upgrade to HTML 4.01 strict

[Markus Wiedemeier]

I have just upgraded my pages from the old site:

http://www.pitcasa.com/casa2/

to

http://www.pitcasa.com/casa/

following the hints of this ng. the validator worked fine both on the
HTML as on the CSS. Is there aything I should change in order to
improve it further?

i.e. place the script (for the external links) into the
CSS and if so, how does one do this?

the tags on all the pages except the index page are still CAPS. I did
run tidy on the index.htm, but is there a way to run tidy on all pages
at ones?

 

[Luigi Donatello Asero]

I have just upgraded my pages from the old site:

http://www.pitcasa.com/casa2/

to

http://www.pitcasa.com/casa/

following the hints of this ng. the validator worked fine both on the
HTML as on the CSS. Is there aything I should change in order to
improve it further?

Congratulations!

--
Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


http://www.italymap.dk
http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/lagenheteriitalien.html

 

[Luigi Donatello Asero]

May-be you should add a table summary, that´s what I have begun to do on my
websites too.



--
Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


http://www.italymap.dk
http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/lagenheteriitalien.html

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Quoth the raven named Luigi Donatello Asero:

Congratulations!

Hold up a minute... no champagne yet. <g>

The pages do not fit within my ~800x600 browser window. Well, some do
but the content is in tiny narrow unreadable columns on either side of
the central graphic.

(Now, where did I put that big old monitor...)

 

[Luigi Donatello Asero]

Quoth the raven named Luigi Donatello Asero:


Hold up a minute... no champagne yet. <g>

The pages do not fit within my ~800x600 browser window. Well, some do
but the content is in tiny narrow unreadable columns on either side of
the central graphic.

(Now, where did I put that big old monitor...)

Of course a liquid design is very important but the new version of the site
is better anyway.


--
Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


http://www.italymap.dk
http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/lagenheteriitalien.html

 

[Markus Wiedemeier]

Of course a liquid design is very important but the new version of the site
is better anyway.

waht is a liquid design?

how do you apply this, when images are involved?

 

[Markus Wiedemeier]

May-be you should add a table summary, that´s what I have begun to do on my
websites too.

what's that good for?

 

[Mark Parnell]

waht is a liquid design?

http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?AnySizeDesign

 

[Luigi Donatello Asero]

what's that good for?

Accessibility.

--
Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


http://www.italymap.dk
http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/lagenheteriitalien.html

 

[Markus Wiedemeier]

http://www.allmyfaqs.com/faq.pl?AnySizeDesign

I followed some of the links and hereis a footnote I found in this
interesting article:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/flexdesign.html
-quote

There are several pages on the web which use the term “any size
design", and recommend web authors not to make any assumptions
whatever about the window size of the reader. True any-size design is
however at present only possible if one avoids the use of images
altogether; something which is not realistic for many sites. If the
SVG vector-graphics format becomes popular, it may come closer to
reality, but photographs will still remain an issue. I therefore
prefer the term flexible design".

-unquote

ths is likely exactly the point why I cannot show the large images
(mostly 568x400px) in the a different way, unless I change the whole
layout of all the current pages.

I think that will be work for the next time I decide to renew the
site. I guess I will leave it the way it is currently. Pitty for the
old monitors of course - but I guess that's about as far as I can
spend time on this.

 

[Markus Wiedemeier]

Accessibility.

what does it do to improve the accessibility?

 

[Luigi Donatello Asero]

waht is a liquid design?

how do you apply this, when images are involved?

Personally, I try to have a width of the whole page which never exceeds
400 pixel, that means that you may need a photo which has a width of 100 or
300 pixel for example depending on the total widh.
Besides I try to resize the window to test if the whole page fits the new
window.
It seems to work.
The page http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/lagenheteriitalien.html
may be an example.





--
Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


http://www.italymap.dk
http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/lagenheteriitalien.html

 

[Luigi Donatello Asero]

I followed some of the links and hereis a footnote I found in this
interesting article:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/flexdesign.html
-quote

There are several pages on the web which use the term "any size
design", and recommend web authors not to make any assumptions
whatever about the window size of the reader. True any-size design is
however at present only possible if one avoids the use of images
altogether; something which is not realistic for many sites. If the
SVG vector-graphics format becomes popular, it may come closer to
reality, but photographs will still remain an issue. I therefore
prefer the term flexible design".

-unquote

ths is likely exactly the point why I cannot show the large images
(mostly 568x400px) in the a different way, unless I change the whole
layout of all the current pages.

I think that will be work for the next time I decide to renew the
site. I guess I will leave it the way it is currently. Pitty for the
old monitors of course - but I guess that's about as far as I can
spend time on this.

You can use a clickable image.
When the user clicks on the image, he or she
opens a larger image in jpg format which is no html file.


--
Luigi ( un italiano che vive in Svezia)


http://www.italymap.dk
http://www.scaiecat-spa-gigi.com/sv/lagenheteriitalien.html

 

[Markus Wiedemeier]

You can use a clickable image.
When the user clicks on the image, he or she
opens a larger image in jpg format which is no html file.

no, I'd rather redesign the layout. the images are mostly of 550x400
px, which is suitable (same as the duck in the web page I mentioned
earlier).

But the redesign of the web-site is a no-go or me at present. I just
have the time for this now.

 

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Quoth the raven named Markus Wiedemeier:

waht is a liquid design?

how do you apply this, when images are involved?

You didn't respond to my post directly, so I'll tack onto your
response to Luigi.

Here's a screenshot, where I've scrolled to the right.
http://home.rochester.rr.com/bshagnasty/images/casa.jpg 42KB

Notice the very narrow column, which is almost impossible to read. It
also looks as if you are attempting to justify the text. That's not
good - harder to read. There is also that large empty area between the
top menu and the graphic.

I would recommend that you have one column only, and place the text
above and below the image, with the image centered in the viewport, or
with the images at the left margin and the text flowing around
it/them. That should work, given the sizes of the images. On those
pages that have secondary navigation, place that horizontally under
the main menu.

And then you get a bonus. No tables needed for layout. <g>

 

[Markus Wiedemeier]

You didn't respond to my post directly, so I'll tack onto your
response to Luigi.

Here's a screenshot, where I've scrolled to the right.
http://home.rochester.rr.com/bshagnasty/images/casa.jpg 42KB

Notice the very narrow column, which is almost impossible to read. It
also looks as if you are attempting to justify the text. That's not
good - harder to read. There is also that large empty area between the
top menu and the graphic.

I would recommend that you have one column only, and place the text
above and below the image, with the image centered in the viewport, or
with the images at the left margin and the text flowing around
it/them. That should work, given the sizes of the images. On those
pages that have secondary navigation, place that horizontally under
the main menu.

And then you get a bonus. No tables needed for layout. <g>

this would be a fine solution for the first page, but the following
pages have a nagivation bar on the left hand side, which I would have
to place below the image, maybe even on more then 1 line, which makes
it rather difficult for other users.

Since I sort of like the style to be identical for the front page as
well as for the following pages, I cannot se a different solution,
then entirely rework the entire pages, which is a rather long job.

For the time being I will be satisfied if it displays well on larger
screens. It might not be perfect, but that's all I can think of at the
moment.

I'l play further with it and if I get to a solution I will let you
know, but I'd really like to maintain some of the current layout as
much as possible.

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

what does it [the summary attribute] do to improve the accessibility?

In theory, we're supposed to use quite some extra markup in data tables
for accessibility, see
http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10/#gl-table-markup
and in principle they have good arguments.

In practice, its real impact is still limited, and it's partly even
poorly designed in principle. For example, the summary attribute
"provides a summary of the table's purpose and structure for user
agents rendering to non-visual media such as speech and Braille", which
is rather vague. Why should the purpose be explained? Shouldn't it be
explained to everyone, _before_ the table, in normal visible text.
Besides, few user agents make use of the summary attribute. Mozilla,
for example, shows its content if you click on the table with the
right-hand button of the mouse and select "Properties", but it shows it
brutally truncated to one line.

I think it's still a good idea to use summary attributes in new pages.
It may help some people, and it works as documentation, too. As a rule
of thumb, I would suggest putting there a description of the table to
the extent that the normal text on the page, before the table and in
its caption, is not sufficient for people who do not see the table as a
whole (such as blind people).