RE: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Bob, I know that you didn't intend any offence, and I appreciate that I did not give the answer that the poster was hoping for, but do I need to remind everyone of the title of this forum? As long as we fail to implement existing standards such as border-radius, IE can legitimately say there is no need for them to support it. Developing a hack (however elegant) is not _promoting_ web standards, semantic mark-up, or accessibility. Mike -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Designer snip If at all possible, stick with the standards - CSS3 includes a declaration for rounded corners, which has been supported by Mozilla for a long time. Mike - Good idea - then the majority of web users won't see them at all! :-) - Best Regards, Bob McClelland ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Patrick if you don't mind my asking, Why do you shake your head at this? Is the good, bad or what? I tried this on my xhtml strict page. It passes validation but generates several warnings for nested emphasis and empty trimmings. As I try dislike my pages to have errors or warnings of any kind, I won't use this bit of code. However I was curious as to your remark --all I can say is...wow *shakes head* Sharron - Original Message - From: Patrick H. Lauke [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 6:51 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners Steve Eades wrote: Hi, I have been playing with Spiffy Corners @ http://www.spiffycorners.com/ for an Intranet but the Spiffy assures that it is Anti-aliased rounded corners using pure CSS. No Images. No Javascript. No fluff. I can assume you that it is very easy to implement and scalable. Works on Macs too. Looking at the required markup div b class=spiffy b class=spiffy1b/b/b b class=spiffy2b/b/b b class=spiffy3/b b class=spiffy4/b b class=spiffy5/b /b div class=spiffy_content !-- Your Content Goes Here -- /div b class=spiffy b class=spiffy5/b b class=spiffy4/b b class=spiffy3/b b class=spiffy2b/b/b b class=spiffy1b/b/b /b /div all I can say is...wow *shakes head* P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.0.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.3/395 - Release Date: 7/21/2006 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
I have not been following this thread so much so bare with me here! If I am totally in left field ignore me. =)I cannot speak for Patrick, but what I think that he is shaking his head at is the class names, the amount of class names, and markup that lacks semantic value. I realize that the classnames are used purely for example here, but it leads us on sort of a painful ride when it is seen. JimOn 7/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Patrick if you don't mind my asking, Why do you shake your head at this?Is the good, bad or what?I tried this on my xhtml strict page. It passes validation but generatesseveral warnings for nested emphasis and empty trimmings.As I try dislike my pages to have errors or warnings of any kind, I won't use this bit of code.However I was curious as to your remark --all I can say is...wow *shakeshead*Sharron Looking at the required markup div b class=spiffy b class=spiffy1b/b/b b class=spiffy2b/b/b b class=spiffy3/b b class=spiffy4/b b class=spiffy5/b /b div class=spiffy_content !-- Your Content Goes Here -- /div b class=spiffy b class=spiffy5/b b class=spiffy4/b b class=spiffy3/b b class=spiffy2b/b/b b class=spiffy1b/b/b /b /div all I can say is...wow *shakes head* P -- Patrick H. Lauke -- __Bugs are, by definition, necessary. Just ask Microsoft!www.co.sauk.wi.us (Work) www.arionshome.com (Personal)www.freexenon.com (Consulting)__Take Back the Web with Mozilla Fire Fox http://www.getfirefox.comMaking a Commercial Case for Adopting Web Standardshttp://www.maccaws.org/Web Standards Project http://www.webstandards.org/Web Standards Grouphttp://www.webstandardsgroup.org/Guild of Accessible Web Designers http://www.gawds.org/ **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Enlightenment is something that will happen while you are haging around here. There are a lot of very tanlented people here and asking for a critique, may hirt a little, but will also get you a lot of wonderful ideas. You might receive ideas and solutions that you have never thought of before. Do not be afraid. Some may bite more than they bark, but we are all well meaning and passionate about Web Standards. So take the bites with a grain of salt, find the truth in what is being said, learn from it, and carry on. Validating is a great start. Semantics can be a tricky area to learn. Maybe someone could propose a more semantically appropriate example to what was posted? Patrick, care to take a swing at it? =)JimOn 7/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Jim, As a veryuniformed builder of a few sites, I really have no understanding as to what is good and or bad. My experience has been, if it works, validates and offers no tidy warnings.well then it'sfair gameto utilize. Ok to utilize if one does not care or is blissfully aware that those in the know are shaking their heads at the code. lol, I'm glad I don't ever ask for a critic of my code, I think I would prefer to remain ignorant. Sharron - Original Message - From: James O'Neill To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2006 10:13 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners I have not been following this thread so much so bare with me here! If I am totally in left field ignore me. =)I cannot speak for Patrick, but what I think that he is shaking his head at is the class names, the amount of class names, and markup that lacks semantic value. I realize that the classnames are used purely for example here, but it leads us on sort of a painful ride when it is seen. -- __Bugs are, by definition, necessary. Just ask Microsoft! www.co.sauk.wi.us (Work)www.arionshome.com (Personal)www.freexenon.com (Consulting)__ Take Back the Web with Mozilla Fire Fox http://www.getfirefox.comMaking a Commercial Case for Adopting Web Standardshttp://www.maccaws.org/ Web Standards Projecthttp://www.webstandards.org/Web Standards Grouphttp://www.webstandardsgroup.org/ Guild of Accessible Web Designershttp://www.gawds.org/ **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
James O'Neill wrote: Validating is a great start. But doesn't guarantee anything other than you've used the right syntax. It's the same as running a spell check in your word processor: it can tell you if you've misspelled words, but it can't tell you if what you've written makes any sense at all. Maybe someone could propose a more semantically appropriate example to what was posted? There is no semantically appropriate way to generate a generic rounded corner box like that. So, if you absolutely must have that exact look, you need to resort to tricks, one way or another. Depending on what content you're actually working with, you could find enough elements to naturally hook into to position the 4 required backgrounds. But you shouldn't have to sully your markup with a myriad of empty elements and meaningless containers only to achieve a visual presentation. Patrick, care to take a swing at it? =) I've been shaking my head so hard, I gave myself whiplash... Earlier in this discussion, somebody said that yes, in an ideal world, the (X)HTML should only carry pure meaning, and the CSS do all the styling...but that in the real world, we do occasionally add certain tiny things (like wrapping things like a site logo, top navigation and search inside a header div - still semantic and structural) to facilitate styling. And sure enough, I agree (in fact, that's one of the points I make in my chapter in the upcoming book[1]). But what about that code sample before? Let's see: - use of B, a purely presentational element which, for whatever reason, was still kept in the XHTML spec - nested B, which make even less sense - LOTS of *empty* B elements - this is the big one: if you start slapping lots of empty elements into your document (even if they're spans, or even if you wrapped your content into 10 separate DIVs or something) you're doing it *purely* for presentational purposes; that's the big difference to wrapping things up in a header div or something...there is *no* semantic justification for empty elements placed into the markup solely for the purpose of allowing some CSS trickery Anyway, long rant...at the end of the day, you're obviously free to do what you think is necessary to achieve a certain look. But I'd sincerely question methods that require you to add junk to your document. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Rounded Corners
None of these solutions have much to do with semantics, and none of them appear to be fool-proof. If at all possible, stick with the standards - CSS3 includes a declaration for rounded corners, which has been supported by Mozilla for a long time. Mike -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janos Hardi Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 1:06 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners Hi, This solution has nothin to do with common semantics - not recommended. Janos On 7/22/06, Al Kendall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: try these http://www.html.it/articoli/nifty/index.html ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Hi Mike, I absolutely agree. Janos On 7/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: None of these solutions have much to do with semantics, and none of them appear to be fool-proof. If at all possible, stick with the standards - CSS3 includes a declaration for rounded corners, which has been supported by Mozilla for a long time. Mike -Original Message- From: listdad@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Janos Hardi Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2006 1:06 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners Hi, This solution has nothin to do with common semantics - not recommended. Janos On 7/22/06, Al Kendall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: try these http://www.html.it/articoli/nifty/index.html ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: None of these solutions have much to do with semantics, and none of them appear to be fool-proof. If at all possible, stick with the standards - CSS3 includes a declaration for rounded corners, which has been supported by Mozilla for a long time. Mike - Good idea - then the majority of web users won't see them at all! :-) - Best Regards, Bob McClelland Cornwall (UK) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Hi, I have been playing with Spiffy Corners @ http://www.spiffycorners.com/ for an Intranet but the Spiffy assures that it is Anti-aliased rounded corners using pure CSS. No Images. No _javascript_. No fluff. I can assume you that it is very easy to implement and scalable. Works on Macs too. Cheers, Steve.On 7/22/06, Jorge Laranjo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I was trying NiftyCube for make rounded corner on my new website.But if I use (as I do) dimensions in em or % insted of px this librarydoesn't work so ok.NiftyCube is a _javascript_ library that makes possibile to have rounded corners with xhtml + css and without images.Anyone has a better way to do rounded corners for a VERY VERY large site.(several templates)--Atentamente,Jorge Laranjoemail [EMAIL PROTECTED]gTalk [EMAIL PROTECTED]msn [EMAIL PROTECTED]aim [EMAIL PROTECTED]skype jorge.laranjohttp://www.olhares.com/fueg0/http://www.flickr.com/photos/fueg0/ http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/102876.html**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Steve Eades wrote: Hi, I have been playing with Spiffy Corners @ http://www.spiffycorners.com/ for an Intranet but the Spiffy assures that it is Anti-aliased rounded corners using pure CSS. No Images. No Javascript. No fluff. I can assume you that it is very easy to implement and scalable. Works on Macs too. Looking at the required markup div b class=spiffy b class=spiffy1b/b/b b class=spiffy2b/b/b b class=spiffy3/b b class=spiffy4/b b class=spiffy5/b /b div class=spiffy_content !-- Your Content Goes Here -- /div b class=spiffy b class=spiffy5/b b class=spiffy4/b b class=spiffy3/b b class=spiffy2b/b/b b class=spiffy1b/b/b /b /div all I can say is...wow *shakes head* P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Paul Novitski wrote: If you call me a conservativist you're right :) I hope we can find a way to the realm of the rounded corners without solutions like this. Sure -- we can just use SPAN or DIV instead. But that still litters the markup with empty, meaningless elements which are there purely to serve the visual layout... Injecting them via javascript may seem a bit more cumbersome, but at least it would keep the content source devoid of non-content-carrying junk. P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Jorge Laranjo wrote: Hi! I was trying NiftyCube for make rounded corner on my new website. But if I use (as I do) dimensions in em or % insted of px this library doesn't work so ok. NiftyCube is a Javascript library that makes possibile to have rounded corners with xhtml + css and without images. Anyone has a better way to do rounded corners for a VERY VERY large site. (several templates) Perhaps you can try this one. No JS. No extra Markup. http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2006/05/02/spanky-corners-10-rounded-corners-clean-html-no-javascript/ Lars Gunther ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Also, in happy times when multiple background images are commonly supported getting rid of one script... is easier than fishing out all extra divs, spans, etc. Looks to me like the CSS3 working draft for border-radius and multiple background-images won't solve much beyond the ordinary round box illusions. Shaped borders will not be possible to create without extra elements - generated or hard-coded. The hard-coded approach is not all that easy to maintain across larger sites - and it does look ugly, and only transparent background-images will go with any page-background and they can't be applied over/outside the edges of the box - even in CSS3 AFAICS. Is there a standard-compliant and 'semantically clean' way to generate the extra elements/style-hooks needed for something like what's in this test-page... http://www.gunlaug.no/homesite/main_6_xv.html ...that'll work in most browsers? Needless to say that I have looked around for alternatives with at least the same design-flexibility, or ways to improve what I have, since I finished that test-page a couple of years ago, but I have yet to find one that works. Lots of conditionals but no can go anywhere solutions around, AFAIK. More difficult still: how to integrate it all with a real background-image on the box. Any real solutions around? regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
At 10:10 AM 7/23/2006, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Is there a standard-compliant and 'semantically clean' way to generate the extra elements/style-hooks needed for something like what's in this test-page... http://www.gunlaug.no/homesite/main_6_xv.html ...that'll work in most browsers? Georg, Your basic structure looks like it would be easy to implement in JavaScript or PHP. Using PHP, the expanded markup would be downloaded to the browser so it would render immediately and wouldn't be dependent on JavaScript. Using either language you'd be able to mark up your pages without hard-coding the extra divs. div class=rob1 div class=t0!-- --/div div class=t1!-- --/div div class=t2!-- --/div div class=t3!-- --/div div class=t4!-- --/div div class=t5!-- --/div div class=t6!-- --/div div class=brdr-field bgnd1 div class=hdl-field h4 class=area-br-left19Easy borders/h4 /div /div div class=b6!-- --/div div class=b5!-- --/div div class=b4!-- --/div div class=b3!-- --/div div class=b2!-- --/div div class=b1!-- --/div /div It looks like your seed markup might be this: div class=rob1 rc div class=brdr-field bgnd1 div class=hdl-field h4 class=area-br-left19Easy borders/h4 /div /div /div If every element that needs the t#s and b#s inserted has a common flag, say an additional class name (such as rc above), JavaScript could walk the DOM and insert the extra divs where needed. Are brdr-field bgnd1 and hdl-field part of the original page markup, or can they be generated too? This is the technique I'm using on my site: http://juniperwebcraft.com/ Compare the page source with the generated source to see the difference. More difficult still: how to integrate it all with a real background-image on the box. Tell me how you envision the background image looking. Would the background image itself appear to have rounded corners as well? Regards, Paul ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Paul Novitski wrote: http://www.gunlaug.no/homesite/main_6_xv.html Your basic structure looks like it would be easy to implement in JavaScript or PHP. Good. I'm almost completely lost when it comes to both Javascript and PHP, so I couldn't get any further on my own ;-) In short: I need help. If every element that needs the t#s and b#s inserted has a common flag, say an additional class name (such as rc above), JavaScript could walk the DOM and insert the extra divs where needed. Are brdr-field bgnd1 and hdl-field part of the original page markup, or can they be generated too? It's an old page-design and not very well styled. I've stopped using it, so I can rethink everything. In new designs I think I can reduce it down to something like... div class=rob1 rc h4 class=area-br-left19Easy borders/h4 /div ...and get the same style-effects, as long as a given number of divs can be generated above, around and below the h4 in this case. Something like... div class=rob1 rc div!-- 7 generated divs here - each with a class --/div div!-- 1 generated wrapper-div -- div!-- 1 generated wrapper-div -- h4Some headline/h4 psome text./p img / psome more text./p /div /div div!-- 7 generated divs here - each with a class --/div /div ...is a likely scenario. If those elements can be generated, then there's nothing stopping me from making it work. All I need to do is to use the first class on the outer wrapper so I can style the generated elements inside to suit my wish for strange shapes on a particular container. In case of javascript and lack of support, I'll let it fall back to a basic style on the outer wrapper. More difficult still: how to integrate it all with a real background-image on the box. Tell me how you envision the background image looking. Would the background image itself appear to have rounded corners as well? Any image that provides a good background for regular, dark, text and whatever, and yes, I want such a background-image to appear within the shaped corner areas as well. Regular pages might be given a simple background like the frosty semi-transparent one I use on my old home-page... http://www.gunlaug.no/index.html ...which isn't hard to position onto each element in the shaped corner areas so it looks as one. More figurative images will make it necessary to calculate the exact height of the box continuously, and adjust image-positions in the shaped corner bottom-area. I always work fluid, so no box-dimensions are known before they arrive at the user-end and are affected by ordinary browser-options. Makes it all a bit harder to pull off, me thinks, so I can avoid the most demanding backgrounds - for now. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Hi, This solution has nothin to do with common semantics - not recommended. Janos On 7/22/06, Al Kendall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: try these http://www.html.it/articoli/nifty/index.html Cheers!!! Al ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
Scott Swabey wrote: Seems like the use of semantically neutral elements to create imageless rounded corners is more than acceptable. Am I missing something? Apart from bloated source-code(?), no, I don't think you have missed anything :-) Personally, I think bloated source-code should be avoided, but it may turn out reasonably well... http://www.gunlaug.no/homesite/main_6_xv.html ...even with a few style-only elements in there. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
On 7/22/06, Al Kendall wrote: try these http://www.html.it/articoli/nifty/index.html At 05:06 AM 7/22/2006, Janos Hardi wrote: This solution has nothin to do with common semantics - not recommended. Janos, may I assume that it's the use of the B tag you're objecting to, rather than the addition of DIVs to the markup to support the rounded corner effect? Alessandro Fulciniti, the author of that technique, uses B tags simply for brevity of markup -- ironic, because while saving six characters for each element (using B instead of SPAN) he's adding a couple of dozen for inline styling. He says, A few words on the use of the b element. I needed an inline element to obtain the rounded corners, since it could be nested in almost every kind of tag mainting the markup valid. So the choice fell on b because it doesn't have semantical meaning and it's shorter than span, like Eric Meyer said. We're currently using a different rounded corners technique on our site http://juniperwebcraft.com/ but similarly adding markup with JavaScript; we're adding classed DIVs to the markup and keeping all the styling in an external stylesheet. (Look at the generated source with the Firefox webdev tool, not the simple page source, to see the resultant markup.) I don't think Fulciniti's technique should be discarded simply because of his debatable tag choice when there are other neutral elements that can more innocuously substitute. Regards, Paul ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
hello, there are extensive lists of several css-only and css js methods for creating rounded corners on http://chronotron.wordpress.com/2006/05/14/nifty-css-rounded-corners-extensive-list/and http://www.econsultant.com/web-developer/css-rounded-corners/ there. greetinx from viennaOn 7/21/06, Jorge Laranjo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I was trying NiftyCube for make rounded corner on my new website.But if I use (as I do) dimensions in em or % insted of px this library doesn't work so ok.NiftyCube is a _javascript_ library that makes possibile to have roundedcorners with xhtml + css and without images.Anyone has a better way to do rounded corners for a VERY VERY large site. (several templates)--Atentamente,Jorge Laranjoemail [EMAIL PROTECTED]gTalk [EMAIL PROTECTED] msn [EMAIL PROTECTED]aim [EMAIL PROTECTED]skype jorge.laranjo http://www.olhares.com/fueg0/http://www.flickr.com/photos/fueg0/http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/102876.html **The discussion list forhttp://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help** -- "He gave man speech, and speech created thought, which is the measure of the Universe." (Prometheus Unbound, Shelley) **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
Re: [WSG] Rounded Corners
try these http://www.html.it/articoli/nifty/index.htmlCheers!!!AlOn 7/22/06, Jorge Laranjo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi! I was trying NiftyCube for make rounded corner on my new website.But if I use (as I do) dimensions in em or % insted of px this librarydoesn't work so ok.NiftyCube is a _javascript_ library that makes possibile to have rounded corners with xhtml + css and without images.Anyone has a better way to do rounded corners for a VERY VERY large site.(several templates)--Atentamente,Jorge Laranjoemail [EMAIL PROTECTED]gTalk [EMAIL PROTECTED]msn [EMAIL PROTECTED]aim [EMAIL PROTECTED]skype jorge.laranjohttp://www.olhares.com/fueg0/http://www.flickr.com/photos/fueg0/ http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/102876.html**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **-- Cheers!Al Kendall **The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
