I've just started using a nice little freeware Java image browser. It's really nice and simple and easy to use. It's called JIBS (Java Image Browser Sorter). It lets you rename images in a folder according to their EXIF meta data, de-dupe folders and rename selected images whatever you like. And lets you go through a slideshow at your own pace, and rotate the images 90 degrees simply and without changing the original image. Lovely. I thought you should know about it. Oh, by the way you need Java to run it. But you have Java installed anyway, don't you?
Labels: Tools
Jason posted this on Thursday, April 06, 2006 at 11:07 am.
Read comments (0). Leave comment.
Right-o. Let's get this straight. There are a couple of posts below that point out some of the flaws in IE. Now, I know there are lots of stories flying about on the web as to why Microsoft are evil, but I have no idea whether that is just propaganda or whether there is an element of truth. I don't have the time nor the inclination to look into it either, because at the moment, the Microsoft products that I use work satisfactorily.
Wherever possible I prefer to use free software, because it's... free.
BUT I do have a problem with IE not really being up to scratch for a modern browser. It not using many css selectors that have been around for many years and that are embraced by most other browsers is a pain when trying to build a site. And there are lots of little bugs. Its non-standard box model causes grief, even if it is better than the standard one. (I mean subtracting "padding" from "width" rather than adding it: it's more intuitive.)
So, I'll blog any bugs and workarounds I have to do for any browser; it just happens that mostly I have to use work-arounds for IE at the moment. Let's see what IE7 has to offer.
Jason posted this on Wednesday, April 05, 2006 at 3:24 pm.
Read comments (0). Leave comment.
I was validating some code at the W3Cs validator the other day and it occurred to me to share this pearl of wisdom with you.
I seems commonplace to me that web developers will crow over the accessibility of their sites after running it through the "Cynthia says" website. Wrong, wrong, wrong!
Those automated accessibility tools are useful - but more to show you where something it definitely gong wrong than where everything's going right. So make sure you do run your sites through it, and correct and issues that are clearly impinging on the accessibility. But once you've ironed out all the issues thrown up, don't then just assume you've got a perfectly accessible site.
The best way to test would be to get a group of people all with problems accessing the web - for example someone partially sighted, or someone unable to control a mouse, or someone colour blind. But I know it's unlikely that you keep a community of people with those kinds of problems in a filing cupboard somewhere just waiting to test your latest website. Instead, think! Use your head. Make sure that everything you can do you have done.
Even the simplest things will make a difference to someone. For example, if you use Firefox to browse, you know that you can enlarge text on screen by using "View -> text size -> increase". But not everyone can do that. If you have declared your font sizes in pixels, and someone looks at your website using IE (as the majority will), then they can't change the font size that easily. So, instead, just use this simple declaration in the "body" rules of your stylesheet. "font-size: 62.5%;" That will make the default font size 10px, from which you can scale all the other fonts in ems. Now, IE will be able to change font size using a similar menu.
That's just one little helping-hand. Basically, think about accessibility rather than devolving your responsibility to a one-minute check on an automated website. It can highlight some things that are wrong with your site, but not everything.
It's better to have a really accessible site fail the automated accessibility check than have a site that passes it, but is really inaccessible because you haven't thought about it.
Jason posted this on Tuesday, April 04, 2006 at 10:30 am.
Read comments (0). Leave comment.
