Freelancers Forum Messages on Monday September 24th 2007
RE: FN-FORUM: Hidden Divs & Google
date posted 24th September 2007 15:11
On 24 Sep 2007 14:46:33 -0000, Sam M - www.wiredeyes.com wrote
> But if you are using them to make your site more dynamic, dropdown
> menus, scrolling news, areas that display dynamically etc etc whe...
RE: FN-FORUM: Hidden Divs & Google
date posted 24th September 2007 15:07
Depends on how they are used.
If they are used simply for hiding lots of keyword rich text that isn't to
be shown to visitors of the site (i.e. a user visiting the site can't make
that content visib...
Re: FN-FORUM: Hidden Divs & Google
date posted 24th September 2007 14:54
On 24 Sep 2007 13:48:00 -0000, Peter Scoins wrote
> Hello Good People,
>
> I Just wondering... does Google index the text inside divs which are
> hidden?!?
>
> Regards
> Peter Scoins
Yes but don't...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 14:51
On 24 Sep 2007 14:10:49 -0000, aidan wrote
> I thought the point we were debating was whether w3C compliance was
> generally prefered.
Nope, one of the original posters stated that MS got away with p...
Re: FN-FORUM: Hidden Divs & Google
date posted 24th September 2007 14:35
On 24 Sep 2007, at 15:02, Martin Wheatley wrote:
> On 24/09/2007 14:49, Peter Scoins wrote:
>> Hello Good People,
>> I Just wondering... does Google index the text inside divs which are
>> hidden?!?...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 14:31
I thought the point we were debating was whether w3C compliance was
generally prefered. Uesability is a side issue with regards to the job in
hand. In the current debate, useability is not anywhere...
Re: FN-FORUM: Hidden Divs & Google
date posted 24th September 2007 14:30
The basic answer is "Yes". If it appears in the source code for the
webpage, it'll be indexed by Google's crawler.
Quoting Martin Wheatley [EMAIL REMOVED]
>
> On 24/09/2007 14:49, Peter Scoins wr...
Re: FN-FORUM: Hidden Divs & Google
date posted 24th September 2007 14:23
On 24/09/2007 14:49, Peter Scoins wrote:
> Hello Good People,
>
> I Just wondering... does Google index the text inside divs which are
> hidden?!?
>
> Regards
> Peter Scoins
>
>
Yes, I don't thi...
FN-FORUM: Hidden Divs & Google
date posted 24th September 2007 14:09
Hello Good People,
I Just wondering... does Google index the text inside divs which are
hidden?!?
Regards
Peter Scoins...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 13:52
On 24 Sep 2007 13:07:48 -0000, Tony Crockford wrote
> it's not the fact that it's standard compliant or not, its that it's
> being used in an inappropriate way.
Close but not quite. Its not the fac...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 13:52
I get the impression that the people contributing to this thread are talking
at cross-purposes.
The definition of usability that I found most appropriate is:
"That quality of a system that makes it...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 13:28
On 24 Sep 2007, at 13:58, Gary Short wrote:
>
> On 24 Sep 2007 12:42:13 -0000, Tony Crockford wrote
>> exactly!
>>
>> so why use it as an example?
>
> What?! I used it because its such an obvious ex...
Re: Spam: SPAM-LOW: Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validate
date posted 24th September 2007 13:24
On 24 Sep 2007, at 13:50, Phillip Healey wrote:
>>> p.s professional is the correct spelling.
>
> Just about sums up your attitude tony!
hey, I'm comfortable in my skin.
I suspect you just misunder...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 13:18
On 24 Sep 2007 12:42:13 -0000, Tony Crockford wrote
> exactly!
>
> so why use it as an example?
What?! I used it because its such an obvious example of a standards
compliant site that is not usable...
RE: Spam: SPAM-LOW: Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validate
date posted 24th September 2007 13:11
>> p.s professional is the correct spelling.
Just about sums up your attitude tony!...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 13:03
On 24 Sep 2007, at 13:29, Gary Short wrote:
>
> However, a field based sales person is a valid class of sales
> person and
> saying "don't do field based sales" is not an option and so the app
>...
Re: Spam: SPAM-LOW: Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 13:01
On 24 Sep 2007, at 13:22, Phillip Healey wrote:
>
> Usability is the fit for purpose status of a item. It scares me that a
> 'proffessional' is asking for a definition.
I know the difference, I want...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:54
On 24 Sep 2007 12:20:04 -0000, Tony Crockford wrote
> can anyone point to a valid site that isn't usable.
>
Write now, can't even find a site that's valid and actually does something
other than bei...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:49
On 24 Sep 2007 12:15:28 -0000, Tony Crockford wrote
> well, that's like saying I tried to drive my car on the railway
> track and it didn't work.
No its not. Driving your car on the railway is not...
FN-FORUM: ippimail.com needs an admin
date posted 24th September 2007 12:49
Hi,
I didn't get *one* taker for this but I thought it might be worth
sending it again now summer is over.
This could be a regular thing for the right person.
Off list please.
> We need someone...
FN-FORUM: font - "rapier"?
date posted 24th September 2007 12:46
hi,
could anyone set a simple word in a font called "rapier" for me and send me
an EPS or illustrator vector? it's for a logo redraw.
please contact me offlist if you've got the font - thanks!
cat...
RE: Spam: SPAM-LOW: Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:42
I agree with Gary!
Its like Health & Fitness! You can be one without the other, but ideally =
you
should have both together.
Usability is the fit for purpose status of a item. It scares me that a
'p...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:41
On 24 Sep 2007, at 13:11, Martin Wheatley wrote:
> On 24/09/2007 12:52, Tony Crockford wrote:
>> how does your use of the term usability differ from accessibility?
>> and in what way would a standard...
RE: FN-FORUM: Prosperity4
date posted 24th September 2007 12:37
Interesting!
Thanks for the explanation. Ill go take a look.
Regards
Phill Healey
Munklefish
Po Box 70
Manchester
M34 3SQ
T: 0161 408 4759
=20
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL REMOVED] [EMA...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:36
On 24 Sep 2007, at 13:09, Gary Short wrote:
>
> On 24 Sep 2007 11:51:21 -0000, Tony Crockford wrote
>> how does your use of the term usability differ from accessibility?
>> and in what way would a s...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:32
On 24/09/2007 12:52, Tony Crockford wrote:
>
>
> On 24 Sep 2007, at 12:36, Gary Short wrote:
>> Agreed. I prefer Firefox over IE but this is not a browser war post its a
>> usability versus standard...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:29
On 24 Sep 2007 11:51:21 -0000, Tony Crockford wrote
> how does your use of the term usability differ from accessibility?
> and in what way would a standards compliant site not be usable?
Take one ful...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:12
On 24 Sep 2007, at 12:36, Gary Short wrote:
> Agreed. I prefer Firefox over IE but this is not a browser war post
> its a
> usability versus standards post and I say usability wins if one
> must...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:10
On 24 Sep 2007, at 12:23 pm, [EMAIL REMOVED] wrote:
> Poor project management also play a large part. Most of the bigger
> w3c
> offenders have a team of developers who work on seperate parts of...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:01
My take in this is that I like to develop to standards and since there are
standards available, it saves me the bother of producing them.
In the past when I've been working for various companies with...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 12:01
>> Designers and companies not worrying about non-standard websites is
>> what allowed Microsoft to get away with IE's bad behaviour for so long.
To a certain extent, I agree. IE's market share was,...
RE: FN-FORUM: Prosperity4
date posted 24th September 2007 12:01
ah, sorry mate i should have explained my self better !
basicly an umbrella company such as orange genie will do all your accounts for you when you work as a contractor or freelancer.
it basicly me...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 11:56
On 24 Sep 2007 11:22:15 -0000, aidan wrote
> I couldn't disagree more strongley on that statement. Usability and
> standards go hand in hand.
Agreed. But I also stand by what I said in my original...
RE: FN-FORUM: Prosperity4
date posted 24th September 2007 11:54
Basically, umbrella companies mean you're an employee of that company, =20
rather than having to do everything through your own limited company, =20
along with all the hassle with tax, insurance, VAT,...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 11:54
On 24 Sep 2007, at 12:06, Gary Short wrote:
> No its not. Its users just wanting to get a job done online and not
> giving a
> stuff (or not even knowing) about what standards the site they are
>...
RE: FN-FORUM: Prosperity4
date posted 24th September 2007 11:47
FWIW
I was using P4 until they went into administration, they charge alot, and i have just had a huge document from the administrators asking what they owe me.
i use Parasol, they came recommended....
RE: FN-FORUM: Prosperity4
date posted 24th September 2007 11:44
Thanks for the advice about Propserity4, but what exactly is the benefit =
of using a scompany like them or Orange Genie? What do they actually do =
for you?
Regards
Phill Healey
Munklefish
Po Box 70...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 11:44
> Problem is 90% of my sites are CMS driven and so validating code on user
> generated content is more or less impossible
I'm experimenting with plain-text user-content entry, with Textile as a
sim...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 11:43
I couldn't disagree more strongley on that statement. Usability and
standards go hand in hand. I've seen situations plenty of times where
someone has rattled together a site that looks fine in IE, b...
RE: FN-FORUM: Prosperity4
date posted 24th September 2007 11:32
for the love of god please do not use Prosperity 4.
Use Orange Genie / Genie World.
Ive been using them for nearly 5 years and they are 100% reliable and on the ball.
I tried prosperity 4 for one...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 11:26
On 24 Sep 2007 10:46:14 -0000, Ian Piper wrote
> Designers and companies not worrying about non-standard websites is
> what allowed Microsoft to get away with IE's bad behaviour for so long.
>
> Ia...
FN-FORUM: Prosperity4
date posted 24th September 2007 11:25
Hi,
Im new to the whole self-employed thing... What is Prosperity4 & does
anybody use / recommend them?
Regards
Phill Healey
Munklefish: multimedia for the masses
Po Box 70
Manchester
M34 3SQ
T: 016...
RE: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 11:11
The answer to this question is not if YOU are for validation necessarily,
it's more are your clients for validation or not, the fact is more a more
clients are asking for W3C validated sites, heard it...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 11:07
On 24 Sep 2007, at 11:33 am, Tony Crockford wrote:
>> The point I'm making is that very few (I couldn't actually find any)
>> well know brands have web sites that validate. Therefore I'm
>> assumi...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 10:53
On 24 Sep 2007, at 11:16, Paul Cooper wrote:
>
> On 23 Sep 2007 13:06:39 -0000, Tony Crockford
> [EMAIL REMOVED] wrote:
>
>> On 21 Sep 2007, at 13:22, Paul Cooper wrote:
>>> Amazon comes up with o...
Re: FN-FORUM: [OT] Have you ever seen Web Forgery script?
date posted 24th September 2007 10:48
On 24/09/2007 11:18, Juraj Seffer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just received an email from an individual with link to fake Nationwide
> website. I found a .zip file on that server.
> http://vastcity.com/cards/mj...
Re: FN-FORUM: [OT] Have you ever seen Web Forgery script?
date posted 24th September 2007 10:45
Hmm, the script contains two email addresses for the information to go to.
How tempting to sign up those email addresses for lots of unpleasant
rubbish. :)
Quoting Juraj Seffer [EMAIL REMOVED]...
FN-FORUM: [OT] Have you ever seen Web Forgery script?
date posted 24th September 2007 10:38
Hi,
Just received an email from an individual with link to fake Nationwide
website. I found a .zip file on that server.
http://vastcity.com/cards/mjsactor/client/
There is a .zip file with .php scri...
Re: FN-FORUM: Opinions on W3C validator
date posted 24th September 2007 10:36
On 23 Sep 2007 13:06:39 -0000, Tony Crockford [EMAIL REMOVED] wrote:
> On 21 Sep 2007, at 13:22, Paul Cooper wrote:
> > Amazon comes up with over 1000 errors. Even Google has 33
> > errors.
>
> not...
|
|