E-mail List Archives

RE: turning off style sheets

for

From: Ian.Lloyd@nationwide.co.uk
Date: Oct 30, 2002 3:28AM


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

********************************************************************
The contents of this email are intended exclusively for the
addressee. If you are not the addressee you must not read
use or disclose the email contents ; you should notify us
immediately [ by clicking "Reply" ] and delete this email.

Nationwide monitors e-mails to ensure its systems operate
effectively and to minimise the risk of viruses. Whilst it has
taken reasonable steps to scan this email, it does not
accept liability for any virus that may be contained in it.
********************************************************************

Check out this tool:

http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/widgets/#nostyle

This gives IE/Win users a right-click menu that disables style sheets on a
page-by-page basis.

I have a JavaScript version in my Favelets page which does the same thing:

http://www23.brinkster.com/favelets/favelets.htm

There's two ways to quickly remove formatting!

Ian Lloyd, Electronic Channels
Nationwide Building Society

e-mail: <EMAIL REMOVED>
tel: 01793-655260
fax: 01793-656368


- -----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
Sent: 25 October 2002 19:36
To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
Subject: turning off style sheets


Dear list:

I often see responses that are couched in terms of "what if style sheets are
turned 'off'." I have two questions about this:

1) For the browsers I know, (IE, some Opera, NN old and new, Mozilla), one
doesn't so much turn stylesheets 'off', as much as one substitutes one's own
preferences in a given area (larger text, high contrast colors, etc.) Is
there in fact a way to turn stylesheets OFF entirely in modern browsers, or
is it always a case of substituting some or all of one's own preferences
into a local stylesheet?

2) Besides accessibility / colorblindness type issues, is there a good
reason why a user might be doing this? I'm not trying to be snotty, I just
honestly want to understand if there's a specific need being addressed.

3) As long as this is hardcore requirement, isn't CSS-positioning completely
off the table, or is 'graceful degradation' acceptable?

If the only reason to bend over backwards to create presentation solutions
that don't fall over when style sheets are removed is that edge-condition
nitpickers are going to give you a hard time for it, I will be hard to
persuade that it's worth the additional effort.

Lori Kay Brown
User Interface Engineer
SiteScape, Inc.
E-mail: <EMAIL REMOVED>


- -------- Original Message --------

==> From: "Leo Smith" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
==> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 14:21:04 -0400

Glenda,

Jukka's suggestion is a good one that should work for you, even if users do
not have style sheets enabled. Essentially, all that you are hiding with the
CSS is the bullet. If CSS is off, then you will simply get the bullet
followed by the section (2)(i) which you will enter textually.

You are preserving the structural markup of a list (albeit an unordered
versus an ordered one), whilst getting the presentation that you are looking
for, with the addition of a bullet when style sheets are switched off - not
a big deal.

My 2 cents...

Leo.

On 24 Oct 2002, at 10:08, Glenda Watson Hyatt wrote:

> Thanks for the suggestion, Jukka. However, what happens when a uses > is
not viewing with stylesheets and thus can't find subsection (2)(i)? > I
guess I will stick with invalid markup [<p> within a <li>], till I > can
find a better solution. > > Cheers, > Glenda > > > As a workaround, though,
you might consider using <ul> markup with > > the numbers as explicit
content, and a CSS rule that suggests > > suppression of bullets: <style
type="text/css"> ul li { > > list-style-type: none; } </style> > > ... > >
<ul> > > <li>(1) foo > > <li>(2) bar > > </ul> > > > > --

Leo Smith Web Designer/Developer USM Office of Publications and Marketing
University of Southern Maine 207-780-4774

---- To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives, visit
http://www.webaim.org/discussion/


- ----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives, visit
http://www.webaim.org/discussion/



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.1.1 (C) 1997 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc.

iQEVAwUBPb+x324wJNdvwuyFAQGkVQf/cwxFVRxeoSFdEFQ1X0lVRdQxbp4hmDY/
JK3gGqxXzIiwD4JNtzJjSosnJLAVOnbs4/lo7Fy83RpO7T+H/JVL/i9LPj4FtfQ5
qiEAmRzj5Lc0moGuxBNjuzgGavgoY01QyxN35WsAekFI/7ex7PduleCGL5i5dg4Z
dCSb06UZQGFjtl9V1ChyKbEKuZ4kKEnY4eGL8+gMNF6h0ApagHX+s1xqQnzf/PZG
encGU+0Bb2hAu/uq6bSqfwT0TNtLqpgUsC1fmVgSJbLkm+5l6AQ7bpf8t4vWKO2V
K5oqJyA0FGzINT+pTo+qy+H09BDYdItxjvWB+gnbu77udQgT/W4tVA==
=vxLG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


----
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or view list archives,
visit http://www.webaim.org/discussion/