Re: [css-d] HTMLdog website / Son of Suckerfish
On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 12:02 PM, David Hucklesby huckle...@gmail.com wrote: Don't know what became of htmldog.com. It's still there from my location in Canada, at http://www.htmldog.com/ Maybe they had some temporary problems. Ed Seedhouse __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] Chrome Table Strangeness
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 4:11 AM, Christopher Barth Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions of where I might look or what I might try? Thanks. Validating your html is always the first thing to try. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] absolute positioning
On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Angela French afre...@sbctc.edu wrote: I'm being driving nuts by absolute positioning rendering between IE and FF. While the others have given you accurate information about how AP works, I should suggest that for laying out major elements of the page you stick to floats and margins. They are easier to work with and easier to understand, although there are some snags, especially with IE and you have to learn how to make a floated element enclose it's children, which it won't by default. AP is great for positioning elements for special effect, but using it to lay out major divisions on your page is pretty complicated and with floats and margins your browser and it's normal flow will do much of the work for you. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Problem floating an image to right
On Wed, Jul 28, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Chris u24y...@gmail.com wrote: But when I insert it into my page, it appears to be correct in dreamweaver, but when I preview or load it up to the server, it's positioned on the left, separating the content. It's driving me nuts as I'm sure it's some silly error in my code. Dreamweaver is not a browser and should emnever/em be used to judge how a web page will look in an actual browser. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Remove a:hover Background-color: Images
On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 10:06 AM, PL polockh...@sprintmail.com wrote: Dreamweaver doesn't display it correctly in the design view But then Dreamweaver isn't a web browser and it's design view should only be used to get a vague impression of how it might look in an actual browser. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] OS Specific CSS?
On Fri, Jul 16, 2010 at 11:46 AM, David Hucklesby huckle...@gmail.com wrote: I am not saying that a reset is bad-- just that it is usually unnecessary. I will say it for you then. It is virtually always bad. IMO -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] letter-spacing
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 11:17 AM, bho...@aol.com wrote: Hi. letter-spacing seems to function in IE, but not in Safari, or Google Chrome. Is this normal? letter-spacing:.5px; Since a pixel is, by definition, the smallest measurement possible on any given screen, how would a browser render a space less than one pixel? That's what you seem to be calling for with the rule: letter-spacing:.5px;. Assuming that s even valid CSS, different browsers would likely round either up to 1 pixel, or down to zero pixels. As far as I know, either would be right. Ed __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Anchor offset ?
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM, genericmailli...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want. The standard way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side processing, such as ASP, PHP, server side includes or several other methods. It can be done with pure html/css at the expense of having to re-edit every page every time you want a change in the common parts of the pages. A straightforward language like PHP is easy to learn and available from most ISP providers. Overall it is much more straightforward to do things that way than to do it with frames. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Anchor offset ?
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM, genericmailli...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Ed Seedhouse eseedho...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM, genericmailli...@gmail.com wrote: Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want. The standard way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side processing, such as ASP, PHP, server side includes or several other methods. I think maybe you missed something, I am not wanting to use frames just make the pages behave in a manner similar to frames. And that's what we normally use server side processing for, as I said. The pages I currently working on will not be on a public server but the design concept will be used later on a public server. Well it's perfectly easy to install Apache with PHP included on a Windows machine, and of course if you are using Linix you either already have it installed or can do so in just a few minutes. When the time is right I will find a web sever source where PHP is available. Just install it on your own local machine. I think everyone who is developing with html/css should have their own local web server installed. Any machine less than five years old can handle this easily. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] thoughts on img alt tag verbage
The alt tag should contain a description of the image. If you were viewing your page without images, what would you want the tag to say to replace it? If your image can't be so described then it is decoration and should be brought in via CSS, not your html. On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 6:36 PM, John j...@coffeeonmars.com wrote: I'm validating my website pages, html first, and mostly what I'm getting errors on is my failure to use alt inside my img tags.. Actually, it's more of a warning, I guess it's promoting best practices, but lack of alt doesn't seem to affect the validity and function of the code. But as I'm going through each image tag, I wonder how verbose should I be? Is the assumption that blind people will gain value from hearing a description of every image they can not see? the website in question is my own graphic design portfolio site, so the odds of blind people visiting are slim. However for other sites, is it wise and proper to paint as much of a picture as you can for benefit of those who can't see? Maybe the answer is an obvious yes for some images, but I can also imagine it being pretty annoying hearing logo over and over again, whereas there could be some functional benefit to hearing shopping cart icon. thoughts? thank you, John __ 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/ -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Making a simple form look identical across the main browsers
Here is my main problem - I need it to look identical in all of the following main browsers, including having the text vertically align in the center of the input fields i.e. line heights etc: I suggest you spend your time on a quest that has a better chance of success, such as the search for the philosopher's stone or the holy grail. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Container doesn't contain as expected
I mean contain in the vertical dimension: floats are removed from the flow, and as such don't affect the height of the parent element, unless that parent element is set to contain those floats, by having a clearing element inside, or use a property that establishes a new block formatting context, per CSS2.1:9.4.1 I believe this is something to do with this. I have added display:block; property to the container. In order to respond to: a property that establishes a new block formatting context - but isn't this? I believe the standard way to deal with this is overflow:hidden on the containing element. Otherwise you have to use clear on the following element. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] New to css
There is nothing evil about tables, which are a part of html and as such serve the purpose of marking up tabular content. If the content is naturally tabular, then it is wrong to mark it up other than with a table. Yes, it is wrong to use tables to create a layout, but not to use them when appropriate is equally mistaken. As Bill said, what HTML should be all about is the semantics of the content. That is what it is designed for, and was right from the start. Use HTML to mark up the meaning of the content, and CSS to modify it's presentation. Abuse of DIVs simply for layout is just as wrong as abusing tables for the same purpose. If you think there is a debate about divs vs. tables you just simply don't get it. And I close with a recommendation to read the links provided by Bill. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] public websites with faulty CSS-s
2010/2/1 Sander Sõnajalg san...@zeroturnaround.com: Hey, I'm currently doing some research on which are the most common sources of incompatibilities for CSS (different browsers understanding things differently). Does anyone know if there is some list of public pages with erroneous CSS somewhere? (I mean publicly available websites that look significantly different with different modern browsers (i.e. IE6+, Opera9+, Firefox3+, ..). Even some single examples would help getting started with my research. Invalid HTML is much more widespread and a much worse problem. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] form position problem on IE 6 and 7 - float issues?
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 4:38 PM, MEMtal...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry really. I thought you are talking about CSS validation only, so I was primarily concerning with that. The xhtml will also be validated on future posts. I think you've got it backwards. Valid html/xhtml is actually more important than valid CSS. You should be testing your markup for validation early and often. After all the CSS specs assume valid html/xhtml. The CSS rules don't even logically apply to invalid html, although most browsers will try anyway. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] adjusting overall size in css?
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Rod Castelloflashju...@sbcglobal.net wrote: So my question is, is there a way to make the site stay the same size on a larger monitor but automatically shrink down on a smaller one? http://fossilbyte.com/1/index.html Well, if you just leave block elements like P to their natural behaviour and don't set a size nor position them , they will naturally occupy all possible width in their containers, And if you set your font size on your body to 100 and size all other fonts when necessary in ems, they will appear to the visitor in either the browser default size or their preferred size if they've adjusted their defaults. And if you don't try to specify exact fonts other than perhaps the generic serif and sans-serif families then they'll usually see font they don't mind much. This involves mostly not doing stuff and allowing the user's browser to be the boss. It saves time and effort for the designer, but it means giving up a level of control, which many designers feel uncomfortable about. But whether you actually have or can have that level of control is at least questionable and I recommend a read through Stewart Allsopp's seminal article at http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dao -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Chrome browser
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 2:13 PM, bruce.som...@web.de wrote: Am I the only Chrome user who finds no Help-facility? Did you try the standard F1 key? Or select help from the drop down menu invoked by clicking on the wrench icon at upper right. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] CSS Menu Over Many Web Pages in a Site
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 3:20 PM, Wayne Wickson webde...@gmail.com wrote: Is there a way, using only CSS, to easily change the menu on each of the one hundred pages on the site without actually using an editor and modifying the one hundred lists one list at a time? If you mean changing the actual links the menu points to the answer is no. CSS is a style and presentation language. What you describe, if I understand you correctly, is best done by a server side language such as PHP, ASP, or even Serve Side Includes. And any number of other server side languages as well. Of course you can change the appearance of all the menus easily with an edit to a single CSS file, but not the actual content. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] em units - how to test
2009/3/3 Michał Zieliński zie...@gmail.com: I really need to have layout (font size) the same on every machine. By the same I rather mean more or less. I definitely don`t want to explain people why they have font about 20px large while on the next monitor it is 12px. Sorry, this is something under control of the user and his browser. Any font sizes you set are only suggestions and there is nothing you can do to change this. If I set the minimum font size to 30px in my copy of Firefox then the smallest font your page shows on my browser will be at 30px for me whether you like it or not. Wise web designers keep this in mind when designing. I think, personally, that a design that breaks when the user sets his own font size is simply a broken design. Alas, that includes all too many of them. :-( But trying to get control of what cannot be controlled is a sure recipe for endless frustration. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] firefox 3 mac: bug with the msthemecompatible metatag
On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 10:21 AM, Marshal Horn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Weird, it didn't show a horizontal scrollbar on Flock. Doesn't Flock have exactly the same rendering engine as Firefox? FF3 has a new version of the rendering engine, and I believe Flock still uses the one from FF2. -- Ed Seedhouse __ 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/
Re: [css-d] Best way for text when enlarged
On 6/21/07, Shark Attack Design [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I wonder what proportion of web users ever bother to adjust the default text size of their browser(s)? The preset default size is generally 16 (I think Safari is different?) although I'm not sure what the units are for that default -- pixels? Points? I think that most people, if they were browsing a site that didn't adjust the font size by CSS, would find that default size uncomfortably large. However, they never adjust their default setting because a) they don't even know that they can, and wouldn't know how to if they did, and b) the majority of sites these days make some effort to ramp the type down from 16 to something more 'designed' -- so the user may not even be aware how large their default setting is. I think the point is that for such people the default size at least does not annoy them so much as to drive them to learn how to change it! So going with their default browser size at least won't offend them too badly, and you don't know how they will react if you impose a size on them. In that sense I argue that the browser default font size is the safest and least likely to cause offense. And as we know if the page offends the user she is likely to hit the home or back button and never return. -- Ed Seedhouse __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
