allan wrote:
Stas Bekman wrote:
The second issue is the css syntax. I read that some browsers don't understand 'background-image' tag, but do understand 'background'. So should I provide both? Of course I've kept the 'background-color' in case the images are disabled.
do you mean understand in a css-way or html-way.
css way, I think it'd be the best to have no special markup in HTML, but to let CSS handle everything. I wonder though, what happens if CSS is turned off in some graphic browsers (not talking about text browsers like lynx).
most browsers understand the html: <body background="some.gif">
besides for best results i _think_ that this:
background-color: #000066; background-image: url(images/bg.jpg); background: url(images/bg.jpg);
should be:
background-image: url(images/bg.jpg); background: url(images/bg.jpg); background-color: #000066;
it seemed to work for mozilla, but you are probably right, it's better to have the color last, just in case...
_____________________________________________________________________ Stas Bekman JAm_pH -- Just Another mod_perl Hacker http://stason.org/ mod_perl Guide http://perl.apache.org/guide mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ticketmaster.com http://apacheweek.com http://singlesheaven.com http://perl.apache.org http://perlmonth.com/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
