Hi Elsi, all While we may have discussed more volatile issues in the BRC, I have never seen one that elicited as much interest. If I may make a private interpretation of "standard browser screen," I take it to mean the screen that is viewed by invoking the index or default URL. Without touching a mouse, page-down or scroll control, the USGWP logo shall be immediately visible. This definition may preclude the placement of the logo on the right side of the screen (depending on resolution) or at the bottom of the page. The intent is to immediately identify our Project to the page viewer, distinguishing it from those who have adopted some form of "GenWeb" alternative. It also proclaims that the page is affiliated with the national USGenWeb Project. As for the usage of graphical browsers, the use thereof is low enough to make "standard browser screen" a moot point. The attempt was made to identify Project pages, not to empower "page police." The home or index page is the front door of our Project pages. Like the realty agencies who place a "for sale" sign in the front yard of a home being sold, Century 21 signs won't be found in the bathroom, bedroom, etc. 'Nuff said. BTW, the Bylaws Revision Committee has two vacancies. Anyone feeling strongly about the future of the USGWP is invited to volunteer. Please contact Roger Swafford, Committee Chair <sagitta56@mchsi.com> Derick S. Hartshorn State Coordinator, NCGenWeb Project Member-USGWP ERC At 09:31 AM 5/3/03, you wrote: >At 04:31 PM 5/2/2003 -0500, Roger Swafford wrote: >>Section 1. All USGenWeb web sites shall display an official USGenWeb >>logo prominently, on the home or index page, in such away that >>the entire image is visible without scrolling down on a standard browser >>screen. The USGenWeb logo used shall be at least 100 pixels by 100 >>pixels in size. > > >Please define "standard browser screen". Within how many pixels of the >top of the "screen" does this image have to appear in order to avoid scrolling? > >What about horizontal scrolling? You don't want to restrict that? > >Unless the USGenWeb wants to dictate design templates (which I don't >necessarily think is a bad idea), you're going to find this particular >requirement difficult to properly define and police. > >And, this proposal pre-supposes a graphical browser. There are users who >browse with text browsers and will never see a logo, no matter how much >they scroll. > >Why does the logo have to appear on only the first/home/index page of the >site? Why not require it on each and every page? > >A much better effort for our organization would be to start proposing >accessibility standards. > >Regards, >Elsi (aka Leigh Compton)

--Boundary_(ID_bY/mahmAgrWU7txGeR8Pdw) Content-type: text/plain; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-222E6FF7; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT >If I may make a private interpretation of "standard browser screen," I >take it to mean the screen that is viewed by invoking the index or default >URL. So, in other words, the group of people that authored this proposed change don't know what they mean. There *is* no such thing as a standard browser screen in the "real world" on the internet. There is no such thing as a standard resolution. So the wording of this new by-law is impossibly flawed from the start. By the way, you're mixing apples and oranges. A browser is something you use, a tool, nothing more or less. The default URL would be what you would see when you use a browser, assuming that you use only the base URL & don't add a specific page designation; for most sites, the "index.htm" or "index.html" page would be what you get. Are you also suggesting that USGW pages would be required to use the "index.htm" as their front page? A lot of people don't. Especially people who may have more than one county on the same account (pretty common among people providing their own webspace outside of the largesse of Rootsweb). Personally, I don't think the current by-law *needs* revising. But substituting one set of vague instructions with a second set of vague instructions certainly is not an improvement. If it's subject to someone's personal interpretation, then what's the purpose? >The intent is to immediately identify our Project to the page viewer, >distinguishing it from those who have adopted some form of "GenWeb" >alternative. It also proclaims that the page is affiliated with the >national USGenWeb Project. Well, now, let's keep the terminology correct <g>. GenWeb is the trademark of a biotech firm. Pardon me for being suspicious, but I tend to think that this whole discussion has less to do identifying our project to the page viewer than it does with those alternative projects. Instead of trying to find roundabout ways to try to somehow diminish or lessen other projects -- and the participation of USGWP volunteers in them -- why not focus on ways to improve the USGWP? >As for the usage of graphical browsers, the use thereof is low enough to >make "standard browser screen" a moot point. But the way the new proposal is worded, "standard browser screen" is hardly moot. In fact, the definition of a standard browser screen is almost the whole point. >The attempt was made to identify Project pages, not to empower "page police." Then identify specific pages with issues and makes suggestions to the webmaster. This new by-law suggestion would do little more than *create* a page police, as some people would begin to run amuck among USGWP pages looking for violations to whine about. >The home or index page is the front door of our Project pages. Like the >realty agencies who place a "for sale" sign in the front yard of a home >being sold, Century 21 signs won't be found in the bathroom, bedroom, etc. >'Nuff said. I don't follow the relevance of this one at all, but whatever. Although perhaps it's worth pointing out that the last time I put a house up for sale, the realtor was providing me with a service for which she was rather handsomely paid. And she put her sign in my yard with my permission, because it was my yard, not hers. Angie Rayfield NCGenWeb Project --Boundary_(ID_bY/mahmAgrWU7txGeR8Pdw) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-avg=cert; x-avg-checked=avg-ok-222E6FF7 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-disposition: inline --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.476 / Virus Database: 273 - Release Date: 4/24/2003 --Boundary_(ID_bY/mahmAgrWU7txGeR8Pdw)--