Re: [WSG] search page vallidation

Marvin, I believe someone mentioned it earlier, but removing the tags just prior to the tag should resolve the issues that you are having with xhtml validation. Cheers, Matt *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/

Re: [ADMIN] THREAD CLOSED [WSG] XSLT: looping through ancestors looking for a specific node

Standards even when it hits me in the face. I'll now go back to my corner... Cheers, -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe:

[ADMIN] THREAD CLOSED [WSG] XSLT: looping through ancestors looking for a specific node

Sorry, Grant, this is off topic for this list. Everyone, if you have a response for Grant please send it off list. Cheers, Matt -- Matt Fellows WSG Core Member http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http

Re: [WSG] Should we design for 800x600 screens?

ent interface. To clarify my position though - I would agree with Jakob Nielson in the general sense, keeping my audience in mind. But knowing your user's will give you more insight into what you _should_ do. -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ [1] - http://www.useit.com/alertbox/sc

Re: [WSG] Structuring CSS

this sort of structuring comes at a cost because a number of > requests need to be made to the server. You're certainly right with the cost in terms speed, by increasing the number of CSS files, but what about the cost of development time, readability and re-usability? -- Matt Fellows http

Re: [WSG] Link Help please

It should be href="xxx.css" not href("xxx.css") -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/

Re: [WSG] tools for IE

rison to Multiple IE's [3] which is buggy. Thanks for the links, -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ [1] - http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=e59c3964-672d-4511-bb3e-2d5e1db91038 [2] - http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2004/10/26/247912.aspx [3] - http://tre

Re: [WSG] Marking up company logo

t is only holding an image, then there is no need for the surrounding tag. Some people (including myself) feel uncomfortable with the floating by itself, so wrapping it in a or something is a nice alternative. -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ **

Re: [WSG] Conditional styles not being used on first-run

g.com > > > > *** > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL

Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li

lol I think I will leave this one alone, I think i'm making you're job more difficult instead of the other way around! Please do send through your solution when you find it so I can have that 'light bulb' moment. Cheers, -- Matt Fellows http:

Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li

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

Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li

es or ## characters link to. learn more The list items will be centered. If you have multiple columns you can just place them next to each other. Or am i still missing something? -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.c

Re: [WSG] Centering all items in a li

A demo would be helpful, but have you tried something along the lines of the following: Link1 Link2 ... div#footer{text-align:center;} div#footer ul li{display:inline;list-style-type:none; } Cheers, -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au

Re: [WSG] Older Browsers

server logs/analytics, you might be able to see that only .07% (~500 of about 700,000 on our site) actually use MSIE 5.0. Then you can make the argument that it is not worth it. Cheers, Matt -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au

Re: [WSG] accessible client side form validation

rg/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ******* > > -- Matt Fellows http://www.onegeek.com.au/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***

Re: [WSG] Floating model: FF counterintuitive

age or attached files. > > > *** > 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

To pipe in extremely late on the matter - aside from it's deprecation from XHTML Strict, forcing users to open links in new windows introduces a host of usability problems. Including breaking the users expectations, taking away user control and of course the infamous breaking of the back button! W

Re: [WSG] WCAG 2 implementation site

Interesting. Thanks Thierry! On 3/12/08, Thierry Koblentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > Behalf Of Matt Fellows > > Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 4:33 PM > > To: wsg@we

Re: [WSG] WCAG 2 implementation site

> I recall reading somewhere that 'accesskey' is often considered more > hindrance than benefit because there are no standardised keys for > specific functions and it inevitably ends up conflicting with regular > browser shortcuts that keyboard users or screenreader users are > likely to wish

Re: [WSG] WCAG 2 implementation site

Nice work Mike, I quite like the way you've used to separate the content for non-css and used display:none in the other case, it chunks the content quite well. I also like the way you have not gone with the basic "skip to content" link and gone with a quick "skip to" menu, I have been advocating

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

Thanks Mike. I guess I would prefer verbose and have them fill the form out once than have them have them misinterpret and have to fix errors, which I imagine can be tedious using a screen reader. Is this the case? It would be great if you could keep us posted about any feedback you get in March w

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

> In some cases that's an excellent solution (what I've been using for a > while) but unfortunately power users will dial down verbosity so much that > they will quiet legends as well. > > A blind power user I know told me * is best. He also told me nothing else is > needed, but he's a person and

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

> What about using a fieldset with *legend* if the required fields can be > grouped together. > Because the legend (required fields) would be read aloud before each label. I thought about this, but I think it makes more sense to have related elements grouped together and in most cases not all of

Re: [WSG] strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field

Interesting indeed! Actually Tee I was going to pose the same question to the list following our discussions the other day :) I would like to get it right in GValidator so the core doesn't need to be modified by clients such as yourself. I would like to see the results of reliable and publicly av

Re: [WSG] PNG in IE6

If you have Adobe CS, you can try exporting the PNG image as PNG-8. Cheers, Matt http://www.onegeek. com.au On 2/21/08, Amrinder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi > > I looked for the working of .png image in internet explorer and found tw

Re: [WSG] Best Practice to Offer Different Formats of Documents

As Joe said, I also think icons are a great way for users to quickly scan the page and get a sense of what is going on. 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. Cheer

Re: [WSG] hello - [OT]

With no offense intended to the list moderators, I feel the usefulness of this mailing list is diminishing due to an increase in irrelevant and lazy postings. The majority of people on this list are genuine web developers, who care for the future of the Web and the place Web Standards has in it. B

Re: [WSG] an accessible question: server-side vs client-side validation

has radio buttons with multi-selection options. > > Cheers, > > tee > > On Feb 12, 2008, at 2:12 AM, Matt Fellows wrote: > > > Hi Tee, > > > > What John is saying is that AJAX is JavaScript yes, but it can also > > make calls to the server (using the XMLHtt

Re: [WSG] an accessible question: server-side vs client-side validation

Hi Tee, What John is saying is that AJAX is JavaScript yes, but it can also make calls to the server (using the XMLHttpRequest object) thus it validates using server-side technologies such as PHP. But what is misleading is that validation using AJAX can be disabled quite easily simply by disabling

Re: [WSG] Styling forms

Forms should be marked up as you would anything else; If you are placing a paragraph in the form you should use a . If you are placing a list inside the form you should use a /, if you are placing headings inside the form you should use h1-h6 etc. etc. The inputs should be arranged using div's inst

Re: [WSG] This IE8 controversy

A great point Casey. MS have taken the first major step in moving towards a standards compliant industry and we, the web designer, are complaining that it's going to break our old sites hacked up for IE6/IE7. The saying says 'we can't have our cake and eat it too', but in fact we can. We have asked

Re: [WSG] Explorer woes with list dropdowns

A JavaScript function that you might be interested in is called the 'Suckerfish' technique. It is a well known problem that IE is difficult at best in these situations so to avoid lots of css hacks etc. you can use a little bit of JS instead. It's accessible, standards compliant and easy to use. T

Re: [WSG] email abuse (OT)

This is not the appropriate forum to be raising these types of issues. There are plenty of places elsewhere from which you can find more information about spam detection and filtering. My suggestion would be to start with Google, as they are your particular email host. Cheers, -- Matt OneGeek