG]  and  in lists

You mean "removing" by that I used display: none; to hide it?
That was for the particular case I worked on where I used a javascript to

view the document at various versions.


The way I see if, if I have a document where I mark up changes and one of

them changes is an item in a list, I find it natrual to mark up the entire >
list item, including the .

If you remove the List Item from the document (the way you're trying to),
what info does that convey and to *whom*?
I'm sorry, but I can't see the logic behind what you're trying to do.

--
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com






***
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] and in lists

[Thomas Thomassen]

But the whole purpose was to use the semantic value of the  to tell 
that the listitem was at some point removed. Classes doesn't provide that. I 
don't see how grouping comes into this.



From the W3C spec:


"These two elements are unusual for HTML in that they may serve as either 
block-level or inline elements (but not both). They may contain one or more 
words within a paragraph or contain one or more block-level elements such as 
paragraphs, lists and tables."



-Thom

- Original Message - 
From: "Kyle Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 5:50 PM
Subject: RE: [WSG]  and  in lists


Regardless,

Tags are there to markup content, whereas classes are used to group together
tags or markup.

Kyle

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Thomas Thomassen
Sent: 25 March 2008 16:43
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG]  and  in lists

I don't find classes to have the semantic value as the tags have. There is
no where defined what the semanic value of classes are. Even though the
classes would share the same name as a tag I don't see it as having the same

semantic value.

- Original Message - 
From: "Kyle Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 3:45 PM
Subject: RE: [WSG]  and  in lists


Using  and  to track changes in a document, is making excellent
use of semantic markup. However markup should only be used to describe
content, not other markup - classes and IDs are used to describe other
markup.

CSS:

del, .del {
display: none;
/* un-comment to use */

/* text-decoration: line-through; */
}

Then on your XHTML


Item 1
Item 2
Item 3



Kyle

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stuart Foulstone
Sent: 25 March 2008 13:47
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG]  and  in lists

Hi,

RE:
"When I hid the  using display: hidden; the list would render
something like this"

I can't say I've ever felt the need to use these tags, but isn't hiding
the content supposed to be the job of the browser/user agent - rather than
you using CSS.


On Sun, March 23, 2008 12:43 pm, Thomas Thomassen wrote:

I was working on some examples for the use of  and .


http://www.thomthom.net/blog/2008/03/document-history-viewer-making-use-of-d
el-and-ins/


As I was working on this I wanted to mark up a list where items had been
added and removed. That's when I realised that you can't wrap up  
or  in  or  elements because ,  and  only allows
list items as their direct child.

The  and  then have to be wrapped inside the list item.


  Item 1
  Item 2
  Item 3


When I hid the  using display: hidden; the list would render
something like this:

* Item 1
*
* Item 3

Because I could wrap up the entire list item, the bullet point would still
remain.

To me it appears illogical to not wrap the  or  around the list
items when you add and remove items to the list. I'm guessing it's a case
where every scenario wasn't accounted for when the specifications was
written. (Yes, I know that I could add an extra class to the list item
that I wanted to hide, but it's not the point. It shouldn't be necessary.)

However, when this scenario presents itself I see it as fine to break the
specification and mark it up like this:

  Item 1
  Item 2
  Item 3


This seem to render exactly as I expect it to do in every browser I've
tested.

* Item 1
* Item 3


I posted a comment about it in the W3C public HTML discussion group,
hoping it'd be picked up and amend HTML5's specification to allow this.
However, there's yet been any response. Is there any other place I could
air this issue in hope of it getting heards by the authors of the next
HTML specs?

***
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]
***



***
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] and in lists

[Thomas Thomassen]

You mean "removing" by that I used display: none; to hide it?
That was for the particular case I worked on where I used  a javascript to view 
the document at various versions.

The way I see if, if I have a document where I mark up changes and one of them 
changes is an item in a list, I find it natrual to mark up the entire list 
item, including the .

  - Original Message - 
  From: Thierry Koblentz 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 5:55 PM
  Subject: RE: [WSG]  and  in lists


   

   

  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Thomas 
Thomassen
  Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 5:44 AM
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
  Subject: [WSG]  and  in lists

   

  I was working on some examples for the use of  and . 
http://www.thomthom.net/blog/2008/03/document-history-viewer-making-use-of-del-and-ins/

   

  As I was working on this I wanted to mark up a list where items had been 
added and removed. That's when I realised that you can't wrap up   or 
 in  or  elements because ,  and  only allows list 
items as their direct child.

   

  The  and  then have to be wrapped inside the list item.

   

  

Item 1

Item 2

Item 3

  

   

  When I hid the  using display: hidden; the list would render something 
like this:

   

  * Item 1

  *

  * Item 3

   

  Because I could wrap up the entire list item, the bullet point would still 
remain.

   

  To me it appears illogical to not wrap the  or  around the list 
items when you add and remove items to the list. I'm guessing it's a case where 
every scenario wasn't accounted for when the specifications was written. (Yes, 
I know that I could add an extra class to the list item that I wanted to hide, 
but it's not the point. It shouldn't be necessary.)

   

  However, when this scenario presents itself I see it as fine to break the 
specification and mark it up like this:

  

Item 1

Item 2

Item 3

  

   

  This seem to render exactly as I expect it to do in every browser I've tested.

   

  * Item 1

  * Item 3

   

   

  I posted a comment about it in the W3C public HTML discussion group, hoping 
it'd be picked up and amend HTML5's specification to allow this. However, 
there's yet been any response. Is there any other place I could air this issue 
in hope of it getting heards by the authors of the next HTML specs?

   

   

  I don't see a problem with the specs [1]. These elements are supposed to be 
used to give information about changes; imho, "removing" an element does not 
convey that type of  information. 

   

  [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/text.html#h-9.4

   

  -- 

  Regards,

  Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com

   

   


  ***
  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] and in lists

[Thomas Thomassen]

I don't find classes to have the semantic value as the tags have. There is 
no where defined what the semanic value of classes are. Even though the 
classes would share the same name as a tag I don't see it as having the same 
semantic value.


- Original Message - 
From: "Kyle Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 3:45 PM
Subject: RE: [WSG]  and  in lists


Using  and  to track changes in a document, is making excellent
use of semantic markup. However markup should only be used to describe
content, not other markup - classes and IDs are used to describe other
markup.

CSS:

del, .del {
display: none;
/* un-comment to use */

/* text-decoration: line-through; */
}

Then on your XHTML


Item 1
Item 2
Item 3



Kyle

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stuart Foulstone
Sent: 25 March 2008 13:47
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG]  and  in lists

Hi,

RE:
"When I hid the  using display: hidden; the list would render
something like this"

I can't say I've ever felt the need to use these tags, but isn't hiding
the content supposed to be the job of the browser/user agent - rather than
you using CSS.


On Sun, March 23, 2008 12:43 pm, Thomas Thomassen wrote:

I was working on some examples for the use of  and .


http://www.thomthom.net/blog/2008/03/document-history-viewer-making-use-of-d
el-and-ins/


As I was working on this I wanted to mark up a list where items had been
added and removed. That's when I realised that you can't wrap up  
or  in  or  elements because ,  and  only allows
list items as their direct child.

The  and  then have to be wrapped inside the list item.


  Item 1
  Item 2
  Item 3


When I hid the  using display: hidden; the list would render
something like this:

* Item 1
*
* Item 3

Because I could wrap up the entire list item, the bullet point would still
remain.

To me it appears illogical to not wrap the  or  around the list
items when you add and remove items to the list. I'm guessing it's a case
where every scenario wasn't accounted for when the specifications was
written. (Yes, I know that I could add an extra class to the list item
that I wanted to hide, but it's not the point. It shouldn't be necessary.)

However, when this scenario presents itself I see it as fine to break the
specification and mark it up like this:

  Item 1
  Item 2
  Item 3


This seem to render exactly as I expect it to do in every browser I've
tested.

* Item 1
* Item 3


I posted a comment about it in the W3C public HTML discussion group,
hoping it'd be picked up and amend HTML5's specification to allow this.
However, there's yet been any response. Is there any other place I could
air this issue in hope of it getting heards by the authors of the next
HTML specs?

***
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]
***



***
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] Apply ALT tag to background image?

[Thomas Thomassen]

You can only apply the alt attribute to  elements. If you need to provide 
an alt attribute to a CSS background image then the background image should 
instead be an  element.

Use the  element for images related to the content and keep all images 
related to layout in your CSS.

  - Original Message - 
  From: Kristine Cummins 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 12:22 PM
  Subject: [WSG] Apply ALT tag to background image?


  I've got a background graphic designated in my style sheet - is there a way 
to apply an alt and/or title tag to that or would I need to just not make it a 
background image? My intuition is the latter - but just if there is a slight 
chance..


  ***
  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]
***

[WSG] and in lists

[Thomas Thomassen]

I was working on some examples for the use of  and . 
http://www.thomthom.net/blog/2008/03/document-history-viewer-making-use-of-del-and-ins/

As I was working on this I wanted to mark up a list where items had been added 
and removed. That's when I realised that you can't wrap up   or  in 
 or  elements because ,  and  only allows list items as 
their direct child.

The  and  then have to be wrapped inside the list item.


  Item 1
  Item 2
  Item 3


When I hid the  using display: hidden; the list would render something 
like this:

* Item 1
*
* Item 3

Because I could wrap up the entire list item, the bullet point would still 
remain.

To me it appears illogical to not wrap the  or  around the list items 
when you add and remove items to the list. I'm guessing it's a case where every 
scenario wasn't accounted for when the specifications was written. (Yes, I know 
that I could add an extra class to the list item that I wanted to hide, but 
it's not the point. It shouldn't be necessary.)

However, when this scenario presents itself I see it as fine to break the 
specification and mark it up like this:

  Item 1
  Item 2
  Item 3


This seem to render exactly as I expect it to do in every browser I've tested.

* Item 1
* Item 3


I posted a comment about it in the W3C public HTML discussion group, hoping 
it'd be picked up and amend HTML5's specification to allow this. However, 
there's yet been any response. Is there any other place I could air this issue 
in hope of it getting heards by the authors of the next HTML specs?

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Fieldsets outside of forms. Was: Safari 3.1 and webkit-border-radius

[Thomas Thomassen]

In addition to using the dictionary, it's worth looking up how W3C uses the 
terms in relationship with the specs. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt


While MUST and MUST NOT would be more handy, reality is grey sometimes and 
does depend on the interpretation of the author. The biggest problem however 
is that most authors never read the specs.



- Original Message - 
From: "tee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, March 23, 2008 2:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Fieldsets outside of forms. Was: Safari 3.1 and 
webkit-border-radius



Perhaps it will help the web standards if W3C to be more authoritative 
and dictatorial?


"MUST NOT", "MUST", "ABSOLUTELY NOT", "ILLEGAL TO USE", "NOT ALLOWED"

to replace these ambiguous "MAY NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT".

This way, it makes no wrong suggestion to people who are not English 
tongue and who needs to depend on English dictionary to understand the 
spec - I am speaking of me :-)


tee



Keryx's point of view seems to be dominant, I fear. Even the teacher
at my web design class seems to think that using EMs to style  citations
is valid. Yet she generally encourages web standards...   :(

Cordially,
David
--



***
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] premature to test/worry new site for IE8?

[Thomas Thomassen]

I've used conditional comments to serve tweak CSS files to older IE 
versions. When I tested IE8 on my sites they all looked fine and I didn't 
have to add a separate CSS file for it. That's quite a good sign for a beta 
version. (I'm using strict mode here so it triggered IE8's superstandard 
mode.)


However, there is no way to make sure it'll work with IE8 now, as it's still 
in beta. You'd have to wait until the RC builds before you can be even close 
to that.


Provided your CC doesn't feed IE8 with fixes intended for IE5, 6 or 7 I 
think you should be fine. If your client demands you're 100% sure it'll work 
fine then your client is being very unresonable as the product is still 
under heavy development.



- Original Message - 
From: "tee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, March 21, 2008 11:52 AM
Subject: [WSG] premature to test/worry new site for IE8?


I am about to start coding for a new site, and client asked me to make 
sure my code will work for IE8, meaning when IE 8 comes out, she  doesn't 
need to pay me extra to fix any problem that may occur in IE  8. Client is 
from a web media company, though I understand her  concerns and that she 
has to answer to her client, but I just don't  know how or if I should 
commit to such 'expectation'.


Last time with IE 7, there was no problem and none of the sites I  coded 
for her break when  IE 7 came out. I think this version  targeting thing 
really got people worry.


Say, I code my CSS with best practice just like I'd always do, and  treat 
IE browsers with CC should it be needed. Do I need to worry  anything with 
IE8? It didn't occur to me to worry anything at all  until client was 
making this request.


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] IE 8 and grey

[Thomas Thomassen]

Because they are defined by w3c what they should map to. 
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#color-units

  - Original Message - 
  From: Adam Martin 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Monday, March 17, 2008 11:43 PM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] IE 8 and grey


  Are you talking from a css point of view? I would advocate not using "words" 
- what happens if a future browser decides that "grey" should be #6; where 
previously it was #3; (just examples). Your design is suddenly not going to 
look as you intended.

  My 2c.
  Adam


  On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 7:41 AM, Keryx Web <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Quick question.

I have not got IE 8 beta 1 myself... Does it understand "grey", spelled
with an e - as it should be ;-)


Lars Gunther


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





  -- 
  -
  http://myfitness.ning.com
  A community of people that care about their health and fitness
  Free fitness videos, recipes, blogs, photos etc.
  -- 
  ***
  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] IE8 news

[Thomas Thomassen]

Google cache: 
http://216.239.59.104/search?q=cache:hJvRsZGb7kUJ:www.geocities.com/hollywood/makeup/4303/t2script.txt+http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/makeup/4303/t2script.txt&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=no&client=firefox-a



- Original Message - 
From: "Andrew Freedman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:05 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE8 news



russ - maxdesign provided the following information on 7/03/2008 7:43 AM:

I have detailed files:
http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/makeup/4303/t2script.txt

:)
Russ



Obviously not

;)
Andrew


***
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] Links are not "hot" in ie8

[Thomas Thomassen]

Yup, I'm seeing odd :hover behaviour as well in some of my own testcases. 
Launch them bug reports at them. https://connect.microsoft.com/IE
Let make sure MS is told about the problems now early. If not we'll be stuck 
with this for sure afterwards.



- Original Message - 
From: "Gunlaug Sørtun" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 7:22 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Links are not "hot" in ie8



Thierry Koblentz wrote:

I think it's going to be a fun ride...


I really don't think it's time to saddle up yet :-)


http://tjkdesign.com/test/ie8/links.asp


So, they still have those stacking-bugs to sort out.

Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
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] IE8 news

[Thomas Thomassen]

Some of the oddness can use experienced here: 
http://thomthom.net/storage/markup/html/sitenav/
In IE8 the drop down menu of the red nav bar will hide when the cursor moves 
over the menu where the headers are below.


Also, the table of content will not drop down.
In my CSS code for the TOC I have
#toc:hover,
#toc:target
{
 height: auto;
}

however, if I remove #toc:target and only have
#toc:hover
{
 height: auto;
}
Then it works fine.

And you will also see that the tr:hover activates differently from other 
browsers.



- Original Message - 
From: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE8 news



Hi Thomas,


One thing I noticed was some oddness with :hover behaviour


I remember when IE7 came out (RC1 I think) I had to add [1] a:hover {} to 
the head of my documents else it didn't work at all. I added it within my 
@import statement with empty braces, like this:



@import "mystylesheet.css"; a:hover { }


I really have top wonder if this is more of the same. What "oddness" are 
you seeing?


I can't say I'll be installing it too soon. I did that with 7 and it just 
led to a bunch of changes (bug fixes) that I didn't need to make by the 
time RC2 came out.


Cheers.
Mike


***
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] IE8 news

[Thomas Thomassen]

p.s. the testcase I'm working on is here: 
http://thomthom.net/storage/markup/html/sitenav/ (NOTE: very rough draft!)
but if you use it to compare IE8 with Firefox2/3, Opera 9 and Safari 3 you 
see that IE8 still got a long way to go. :(



- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Thomassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:50 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE8 news


IE8 does provide a mode switch to IE7. There's a new button next to the 
home button. Though I'm not surpriced it nuked your IE6 installation.


I gave it a go and tried some of my testcases where I make heavy use of 
selectors and other cutting edge CSS features. Can't say I was impressed. 
I had actually hoped for more. I thought they'd pushed it quite a bit 
further, but it's looking pretty much like IE7, except that there seems to 
be less quirks. One thing I noticed was some oddness with :hover behaviour 
quite a few times. And my unordered list with square bullets now displays 
as quetsionmakrs with a border around it.



- Original Message - 
From: "tee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE8 news



I decided to be the brave and die first IE's victim :-)

Very Bad! my IE 6 is gone, IE 7 standalone is working. The
installation took over 15 minutes.

How do they expect we test the browser by disable the the previous
version(s) ??



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***









tee
On Mar 5, 2008, at 11:32 AM, aleagi wrote:


Yeah, I'm afraid to install it and kick IE6 and 7 out of my box!

Anyone with the guts to do it? @:D

Regards.
Aleagi
.

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

Anybody installed the IE8beta1 yet?
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/ie/ie8/readiness/Install.htm
Wondering if this nukes IE7 and embeds itself into Windows, or if
it can
run standalone...

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
__
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
__




***
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]
***





***
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]
***





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] IE8 news

[Thomas Thomassen]

IE8 does provide a mode switch to IE7. There's a new button next to the home 
button. Though I'm not surpriced it nuked your IE6 installation.


I gave it a go and tried some of my testcases where I make heavy use of 
selectors and other cutting edge CSS features. Can't say I was impressed. I 
had actually hoped for more. I thought they'd pushed it quite a bit further, 
but it's looking pretty much like IE7, except that there seems to be less 
quirks. One thing I noticed was some oddness with :hover behaviour quite a 
few times. And my unordered list with square bullets now displays as 
quetsionmakrs with a border around it.



- Original Message - 
From: "tee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 9:04 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE8 news



I decided to be the brave and die first IE's victim :-)

Very Bad! my IE 6 is gone, IE 7 standalone is working. The
installation took over 15 minutes.

How do they expect we test the browser by disable the the previous
version(s) ??



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***









tee
On Mar 5, 2008, at 11:32 AM, aleagi wrote:


Yeah, I'm afraid to install it and kick IE6 and 7 out of my box!

Anyone with the guts to do it? @:D

Regards.
Aleagi
.

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

Anybody installed the IE8beta1 yet?
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/ie/ie8/readiness/Install.htm
Wondering if this nukes IE7 and embeds itself into Windows, or if
it can
run standalone...

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
__
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
__




***
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]
***





***
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] IE8 news

[Thomas Thomassen]

I got a spare computer to test this on. Thanks for the heads up about the 
availiblity of the beta.



- Original Message - 
From: "aleagi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2008 8:32 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE8 news


Yeah, I'm afraid to install it and kick IE6 and 7 out of my box!

Anyone with the guts to do it? @:D

Regards.
Aleagi
.

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:

Anybody installed the IE8beta1 yet?

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/products/winfamily/ie/ie8/readiness/Install.htm
 Wondering if this nukes IE7 and embeds itself into Windows, or if it can
 run standalone...

 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
 __
 Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
 http://webstandards.org/
 __




 ***
 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]
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] IE8 news

[Thomas Thomassen]

True. IE is more than just a browser. It's a development platform. Intranet 
systems, HTA applications etc. Some of them might be used in mission critial 
systems where it's less than ideal to update the HTML and CSS every time IE 
updates it rendering engine so locking them self to a spesific version is 
very handy for them.
There are still systems using DOS software for their operation because 
porting it to a new system would cause a great risk of bugs.



- Original Message - 
From: "John Hancock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 5:34 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE8 news


How can you disagree with a capability? Isn't it a feature to be used  if 
you so choose? For intranets etc that you can force this behaviour  can 
actually be a good thing, but if you don't like it, you don't have  to use 
it! Microsoft has certainly responded here, but in my opinion  we 
shouldn't be criticising the for offering optional extras.


On 04/03/2008, at 3:23 PM, Tate Johnson wrote:

Microsoft is actually responding to their customers (and the  community). 
Wow, I'm impressed.


While I still disagree with the capability to render in "IE7 Strict 
Mode", at least this is no longer the default in IE8.





***
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] multiple css style sheets

[Thomas Thomassen]

You specify different stylesheets for different medias. The most common ones 
are to target handhelds, print and screenreaders. The user-agent will use 
the MEDIA attribute to pick the correct stylesheet.
It is also possible to provide multiple stylesheets which the user can 
select from. Though IE doesn't have any UI for this. These are provided by 
adding 'alternate' to the REL property. ( rel="alternate stylesheet" )



- Original Message - 
From: "Michael Horowitz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 5:55 PM
Subject: [WSG] multiple css style sheets


Just inherited a site and saw pages with multiple style sheets.  Is there 
a reason for that and how does the browser determine what to use if there 
is a conflict


--
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079



***
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] Web Browser Testing and the Practicallity of Testing other OS's

[Thomas Thomassen]

It might be worth testing on different platforms. Firefox 2.0 on Windows, OSX 
and Linux. I belive there some times are some quirks that creeps up. All though 
rare.

  - Original Message - 
  From: Andrew WC Brown 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 3:28 PM
  Subject: [WSG] Web Browser Testing and the Practicallity of Testing other OS's


  Hi WSG,


  I'm testing a custom application to see if it works in different OS's and Web 
Browsers.
  My question is there any practical reason to test different OS when you can 
download them on your current OS.


  eg. W2K Internet Explorer 5.5 vs WXP Internet Explorer 5.5
  I have multiple IE but is there really any reason to use a different OS? Is 
the web browser going to be any different?
  Anyone with web browser testing experience have any advise?

  ***
  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] books

[Thomas Thomassen]

Aye! A case of my own head not thinking... ;)
  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Ortenzi 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 7:57 AM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] books


  you mean "Dont make ME think", right? ;-)


  you made me think about it...


  ;-)


  On Feb 19 2008, at 07:29, Thomas Thomassen wrote:


"Don't make the think -- A Common Sence Approach to Web Usability" by Steve 
Krug


  Joe Ortenzi
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  www.joiz.com





  ***
  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] repeating background png support ie6

[Thomas Thomassen]

Screenshots sent.

Not sure how gracefully degrade. I think once when I used a translucent 
image it was an even colour and IE6 should simply degrade to display the 
colour solid. That worked fine for my use. Your case might be different 
though.




- Original Message - 
From: "kevin mcmonagle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 5:06 PM
Subject: [WSG] repeating background png support ie6



Hi,
Whats the standards way to handle or degrade ie6 png support for a 
repeating background img?
Im having problems solving this-ies4mac doesn't seem to do well with 
conditional comments and png hacks-so i cant tell whats working.


Im thinking about putting the wrapper div with the repeating background 
image in two different stylesheets. One with a png for normal browsers and 
one with a gif for ie then i would just hide the png from ie6 and give it 
the gif one  with conditional comments.


Also if anyone can email me a screen shot from ie6 off list that would be 
great.


beta page:

http://www.arasgcc.com/indextest.html

-thanks
kevin







***
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] books

[Thomas Thomassen]

"Don't make the think -- A Common Sence Approach to Web Usability" by Steve Krug

  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 7:31 AM
  Subject: [WSG] books


  Anybody can suggest me some good books or other resources for

  · Webstandards

  ·  css technics

  ·  Ui design and development

  ·  javascript (especially for UI purpose)

   

  I prefer   books.

   

  Thanks a ton

  Naveen Bhaskar Menon

   


  ***
  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] long words not wrapping inside DIV

[Thomas Thomassen]

As far as I know, control of how text wrap was introduced in CSS3: 
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-text/#text-wrap
All though, IE has it's own property for this 
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms531186(VS.85).aspx

I think you'll have to pick a different word for your localization. 

Out of curiosity, why can't you change the width of the drop down menu?

  - Original Message - 
  From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 7:23 AM
  Subject: [WSG] long words not wrapping inside DIV


  HI .

   

  I have a dropdown menu with a width of 150px. while localization some texts 
are too long  and it is not wrapping inside the DIV and going outside the div. 
Is there any way to wrap long words. I don't want to use scrollbars in the div 
and I can't increase the width of the DIV.

   

  Pls help..

   

  Thanks a ton in advance..

   

  Naveen Bhaskar Menon

   


  ***
  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] Best Practice to Offer Different Formats of Documents

[Thomas Thomassen]

True. Dean Edwards got a very good library to aid IE: 
http://dean.edwards.name/IE7/
  - Original Message - 
  From: Andrew Cunningham 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 12:49 PM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] Best Practice to Offer Different Formats of Documents



  On Sun, February 17, 2008 10:02 pm, Thomas Thomassen wrote:
  > Yes, IE doesn't handle attribute selectors.
  > 

  There are always javascript workarounds for attribute selectors in IE.

  > However, I'd still be tempted to use it. The only thing that happens is
  > that
  > IE6 doesn't display the icons. Graceful degradation. Users with newer
  > browsers will get a better experience, but it'll still work with the older
  > browsers.
  > 



  -- 
  Andrew Cunningham
  Research and Development Coordinator
  Vicnet
  State Library of Victoria
  Australia

  [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  ***
  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] Best Practice to Offer Different Formats of Documents

[Thomas Thomassen]

Yes, IE doesn't handle attribute selectors.

However, I'd still be tempted to use it. The only thing that happens is that 
IE6 doesn't display the icons. Graceful degradation. Users with newer 
browsers will get a better experience, but it'll still work with the older 
browsers.



- Original Message - 
From: "Designer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2008 10:56 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Best Practice to Offer Different Formats of Documents



Matt Fellows wrote:


There is a nice article [1] that can show you how to automatically
style links with little icons depending on the extension of the file
it points to if you are interested.

Cheers,

Matt

[1] - 
http://www.askthecssguy.com/2006/12/showing_hyperlink_cues_with_cs_1.html





Hi Matt,  I was intrigued by the simplicity of your use of:

a[href $='.pdf'] {
   padding-right: 18px;
   background: transparent url(../../sitegraphics/outofit.gif) no-repeat 
center right;

}

etc., but when I checked it in my (standalone) IE6, it failed. Is that to 
be expected? (standalone IE6 gives 'funny' results sometimes).  If so, 
it's dead as a useful tool for me.


Bob
www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk




***
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] hello

[Thomas Thomassen]

Nothing. Web 2.0 is a buzzword. There's nothing truely new.
It's often accociated with social networking. Sites where the users provide the 
content.

  - Original Message - 
  From: Gitanjali 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 2:21 PM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] hello


  What is the difference between normal web template and web 2.0 templates???


  On Feb 12, 2008 6:40 PM, Gitanjali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hello aleagi

Thank you very much..


On Feb 12, 2008 6:17 PM, aleagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

  Hello Gitanjali,

  In general, there's no rule to design to web 2.0.

  There's a myth concerning that you have to use shades, a lot of spaces
  between elements, large font sizes, and stuff...

  But, in general, the design must be clean and balanced.

  If this can help:
  http://www.templateworld.com/all_web_2.0_templates_1.html

  But, web 2.0 is more about structure of the pages like XHTML 1.0
  Strict (or 1.1) without errors, CSS well structured, tableless, WCAG
  1, 2 and 3...

  So, if your pages are already with this elements (well coded), the
  design will be a very easy thing to do. An advice: less is more! @;]

  Have a nice day!


  Regards,
  Luiz Gustavo Aleagi Nunes
  -
  "Nosce te ipsum"
  -
  http://sapiensdc.com.br





  On Feb 12, 2008 10:26 AM, Gitanjali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  > Hello aleagi!
  >
  > i want to know what is web 2.0 and how to do a template using web 2.0
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >
  > On Feb 12, 2008 5:45 PM, aleagi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  >
  > > Hello Gitanjali,
  > >
  > > Help with what?
  > >
  > > Web 2.0 is a concept that has a lot of subjects to be discussed...
  > >
  > > What do you want to know about web 2.0? (If this exists at all).
  > >
  > > Regards,
  > > Luiz Gustavo Aleagi Nunes
  > > -
  > > "Nosce te ipsum"
  > > -
  > > http://sapiensdc.com.br
  > >
  > >
  > > On Feb 12, 2008 10:07 AM, Gitanjali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
  > > > Hello all!
  > > >
  > > > Can anybody help me in web 2.0 please
  > > >
  > > > --
  > > > Regards.
  > > > Gitanjali,
  > > > Web Designer.
  > > >
  > > > ***
  > > > 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]
  > > ***
  > >
  > >
  >
  >
  >
  > --
  >
  >
  > Regards.
  > Gitanjali,
  > Web Designer.
  >
  > ***
  > 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]
  ***






-- 
Regards.
Gitanjali,
Web Designer.




  -- 
  Regards.
  Gitanjali,
  Web Designer.

  ***
  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] Decorative bolding

[Thomas Thomassen]

The branding might change. I'm in favour of span with a class, like: class="logo">.



- Original Message - 
From: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 4:42 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Decorative bolding



Do I:
a. Use the  tag, or...
b. Use a  tag and bold it using CSS?



I'd use ,  is deprecated



Actually it's not deprecated, not in HTML 4, 5 or XHTML 1. If ever there 
was a case for the use the 'b' element, this might be a good one.


---

Strong is "important" so, as Rachel stated, it isn't appropriate. A span 
is fine as others have pointed out, but the b element might also be a 
sound choice in this case. The b element is a highlight of sorts. That is 
its semantic value, its role as an element in a web document.


From HTML 5:

The b element represents a span of text to be stylistically offset from 
the normal prose without conveying any extra importance, such as key words 
in a document abstract, product names in a review, or other spans of text 
whose typical typographic presentation is boldened.



It is bold without the importance, at least that is its default rendering. 
Remember, just because it is bold might not necessarily mean that it is a 
"style." All elements have a default rendering. Strong is bold and so are 
headings. They all have a role, and we don't think of those as a style.


A better way to answer the original question might be to ask: Do you want 
the "value" retained in the mark-up, or is it purely a style that painted 
onto the presentational layer? Or, worded another way, should the boldened 
treatment exist without styles?


If it should, then the b might be best. Otherwise I heartily agreee that 
the span element should be used.


Respectfully,
Mike Cherim






***
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] use of in

[Thomas Thomassen]

The definition lists aren't soly for defining a term. The W3C specs gives an 
example usage of  to marking up dialouges. I see the defintion lists as 
a good option when the list consists of two parts, a headline and a 
description.


- Original Message - 
From: "John Faulds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 6:39 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] use of  in 



If the lists have a number of levels like
 Services
   Web Site Development
Graphics
SEO and
more
About Us
Me
You
Someone else


I'm not talking about presenting a list of links; I'm talking about 
presenting the actual content on a page. From your example above, it's 
quite feasible that you'd just have one page for Services and one for 
About Us. If you present


* Web Site Development
* Graphics
* SEO

as a list of services (which it is), then it's quite likely you're going 
to need more than one paragraph to describe each of them.


I don't buy the definition list option because I don't believe a 
description of a service is a 'definition' of that service (descriptions 
and definitions are two separate things).


The argument for splitting onto separate pages may not always be the best 
option either - there may not be enough to say about each one to warrant 
that, but there may be more than can fit into one single paragraph.


You see bulleted or numbered lists of more than one paragraph in printed 
material all the time, particularly academic publications.


--
Tyssen Design
http://www.tyssendesign.com.au
Ph: (07) 3300 3303
Mb: 0405 678 590


***
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] IE6 3-pixel jog victim

[Thomas Thomassen]

Add left padding to the paragraph intead?

- Original Message - 
From: "Jens-Uwe Korff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Sunday, February 10, 2008 10:33 PM
Subject: [WSG] IE6 3-pixel jog victim


Hi,

I have restyled a timeline but have come stuck with IE6's 3-pixel jog.

I cannot apply the usual remedy (floating the paragraph) as I need any
element next to the floated "offender" to be indented. Hence the
paragraph has a left margin which cannot be zero.

I've tried all the usual IE6 tricks (position, hasLayout, inline) to no
avail.

Any help is greatly appreciated.

http://creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/history/aboriginal-history
-timeline.html

Thanks,
Jens

The information contained in this e-mail message and any accompanying files 
is or may be confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, 
dissemination, reliance, forwarding, printing or copying of this e-mail or 
any attached files is unauthorised. This e-mail is subject to copyright. No 
part of it should be reproduced, adapted or communicated without the written 
consent of the copyright owner. If you have received this e-mail in error 
please advise the sender immediately by return e-mail or telephone and 
delete all copies. Fairfax does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness 
of any information contained in this e-mail or attached files. Internet 
communications are not secure, therefore Fairfax does not accept legal 
responsibility for the contents of this message or attached files.



***
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] Small element (was:Styling forms)

[Thomas Thomassen]

I had a look at your article. Got some questions:

One of your examples:

Why does this semantic markup stuff have to be so unclear at times,
   he thought.


Wouldn't it be more appropriate to use:

Why does this semantic markup stuff have to be so unclear at times,
   he thought.

...since it's quoting a person's though?


As for:

The nematicidal marigold,
Tagetes minutum,
can grow to 8-10 feet.


wouldn't that be better as:

The nematicidal marigold,
Tagetes minutum,
can grow to 8-10 feet.

As this then defines what Tagetes minutum is?


Gotto give it to you. It's been a while since my ideas of semantial markup 
has been challenged such as your articles does. Refreshing. My mind bubbles. 
I'll have to investigate your other articles. And I think it's time for me 
to have a new look at the w3c specs for these 'old' elements again.



- Original Message - 
From: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 8:34 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Small element (was:Styling forms)



Hi Thomas,


In HTML4 it's a font style element on the line with  and  etc


I guess I've always considered it a font-sizing element more than a 
styling thing, though the final result is a visual style. I've always felt 
it has a meaning of being less important than the surrounding text. An 
afterthought, a byline, some fineprint, or supporting sub-text.



can we say that  has a semantic meaning now?


I always felt it did in an odd sort of way. I judge its use again with 
styles off. If I really want the text to be smaller to effectively 
separate its meaning from the surrounding text, then I use the small 
element. If it shouldn't be, or if I'm not sure or can't decide, or I 
don't care one way or the other, then I don't use it. If I still want it 
to appear smaller for some reason I will likely use a span element instead 
to style the text in question without dimishing its value as it relate to 
the surrounding content. However, when I usually want text to be smaller, 
then it is usually because I feel it *is* less important falling into one 
of the categories I mentioned, so I usually end up using the small tag. I 
may use it more than some people for this reason.


Same thing applies to the b element, but differently. The b element is 
meant to be a highlight. I end up never using it because I always end up 
asking myself why I want to highlight something. My answer always guides 
me. If it's purely stylistic then I use a span, but I usually want to 
hightlight a word because it is meant to be spoken with emphasis 
(inflection) so I'll end up using em. Or it may be more important than the 
surrouding (a common reason to highlight a word or phrase), then I use the 
"important" element: strong. b is one of those I don't really have a use 
for. I use the i element more regularly becuase the W3C is more clear 
about it, and its uses are more distinct and meaningful


My thoughts on those two elements are spelled out in more detail here: 
http://green-beast.com/blog/?p=222


Cheers.
Mike








I think this might be one of those double-edged swords.


***
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] Styling forms

[Thomas Thomassen]

I'm with you there. I also check my sites without styling. Gives an idea if 
the document is well structured.


I'll be posting a link to the archive of this thread on the forum I regulary 
use. The common guide to people asking to mark up forms has been to use 
lists. It'll be interesting too see the discussion spark off there as well. 
Your article will be nice food for thoughts.


Straying away from the topic a little. (I suppose I should've created a new 
topic?)
I noticed you used  on your blog. In HTML4 it's a font style element 
on the line with  and  etc. However, in HTML5 it now got a meaning. 
Small print. The question is, even though HTML5 is still a draft, can we say 
that  has a semantic meaning now? Even though HTML, which is a 
current recommendation, doesn't define it as such?
I've often found my self wanting to use  for small prints, side 
comments and such, but until HTML5 came along I thought it was just the way 
I interpreted the  tag, so I didn't make any use of it.



- Original Message - 
From: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 6:51 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms



Hello Thomas,


But I'm not sure I feel comfortable with
a  between the  and .


I know developers are mostly split down the middle about this issue that 
I've seen. To me, and perhaps this is really silly, but I really like my 
sites to look and be just as usable with styles off as they are with 
styles on, and I find adding breaks really neatens up the form visually 
when viewing the site without styles, organizing it a bit. To me that's a 
positive thing.


I don't think the break use has any bearing on the accessibility of the 
form's elements so that doesn't seem to have bearing on my decision. No 
negatives that I'm aware of.


Semantically speaking, I think the introduction of a break is akin to 
adding a slight pause. I don't think that has any bearing on accessibility 
to that end either.


I will say this, though, I do respect the choice made by those who choose 
not to use it. So much so that the third version of my contact form script 
has a configuration variable called $add_breaks to which entering "yes" 
will add them in and entering "no" remove them. Each to their own I 
figured. No harm either way that I know of so I may as well be 
accommodating :)


Cheers.
Mike


- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Thomassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


Very interesting article. I'm reevaluating my options about lists on 
forms.


But I'm not sure I feel comfortable with a  between the  and 
. Semantically it looks like it separates them, even though the 
FOR attributes connects them.


If the  came after the  then both the  and the  
ends up in the same line without any CSS styling.


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms



Hi Rachel,


I'd be very interested in reading your article when it's ready


For better or worse, it's published:
http://green-beast.com/blog/?p=254

Cheers.
Mike




***
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]
***





***
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] Styling forms

[Thomas Thomassen]

Very interesting article. I'm reevaluating my options about lists on forms.

But I'm not sure I feel comfortable with a  between the  and 
. Semantically it looks like it separates them, even though the FOR 
attributes connects them.


If the  came after the  then both the  and the  
ends up in the same line without any CSS styling.


- Original Message - 
From: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 3:34 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms



Hi Rachel,


I'd be very interested in reading your article when it's ready


For better or worse, it's published:
http://green-beast.com/blog/?p=254

Cheers.
Mike




***
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] Styling forms

[Thomas Thomassen]

hm... this thread has given me a thinker.
How does screenreaders treat using just ?


  
Foo: 
Bar: 
  


How will it present the form? If it's all inline, will it be read continuous, 
or will there be a break between the elements?

  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Ortenzi 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 9:31 PM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


  Well done Alexey!


  Are we not confusing semantics with presentational here?


  if it is OK to strip the presentational out of a list element (when we use a 
list for a navigation group and want our navigation elements in a row instead 
of a column) what is wrong with supplanting the inline quality of a label/input 
group by designating it a block element, and then group several form elements, 
or even each label input group with fieldsets?


  BTW:  is the equivalent of a force carriage return and thus belongs 
within paragraphs, i thought!


  Joe


  On Feb 7 2008, at 19:55, Алексей Новиков wrote:


On Behalf Of Thierry Koblentz
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 10:29 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


TK> fwiw, I think BRs are the perfect fit.


BRs? Are BRs semantically correct? I believe they aren't.


--
Regards,
Alexey Novikov
http://studiomade.ru






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***




  Joe Ortenzi
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  www.joiz.com





  ***
  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] Styling forms

[Thomas Thomassen]

While I see your point, what I find to be troublesome is that Label and 
Input are inline elements. While it's easy to wrap the Inputs in Labels and 
make the Labels block elements, with just plain HTML and no CSS that means a 
form's elements will end up all in one long line.


Now, one can assume that most users will be using a user agent applying CSS, 
so it might not be much of an issue. But I don't see  as similar to 
.



- Original Message - 
From: "Mike at Green-Beast.com" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 6:07 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms



Still need some extra elements to organise them.
Such as lists.


I don't know why that would be. Proper use of form elements is the only 
organizational support needed. In my opinion, use of any other non-form 
elements on form's isn't necessary, or advantageous and, if not careful, 
can actually take away from the form.


Just like a  doesn't need a , a  combo doesn't need 
an .


Old conversation, I know, but I just had to chime in.

Cheers.
Mike Cherim
http://green-beast.com/








- Original Message - 
From: "Thomas Thomassen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 11:05 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


Fieldsets and Labels is present in HTML4 as well. Don't see anything new 
about that. Still need some extra elements to organise them. Such as 
lists.
 - Original Message - 
 From: Joe Ortenzi

 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
 Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:36 AM
 Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


 Has anyone looked up the HTML 5 pages on form elements?


 http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/


 http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#forms


 It's all fieldsets and labels... which makes more semantic sense than 
paragraphs, lists, and dd/dl



 JOe


 On Feb 6 2008, at 04:06, Steve Green wrote:


   There may be specific cases where it would be right to mark up a form 
as a
   list, although I can't think of one. As a general rule it would be 
wrong.



   The argument against marking up a form as a list is that a form is not 
a

   list. A form is one or more groups of form controls, and the fieldset
   element is the correct means by which form controls should be grouped.
   Within a fieldset, paragraph elements should be used for individual 
form

   controls.


   Steve






   -Original Message-
   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
On

   Behalf Of Michael Horowitz
   Sent: 06 February 2008 03:38
   To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
   Subject: [WSG] Styling forms


   I've been looking at styling forms and I'm seeing some people mark them 
up
   as ordered lists and other using paragraphs.  What are the arguments 
for the

   different markup types.


   --
   Michael Horowitz
   Your Computer Consultant
   http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
   561-394-9079






   ***
   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]
   ***




 Joe Ortenzi
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 www.joiz.com





 ***
 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]
***



***
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] Styling forms

[Thomas Thomassen]

Fieldsets and Labels is present in HTML4 as well. Don't see anything new about 
that. Still need some extra elements to organise them. Such as lists.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Ortenzi 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:36 AM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


  Has anyone looked up the HTML 5 pages on form elements?


  http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/


  http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#forms


  It's all fieldsets and labels... which makes more semantic sense than 
paragraphs, lists, and dd/dl


  JOe


  On Feb 6 2008, at 04:06, Steve Green wrote:


There may be specific cases where it would be right to mark up a form as a
list, although I can't think of one. As a general rule it would be wrong.


The argument against marking up a form as a list is that a form is not a
list. A form is one or more groups of form controls, and the fieldset
element is the correct means by which form controls should be grouped.
Within a fieldset, paragraph elements should be used for individual form
controls.


Steve






-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Michael Horowitz
Sent: 06 February 2008 03:38
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Styling forms


I've been looking at styling forms and I'm seeing some people mark them up
as ordered lists and other using paragraphs.  What are the arguments for the
different markup types.  


--
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079






***
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]
***




  Joe Ortenzi
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  www.joiz.com





  ***
  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] display differences firefox ie 7.0

[Thomas Thomassen]

"On having Layout" is a good article that gives good insight to most of IE's 
quirks: http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/onhavinglayout.html
  - Original Message - 
  From: Joe Ortenzi 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 8:14 AM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] display differences firefox ie 7.0


  MH:


  Someone earlier this week sent a very good presentation that explained a lot 
of the problems you are facing. It is quite a long presentation (more of a 
lesson really!) but it answers a lot of the problems you are having. There are 
also a collection of great links sprinkled through that we could all find 
useful in our bookmarks list.


  give it a whirl!


  http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/


  Joe


  On Feb 6 2008, at 02:10, Michael Horowitz wrote:


I've noticed that my site is centered it ie 7.0 but left justified in 
firefox http://terrorfreeamerica.us/.  What are the issues and workarounds to 
keep them in sync. In this case I would like it centered both ways but I would 
love to know how to do it either way.


Thanks


-- 
Michael Horowitz
Your Computer Consultant
http://yourcomputerconsultant.com
561-394-9079






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***




  Joe Ortenzi
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  www.joiz.com





  ***
  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] Styling forms

[Thomas Thomassen]

When the LABEL element wraps around INPUT you do not need the FOR 
attribute.The hierarchy provides the connection between them. However, when 
the LABEL does not wrap around the INPUT, the FOR attribute is required for 
useragent to know the elements are related.



- Original Message - 
From: "John Faulds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


Hi Germ17,I have seen your example presented in GERMWORKS.NETFYI, your 
approach is perfect to my knowledge, but the  element should not 
wrapped by any  element. It's not compliant/accessible...I 
request you to modify this example according to standards, if you believe

the same.


You're wrong there. It's perfectly valid HTML and I don't believe it is 
any less accessible as long as the 'for' attribute is specified.



--
Tyssen Design
http://www.tyssendesign.com.au
Ph: (07) 3300 3303
Mb: 0405 678 590


***
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] Styling forms

[Thomas Thomassen]

Have a look at this article on A List Apart: 
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/prettyaccessibleforms
If you haven't been too that site before then have a snoop around. They got 
lots of really good articles.



- Original Message - 
From: "Christian Snodgrass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 4:50 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling forms


It kind of depends on the form itself. Definition lists and unordered 
lists also are used a lot.


Usually, I would say unordered or definition lists are the most 
appropriate. If the questions were numbered, I could see using ordered 
lists. Paragraphs are kind of the lazy way. You can also use field sets, 
which are really appropriate for groups of related items.

Michael Horowitz wrote:
I've been looking at styling forms and I'm seeing some people mark them 
up as ordered lists and other using paragraphs.  What are the arguments 
for the different markup types.



--

Christian Snodgrass
Azure Ronin Web Design
http://www.arwebdesign.net/ 
Phone: 859.816.7955



***
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] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type

[Thomas Thomassen]

Now that's new to me. Will have to read up on that. But then I see no point 
in XHTML 1.1, because wasn't it mean to be modulized and extendible by XML?



- Original Message - 
From: "Keryx Web" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 5:52 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type



Thomas Thomassen skrev:
There's no difference between XHTML 1.1 and XHTML 1.0 Strict. XHTML 1.1 
only advantage is that it's modulized


Not entirely true. XHTML 1.1 includes ruby.

and can only be sent as XML so it can be extended. If you're not 
extending it then you're better off with XHTML 1.0.


FWIW - and I do not wish to reopen the "considered harmful" debate - 
appendix C allows for sending XHTML 1.1 as well as XHTML 1.0 as text/html. 
(That's a recent change in the specs that few seem to know about.)



Lars Gunther


***
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] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type

[Thomas Thomassen]

There's no difference between XHTML 1.1 and XHTML 1.0 Strict. XHTML 1.1 only 
advantage is that it's modulized and can only be sent as XML so it can be 
extended. If you're not extending it then you're better off with XHTML 1.0.


- Original Message - 
From: "Designer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 12:10 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type



Thomas Thomassen wrote:
Why sniff out browsers that accept XML? If the document is marked as 
XHTML 1.1 it should allways be sent as XML.


Though, I have seen people sniffing out browsers and using server side 
scripting to change the doctype. XHTML 1.1 to browsers than supports it, 
and XHTML 1.0 with the html mime to older browsers. Which is meaningless 
since the document effectivly is XHTML 1.0.


Maybe, but coding in xhtml1.1 makes you MUCH more fussy about syntax etc. 
and it shows up any 'well formed' errors as soon as you browse. So, whilst 
the user will know nothing about all this, it makes you as a designer get 
lots of practice in using the stricter syntax, ready for some day in the 
future when you will need it.


Maybe :-)

Bob

www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk





***
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] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type

[Thomas Thomassen]

Why sniff out browsers that accept XML? If the document is marked as XHTML 
1.1 it should allways be sent as XML.


Though, I have seen people sniffing out browsers and using server side 
scripting to change the doctype. XHTML 1.1 to browsers than supports it, and 
XHTML 1.0 with the html mime to older browsers. Which is meaningless since 
the document effectivly is XHTML 1.0.



- Original Message - 
From: "David Hucklesby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:07 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type


On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:37:26 +1100, Andrew Freedman wrote:


Conflict between Mime Type and Document Type


http://www.bigbaer.com/css_tutorials/css.image.text.wrap.htm



Yah. DOCTYPE is XHTML 1.1, which should only be served as XML.
I suggest HTML 4.01 or XHTML 1.0 instead, unless you want to
sniff for browsers that accept XML on your server processing.

Be aware that the XML prolog puts IE6 into "quirks" mode.

Cordially,
David
--




***
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] This IE8 controversy

[Thomas Thomassen]

By the sound of it, IE9 will default to IE7 for documents with proper strict 
doctype and IE6 for documents with invalid or missing doctype. Just like 
IE8.


Regarding what you said about "X-IE9-Compatible", "X-IE10-Compatible":
No, it would be

if the site was made for IE9, and

the http-equip header name itself would not need to be replaced.

And your proposed solution is a punishment to the users and the owners of 
the sites. And the owners will loose money if their sites suddently break 
due to missing visitors and having to pay someone to sort it out.
It doesn't sound fair to do this to the owners and users because they're the 
ones that'll suffer the most. And we are after all offering a service.



- Original Message - 
From: "James Bennett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:03 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] This IE8 controversy



On Jan 30, 2008 1:31 AM, Thomas Thomassen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

They don't want to default to IE8 rendering because of what happend with
IE7. It broke website. Not only that but IE is used so much outside the
browser as well. It's a platform. Intranet apps. HTA apps. Even help 
files

uses the IE engine. If IE8 defaulted to IE8 rendering, then you risk
breaking ALL of that. And who's going to get the heat for that? The
developers! Us!


And then when IE9 comes out, what does it default to? The same people
who built stuff that relied on IE6 bugs and broke in IE7 will build
stuff that relies on IE8 bugs and breaks in IE9 (especially since IE8
will be the first version with any support for the HTML 5 drafts; like
any first implementation of anything, there will be bugs). And so on
into the future; do we get an X-IE9-Compatible and an
X-IE10-Compatible, and an X-IE11-Compatible down the line to deal with
that?


When I first heard of this new tag I didn't know what to think of it. But
I'm starting to like it more and more. What I've yet to hear from from
people who don't like the solution is a realistic alternative. Letting 
the

sites break is not an alternative.


Well, there are three groups here:

1. Standards-based developers who don't rely on browser bugs to make
their stuff work.
2. Standards-based developers who do rely on browser bugs to make
their stuff work.
3. Developers who don't use standards-based techniques at all.

Group 1 doesn't need X-UA-Compatible because they don't have the
"problem" it allegedly solves.

Group 3 doesn't need X-UA-Compatible because they have quirks mode.

Group 2 are the only ones who "need" it, but by accepting it they're
giving up on the ability to use any new features down the road (since,
to kick future IE versions into a more featureful standards mode,
they'd have to stop relying on old bugs).

So the solution is to make Group 2 stop existing, and all that's
really needed is for browser vendors to do nothing special to cater to
them; the simple market force of clients who want functioning web
sites will sort things out all on its own by either giving Group 2 an
incentive to change its ways, or putting them out of business.


--
"Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct -- the best kind of 
correct."



***
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] This IE8 controversy

[Thomas Thomassen]

Not every site has a webdesigner constantly maintaining it. Retroactively 
editing the millions of existing pages out there will cost an enourmouse 
amount of money. Fitting a meta tag into existing documents isn't as easy as 
implementing it into new ones.



- Original Message - 
From: "Chris Knowles" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] This IE8 controversy



Thomas Thomassen wrote:
You don't have to modify every single HTML you publish. You can set the 
HTTP header for HTML files on your server and off you go. What I've yet 
to hear from people who don't like the solution is a realistic 
alternative. Letting the sites break is not an alternative.




heres an alternative, instead of letting the sites break, add a meta tag 
to them to fix them to an older browser version. "You don't have to modify 
every single HTML you publish. You can set the HTTP header for HTML files 
on your server and off you go."


It seems that what is so quick and simple for one group of people to do is 
somehow a huge task for the other group?


--
Chris Knowles


***
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] This IE8 controversy

[Thomas Thomassen]

- Original Message - 
From: "Katrina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] This IE8 controversy



Thomas Thomassen wrote:
You don't have to modify every single HTML you publish. You can set the 
HTTP header for HTML files on your server and off you go.


Don't forget the nasty gotcha: save that page on your own computer, load 
it back up and suddenly it looks different (as the browser doesn't have 
the meta tag in the code for the webpage).


Yes, that is an issue. But saving webpages to disc has always been 
unreliable. Espesially now with the extensive use of AJAX and other embedded 
and streamed content.





> Letting the sites break is not an alternative.
Yes it is. You just don't like it :)


You're correct. I don't like it. Because it punishes the users and the 
owners of the sites.




Kat



***
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] This IE8 controversy

[Thomas Thomassen]

But the crappy intranet sites etc that are coded specifically to IE6 or 
IE7's quirks *won't* go away (as that's the whole reason why MS are doing 
this), so no, the meta tag (and the associated rendering engine) will 
stay. If they're freezing rendering unless you opt-in because corporates 
won't update the sites now, what makes you think that they will ever 
update the sites?


That's the whole idea. That they *won't* have to update their intranet 
application to account for a new IE rendering engine. And for an intranet 
application, and such like, web standards and semantics is not an issue. 
It's an application, it runs on the IE engine and it works.



And because of the delay and the meta-tag, more developers will have grown 
complacent and lazy (coding for just that rendering engine*), and so the 
number of sites that will 'break' will have increased.


Then they're made by non-professional developers. Which is how most sites 
are made anyway. Webdevelopers that cares about clean coding, semantics and 
webstandards are a minority. Most of the web is allready "broken". There's 
tagsoup and hacks all over the place. I can't see how this tag will change 
that. 




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] This IE8 controversy

[Thomas Thomassen]

You don't have to modify every single HTML you publish. You can set the HTTP 
header for HTML files on your server and off you go. Btw, you have to author 
every single document, so is it really that bad to add a meta tag?

They don't want to default to IE8 rendering because of what happend with IE7. 
It broke website. Not only that but IE is used so much outside the browser as 
well. It's a platform. Intranet apps. HTA apps. Even help files uses the IE 
engine. If IE8 defaulted to IE8 rendering, then you risk breaking ALL of that. 
And who's going to get the heat for that? The developers! Us!

When I first heard of this new tag I didn't know what to think of it. But I'm 
starting to like it more and more. What I've yet to hear from from people who 
don't like the solution is a realistic alternative. Letting the sites break is 
not an alternative.
  - Original Message - 
  From: Ben Buchanan 
  To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
  Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2008 1:23 AM
  Subject: Re: [WSG] This IE8 controversy





I don't think they're ignoring the "mess" they created at all.. 

  You're right there. They're not ignoring the problem, it's just that a lot of 
people don't agree with their solution. 


Is
adding a meta tag really too much work to provide your users/visitors
the viewing experience they should have?

  Consider it this way: is any other browser maker asking you to modify every 
single HTML document you publish, just to fix a problem *they* created? ...and 
not for the first time, given MS already expects us to load up our sites with 
conditional comments and extra stylesheets...

  It really wouldn't matter so much if they were making IE8 default to IE8, 
then letting people set it back to IE7 if they actually need it. This way 
around ticks people off for the same reason SPAM ticks them off - they didn't 
ask for it!

  cheers,

  Ben

  -- 
  --- 
  --- The future has arrived; it's just not 
  --- evenly distributed. - William Gibson 
  ***
  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] Background images versus image

[Thomas Thomassen]

You could make the javascript trigger on the image onload events. Though, I 
think some older version of Opera, v8 or 7.54, doesn't support the onLoad 
event for images.



- Original Message - 
From: "Christian Snodgrass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2008 12:43 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Background images versus image



That script has two flaws that reduce it's user base:
1) As said many times now, Javascript+CSS-Images = unusable
2) The imaged version doesn't work in Safari. In Safari, it shows up as 
the default (to me, this isn't acceptable). Also, if anyone isn't aware, 
Safari is the major browser for Mac computers.


So, to fix this, first you make it so it doesn't load if images aren't 
available. I'm working on this. Then, you  find an alternative, working 
method for Safari. I'm gonna attempt to fix this as well.


The images is the biggie, the Safari thing isn't so much usability, just 
that the look isn't consistent when it should be.


Likely, James A. wrote:

Agreed thanks,
 I don't know much about JavaScript, but is there really a way to make 
sure that you get all users?



*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
*On Behalf Of *Dave Woods

*Sent:* Friday, January 25, 2008 2:33 PM
*To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
*Subject:* Re: [WSG] Background images versus image

"What are the chances of that happening? I would think it would be very
slim wouldn't it?"

You'd be surprised... I know a few dialup users who browse with images 
disabled to speed up loading times but leave CSS and JavaScript on so 
that the presentation and any enhanced functionality is still available.


I agree that these types of users are in the minority but they do exist.



On 25/01/2008, *Likely, James A.* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:




From all of the examples that I have seen this is the one that
accommodates most users.

How would a screen reader read this option? Has any one tested
something
similar to the example that I found?

Thanks again for the help.

James

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
]
On Behalf Of Christian Snodgrass
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 1:03 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
Subject: Re: [WSG] Background images versus image

That isn't bad, but if you have Javascript and CSS, but no images, it
fails completely.

Likely, James A. wrote:
> Thanks for the emails. Some things I didn't think of but will
from now

> on. I have been doing some reading and looking at options and found
> this example.
>
> http://www.chriserwin.com/scripts/crir/
>
> What are your thoughts on this approach?
>
> To me it looks pretty user friendly.
>
> Please let me know as this is new to me.
>
> Thanks
>
> James
>
>

> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
] *On Behalf Of *Dave Woods
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:59 AM
> *To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org 
> *Subject:* Re: [WSG] Background images versus image
>
> The first question I'd ask is why not just use check boxes
instead of
> trying to replicate them? If you mark them up correctly then 
there's
> really no better accessible method than using the correct element 
as

> it was meant.
>
> If you go down this route then you're likely to create all kinds of
> problems for yourself... what happens when users don't have css
> available (mobile devices), images disabled (dialup users) or are
> using screenreaders.
>
> If you want to change the appearance then I'd use JavaScript to
> enhance the existing check boxes but for those user agents that
don't
> support JavaScript or have it disabled you should have the fall 
back

> of regular forms.
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> - - - - -
> http://www.dave-woods.co.uk
>
>
> On 23/01/2008, *Likely, James A.* < [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> >>
wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am working on a new site for a client and need some
thoughts on
> a problem that I have.
>
> I am making a list with clickable boxes (like input boxes) that
> have a checked, disabled and clickable state. My question
is, what
> would work best. Using background images or adding images to 
the

> code.
>
> The reason I ask is
>
> 1) If I use images, we can add alt text to de

Re: [WSG] Background images versus image

[Thomas Thomassen]

Most mobile phones won't use Javascript or CSS either. And the usage of 
handheld devices is rapidly increasing. So is other gadgets. Nintendo DS for 
instance. We can't assume that only browser applications is used to access 
our webpages.


- Original Message - 
From: "Christian Snodgrass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

To: 
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 8:31 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Background images versus image


I haven't tested on many screen readers, but from what I understand, most 
have CSS disabled, so it would read this as a regular form.


However, there is the possibility that someone uses a regular browser with 
screen reading technology (just like what you could use to read a document 
in Word). As for how likely this case my be, I have no idea. I'd say it'd 
have somewhere from 75-95% success rate for disabled users, but that is 
just an educated guess and is in no way a scientific or statistically 
evaluation.


You've actually gotten me interested in this idea so I'm currently working 
on my own version of that, with some fail safes to help eliminate this 
problem, as well as make it work on Safari (since, as you probably 
noticed, in his notes he said he disabled it in Safari). I'll let you know 
how it turns out.


Likely, James A. wrote:

What are the chances of that happening? I would think it would be very
slim wouldn't it?

>From all of the examples that I have seen this is the one that
accommodates most users.
How would a screen reader read this option? Has any one tested something
similar to the example that I found?

Thanks again for the help.

James
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Christian Snodgrass
Sent: Friday, January 25, 2008 1:03 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Background images versus image

That isn't bad, but if you have Javascript and CSS, but no images, it 
fails completely.


Likely, James A. wrote:


Thanks for the emails. Some things I didn't think of but will from now




on. I have been doing some reading and looking at options and found this 
example.

 http://www.chriserwin.com/scripts/crir/
 What are your thoughts on this approach?
 To me it looks pretty user friendly.
 Please let me know as this is new to me.
 Thanks
 James






*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
*On Behalf Of *Dave Woods

*Sent:* Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:59 AM
*To:* wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
*Subject:* Re: [WSG] Background images versus image

The first question I'd ask is why not just use check boxes instead of 
trying to replicate them? If you mark them up correctly then there's 
really no better accessible method than using the correct element as it 
was meant.


If you go down this route then you're likely to create all kinds of 
problems for yourself... what happens when users don't have css 
available (mobile devices), images disabled (dialup users) or are using 
screenreaders.


If you want to change the appearance then I'd use JavaScript to enhance 
the existing check boxes but for those user agents that don't support 
JavaScript or have it disabled you should have the fall back of regular 
forms.


Hope that helps.

- - - - -
http://www.dave-woods.co.uk


On 23/01/2008, *Likely, James A.* < [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> wrote:


Hello,

I am working on a new site for a client and need some thoughts on
a problem that I have.

I am making a list with clickable boxes (like input boxes) that
have a checked, disabled and clickable state. My question is, what
would work best. Using background images or adding images to the
code.

The reason I ask is

1) If I use images, we can add alt text to describe what function
the images have. This would help with screen readers and people
with disabilities.

2) Background images keep the code clean but wonder about the alt
text and how screen readers and people with disabilities would
read the site. Is there a way to imitate the alt for background
images?

You can see an example of both ways at:

Using images: _http://wisconsin.joekiosk.com/list/list.html_
Using background images:
_http://wisconsin.joekiosk.com/list/list2.html_

Let me know your thoughts and what you think would work best. I
love the background images as the code is clean, but has any one
done any testing to see how this would work for screen readers or
do you have suggestions on how to make it more accessible?

Thanks for the help.

James





***


List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm

Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




*