I just uploaded a new design for the church of which I'm a volunteer  
web guy.  The HTML and CSS validate.

A "Speed Report" sees two large background images loading for the  
header/banner, but I think my CSS only should load one.  They're big  
images, so if it's loading both of them, it's a real page weight  
problem.  Here are the details:

A different header/banner image loads depending on a body tag id.   
Here's the relevant CSS:

#twoCol #header {background-image:url(../img/header2col.jpg);}
#threeCol #header {background-image:url(../img/header3col.jpg);}
#header {
        padding: 0;
        background-repeat: no-repeat;
        background-position: center top;
        height: 248px;
}

and here's the relevant HTML:

<body id="threeCol">
<div id="header">
      <h1>&nbsp;</h1>
</div>

It seems to work fine!  However, I just discovered that a "Speed  
Report" seems to be "seeing" BOTH "header" background images loading  
whereas my CSS is supposed to be only loading one.  Here's the  
relevant part of the report:

QTY     SIZE#   TYPE    URL     COMMENTS
1       112194  CSS IMG         http://www.holycrossoca.org/img/header3col.jpg  
 
Header size = 341 bytes
1       112189  CSS IMG         http://www.holycrossoca.org/img/header2col.jpg  
 
Header size = 341 bytes

Here are the relevant pages:

http://www.holycrossoca.org
http://www.holycrossoca.org/css/hc.css
http://analyze.websiteoptimization.com

Can anyone tell me whether I've misunderstood my CSS somehow, and it's  
actually telling the browser to load both header images?  And if my  
CSS is doing what I think it's doing, how does that "Speed Report"  
somehow "see" both of those header images loading?

Many thanks!

Theophan
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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/

Reply via email to