[Wsuug] New Web Page

[Ken Collins]

Yea, that's the one I was thinking about, totally agreed about the -9999em CSS.

 - Ken

On Feb 17, 2010, at 8:47 PM, David McCormick wrote:

> 
> 
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 8:38 PM, Reese <howell.r at inkworkswell.com> wrote:
> On 17-Feb-10 19:44, Ken Collins wrote:
> My thoughts with a caveat that I seldom think about these details now :)
> 
> 1) I see a lot of classes that should really be IDs. Generally page sections are a one per page thing. Perhaps change all DIV's that use one off class names to IDs instead?
> 
> Well, that's sort of the issue. It's currently a 1-page site but
> there has been talk of putting a blog in place, so blog-friendliness
> re: the eventual theme was also a consideration.
> 
> 
> 2) To address the font and semantic happiness for the header would something like this work?
> 
> <div id="branding">
>  <h1>Refresh Hampton Roads</h1>
> </div> 
> #branding { /* ... your normal CSS here for BG ... */ }
> #branding h1 { display:none; }
> 
> That would probably work. But then, lots of other things would probably
> work too. So what is the best practice? That is the question I asked.
> 
> 
> If you care about accessibility, you dont want to use display: none. This will hide from screenreaders. You'd be better off using text-indent: -9999em or the like, or even something like "position: absolute; left: -9999em;".
> 
> IMHO, you should always have text where you have an image, whether its a off screen element, or alt / title, etc.
>  
> I saw that Kelley quoted some from a spec somewhere, the issue as I and
> Denise see it? The compromise between that verbatim compliance and the
> yield to the designer(s) so that the page is true to the vision of the
> designer. Which may make the page a bit less accessible for some.
> Including some search engines I think.
> 
> My first effort didn't pay much attention to Denise's specs for font
> size and face, I had the component widths down but some of the
> alignments were off. The 2nd effort was better and I thank Denise for
> the feedback she gave me, but here we are at v0.3 and this one last
> issue. The only one I'm really kicking up a fuss about. Images or
> text, for info that c/should be conveyed as text IMO. Is the message
> that the text conveys more important or is the appearance of the font
> more important? What is the best practice on this?
> 
> 
> 3) Since the heading graphic is the <h1> for every page, maybe everything else that is currently and <h1> is really a <h2>?
> 
> Well, like I said: It's a 1-page site right now. There is an intention
> or desire to turn it into a blog and who knows where else it might go,
> so keeping all of the options open as much as possible, was part of the
> unwritten spec. Having an integrated mailing list under the same domain
> name (or a subdomain) also shows a bit of professionalism, so I hope
> we can work that out equitably.
> 
> 
> Reese
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wsuug mailing list
> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Wsuug mailing list
> Wsuug at list.wsuug.org
> http://www.thelinuxlink.net/mailman/listinfo/wsuug

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.thelinuxlink.net/pipermail/wsuug/attachments/20100217/8ff52f32/attachment.html>