-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven Hildreth Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:52 AM To: Jason Clinton Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
[snip]
My position is that if it renders well in Mozilla, Firefox, Konqueror and IE that is ensuring a wide enough target audience. Sure the Links guys will get pissed, but realistically I think we should ensure operability with the 99% audience - not degrade the overall visual impression for all to appease the 1%
I have to agree with Steven on this to some extent. I'm not a purist anyway. I too have worked with CMS systems, mostly just PostNuke and Mambo. I know that PostNuke has a module available which produces a "hand held friendly" representation of the website.
(Compare http://www.1on1security.com/ with http://www.1on1security.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=AvantGo&file... for example.)
Perhaps we can strike a balance between the two... if the 1% is "intelligent" enough to use Links/Lynx, then they can find the appropriate module - we can even place the link where such browsers readily locate it, etc. Thoughts? [Grrr.. I really wish hitting "reply" would respond to the list, rather than the poster - but at least now I am not so thoughtless as to not consider the blind - made me at least mindful of them as I re-post this to the list.]
[/me tosses a 5 gallon can of gas on the fire, and giggles from the sidelines.] Dustin
I like this idea, have a <for blind> link at the top in the first few lines of the page, that is w3c compliant. Then we can write something for the blind pages that pulls the articles out of the sql database. Still dynamic, same content just different look (not violating seperate-content principle or whatever jason was talking about), and we still get the nice look. Sure it'll take a little work, but... what do we do.. sit around and argue in the IRC channel anyway.
Don't take that as me volunteering to do it. I don't have a clue. If it came to it though, i could probably learn.
Dustin Decker wrote:
-----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Steven Hildreth Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 11:52 AM To: Jason Clinton Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Proposed Web site redesign (beta)
[snip]
My position is that if it renders well in Mozilla, Firefox, Konqueror and IE that is ensuring a wide enough target audience. Sure the Links guys will get pissed, but realistically I think we should ensure operability with the 99% audience - not degrade the overall visual impression for all to appease the 1%
I have to agree with Steven on this to some extent. I'm not a purist anyway. I too have worked with CMS systems, mostly just PostNuke and Mambo. I know that PostNuke has a module available which produces a "hand held friendly" representation of the website.
(Compare http://www.1on1security.com/ with http://www.1on1security.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=AvantGo&file... for example.)
Perhaps we can strike a balance between the two... if the 1% is "intelligent" enough to use Links/Lynx, then they can find the appropriate module - we can even place the link where such browsers readily locate it, etc. Thoughts? [Grrr.. I really wish hitting "reply" would respond to the list, rather than the poster - but at least now I am not so thoughtless as to not consider the blind - made me at least mindful of them as I re-post this to the list.]
[/me tosses a 5 gallon can of gas on the fire, and giggles from the sidelines.] Dustin
Kclug mailing list [email protected] http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 12:26:17PM -0600, Dustin Decker wrote:
etc. Thoughts? [Grrr.. I really wish hitting "reply" would respond to the list, rather than the poster
I'm relatively new here, but looks like it's been covered before:
http://www.kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/2000-September/002086.html http://www.kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/2001-December/005508.html http://www.kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/2000-July/001621.html
[/me tosses a 5 gallon can of gas on the fire, and giggles from the sidelines.]
That's a sure way to start a flame war. =)
[ dons flame-proof suit ]
http://www.google.com/search?q=reply-to%20munging
Jeremy
I'd love to have the return address be [email protected], most of the time reply's come striaght to me when i post, and not to the list, where they should have been. Especially when talking about Chris's wreck. Maybe new topic?
Jeremy Turner wrote:
On Tue, Nov 09, 2004 at 12:26:17PM -0600, Dustin Decker wrote:
etc. Thoughts? [Grrr.. I really wish hitting "reply" would respond to the list, rather than the poster
I'm relatively new here, but looks like it's been covered before:
http://www.kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/2000-September/002086.html http://www.kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/2001-December/005508.html http://www.kclug.org/pipermail/kclug/2000-July/001621.html
[/me tosses a 5 gallon can of gas on the fire, and giggles from the sidelines.]
That's a sure way to start a flame war. =)
[ dons flame-proof suit ]
http://www.google.com/search?q=reply-to%20munging
Jeremy _______________________________________________ Kclug mailing list [email protected] http://kclug.org/mailman/listinfo/kclug
-
Dustin Decker -
Jeremy Turner -
Tom Bruno