<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Spider Trax &#187; Scripting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/category/scripting/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog</link>
	<description>The meanderings of a black widow...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Apr 2010 13:22:19 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Support And Educate</title>
		<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2007/10/05/support-and-educate/</link>
		<comments>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2007/10/05/support-and-educate/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Black Widow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Accessibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scripting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web accessibility]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=156</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Grant Broome has recently expressed some reservations over the suggestion that site developers abandon text-sizing widgits in favour of educating users instead. He&#8217;s worried that this approach is overly biased Personally, I don&#8217;t see this discussion as particularly biased. More of a natural maturing within the web accessibility development sector. For years, we&#8217;ve been aware [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2007/10/05/support-and-educate/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supporting Legacy Browsers, or Not</title>
		<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/12/08/supporting-legacy-browsers-or-not/</link>
		<comments>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/12/08/supporting-legacy-browsers-or-not/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Dec 2006 16:40:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Black Widow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Scripting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=86</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Following a conversation about the problems of supplying accessible content to old (legacy) browsers Mike Cherim came up with a PHP solution that would allow developers to serve very plain content to legacy browsers but rich content to everyone else. There&#8217;s nothing wrong with Mike&#8217;s code but I felt it could be tidied up and, [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/12/08/supporting-legacy-browsers-or-not/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>An Alternative Colour Contrast Analyser</title>
		<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/10/06/an-alternative-colour-contrast-analyser/</link>
		<comments>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/10/06/an-alternative-colour-contrast-analyser/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Oct 2006 15:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Black Widow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Accessibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scripting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CSS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[web accessibility]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=71</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Following my comments in Does W3C Get Its Contrasts Wrong?, I decided to develop an alternative colour contrast analyser that took into account some of the points I&#8217;d raised. As well as using the W3C thresholds, it uses the Hewlett Packard Color Difference threshold which, at 400, is 20% lower than the corresponding W3C figure. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/10/06/an-alternative-colour-contrast-analyser/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Reply-To Header Can Create Bounces</title>
		<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/10/02/reply-to-header-can-create-bounces/</link>
		<comments>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/10/02/reply-to-header-can-create-bounces/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 02 Oct 2006 22:00:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Black Widow</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Scripting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=67</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If your form email script creates a Reply-To header that doesn&#8217;t conform to the examples given in RFC 822, you may find that some of your mails are rejected by SMTP servers &#8211; even if your mail headers conform to RFC 2822. A site had a number of email scripts that had been built up [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/10/02/reply-to-header-can-create-bounces/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
