Got my information from '
http://www.positioniseverything.net/articles/multiIE.html ', the article
is called a technical discussion about CSS.
Tried these CCs in multiple ways, but it does not work. For example:
...
link rel=stylesheet title=compact type=text/css
href=stylesheets/layout.css
Soeren Mordhorst wrote:
!--[if IE 6]
link rel=stylesheet href=stylesheets/ie5xstyles.css type=text/css
/ ![endif]--
This one should link to a CSS file for IE6, not IE5.x, but I'll assume
that was just a typo and you meant something like ie6xstyles.css.
So what I need are three css-files:
On 2/20/06, Soeren Mordhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tried these CCs in multiple ways, but it does not work. For example:
...
Any suggestions?
As far as I know, if you have standalone installs of IE 5 and 6 on
your machine, they will not see the conditional comments.
--
--
Christian Montoya
As I said, I tried that, excluding the hack (which is the text in blue),
didn't work for me.
Kind regards,
Taco Fleur - CEO
Free Call 1800 032 982 or Mobile 0421 851 786
Pacific Fox http://www.pacificfox.com.au an industry leader with commercial
IT experience since 1994 .
*
Dear Lachlan,
this was realy a typo.
Still it does not work.
The link to the site is:
http://www.webnauts.net/redesign/test.html
CSS-files:
http://www.webnauts.net/redesign/stylesheets/layout.css
http://www.webnauts.net/redesign/stylesheets/iestyles.css
yes Christian, the old IE-browsers are standalones ...
Is it possible to install older versions of IEs next to a new one?
Tried to install IE7beta as a standalone, but after that IE6 is not
working anymore. For installation I followed an article of sitepoint
IE7: The 'IEagle' has Landed
Hi!
I read a lot of threads about font-sizing lately, but I still did
not catch the point of best practice yet.
I use to set the body font-size to 62.5% for getting 1em = 10px at
default settings. (It's much easier for me and the browser to
calculate round values...) Then I increase
Martin Heiden wrote:
I read a lot of threads about font-sizing lately, but I still did
not catch the point of best practice yet.
I use to set the body font-size to 62.5% for getting 1em = 10px at
default settings.
Eek! Never rely on default settings, many users will change them.
So if a
Lachlan Hunt
but lot's of people (mostly designers) who prefer smaller
font-sizes.
It's unfortunate that so many designers prefer small font
sizes. They
fail to realise that while they may think small fonts may
look good from
a design perspective and are easily readable on their
...
Yes, we as developers
can educate them, but when they see their competitor sites (and
even big sites from the likes of IBM and co.) *all* setting a slightly
smaller default font size, they expect the same on their site as well.
A yes, but all those other sites are wrong and I do it the
Default font sizes also depend on the cultural background of the
viewers/users. The default setting on Windows works out to be the
same size as Times New Roman 10 pt when printed on Letter size paper.
Australian's prefer default sizes of Times New Roman 12 pt when
printed on A4 paper. I
Christian Montoya wrote:
On 2/20/06, Soeren Mordhorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tried these CCs in multiple ways, but it does not work. For example:
...
Any suggestions?
As far as I know, if you have standalone installs of IE 5 and 6 on
your machine, they will not see the conditional
Além de querer controlar os países agora querem controlar o único veículo
socialista mundial.
Éh, Bush!!!
Tú és um grande f...
http://www.midiaindependente.org/pt/blue/2006/02/345906.shtml
--
: marcello.côcu
.: IPwd - stúdio de webdesigner
..: http://ipwd.ppg.br
...: BH - MG - Brasil
people that use the Internet world wide. Consider this: the number of
people that visit my relatively small site every single day would be
more people than I've met in my entire life time, so it's hardly...
This could be read in two ways. You have a hugely popular site, or you need
to get out
Russ
Gentle-persuasion-free-styler
riding a mad Shetland pony ;)
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
On 2/20/06, Martin Heiden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On the other hand, I don't know anyone who changed the default
font-size in his/her browser, but lot's of people (mostly designers)
who prefer smaller font-sizes.
Well, the question is: Which group of people is more important? Or
Hello everyone,
I would appreciate it very much if you could look at this site: http://www.visitshetland.com/
I have already checked it on several different machines and everything seems to be working fine.
Today I received a call from someone saying that the site would not display correctly.
David Nicol wrote:
I would appreciate it very much if you could look at this site:
http://www.visitshetland.com/
...
This person was using IE6, on a brand new laptop.
Site looks fine on Windows XP SP2, IE6
Could it be that one of the CSS files failed to load properly for this
user -
Hi,
on Monday, February 20, 2006 at 12:57 wsg@webstandardsgroup.org wrote:
A far more fundamental group of people (which I already mentioned
in my first email on this discussion) is of course that of
the clients who pay for web design/development.
That's one point.
The other problem that I
I don't see any text in blue at the (later) link i posted. Are you sure
you tried the right example?
--
Jan Brasna :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com | www.wdnews.net
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Christian Montoya wrote:
Most users might say that
the site is unusually big but very comfortable on the eyes, and
that's not a bad thing.
However, with many clients, it won't even get to live stage unless their
wishes for smaller font size is implemented.
In the end there's no reason to
Lachlan Hunt wrote Mon, 20 Feb 2006 22:32:22 +1100:
IMHO, any smaller than 'small' (approx 82%) is too small for main body copy
Title the following 'The meaning of small'. It's simply a collection
of facts and observations about CSS small.
The CSS2 spec recommended a 1.2 factor between
David Nicol wrote:
Hello everyone,
I would appreciate it very much if you could look at this site: http://www.visitshetland.com/
I have already checked it on several different machines and
everything seems to be working fine.
Today I received a call from someone saying that
Martin Heiden wrote:
I use to set the body font-size to 62.5% for getting 1em = 10px at
default settings. ...
Martin, you may like to consider the effect of defining a small font size
on the BODY element. Georg Sørtun did some experiments that illustrate
the problem:
I went here: http://www.jakpsatweb.cz/css/css-vertical-center-solution.html
Legend for colors:
CSS styles for every browser
CSS styles for standard browsers
CSS style for Internet Explorer only (with underscore hack)
Kind regards,
Taco Fleur - CEO
Free Call 1800 032 982 or Mobile 0421 851
So please read again this
http://www.mail-archive.com/wsg%40webstandardsgroup.org/msg26051.html.
--
Jan Brasna :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com | www.wdnews.net
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Tho I haven't checked it, sounds like the user had Images disabled in
IE6.
On 20 Feb 2006, at 20:02, Designer wrote:
David Nicol wrote:
Hello everyone,
I would appreciate it very much if you could look at this site:
http://www.visitshetland.com/
I have already checked it on several
russ - maxdesign wrote:
people that use the Internet world wide. Consider this: the number
of people that visit my relatively small site every single day
would be more people than I've met in my entire life time, so it's
hardly...
This could be read in two ways. You have a hugely popular
?? This confusing;
http://www.jakpsatweb.cz/css/priklady/vertical-align-valid-solution-en.html
leads to a page that displays the sample from
http://www.jakpsatweb.cz/css/css-vertical-center-solution.html and on that
page there is a link to
-
Please view source for details or read
Hi again,
Thanks for your help. Although I have not yet been able to verify what caused the problem, I'm glad that no-one else seems to be having the same issues.
Cheers
David
At Sat, 18 Feb 2006 11:52:15 +0100 Vincent Hasselgård wrote:
About 4-5 months ago they built a new national library here in Norway, the
architects worked alot with making the place accesible for users with
different disabilites. Essentially they did everything wrong. ...
high-contrast art on
is that the one you want me to read?
You can read the principles of this trick there, but use the clean
solution you can find if you view the source of the exact page I posted.
--
Jan Brasna :: www.alphanumeric.cz | www.janbrasna.com | www.wdnews.net
Lachlan Hunt wrote:
russ - maxdesign wrote:
Could it not be argued that the unimportant legal content is
sometimes more important to some users than the general content on the
page? :)
I'm sure there are some that think such notices should be shown in large
bold letters, read and agreed to
Mike Brown wrote:
Russ
I think you need to do some research on porn site best practices here
and report back to the list :)
Mike never visited a porn site so wouldn't know
sarcasm class=tuiYeah, right/sarcasm
:-p
**
The discussion
David Nicol wrote:
I would appreciate it very much if you could look at this site:
http://www.visitshetland.com/
...
Does anyone else get the same problem as this user?
I can (almost) replicate it. Accessibility options (ignore
colors, font styles, font sizes) ticked and text size
http://www.visitshetland.com/
interesting url given, the running joke about shetland ponies on this
list right now.
kind regards
Terrence Wood.
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Hi All,
I'm working on site with a large amount of content that can get up to 5
levels deep.
With a breadcrumb such as: My Site Developers Resources Specific
Resource
I've been reading this:
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#document-headers
Specifically I would like some
I want to use the name of the site in the H1.
Is it appropriate to use the breadcrumb as the H1 element?
I'd say it is better to use the h1 element for the site name as an initial
statement then use something like an ordered list or unordered list for the
breadcrumb:
h1
Site name
/h1
ol
James,I'd suggest this guideline refers to the body content of a page rather than navigational elements. If it were me, I wouldn't wrap an H1 around the breadcrumbs (or part thereof). I would reserve the use of H1, H2 etc for page headings, section headings, bylines, sub-section titles etc only.
Thanks Russ, and Steve thats 2 no's I don't need any more convincing.
I'll leave the site name as the first heading.
Cheers,
James
--
James Hunter
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
James Hunter:
Is it appropriate to use the breadcrumb as the H1 element?
Breadcrumbs do not describe the *document* structure - they hint at the
*site* structure (provided you only provide a hierarchal navigation
system) or site history (depending on what type of breadcrumb you
employ).
Terrence Wood wrote:
James Hunter:
Is it appropriate to use the breadcrumb as the H1 element?
I'm thinking out aloud here: not sure why, but using a list for
breadcrumbs doesn't quite sit right with me, despite it being a type of
navigation device. I think it is due to list structures
On 21/02/06, Terrence Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking out aloud here: not sure why, but using a list forbreadcrumbs doesn't quite sit right with me, despite it being a type ofnavigation device. I think it is due to list structures replacing thedir and menu elements - and the notion that
On 21/2/06 12:31 PM, Terrence Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
James Hunter:
Is it appropriate to use the breadcrumb as the H1 element?
Breadcrumbs do not describe the *document* structure - they hint at the
*site* structure (provided you only provide a hierarchal navigation
system) or site
I never thought the day would come when there actually was a legitimate
use for pop-ups!
It's legitimate to use pop-ups, if a court judge orders you to :)
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,18214048%5E15306%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html
Kat :)
I never thought the day would come when there actually was a legitimate
use for pop-ups!
It's legitimate to use pop-ups, if a court judge orders you to :)
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,18214048%5E15306%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html
I suspect the judge is confused about pop ups versus
Kat wrote:
I never thought the day would come when there actually was a
legitimate use for pop-ups!
It's legitimate to use pop-ups, if a court judge orders you to :)
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,18214048%5E15306%5E%5Enb
v%5E,00.html
Hardly legitimate, and a very poor
Kat wrote:
I never thought the day would come when there actually was a legitimate
use for pop-ups!
I'm still waiting for that day.
It's legitimate to use pop-ups, if a court judge orders you to :)
http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,18214048%5E15306%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html
No,
Original Message
From: Lachlan Hunt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re:[WSG] A legitimate case for pop-ups
Date: 2/20/2006 21:24
There may be other ways to force upgrading without using a popup and
the actual implementation is irrelevant from a legal
Bert Doorn wrote:
David Nicol wrote:
http://www.visitshetland.com/
Does anyone else get the same problem as this user?
I can (almost) replicate it. Accessibility options (ignore colors,
font styles, font sizes) ticked and text size increased gives
something very similar.
50 matches
Mail list logo
