On 7/3/04 11:38 PM Geoff Deering [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out:
It is better practice to stop using such elements, especially when there are
other elements that serve the same purpose, but are more semantically correct
and accessible.
Would someone please post a URL to a rousing, thorough,
Geoff Deering wrote:
Yes, correct for XHTML1.x, but I can't see it in your reference to
http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-inline-text.html#sec_9.12. All the
font style elements have been removed in XHTML2.
The reference was in regards to sub and sup which currently are valid
XHTML2 without any
-Original Message-
From: Mordechai Peller
Geoff Deering wrote:
It is better practice to stop using such elements, especially when
there are other elements that serve the same purpose, but are more
semantically correct and accessible
I agree with the exception of sub and sup
Thanks for all the suggestions. I've not got a particular device in
mind, but rather wanted to get a general idea of how a site might look
on a small screen. The suggestions here have covered it very nicely,
so thanks.
Also, as luck would have it, web-graphics.com have just published a
very handy
Hello, hypotheticaly and semanticaly, not exist any element to describe a
file name. I usually use a link whit any href.
Luca Mascaro
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Peter -
The code tag is HTML 4, and represents 'computer code'-
http://htmlhelp.com/reference/html40/phrase/code.html
Quote:
The *CODE* element denotes /computer code/. Visual browsers typically
render *CODE* as monospaced text, but authors can suggest a rendering
using style sheets
-Original Message-
From: Rick Faaberg
On 7/3/04 11:38 PM Geoff Deering [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent
this out:
It is better practice to stop using such elements, especially
when there are
other elements that serve the same purpose, but are more
semantically correct
and accessible.
Luca Mascaro .info wrote:
Hello, hypotheticaly and semanticaly, not exist any element to describe a
file name. I usually use a link whit any href.
Luca Mascaro
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Hi Lee,
Thank you for your detailed comments.
OK... number 1 and 2 make sense.Butno 3
doesn't. In my FF 0.9 I can tab through the page with and without _javascript_
enabled. But maybe I misunderstand what you're saying.
This is where I'm not sure what the best approach
is. The 3 links
Geoff Deering wrote:
They are not part of the "Font Style Elements", they are part of the
"Special Inline Elements". But this shows how even the W3C specs can be
misleading, cause FONT is part of the Special Inline Elements", yet B, I, U
etc are "Font Style Elements".
I've done some
(Sorry about the doublepost... don't know what
happened to the subject line)
Hi Lee,
Thank you for your detailed comments.
OK... number 1 and 2 make sense.Butno 3
doesn't. In my FF 0.9 I can tab through the page with and without _javascript_
enabled. But maybe I misunderstand what you're
Robert O'Neill wrote:
Looks as expected in IE6 but navigation does not float as expected in
Opera and in Mozilla the footer moves to the top of the page. Any
help, advice, or guidance would be greatly appreciated.
The problem is that you're assuming IE6 is getting it right. That's a
bad
Hello Kim,
You're welcome.
Continuing with out conversation and therefore keeping the posts together
so people don't get confused.
Let's go back to #1.
(1) Your first question deals with the fact that you have the
following codes in
use.lia
href="produkter.htm" title="Gruppe:
produkt
Hi Lee,
Continuing with out conversation and therefore keeping the posts
together so people don't get confused.
Let's go back to #1.
(1) Your first question deals with the fact that you have the
following codes in
use.lia
href="produkter.htm" title="Gruppe:
produkt
Greetings,
I have two questions please.
1. Is there a way to link background images? I want to link my banner image, which is currently set as a div background image, back to the homepage .
2. Can I specify image sizes within my css definition? Here are two scenarios:
a. background image -
Hello Kim,
Strict requires all pages to be opened in the same
window.
Regardless of how you do the _javascript_ it will not provide an accessible
option. My recommendation would be to remove the onkeypress and use
tabindex and accesskey. Then the person can open those links in new
windows.
Hi Lee,
Hello
Kim,
Strict requires all
pages to be opened in the same window.
OK... I thought the
onkeypress combined with onclick would do OK since it validates
strict
Regardless of how you
do the _javascript_ it will not provide an accessible option. My
recommendation would be to
On Sun, 4 Jul 2004 13:44:28 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. Is there a way to link background images? I want to link my banner
image,
which is currently set as a div background image, back to the homepage .
No, wanting to do that would make it content, which means it should go
in the html.
yes there is a way you can link background images; but a little more mark up
is required.
lets say you have
h2 id=bG/h2
and styles as
h2#bG{background: url(image.gif) no-repeat;height:20px;width:220px}
now adding some extra markup inside that h2 as follows
h2 class=savea href=# title=Sign up
Bummer! Oh well, I'll just have to find another way to do this then. Thanks for your help, Lea.
Ans:
No, wanting to do that would make it content, which means it should go
in the html.
Question:
1. Is there a way to link background images?
-Original Message-From:
Mordechai Peller
Geoff
Deering wrote:
They are not part of the "Font Style Elements", they are part of the
"Special Inline Elements". But this shows how even the W3C specs can be
misleading, cause FONT is part of the Special Inline Elements", yet B, I, U
in my previous example i explained it;
but the final mark up for that quick example should of been:
h2 id=bG class=savea href=# title=The clickable bG/a/h2
-peace
_
Protect your inbox from harmful viruses with new ninemsn Premium. Go
Geoff Deering wrote:
I have no disagreement with this at all. What I
am saying is if you develop a large site, that is very well designed
and engineered, then, when XHTML2 comes out there are found to be HUGE
benefits for using it (this is just hypothetical), then what is the
cost
-Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Mordechai
PellerSent: Monday, 5 July 2004 9:54 AMTo:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: Re: [WSG] Styling
Text...Geoff Deering wrote:
I have no disagreement with this at all. What I am
Re
http://www.andybudd.com/archives/2004/07/quick_accessibility_quiz_now_with_prizes/index.php
Q1. There is no correct answer offered by
Andy.
For
starters, to comply with WAI-A youneed tocomply with all WCAG1
Priority 1 Checkpoints, for WAI-AA youneed tocomply with all WCAG P1
and 2
Belatedly, the PDA browser I use is Plucker, which has lots of great
features and is open-source. It's for Palms, not Windows PDAs, but is
compatible with Mac, Windows and LINUX.
http://www.plkr.org/
Have You
Ok, my question is why the H2? What standard are you trying to promote with
that concept?
Using an H2 in that manner breaks accessibility.
Why wouldn't you do this?
a#bG{
background: url(image.gif) no-repeat;
height: 20px;
width:220px;
display: block;
line-height: 20px;}
a href=# id=bG
Do notcount onseeing STRONG removed. There is a purpose
for it.
B
and I are still used in current versions. However, B and I have been
removed from all future versions of XHTML.
EM is not being removed or questioned. So, why do you think STRONG
will be removed? Just because there is a
We've had many, many calls for emails to this list to be posted in
plain text rather than HTML or rich text.
May I reiterate the call? A fair number of recent emails have shown up
in my email client with tiny, hard-to-read text.
So, please use plain text in emails if you want to be read.
-Hugh
Ok, my question is why the H2? What standard are you trying to promote with
that concept?
none
its a concept, something i felt like doing- you can use it with any tag, i
chose a heading- because on the project i use it on; the links are headings.
If it's not your fancy, dont use it.
-peace
Hi,
Can I ask what commercial and/or open source CMSs developers on this list
use, which ones they prefer, ones they don't like (and for what reasons). I
am asking from the point of view of providing clients with easy to use
interfaces, whilst maintaining standards based markup?
Is anyone using
31 matches
Mail list logo
