lucy24
msg:4526242 | 6:48 am on Dec 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
:: looking around vaguely ::
Don't know about the rest of youse, but the crystal ball is in the shop so I'd need just a tiny bit more information. Like what the relevant CSS and HTML look like. The word "theme" normally makes me think CMS with a bunch of built-in styles, but here you seem to be talking about brother's browser themes. FF and That Other Browser can't share themes can they?
:: detour to Firefox to read up on, uh, browser equivalent of custom ring tones ::
|
ken_b
msg:4526311 | 2:45 pm on Dec 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| Like what the relevant CSS and HTML |
|
Yeah, that's the kind of hint of where to start looking that I was looking for.
Theme: In this case theme refers to the themes (for the desktop?) you can choose from in Win 7.
If it matters he usually use a "high contrast" theme.
I haven't used Win 7 enough to know where everything is yet. Still digging around.
I'll take a look at the code for the site/page that started this quest. But CSS is the equivalent of ancient Greek to me, so I might not use the proper terminology in my posts yet.
|
dstiles
msg:4526395 | 9:51 pm on Dec 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Presumably you're not talking about adverts, which can be pre-blocked in some browser schemes?
|
ken_b
msg:4526396 | 10:05 pm on Dec 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
No, not ads.
It's logos, site images, etc. I can't recall right now, but some navigation images might have been affected too.
Have to look again when I get there in the next few days.
|
lucy24
msg:4526409 | 10:47 pm on Dec 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
OK, so we're talking about themes for the whole operating system. Mac has never been big on those, though I've got a fuzzy recollection of having a third-party extension that did something analogous for OS 7.5-ish. It got annoying after a while. Now I don't even use a desktop picture.
Is the problem with all images on some sites, or just some individual images? I'm thinking something in the filenames that conflicts with filenames used in his OS theme.
<probably irrelevant digression>
I once ran into a mysterious situation when using my son's computer to read message boards. They had lots of smileys, but three specific ones wouldn't display. Fortuitously a site programming geek drifted by and instantly noticed that the three smileys in question were named :mad: :sad: and ... I forget the third, but you get the idea. (This was years ago. Safari has presumably long since got those figured out.)
I also discovered that I couldn't use the div name "ads" in e-books, because Camino would quietly eat the whole publisher's-advertising section :) I now use a longer name.
</digression> [edited by: tedster at 6:33 pm (utc) on Dec 10, 2012]
|
ken_b
msg:4526413 | 10:57 pm on Dec 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| Is the problem with all images on some sites, or just some individual images? |
|
Just some individual images (other images on those same sites show fine). The affected images are usually at the very top of the page where a logo and horizontal nav bar/links would be.
It's not all websites, just some. I was thinking it's the coding on those sites, but file names could be it.
I'll get a in person look at the issue on his machines again tomorrow I think.
|
g1smd
msg:4526421 | 11:28 pm on Dec 9, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Make a note of the pixel dimensions of the images that don't show up.
You might see a pattern develop: image sizes that are commonly used for banner and skyscraper ads might be automatically filtered out by ad blocking software that's a bit, err, over-zealous.
|
sonjay
msg:4526467 | 3:31 am on Dec 10, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| If it matters he usually use a "high contrast" theme. |
|
That might matter. Are the missing images background images? According to the WebAIM blog, "CSS Background images are often used on websites in place of true images, especially for small icons or for elements that are repeated throughout the page. These images are typically hidden in High Contrast Mode. The good news is that this means that decorative background images will usually be hidden, simplifying the visual layout of the page and potentially enhancing accessibility. The bad news is that CSS images, including CSS sprites, that convey meaning will usually be completely invisible."
I believe that a link to the WebAIM site is permitted here. (Or if it's not, I think it should be.) You can find the info about the background images and high contrast mode here: [webaim.org...] -- scroll down to the "Background CSS Images" section.
|
ken_b
msg:4526471 | 4:09 am on Dec 10, 2012 (gmt 0) |
sonjay:
Thanks for the link! That sounds pretty close to what's happening.
|
g1smd
msg:4526523 | 7:38 am on Dec 10, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Links to authorative resources, especially those that define the nuts and bolts of the internet, are usually fine.
|
lucy24
msg:4526540 | 8:24 am on Dec 10, 2012 (gmt 0) |
| You can find the info about the background images and high contrast mode here: |
|
That was amazingly useful.
I went to my Universal Access settings (Mac) and experimented, both by cranking up the contrast and by switching black/white. My main site* came through pretty well overall. In one place the muted color-coding got lost-- but that was nonessential Added Value anyway. And negative photographs of rats look very weird indeed. But the background color is light enough to go to white, which is obviously the biggest concern.
Odd quirk is that my own desktop color, which I picked for its restfulness, becomes painfully garish at high contrast.
* Looking at an art-studio site with display settings geared toward low visual acuity seemed pretty pointless ;) And the Test Site is designed to look horrible anyway.
|
ken_b
msg:4526634 | 4:59 pm on Dec 10, 2012 (gmt 0) |
Sonjay;
Thanks so much! That was the problem!
I really appreciate everyones input folks, thanks again everyone!
|
|
