cak

Markup experts will tell you that Internet Explorer has no support whatsoever for XHTML, so there are no "real" benefits (and more than a few drawbacks) to using it on most public sites. Here are a couple of good articles on the subject: *ttp://www.sitepoint.com/forums/showthread.php?t=393445 *ttp://lachy.id.au/log/2005/12/xhtml-beginners Using a strict DOCTYPE instead of a transitional DOCTYPE will yield tangible benefits, though. HTH, Carol

The XML declaration at the top of your page causes Internet Explorer 6 to render in 'quirks (backward compatible) mode," so keyword sized fonts are going to appear one size larger than they would in "strict mode." This is arguably a bug in Internet Explorer 6; modern, standards compliant browsers (like FireFox) will render your XHTML pages in "strict mode." *ttp://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingKeywords *ttp://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=RenderingMode The XML declaration is technically optional in XHTML documents, but including it is definitely best practice if you are using a character encoding other than UTF-8. *ttp://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/#guidelines Noticed that you have specified an application/xhtml+xml content-type via a meta tag. Browsers are going to ignore that directive because the server is sending text/html. You will need a fairly sophisticated content negotiation script to serve application/xhtml+xml to user agents that claim to prefer it, and text/html to legacy browsers. Internet Explorer (among others) will not display documents sent with application/xhtml+xml content type. *ttp://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php *ttp://www.autisticcuckoo.net/archive.php?id=2004/11/03/content-negotiation HTH, Carol

Exactly. Just a bit of clarification on the iframe doctype issue: Inline frames are not defined in the HTML 4.01 Strict DTD or its XHTML 1.0 Strict counterpart. *ttp://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd *ttp://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd Many authors use a div element with an explicit height and width, combined with the CSS declaration “overflow: auto” to achieve the same effect. This also eliminates the need for some kind of scripting to ensure iframe content is always displayed within its parent page. HTH, Carol

Looks like the encoder is generating decimal NCR's (Numeric Character References). The syntax for a decimal NCR is "D;", where D is a decimal number, refers to the ISO 10646 decimal character number D. htt*://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/charset.html#h-5.3.1 I see "&#D;" on the contact page, which is incorrect. However, the web version seems to be generating the correct NCR format. HTH, Carol

No doubt Google has been lax on hidden text in the past. One of the sites returned for a search phrase that I monitor disappeared from Google results following the recent update. It may be a coincidence, but the phrase is repeated in a large block of text hidden using the same method employed above. Definitely something to consider… HTH, Carol

Wonder if Google applied a “penalty” for the hidden text at the bottom of the page? HTH, Carol

Brothercake (go figure) offers another sophisticated, cross browser solution: Ultimate Dropdown Menu. Should be free for non-profit, but I think a link-back is required. HTH, Carol

The attribute “topmargin="9" (on your body element) is invalid for the doctype declared. Your XHTML doctype triggers “strict mode” rendering in Gecko browsers (Mozilla, FireFox, & Netscape), and these browsers will generally ignore invalid attributes in “strict mode.” A quick fix would be remove the topmargin attribute from your body tag, and use CSS instead: >body { background-color: #2E0042; margin-top: 9px; padding-top: 0; } The latest flavor of Opera will not display the menu at all; a CSS version would be preferable. HTH, Carol

Hey CowboyFrank, Mime type is text/plain for the page in question. You need to send it as text/html. Do you know how to configure mime types in CPanel or .htaccess? HTH, Carol

I like your point Thomas. In many cases, voluntary efforts toward accessibility are going to yield better results than forced compliance. Still, some of the larger companies don’t get it, and we are starting to see some enforcement in the USA under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The New York Attorney General just ruled that the Ramada.com and Priceline.com websites were places of public accommodation and subject to ADA requirements. Both companies agreed to make their sites accessible to blind and visually impaired users, and they will pay “investigation fees” of $40,000 and $37,500, respectively: www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2004/aug/aug19a_04.html HTH, Carol

JavaScript is not evil; it depends on the usage. If you utilize JavaScript to deliver content or for any important functionality (navigation), provide a textual equivalent. Like Lisa said, text links are ideal. Avoid Java applet navigation and links. One of the most important steps you can take for blind/vision-impaired visitors is to provide a meaningful textual equivalent (alt attribute) for ALL your images. This is not necessarily a description of the image. In many instances, you'll want to express the image's function or the information it conveys. Use null alternative text (alt="") for purely decorative or spacer images. Document structure is very important. Many screen readers can extract heading information (h1-h6), allowing users to skim a page without reading every word. Joe Clark's excellent (and free ) book on Web accessibility can be found here: ht*p://www.joeclark.org/book/ HTH, Carol

On my 56K: jikrantz.se/ - 40 secs tchwebring.jikrantz.se/ - 22secs HTH, Carol

Ian Hickson developed a standards compliant flash embed method that doesn’t rely on JavaScript or an extra .swf file. He does use two different object elements; one is enclosed in an IE conditional comment (hack). Despite the extra markup; it does have some advantages over Flash Satay. A brief discussion and example can be found here: h**p://www.dezwozhere.com/blog/archives/000516.html HTH, Carol

Very attractive site! The problem is in your first td element, <td height="915" align="left" valign="top">. On your interior pages, the height is set to 562. HTH, Carol