ah, I love explanations. I'm not great on memory unless I understand
something. Never would've been a good actor.
Okay, so the basic idea as I see it is to work with the anchors
instead of the li. I saw the li as the more base part and worked
from big to small, but here small was the essential part (the link).
Now that "side li" and "side li:hover" are gutted, do I still need
them? I noted that it worked fine without them.
thank you for your help Bill.
daniel
On Aug 22, 2008, at 11:12 AM, Bill Brown wrote:
> This should help. Explanation follows code.
>
> #side li {
> color: #FFF; /* - REMOVE [1] */
> padding: .25em; /* - REMOVE [2] */
> }
> #side li:hover {
> background: #F3E0A8; /* - REMOVE [3] */
> color: #000; /* - REMOVE [4] */
> }
> #side li a {
> background-color: #CCA349; /* + ADD [5] */
> color: #FFF;
> display: block;
> padding: 0.25em; /* + ADD [6] */
> text-decoration: none;
> }
> #side li a:hover {
> background: #F3E0A8; /* + ADD [7] */
> color:#000000;
> }
>
> [1] Redundant - Already in anchor style.
> [2] Moved to 6.
> [3] Moved to 7.
> [4] Redundant - Already in anchor hover style.
> [5] Just good practice when specifying color.
> [6] From LI style.
> [7] From LI:hover style.
>
> Hope it helps.
> --Bil
--
Daniel Kessler
University of Maryland College Park
School of Public Health
3302E SPH Building
College Park, MD 20742-2611
Phone: 301-405-2545
http://sph.umd.edu
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
