Re[2]: [WSG] forcing IE6 into quirks mode
Hello Gunlaug, Saturday, November 20, 2004, 12:05:19 AM, you wrote: IE6 should be seen as an obstacle from a users point of view, as well as from a web designer's position. I'm not a user and I don't design for IE6 either. Although I think I agree with you, the reality is that the vast majority of web users are using IE6. You may as well say that Windows has bugs. It does, but lots of people use it. My approach is to design pages that look good, are standards-compliant and accessible, but I also have to make sure that they work well in IE6, because that's what most users will be looking at them with. -- Best regards, Iainmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** 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] forcing IE6 into quirks mode
Iain Harrison wrote: Hello Gunlaug, Saturday, November 20, 2004, 12:05:19 AM, you wrote: IE6 should be seen as an obstacle from a users point of view, as well as from a web designer's position. I'm not a user and I don't design for IE6 either. Although I think I agree with you, the reality is that the vast majority of web users are using IE6. You may as well say that Windows has bugs. It does, but lots of people use it. My approach is to design pages that look good, are standards-compliant and accessible, but I also have to make sure that they work well in IE6, because that's what most users will be looking at them with. Iain, I follow you 100% and I think I wrote something very similar, but I don't design _for_ IE6! My point is that IE6 is less of a problem in quirks mode, as the thread goes. Fixing IE/win is the easy part, so why complicate it if no visitor can see the difference? To be precise: - I _design_ using standards in Opera, Moz/FF and Lynx (in whatever order), and includes Safari in that group although I haven't got a Mac yet (will soon). - I have almost made an artform out of whipping IE5.0+/win into presenting any ordinary creation as a standard compliant look-alike. Advanced creations isn't possible in IE/win, but I know how to cheat if I want to. I handcode everything, and I have as much control as I'd like when it comes to any browser I can get up on my screens/OS (win2K-pro). I share my knowledge about how to fix IE5/IE6 on win into something that looks like compliance with standards-- through hacking or whatever-- in any mode-- over at css-d. However, I often have doubts if I'm doing anyone a favor by doing so. It's fun though... :) regards Georg ** 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] simple javascript question
Hi Ted, I think it really depends on the doctype (i.e (X)HTML Strict or Transitional) of the document. In Strict Doctypes the attribute "language" is deprecated in script elements. See this quick guide: http://www.zvon.org/xxl/xhtmlReference/Output/comparison.html However in transitional/ loose doctypes the attribute is allowed. The "type" attribute is the only required attribute for the script element Check this: http://www.zvon.org/xxl/xhtmlReference/Standard/interact/scripts.html#edef-SCRIPTTed Drake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this validlanguage="_javascript_" type="text/_javascript_"or should I just have type only. I'm afraid of breaking any functions that might require the language.Ted**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list getting help**__Do You Yahoo!?Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: [WSG] forcing IE6 into quirks mode
I find your take on all this very interesting as it is my mindset to try and find the happy medium that you seemingly are now accomplishing. I was wondering if you can give links to some of your sites and/or to some of the discussions on css-d. IMHO your approach to throwing IE5/IE6 to the dogs (so to speak) makes sense, though I'd prefer that those browsers were used by or preferably eaten entirely by the dogs. Enjoy your upcoming Mac, I know you will. wayne ** 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] forcing IE6 into quirks mode
Wayne Godfrey wrote: I find your take on all this very interesting as it is my mindset to try and find the happy medium that you seemingly are now accomplishing. I was wondering if you can give links to some of your sites and/or to some of the discussions on css-d. The thread should tell that I don't design web sites for a living. I'm just another retired, and bored, software-man. Web-carpentry beats computer-games and crossword-puzzles. site: http://www.gunlaug.no/ (partly bilingual-- a design-mix ready for re-design) author: http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/main_author.html (where I test out some new ideas at the moment) You might find http://www.css-discuss.org/ interesting. Not much discussion about quirk mode for IE6 though. IMHO your approach to throwing IE5/IE6 to the dogs (so to speak) makes sense, though I'd prefer that those browsers were used by or preferably eaten entirely by the dogs. Enjoy your upcoming Mac, I know you will. So I've been told by many. Hope to have an iMac up and running before x-mas (have already paid for it). Now I only have a dual-processor high speed multi-tasking workstation with multiple screens, and support-units with more screens-- all running win2K-pro. Georg ** 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] forcing IE6 into quirks mode
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: Wayne Godfrey wrote: Enjoy your upcoming Mac, I know you will. So I've been told by many. Hope to have an iMac up and running before x-mas (have already paid for it). Now I only have a dual-processor high speed multi-tasking workstation with multiple screens, and support-units with more screens-- all running win2K-pro. Not bad for a carpenter. ;-) I think your iMac will fall silent in such company. :-D Jeroen -- vizi fotografie grafisch ontwerp - http://www.vizi.nl/ ** 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] Font size and arrogance
Lothar B. Baier wrote on Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:47:16 +0100: But is it my fault, that dell or hp ore other produce laptops, which screensize and screen resolution are set to a default which makes it impossible to read a text easy? One size cannot fit all. With defaults come a means to change them to suit user needs. It should not bother you that some don't know this or don't use it. Is it my fault, that the designers of browsers after about 10 years of webstandards are not able to produce browsers which behave according to those standards? I don't think so. The newest and best ones do behave according to standards quite well, if not perfectly. So I think instead of spending a mayority of our time in finding solutions for problems, which are not caused by us, we should collect our energy to put presure on browser designers to produce browser which are standard Are you sure web page designers aren't causing problems? I suggest you don't know, but can find out a lot if you want. The open source Mozilla project, makers of Firefox, Camino and Mozilla Suite software, has several places where you can learn what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what users and page authors complain or rave about. I don't know about what M$ is or isn't doing, but I do know that the makers of Safari, Gecko and Opera do their best to produce browsers designed to work well within the defined standards, and still work as well as possible with M$'s undefined standards. Don't forget, a browser is a USER AGENT, not a web page author agent. It's purpose is to meet the needs of the user first, and web page authors secondarily. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** 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] Font size and arrogance
designer wrote on Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:28:45 -: When you buy wallpaper, how on earth do you manage to change the default size of the pattern? I don't. If I don't like it, I don't buy it. Also, when you buy someone a coffee table book, say, of great art works, do you buy them seven copies, each with a different size type/layout and ask them which one they want? No, but if I can't find one I can read, I don't buy any at all. When you watch something on Television, do you have a set of large magnifiers (or reducers) to put in front of the screen, so you can use the one to suit your mood? No, I just buy a big TV. :-) These things (and nearly everything else in life) are at the mercy of the designers who helped produced them. For a lot of web designers (as opposed to web site producing technicians), a web site is just the same Ah, but no it isn't. Everybody's viewport is a different size. Besides differences in display size, resolution and DPI, browser window sizes are limited only by the user's ability to discretely choose some particular size, being nearly infinitely adjustable. The designer has no reliable way to know either how big it is, or how big anything in it is. You know the old saying: you can't please all of the people all of the time? Anyone who thinks he can is the one being arrogant :-) The web is a bit different. It presents an opportunity to get really close most of the time, by utilizing user preferences, rather than fighting them. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** 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] Font size
Javier wrote on Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:25:51 +0100: I'm trying to develope a site with proportional font size. When I start to test what I did, I falled in problems with Firefox/IE differences. Fonts that in Firefox appears big or normal in IE appear so small. Then I tried to check other sites to see what the people are doing... I've seen a lot of combinations and tested various but nothing work as I want. May be I'm combining everything instead of take a method and try to apply it and solve its problems. Now I want to start from scratch but I'm not sure wich method to use. I've seen people that apply a font small in body and then use em's in all other settings. I've seen people that apply a 65% font-size in body, others a 100%, etc.. and then use em's in other settings but others use percentage... Now I'm really confused... Which is the best way to get fonts working identically in any browser ? Sorry for the question, is the second I ask about fonts, but this problem is driving me nuts. You're probably just encountering IE's font size inheritance bugs. Take a look at http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/IE/IE6FontInherit.html http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/IE/IE6FontInherit3.html Then make sure you aren't letting any of those happen in your styling. Be sure if you still have difficulty to post a URL exhibiting the problem you are having if you ask for help. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** 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] Font size and arrogance
Lothar B. Baier wrote on Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:06:50 +0100: Somebody buys a laptop with a 14 inch screen and puts it 1400 by 1050 pixel screenresolution. Then he complains, that all of the text ist to small to read. That reminds me of the man, who choose a two-seated spider car because he likes it very much to drive fast with an open roof. And than he complains about the designer of that car, because he is not able to move his 5-room-houshold to the next city with that car and has to rent a truck. This not a good comparison. A laptop screen has what is known a native resolution. What that means is that choosing some other resolution, if that is possible at all to do, causes degraded rendering accuracy. Reducing resolution on such a display by some nominal amount, such as from 1400x1050 to 1024x768, causes a compounded effective resolution reduction. Nominally, going from 1400x1050 to 1024x768 is a resolution reduction of 46.5%, but doing that on a flat panel display produces degradation noticably in excess of 46.5%. To clarify my opinion: On every computer I know, it is possible to reduce the screenresolution to get bigger text to the screen. So, when sobody with a handicap on his eyesight uses to set the screenresolution to the max. possible, he should not blame a webdesigner for no longer being able to read the text on a website. I design all my websites on a computer with the screenresolution set appropriate to the size of the screen I use. If the user does the same, he will be able to read, what is written there. If not, it's not my fault. The problem is high resolution is designed for those who require high quality. People who pay extra to enjoy high quality don't easily accept the proposition that to improve some problem (font size) that they must discard the higher quality they paid for. What astute users of high resolution equipment do is adjust their own settings to ensure that high resolution does not shrink their fonts. Once they do this, their only problem with too small fonts results from web page designers who size in pt or px, disregarding user settings. IOW, changing resolution is not the correct way for a user to change font sizes. Depending on OS and software used, this is appropriately done by making some system wide settings change, or a software dependent preference change. Or, he could switch to a larger display. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** 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] Font size
Terrence Wood wrote on Fri, 19 Nov 2004 12:04:19 +1300: I also note that Felix has not stepped up to the plate to support any of his opinions with research based results despite demanding (and getting) the same from the ``designer's side'' of the debate. Your Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:50:17 +1300 post link did that for me. Pointing to bug fixes for mozilla doesn't cut it as research. I think if I provided some examples people could examine for themselves. Bugzilla pages are far more than patches to fix bugs. Before the patches happen, there is discussion about behavior, both of Mozilla and its competitors, whether or not the behavior is intended, and what if anything can or should be done about it. Much discussion is about text sizing, and much of that is from users complaining about text-related usability issues. The most repeated text-related user complaint can be summarized as why doesn't zoom stick?. However, the majority of users don't, There's nothing so absurd that if you repeat it often enough, people will believe it.William James -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** 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] Font size
Natalie Buxton wrote at Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:58:25 +1100: Selectively quoting and removing the key point I made misrepresents what I said in my earlier email: I normally quote only portions relevant to comments I make. I believe that the best the designer can do is ensure their fonts are specified in relative units so that a site visitor can resize the text to whatever they like. For the vast majority, those sites WILL be ready for use on arrival. If the first thing visitors need to do on arrival is change the page's font size, even though they have previously set defaults that suit their needs for sites that honor defaults, those sites weren't ready for use on arrival. It really isn't as cut and dried as you are trying to imply. If designers left all text at the browser default for whatever resolution they are designing on, why bother with design at all? There's a LOT more to designing for the web than fonts. With the current state of browsers and standards, designing complex sites that don't break with the use of a wide range of font sizes is anything but trivial. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** 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] Font size
Terrence Wood wrote on Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:50:17 +1300: People get off making this assumption because 10-12pt type is the most common font size used in the print world, Web pages aren't printed on fixed size paper. Browser viewports are for all practical purposes infinitely adjustable in size. Not counting those who run their browsers maximized, it's nearly impossible to find two people using the same size viewport in a sample of practical size. Web pages thus need to be able to adapt to pages whose width is unknown, and whose type size is unknown. and 10-12px on screen is close approximation of that. Only on old Macs and some X Windows systems is that true. 12px = 12px only at 72 DPI, and very few computers use so low a resolution for the internet any more. The most common default font size on today's internet is 16px, which at the standard today browser DPI of 96 is 12pt. 10pt at 96 DPI is 13.33px. IE6 defaults to 12pt. Gecko defaults to 16px. Windoze users often chose a non-default system font size large fonts, which keeps the IE6 default at 12pt, but changes its meaning via a switch to 120 DPI that makes it 20px, 25% larger. 12px type is the preferred size according to research: http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/41/onlinetext.htm According to that page, 12pt is the preferred size. Felix where is proof to back up any of your sweeping generalisations about users? The page you cited seems sufficient, but http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/wauth2.html has links to more if you need it. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** 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] web essentials 04 - zeldman video keynote online
Leslie Riggs wrote: Anyone who provides transcripts or subtitling does an enormous, incalculable service for Deaf and hard of hearing professionals like me. We get to smile, laugh, and ponder right along with everyone else, instead of a few seconds later. Ok, call me enormous and incalculable...used the chance to play around with SMIL a bit. http://www.splintered.co.uk/experiments/66/ Captioned as Quicktime SMIL 1.0. Takes ages to buffer, as it references Zeldman's original, non-optimised 9MB movie :( Also available is a simple HTML transcript. I'd be interested to hear about any compatibility issues of the embedded QT SMIL (particularly from Mac users). Cheers, 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 ** 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] Font size... [ADMIN - CLOSED AGAIN]
Felix. A thread closed by a core member is not to be opened again. Period! The topic has been exhausted. If you have fresh information on the topic after a thread has been closed, send it directly to the person and not to the list. Peter ** 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] ADMIN - THREAD CLOSED
Peter Firminger wrote: A thread closed by a core member is not to be opened again. Period! That's fine, except until one receives notification a thread is closed, one cannot know a thread is closed. The subject was apparently very popular, and created a flood of posts in related though somewhat distinguishable threads. The problem is, the mail servers were misbehaving at the time (and apparently still are, as I have even late today received Friday posts from the WG list). I was getting posts several hours or even more than a day after they were, presuming the timestamps were correct. So, I decided to just read and respond as I came to them sorted into timestamp order, FIFO if you please, without regard to actual arrival time, after much time given to allow arrival of stragglers, instead of my usual procedure to read through all or most and pick the most interesting for immediate or priority attention, saving others for later or skipping. I responded to no WG list posts of any kind that were timestamped prior to the closure post I eventually came to, from russ, at Fri, 19 Nov 2004 20:20:35 +1000. There's an additional problem with the application of thread closure in this case (if not others). Apparently russ thinks everyone subscribing has perfect memory. That is, we all have committed to memory all posts on a given subject in order to know the definition of the particular thread to which he referred. I have no such memory. I go through upwards of 600 posts on various subjects in a typical day. In order for me to know the meaning of this thread, I need more information. The closure post contained nothing to provide that contextual information except for two very generic short words in the subject line. The closure post stripped all prior content from the thread that might identify it more precisely, including reference identification that all competent emailers include. I see your mailer, though different from russ', also strips these invaluable threading references before sending. Russ' message ended with the words No more font size discussions!. On its face, since no time frame is mentioned, leaving the putative ban indeterminate, it clearly conflicts with the following words from http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm The mail list is for web designers developers who are interested in ... best practices. and The mail list covers any topic associated with web standards...best practices. Posts in fitting such description not containing flames and not simply regurgitating comments from upthread should not be subject to an indeterminate ban. IMO, my responses contained neither flames nor regurgitation, nor were responses to same. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] How not to inherit
I have the following code in a file:
begin code
a:hover {
background-color: #dedede;
color: #385468;
text-decoration: none;
}
#navbar-main a:hover, #navbar a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
}
/end code
The problem is, I don't want the navbar rule to inherit the color and
background-color declarations from the previous rule. Suggestions?
Thanks in advance!
Lee
**
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] How not to inherit
can you simple redifine them with the color and background they should have?
not sure your specific instance... more information might lead to a
better way to do exactally with your looking for
~j
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 23:24:54 -0500, Lee Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have the following code in a file:
begin code
a:hover {
background-color: #dedede;
color: #385468;
text-decoration: none;
}
#navbar-main a:hover, #navbar a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
}
/end code
The problem is, I don't want the navbar rule to inherit the color and
background-color declarations from the previous rule. Suggestions?
Thanks in advance!
Lee
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
--
Jonathan T. Sage
Theatrical Lighting / Set Designer
Professional Web Design
[HTTP://www.JTSage.com]
[HTTP://design.JTSage.com]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[See Headers for Contact Info]
**
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] How not to inherit
On 11/20/04 8:24 PM Lee Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out:
begin code
a:hover {
background-color: #dedede;
color: #385468;
text-decoration: none;
}
#navbar-main a:hover, #navbar a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
}
/end code
The problem is, I don't want the navbar rule to inherit the color and
background-color declarations from the previous rule. Suggestions?
What do you want those attributes inherited from then?
I'd say you need to declare them in the second declaration to set them for
navbar-main.
I'm missing the point I'm sure.
Erik Fåberg
**
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] How not to inherit
You could use something like
#navbar-main a:hover, #navbar a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
color: #--;
background: #--;
}
if you just want to color the links -- since it's more specific than
just the 'a' rules, it should take precedence (at least it should, I
haven't tested this particular example).
Cam
On 21/11/2004, at 3:29 PM, Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
can you simple redifine them with the color and background they should
have?
not sure your specific instance... more information might lead to a
better way to do exactally with your looking for
~j
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 23:24:54 -0500, Lee Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I have the following code in a file:
begin code
a:hover {
background-color: #dedede;
color: #385468;
text-decoration: none;
}
#navbar-main a:hover, #navbar a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
}
/end code
The problem is, I don't want the navbar rule to inherit the color
and
background-color declarations from the previous rule. Suggestions?
Thanks in advance!
Lee
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
--
Jonathan T. Sage
Theatrical Lighting / Set Designer
Professional Web Design
[HTTP://www.JTSage.com]
[HTTP://design.JTSage.com]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[See Headers for Contact Info]
**
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] How not to inherit
Erik,
Thanks. It's so simple I couldn't figure it out. I just changed the colors
to what I did want and it worked (Duh!)
Thanks again.
Lee
At 11/20/04 11:44 PM, Rick Faaberg wrote:
On 11/20/04 8:24 PM Lee Underwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out:
begin code
a:hover {
background-color: #dedede;
color: #385468;
text-decoration: none;
}
#navbar-main a:hover, #navbar a:hover {
text-decoration: underline;
}
/end code
The problem is, I don't want the navbar rule to inherit the color and
background-color declarations from the previous rule. Suggestions?
What do you want those attributes inherited from then?
I'd say you need to declare them in the second declaration to set them for
navbar-main.
I'm missing the point I'm sure.
Erik Fåberg
**
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] web essentials 04 - zeldman video keynote online
That was absolutely terrific. I loved it. THANK YOU. I'm still chuckling over Jeffrey's This is CSS, this is XHTML, and this is wait a minute... And at last, I understand what he was SAYING!! I didn't have any problems with the QT SMIL at all, using WinME and Mozilla Firefox 1.0 - I did update my QuickTime before playing the movie, though, to make sure I had the latest version. How hard was it to caption, Patrick? Is it real time-consuming? Would it be something doable for each of the presentations that are filmed? (a delighted and thankful) Leslie Riggs Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Leslie Riggs wrote: Anyone who provides transcripts or subtitling does an enormous, incalculable service for Deaf and hard of hearing professionals like me. We get to smile, laugh, and ponder right along with everyone else, instead of a few seconds later. Ok, call me enormous and incalculable...used the chance to play around with SMIL a bit. http://www.splintered.co.uk/experiments/66/ Captioned as Quicktime SMIL 1.0. Takes ages to buffer, as it references Zeldman's original, non-optimised 9MB movie :( Also available is a simple HTML transcript. I'd be interested to hear about any compatibility issues of the embedded QT SMIL (particularly from Mac users). Cheers, Patrick H. Lauke ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
