<li> height is to big

Mark wrote on 18 feb 2006 in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:

Well, i can write for over 30 years and it has been "u" for all i know.

You are wrong.

I often still write "U" and "Uw".


--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

"Alan J. Flavell" <flavell (AT) physics (DOT) gla.ac.uk> writes:

My impression is that there's no shortage of competent contributors
from .nl

Indeed, accessibility has matured and is nowadays written with a
capitalised U (for Unusable) over here. We (oh my, I am actually
entitled to say 'they' have fine advice all over the place

<http://drempelsweg.nl/>

Oh sorry, bad request.

<http://www.drempelsweg.nl/>

(anybody capable of making it *that* bad with only infinitely nested
tables and <FONT> all over the place can be sure of my professional
respect; I wouldn't know how)


--

|| hexadecimal EBB
o-o decimal 3771

--oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
205 goodbye binary 111010111011

Stan Brown <the_stan_brown (AT) fastmail (DOT) fm> writes:

Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:17:22 +0100 from Mark <scheper (AT) xs4all (DOT) nl>:

I did inform the designer and the client. But they do not care...

Fait accompli. Note that on the bill you write, require your name to be
excluded from the development process and charge a resonable fee for
that (just for the idea - you do a bad job at the expense of possible
*quality* follow-up work; if you do not have a policy about that, make
one *now* and confidently reverse-engineer the marketese-approach in
future: your nominal fees are for interoperable products, anything less
costs extra; be smart and polite at that - you want your customer to
come back later).

Sorry, but part of your job is explaining the realities to them. If
they want what is impossible (not just expensive, impossible) you
need to make them see reason.

The odds are that they find somebody else who does not consider it
impossible in no time.


--

|| hexadecimal EBB
o-o decimal 3771

--oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
205 goodbye binary 111010111011

Mark <scheper (AT) xs4all (DOT) nl> writes:

kchayka wrote:

IE has known problems spacing list markup containing
a{display:block}.

Or any inline element, BTW.

Found it, thanks.

li
display: inline;
/li

It's bad practice to have block-display boxes in inline-display boxes.
Instead of *adding* a css rule you could simply *remove* the whitespace
in the markup, e.g.

<ul

li>item 1</li
li>item 2</li
li>item 3</li
/ul

(NB: this markup style is also generally a good thing for walking
through DOM nodes; when looking for e.g. a previous sibling of a list
item you probably do not want to catch whitespace


--

|| hexadecimal EBB
o-o decimal 3771

--oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
205 goodbye binary 111010111011

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Eric B. Bednarz wrote:

Indeed, accessibility has matured and is nowadays written with a
capitalised U (for Unusable) over here.

(Alright, there's no need to rub it in that it took me 40+ years to
notice...)

http://www.drempelsweg.nl/

An accessibility site, eh? Hmmm, they "helpfully" offer to Lynx this
menu:

Lettergrootte
normale lettergrootte normaal
grotere letter groter
grootste letter grootst

None of the choices have the slightest effect on Lynx, of course, (and
they evidently don't understand the appropriate use of ALT text, but
that's another topic).

I really can't welcome this kind of nannying - if they were *really*
interested in all-round accessibility, they would be teaching their
users how to set their *own* text size, not purporting to offer them a
choice of only three sizes - and which won't have the slightest effect
on any other site.

Personally, I think "XHTML/1.0 Transitional" is a big warning sign in
itself. I suppose there might just now and again be exceptions, but
this doesn't seem to be one of them. Hmmm, the page that I tried
validating came up with only 30 validation errors - and the CSS
checker refused to even start, with such crap XHTML. That's a WAI
failure in itself.

OK, I'll admit that their actual CSS files are syntactically OK,
unlike their XHTML, but what about this as their default?

body
{
font-size: 75%;
}

Ha! I finally managed to get back on-topic for this group. If I
disable my browser's handy minimum font size, I'm back in their world
of microfonts.

Evertjan. wrote:

Mark wrote on 18 feb 2006 in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:


Well, i can write for over 30 years and it has been "u" for all i know.


You are wrong.

I often still write "U" and "Uw".

Well, i checked my dictionary from 1980. There i find: u pers. vnm. v.d.
tweede persoon and not U...

So "wrong" would be a bit to much
You can write what you want though.

Mark wrote on 20 feb 2006 in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:

Evertjan. wrote:
Mark wrote on 18 feb 2006 in comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets:

Well, i can write for over 30 years and it has been "u" for all i know.

You are wrong.

I often still write "U" and "Uw".

Well, i checked my dictionary from 1980. There i find: u pers. vnm. v.d.
tweede persoon and not U...

So "wrong" would be a bit to much

No, the modern habit of writing lowercase is not wrong, but that you think
"it has been "u" for all i know".

You can write what you want though.

Tja ..

It is not a dictionary thing. The uppercase U is[/was?] only used when
addressing a person in a letter, not when quoting a spoken senence like in:

Ze zei: "Hoe heet u?"

--
Evertjan.
The Netherlands.
(Please change the x'es to dots in my emailaddress)

"Alan J. Flavell" <flavell (AT) physics (DOT) gla.ac.uk> writes:

On Sun, 19 Feb 2006, Eric B. Bednarz wrote:

http://www.drempelsweg.nl/

An accessibility site, eh?

They even spawn certificates if you declare to have good intentions.

I really can't welcome this kind of nannying

Well, I have a couple of problems with this, uh, initiative.
Unsurprisingly, they do a mighty fine job proving that accesible sites
are butt ugly, but worse, they are not even accessible at that.
Text-size wasn't really *that* much of a problem when Siegel tried to
kill the web.

but what about this as their default?

body
{
font-size: 75%;
}

It's accessibility and stuff ('IE-lusers can resize'), for the time
being the politically correct and like totally certified way du jour to
say '12px is more pretty' over here.


--

|| hexadecimal EBB
o-o decimal 3771

--oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
205 goodbye binary 111010111011

"Mark" <scheper (AT) xs4all (DOT) nl> wrote

Alan J. Flavell wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Mark wrote:


My impression is that there's no shortage of competent contributors from
.nl - who would surely be equally vociferous about web design on a
Nederlands-speaking usenet group, if the hon. Usenaut is doubtful of his
ability to communicate in English.

Unfortunately not found one yet.


For an outspoken contributor, who I probably don't always agree with, but
who is likely to make you think, I suggest
http://www.pretletters.net/html/webontwerp.html

for example
http://www.pretletters.net/html/webo...id-design.html
and so on.

I don't personally read nl.internet.www.ontwerp, but I see that she
points to it.

Ah, thanks!



(And has it gone out of fashion to capitalise the pronoun "U" in Dutch?)

It has neven been in fashion.


This is clearly wrong - I guess you're too young, but my printed Dutch
course (from half a lifetime back) is quite definite that the polite 2nd
person is always capitalised. I guess there's been a change in the
meantime - sorry that I hadn't noticed that before.

best

Well, i can write for over 30 years and it has been "u" for all i know.
But what you write can be true. I think it changed during the years then.

Mark

"Mark" <scheper (AT) xs4all (DOT) nl> wrote

Alan J. Flavell wrote:
On Fri, 17 Feb 2006, Mark wrote:


My impression is that there's no shortage of competent contributors from
.nl - who would surely be equally vociferous about web design on a
Nederlands-speaking usenet group, if the hon. Usenaut is doubtful of his
ability to communicate in English.

Unfortunately not found one yet.


For an outspoken contributor, who I probably don't always agree with, but
who is likely to make you think, I suggest
http://www.pretletters.net/html/webontwerp.html

for example
http://www.pretletters.net/html/webo...id-design.html
and so on.

I don't personally read nl.internet.www.ontwerp, but I see that she
points to it.

Ah, thanks!



(And has it gone out of fashion to capitalise the pronoun "U" in Dutch?)

It has neven been in fashion.


This is clearly wrong - I guess you're too young, but my printed Dutch
course (from half a lifetime back) is quite definite that the polite 2nd
person is always capitalised. I guess there's been a change in the
meantime - sorry that I hadn't noticed that before.

best

Well, i can write for over 30 years and it has been "u" for all i know.
But what you write can be true. I think it changed during the years then.

Mark