Navigation lists and accessibility issues

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Dylan Parry, Aug 6, 2007.

  1. Dylan Parry

    Dylan Parry Guest

    I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There are
    two places that the navigation can "live":

    1) Before the content;
    2) After the content

    But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think
    that it was best to put the content first and the navigation following
    it, but started to think about it - what's more annoying: having to
    select a "skip navigation" link/listening to the same navigation on
    every page; or realising you're on the wrong page but having to listen
    to 20 paragraphs of content before getting to the navigation?

    For that reason, I'm inclined to think that perhaps the best place for
    the navigation is indeed before the content with a link to skip it. I
    know I'd rather select that link on each page that wade through the
    content just to get to the next page!

    What are your thoughts on this issue?

    --
    Dylan Parry
    http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

    The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
    those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.
     
    Dylan Parry, Aug 6, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Dylan Parry

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    On Aug 7, 1:16 am, Dylan Parry <> wrote:
    > I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There are
    > two places that the navigation can "live":
    >
    > 1) Before the content;
    > 2) After the content
    >
    > But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think
    > that it was best to put the content first and the navigation following
    > it, but started to think about it - what's more annoying: having to
    > select a "skip navigation" link/listening to the same navigation on
    > every page; or realising you're on the wrong page but having to listen
    > to 20 paragraphs of content before getting to the navigation?
    >
    > For that reason, I'm inclined to think that perhaps the best place for
    > the navigation is indeed before the content with a link to skip it. I
    > know I'd rather select that link on each page that wade through the
    > content just to get to the next page!
    >
    > What are your thoughts on this issue?
    >

    Ummm, neather?. I can use the control key to stop the speach from
    reading stuff that I don't really want and to get to the main content
    I can just use the nubers 1 through 6 to find section headings. In a
    decent screanreader anyway. Which I think is all of them.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesign.awardspace.biz
     
    Chaddy2222, Aug 6, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Dylan Parry
    <> writing in news:46b73b6f$0$646$bed64819
    @news.gradwell.net:

    > I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There

    are
    > two places that the navigation can "live":
    >
    > 1) Before the content;
    > 2) After the content
    >
    > But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think
    > that it was best to put the content first and the navigation following
    > it, but started to think about it - what's more annoying: having to
    > select a "skip navigation" link/listening to the same navigation on
    > every page; or realising you're on the wrong page but having to listen
    > to 20 paragraphs of content before getting to the navigation?
    >
    > For that reason, I'm inclined to think that perhaps the best place for
    > the navigation is indeed before the content with a link to skip it. I
    > know I'd rather select that link on each page that wade through the
    > content just to get to the next page!
    >
    > What are your thoughts on this issue?
    >


    I agree with you. If you look at a page using Opera in small screen
    mode, or maybe on a phone or something, it's immediately clear that the
    skip link and navigation is right at the top. Imagine this -- the
    Internet, 2007 - you are on a small device and you've Googled for
    something and find the index page, but really need a subpage. You get to
    the page, and have to wade through all that content, just to get to the
    navigation where the subpage is you want -- and you're doing this on your
    phone where you get charged oodles per minute.

    --
    Adrienne Boswell at Home
    Arbpen Web Site Design Services
    http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
    Please respond to the group so others can share
     
    Adrienne Boswell, Aug 6, 2007
    #3
  4. Dylan Parry

    David Mark Guest

    On Aug 6, 11:16 am, Dylan Parry <> wrote:
    > I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There are
    > two places that the navigation can "live":
    >
    > 1) Before the content;
    > 2) After the content
    >
    > But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think


    After the content.

    > that it was best to put the content first and the navigation following
    > it, but started to think about it - what's more annoying: having to
    > select a "skip navigation" link/listening to the same navigation on
    > every page; or realising you're on the wrong page but having to listen
    > to 20 paragraphs of content before getting to the navigation?


    Change your thinking. Put a "Skip to Navigation" link before the
    content. You can optionally hide it for screen media and show it for
    handheld. But realize that if you hide it, most screen readers will
    not "see" it either as they just read what is on the screen (this is
    why some authors position the link off the screen, instead of hiding
    it.) Aural browsers will see it either way.

    Also, links that reference the next, previous, parent and home pages
    should have access keys, as well as link elements in the header. A
    bookmark link that references the navigation anchor is a good idea as
    well. Lynx (for example) displays these types of links in a row
    across the top of the page.

    View pages in Lynx, a mobile device or listen to them through a screen
    reader (or aural browser) and it becomes apparent that navigation
    first is backwards and often redundant.

    Furthermore, look at search engine result snippets for upside-down
    sites and you see the same "Back to Home", "Contact Us", "Feedback",
    etc. text over and over. I have also heard that spiders prefer to see
    top-level headings and relevant content at or near the top (the higher
    the better.)
     
    David Mark, Aug 6, 2007
    #4
  5. Dylan Parry

    Bergamot Guest

    David Mark wrote:
    >
    > Change your thinking. Put a "Skip to Navigation" link before the
    > content.


    Is that content really the first thing on the page, or is it after the
    masthead? If there is a page header preceding the content, you've just
    stuck the skip link in between them, and not necessarily so easy to find.

    Maybe a better idea is to have 2 links at the very top of the page,
    before *anything* else:
    - go to the content
    - go to the navigation

    The worst anyone will have to do is scroll back to the top of the page,
    but that may be easier than hunting down a link stuck between 2 sections
    within the page. IMO

    --
    Berg
     
    Bergamot, Aug 7, 2007
    #5
  6. Dylan Parry

    David Mark Guest

    On Aug 7, 1:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:
    > David Mark wrote:
    >
    > > Change your thinking. Put a "Skip to Navigation" link before the
    > > content.

    >
    > Is that content really the first thing on the page, or is it after the
    > masthead? If there is a page header preceding the content, you've just
    > stuck the skip link in between them, and not necessarily so easy to find.


    Right at the top. Then comes the H1. Logos and the like that often
    appear at the very top are below the content in my scheme as well.
    They are hidden from handheld devices and printers and positioned in
    the top margin on monitors.
     
    David Mark, Aug 7, 2007
    #6
  7. Dylan Parry

    Dylan Parry Guest

    David Mark wrote:

    > Right at the top. Then comes the H1. Logos and the like that often
    > appear at the very top are below the content in my scheme as well.


    Do you have an example of a site you've built in this way? I'm
    interested to see how you've laid out both the visual appearance of such
    a site as well as the code behind the page.

    --
    Dylan Parry
    http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

    The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
    those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.
     
    Dylan Parry, Aug 7, 2007
    #7
  8. Dylan Parry

    David Mark Guest

    On Aug 7, 5:48 am, Dylan Parry <> wrote:
    > David Mark wrote:
    > > Right at the top. Then comes the H1. Logos and the like that often
    > > appear at the very top are below the content in my scheme as well.

    >
    > Do you have an example of a site you've built in this way? I'm


    Yes, but it isn't public yet.

    > interested to see how you've laid out both the visual appearance of such


    The particular site I am testing now looks much like any other site in
    a PC browser with CSS enabled. It has an elastic two column
    (navigation and content) layout, a logo and login link at the top,
    legalities at the bottom. On (most) handhelds it looks radically
    different. There is only one column, the navigation is below the
    content, the "Skip navigation" link appears at the top, the login link
    is at the bottom, etc. The handheld rules simply override positioning
    and display for certain elements, which covers devices that don't
    respect the mutual exclusivity of media-specific style sheets (eg
    interpret both screen and handheld types.)

    As for sound, I did recently add an aural style sheet, but have found
    that most screen readers pay little attention to it. Opera's voice
    feature respected some of the simpler rules.

    > a site as well as the code behind the page.


    Underneath the stylings are simple semantic documents, which are
    friendly to text-only browsers, screen readers, search engines, etc.
    The markup is very simple when compared to the average fixed-width,
    tables-in-tables-with-spacers site. It's lighter too, which helps out
    with handheld support as some services reject any page over 10K.

    None of these techniques are new or particularly complex, but I too
    had a hard time finding sites that used them. As I recall, Opera had
    some good demonstrations on their site.
     
    David Mark, Aug 7, 2007
    #8
  9. David Mark wrote:
    > On Aug 6, 11:16 am, Dylan Parry <> wrote:
    >> I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There are
    >> two places that the navigation can "live":
    >>
    >> 1) Before the content;
    >> 2) After the content
    >>
    >> But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think

    >
    > After the content.
    >


    interesting thinking, but what happens when you follow a search engine
    result list and end up on a subpage? You would first see or hear only
    the content without knowing if the site has actually the content you
    were looking for. I tend to have favor a more structured approach: show
    me the structure (hence navigation) of a site, and then what I will get
    content wise. I always put an (invisible) metanavigation to the content
    and menus on each page:

    * skip to content
    * skip to navigation

    - About us
    - Our Products
    - Where to find us

    Here is our content

    This seems to me the most logical way as it follows a well known
    structured approach (first thing in a book is the table of contents,
    first thing on each elevator exit in a building are signs what can be
    found on each level).
    If you put it the other way round, you will force people to search
    actively for the navigation, which seems to me a wrong approach.
    (Although Nielsen would have another opinion on this, but he assumes
    that users are first looking at the content and _then_ at the
    navigation, so it all bases on this assumption :)

    cheers
    bernhard

    --
    www.daszeichen.ch
    remove nixspam to reply
     
    Bernhard Sturm, Aug 7, 2007
    #9
  10. Dylan Parry

    Karl Groves Guest

    Dylan Parry <> wrote in
    news:46b73b6f$0$646$:

    > I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There
    > are two places that the navigation can "live":
    >
    > 1) Before the content;
    > 2) After the content
    >
    > But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think
    > that it was best to put the content first and the navigation following
    > it, but started to think about it - what's more annoying: having to
    > select a "skip navigation" link/listening to the same navigation on
    > every page; or realising you're on the wrong page but having to listen
    > to 20 paragraphs of content before getting to the navigation?
    >
    > For that reason, I'm inclined to think that perhaps the best place for
    > the navigation is indeed before the content with a link to skip it. I
    > know I'd rather select that link on each page that wade through the
    > content just to get to the next page!
    >
    > What are your thoughts on this issue?
    >


    Having observed disabled people actually using sites, I can say that my
    personal opinion is that it doesn't really matter (for blind users) so
    long as: a) they can access content easily without being burdened with
    repetitious tabbing past lists of links and, b) they can effectively
    navigate when they need to. c) they know how to do "a" and "b"

    So, if your nav is *before* the content, immediately give them a way to
    skip it at the very top before any content is written out (IOW, right
    aftter <body>)

    If your nav is *after* the content, immediately give them a way to get
    to the navigation, again right after <body>


    Most people unfortunately believe that this feature only benefits blind
    users, and fail to understand that people with motor control problems
    have to tab to navigate. Where you place navigation (before or after
    content) is of no consequence to blind people as long as they can use it
    without it being a huge pain in the ass. But people with motor control
    disorders will *see* the navigation there at the top (or left) and begin
    tabbing, expecting focus to switch to the navigation options early in
    their tabbing. If the navigation is placed after content, this also
    means they won't get focus on any of the navigation links after they've
    already tabbed through everything else. In other words, you've just
    removed frustration from one population and transferred it to another.

    I say put the navigation before content and allow them to skip to
    content rather than skip to navigation.





    --
    Karl Groves
    http://www.thehotrodclassifieds.com
    http://www.grayscalecms.com
    http://www.karlcore.com
     
    Karl Groves, Aug 7, 2007
    #10
  11. Dylan Parry

    Bergamot Guest

    David Mark wrote:
    > On Aug 7, 1:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:
    >>
    >> Is that content really the first thing on the page, or is it after the
    >> masthead?

    >
    > Right at the top. Then comes the H1. Logos and the like that often
    > appear at the very top are below the content in my scheme as well.


    I have to wonder how fairs when CSS isn't applied. Is it still
    structurally logical? I'd like to see a sample.

    --
    Berg
     
    Bergamot, Aug 7, 2007
    #11
  12. Dylan Parry

    dorayme Guest

    In article <Xns9985931E96C42karlkarlcorecom@130.81.64.196>,
    Karl Groves <> wrote:

    > Having observed disabled people actually using sites, I can say that my
    > personal opinion is that it doesn't really matter (for blind users) so
    > long as: a) they can access content easily without being burdened with
    > repetitious tabbing past lists of links and, b) they can effectively
    > navigate when they need to. c) they know how to do "a" and "b"


    Well said and there were more useful remarks too by you...

    I would like to see some examples of your advice being
    implemented, have you any urls at hand that are in your opinion
    fine enough examples please?

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Aug 7, 2007
    #12
  13. Dylan Parry

    David Mark Guest

    On Aug 7, 4:47 pm, Bergamot <> wrote:
    > David Mark wrote:
    > > On Aug 7, 1:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:

    >
    > >> Is that content really the first thing on the page, or is it after the
    > >> masthead?

    >
    > > Right at the top. Then comes the H1. Logos and the like that often
    > > appear at the very top are below the content in my scheme as well.

    >
    > I have to wonder how fairs when CSS isn't applied. Is it still
    > structurally logical? I'd like to see a sample.


    It looks fine. I tested in Firefox with "no style" applied and in
    Lynx. Other than the "to navigation" link, the main header is the
    first thing you see. The logo is at the very bottom instead of the
    very top and the login/sign up links appear in the footer above the
    legalities. I am not in a position to post a public sample at the
    moment. When the site I am working on is made public, I will try to
    remember to post a follow-up here.
     
    David Mark, Aug 8, 2007
    #13
  14. Dylan Parry

    David Mark Guest

    On Aug 7, 2:28 pm, Karl Groves <> wrote:
    > Dylan Parry <> wrote innews:46b73b6f$0$646$:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > > I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There
    > > are two places that the navigation can "live":

    >
    > > 1) Before the content;
    > > 2) After the content

    >
    > > But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think
    > > that it was best to put the content first and the navigation following
    > > it, but started to think about it - what's more annoying: having to
    > > select a "skip navigation" link/listening to the same navigation on
    > > every page; or realising you're on the wrong page but having to listen
    > > to 20 paragraphs of content before getting to the navigation?

    >
    > > For that reason, I'm inclined to think that perhaps the best place for
    > > the navigation is indeed before the content with a link to skip it. I
    > > know I'd rather select that link on each page that wade through the
    > > content just to get to the next page!

    >
    > > What are your thoughts on this issue?

    >
    > Having observed disabled people actually using sites, I can say that my
    > personal opinion is that it doesn't really matter (for blind users) so
    > long as: a) they can access content easily without being burdened with
    > repetitious tabbing past lists of links and, b) they can effectively
    > navigate when they need to. c) they know how to do "a" and "b"
    >
    > So, if your nav is *before* the content, immediately give them a way to
    > skip it at the very top before any content is written out (IOW, right
    > aftter <body>)
    >
    > If your nav is *after* the content, immediately give them a way to get
    > to the navigation, again right after <body>
    >
    > Most people unfortunately believe that this feature only benefits blind
    > users, and fail to understand that people with motor control problems
    > have to tab to navigate. Where you place navigation (before or after


    It is also useful for users of text-only browsers and handhelds.

    > content) is of no consequence to blind people as long as they can use it
    > without it being a huge pain in the ass. But people with motor control
    > disorders will *see* the navigation there at the top (or left) and begin
    > tabbing, expecting focus to switch to the navigation options early in
    > their tabbing. If the navigation is placed after content, this also
    > means they won't get focus on any of the navigation links after they've
    > already tabbed through everything else. In other words, you've just
    > removed frustration from one population and transferred it to another.


    You can create a logical tab order to make the navigation focus first,
    or better still, use access keys for frequently used navigation
    elements (eg home, up, next, etc.)
     
    David Mark, Aug 8, 2007
    #14
  15. Dylan Parry

    David Mark Guest

    On Aug 7, 11:54 am, Bernhard Sturm <> wrote:
    > David Mark wrote:
    > > On Aug 6, 11:16 am, Dylan Parry <> wrote:
    > >> I've been wondering lately about navigation and accessibility. There are
    > >> two places that the navigation can "live":

    >
    > >> 1) Before the content;
    > >> 2) After the content

    >
    > >> But which is best from an accessibility point of view? I used to think

    >
    > > After the content.

    >
    > interesting thinking, but what happens when you follow a search engine
    > result list and end up on a subpage? You would first


    If you put content first then the search engine snippets are more
    likely to lead users to the page with the content they are after.

    see or hear only
    > the content without knowing if the site has actually the content you
    > were looking for. I tend to have favor a more structured


    This will most often happen when navigation is at the top as every
    search result says the same thing (eg Home, Site Map, etc.)

    approach: show
    > me the structure (hence navigation) of a site, and then what I will get


    I can't see how the navigation would logically precede the content on
    a page.

    > content wise. I always put an (invisible) metanavigation to the content
    > and menus on each page:
    >
    > * skip to content
    > * skip to navigation
    >
    > - About us
    > - Our Products
    > - Where to find us
    >
    > Here is our content
    >
    > This seems to me the most logical way as it follows a well known
    > structured approach (first thing in a book is the table of contents,


    But the table of contents does not appear at the top of every page.

    > first thing on each elevator exit in a building are signs what can be
    > found on each level).


    I think Web sites are more like books than buildings and the maps off
    the elevator don't get in the way of the "content" of the floor.

    > If you put it the other way round, you will force people to search
    > actively for the navigation, which seems to me a wrong approach.


    Why would they have to search for it? If it doesn't appear in a
    sidebar (eg on a handheld), you display a link at the top that jumps
    right to it.
     
    David Mark, Aug 8, 2007
    #15
  16. Dylan Parry

    Karl Groves Guest

    dorayme <> wrote in news:doraymeRidThis-
    :

    > In article <Xns9985931E96C42karlkarlcorecom@130.81.64.196>,
    > Karl Groves <> wrote:
    >
    >> Having observed disabled people actually using sites, I can say that my
    >> personal opinion is that it doesn't really matter (for blind users) so
    >> long as: a) they can access content easily without being burdened with
    >> repetitious tabbing past lists of links and, b) they can effectively
    >> navigate when they need to. c) they know how to do "a" and "b"

    >
    > Well said and there were more useful remarks too by you...
    >
    > I would like to see some examples of your advice being
    > implemented, have you any urls at hand that are in your opinion
    > fine enough examples please?
    >


    I believe that the WebAIM site does a good job of leading by example:
    http://webaim.org/

    One thing that concerns me is "discoverability" of the skip link where it
    is. The sad truth is that skip links are used so infrequently that only
    technically proficient users are likely to use it. In disabled populations,
    technical proficiency is far lower than in non-disabled ones. What may
    happen is that the disabled users may not look for (and therefore may not
    notice) the skip link or know what they should do with it. Once they do
    discover & use it, however, they're likely to appreciate it very much.




    --
    Karl Groves
    http://www.thehotrodclassifieds.com
    http://www.grayscalecms.com
    http://www.karlcore.com
     
    Karl Groves, Aug 8, 2007
    #16
  17. Dylan Parry

    John Hosking Guest

    John Hosking, Aug 8, 2007
    #17
  18. Dylan Parry

    dorayme Guest

    In article <Xns9985D05AA70D9karlkarlcorecom@130.81.64.196>,
    Karl Groves <> wrote:

    > dorayme <> wrote in news:doraymeRidThis-
    > :
    >
    > > In article <Xns9985931E96C42karlkarlcorecom@130.81.64.196>,
    > > Karl Groves <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> Having observed disabled people actually using sites, I can say that my
    > >> personal opinion is that it doesn't really matter (for blind users) so
    > >> long as: a) they can access content easily without being burdened with
    > >> repetitious tabbing past lists of links and, b) they can effectively
    > >> navigate when they need to. c) they know how to do "a" and "b"

    > >
    > > Well said and there were more useful remarks too by you...
    > >
    > > I would like to see some examples of your advice being
    > > implemented, have you any urls at hand that are in your opinion
    > > fine enough examples please?
    > >

    >
    > I believe that the WebAIM site does a good job of leading by example:
    > http://webaim.org/
    >


    Thanks for this.

    As JH says, body {font-size: .85em} is not the best, but in this
    case, from a quick look, it actually looks fine with body
    {font-size: 100%;) so there is no particular reason for the
    smaller.

    > One thing that concerns me is "discoverability" of the skip link where it
    > is. The sad truth is that skip links are used so infrequently that only
    > technically proficient users are likely to use it. In disabled populations,
    > technical proficiency is far lower than in non-disabled ones. What may
    > happen is that the disabled users may not look for (and therefore may not
    > notice) the skip link or know what they should do with it. Once they do
    > discover & use it, however, they're likely to appreciate it very much.


    I expect authors would be reluctant to make it more prominent for
    aesthetic reasons, they see it from the start as something
    marginal, they would like to sort of hide it for the majority but
    want also to include it for the minority.

    There are at least two ways to go on this. Bite the bullet and
    make it prominent and build it in to the design 'at the top' or
    for first announcement. Unlike the url above where it simply
    looks like a blemish, an afterthought.

    The other way to go is this, make the skip to content the very
    first item of a prominent 'navigation first' strategy.

    In a way, I think there is not one good general answer to the OPs
    question because so much depends on particular considerations.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Aug 8, 2007
    #18
  19. Dylan Parry

    Dylan Parry Guest

    Karl Groves wrote:

    > Having observed disabled people actually using sites

    [...]

    That statement makes it all the more valid. IMHO, the only way you can
    say for sure which is best is by observing /real-life/ users and how
    they cope (or not) with each technique. Obviously, in your case you have
    done! No amount of theorising can ever make up for proper observation in
    something as practical as accessibility.

    Cheers, Karl - you've been v. helpful in clearing my thoughts

    --
    Dylan Parry
    http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

    The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
    those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.
     
    Dylan Parry, Aug 8, 2007
    #19
  20. Dylan Parry

    Karl Groves Guest

    Dylan Parry <> wrote in
    news:46b972bd$0$648$:

    > Karl Groves wrote:
    >
    >> Having observed disabled people actually using sites

    > [...]
    >
    > That statement makes it all the more valid. IMHO, the only way you can
    > say for sure which is best is by observing /real-life/ users and how
    > they cope (or not) with each technique. Obviously, in your case you
    > have done! No amount of theorising can ever make up for proper
    > observation in something as practical as accessibility.
    >
    > Cheers, Karl - you've been v. helpful in clearing my thoughts
    >


    Thanks for the kind words.

    Watching people interact with sites is a major eye opener for me. I
    enjoy every opportunity to go into the lab and act as an observer during
    usability studies.

    Earlier this year, I had the opportunity to go into the Technology
    Center at the NFB headquarters in Baltimore MD and watched blind users
    interact with web sites. They have this incredible room, probably 25
    feet wide and 100 feet long filled with an amazing array of different
    assistive devices.

    One of the things you hear a lot in discussions of usability is how
    people will "scan" a page looking for important phrases and keywords
    rather than reading it word for word. Amazingly, I noticed this
    happening with blind users as well. They would land on a page and
    immediately begin tabbing, listening for link text to take them where
    they wanted to go. Trouble was, as the screenreader was in the middle
    of reading one link, they'd be tabbing to another. It was not unlike
    someone holding the remote control's "channel-up" button down and was
    kind of unsettling (because I could see them repeatedly skipping past
    the link they were seeking).

    Most users of screen readers will be able to go into summary mode and
    also be able to generate a list of links. It is vitally important (even
    more than a skip link, IMO) to create pages with an effective use of
    headings and also with intelligently labelled links. No two links
    should be labelled the same unless they go to the same destination and
    for &diety; sake don't use "click here" or "more" or things like that.


    --
    Karl Groves
    http://www.thehotrodclassifieds.com
    http://www.grayscalecms.com
    http://www.karlcore.com
     
    Karl Groves, Aug 8, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Dom
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,790
    Andrew Thompson
    Sep 1, 2004
  2. Veli-Pekka Tätilä
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    362
    Veli-Pekka Tätilä
    Oct 6, 2005
  3. =?UTF-8?B?w4FuZ2VsIEd1dGnDqXJyZXogUm9kcsOtZ3Vleg==

    List of lists of lists of lists...

    =?UTF-8?B?w4FuZ2VsIEd1dGnDqXJyZXogUm9kcsOtZ3Vleg==, May 8, 2006, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    451
    =?UTF-8?B?w4FuZ2VsIEd1dGnDqXJyZXogUm9kcsOtZ3Vleg==
    May 15, 2006
  4. Replies:
    4
    Views:
    374
    Jukka K. Korpela
    Jul 24, 2006
  5. krishnakant Mane

    python and accessibility issues.

    krishnakant Mane, Nov 16, 2006, in forum: Python
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    410
    Paddy
    Nov 17, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page