|
|
Posted by Stan McCann on 02/02/06 22:33
"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote in
news:Xns975ECBA428FFEjkorpelacstutfi@193.229.4.246:
> Stan McCann <me@stanmccann.us> wrote:
>
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/index/elements.html says that
>>> <address> is "information on author", and the DTD comment says the
>>> same.
>>
>> I do not see "information on author" anywhere in that
>> specification.
>
> You don't? I mentioned _two_ locations, in the text you quoted.
> (Actually, the DTD comment appears both in the description of the
> element and in the DTD itself, which is part of the spec, too.)
OK, I found where it does say "information on author" but in the
expanded text that clarifies usage, it says "used by authors to supply
contact information for a document or a major part of a document" which
you snipped. So, the W3C provides two statements that contradict each
other. "information on author" != "used by authors." Which are we to
go by? The short notation/comment or the explanation of usage
provided?
>> How does an audio reader render lists?
>
> It depends. Some early speech-based user agents read the items of a
> <ul> list in succession as if they were all one paragraph (and for
> this reason, some people recommended using <ol> instead), but modern
> software works better and reads it in some "itemized" way.
I use the two semantically, I think. For lists where order does not
matter, I use <ul>. Where the order of the items does matter, I use
<ol>.
>> Does it say "bullett" for each list item?
>
> Probably not. But it may pause between the items.
I just talked to a blind student that uses Window Eyes. He doesn't
know HTML so I'm not sure how valuable his input is as he said anything
is ok as long as each is on a different line. I'm not sure he really
knew what I was refering to without setting up some demonstrations for
him.
>> Most modern browsers will display CSS mostly
>> correct.
>
> Well, that's quite an exaggeration. After all, IE is by far the most
> common browser, and it has a poor CSS implementation. If you mean
> just list bullet suppression, then you're right - up to a point.
No, I didn't mean just bullet suppression. IE does have a poor
implementation of the box model, positioning and other fancy stuff.
The basics (CSS 1 and some of the simpler things in 2.1) work fairly
well IMO. Maybe I think that way because the only time I use IE is to
check to see how pages are displayed in it. I use FF as my regular
browser.
>> So, if a ul is semantically correct, the fact that
>> bulletts are the default display is irrelavent, a very very small
>> number of people might see the address list presented with
>> bulletts.
>
> Drop at least one of the "very" words. Think about text-based
Yeah, I get carried away sometimes. Reading that over again, I'll drop
both verys.
> browsers like Lynx and Links, which ignore style sheets. Think about
> the possibility of switching off style sheets or using user style
> sheets to override author style sheets.
>
I also like to check pages I do without style sheets. I do so mostly
to see that presentational sequence is in tact *knowing* that things
won't be the same. I see no harm in an address being in italics or
having bullets before each line if that is the default presentation.
Of the options in the page on your site, I'm leaning more and more to
using <div>. I'm undecided about the inner markup. On one hand, I see
nothing wrong with using <br> for a line break (not for spacing). On
the other hand, using <div> for the inner markup as shown on your web
page makes sense to me.
--
Stan McCann, "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/
Webmaster, NMSU at Alamogordo http://alamo.nmsu.edu/
Now blocking Google Grouper posts and replies.
http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|