- From: C. Bottelier <c.bottelier@iradis.org>
- Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 19:47:43 +0200
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>disagreement on default colours - any tendency for tools to set >background to white, is probaby an attempt to make Netscape behave >like Internet Explorer, for people who don't change the colours >themselves). The least the tools should also do is set the documents foreground and link colours as well. The behaviour I've seen in the tools is that most of them let the colours alone, until you press the Ok or Apply button in some of the property editors in which one has the possibility to change the page layout. After you click on the button (and haven't changed anything in the dialog) a repative random set of attributes is forced. For example the bgcolor of the body element, and a spontanious font face=arial around the whole document. Not to mentoin a few hundred times a <span lang="" class="">. (But this is another problem) This seems more as a failed is-dialog-field-changed routine. >(Whilst designers normally know the colour of the paper they use, >logo designers cannot always rely on this, even though the design >concept may try to mandate a particular colour.) > >Failing to fully specify colours (even allowing for the cascade) is >really quite common. It's especially common where people mix legacy >and CSS methods. And thus creating less accessible pages, because a user of alternate colours should disable the color support in his browser, introducing other problems like floating elements for menu's, conflicting background images and so on. Christian
Received on Sunday, 20 October 2002 13:40:28 UTC