Alan Gresley wrote:
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
If a browser can't stack various layers of one element together in
the right order on top of all layers of another element, without
explicitly being told to group and stack element layers by using
a nonsensical property/value for the case, then it
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 7:14 PM, Scott Sauyet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Francis wrote:
Can anybody figure out why the quote on this page overlaps the footer
near
the bottom right-hand side?
http://www.bris.ac.uk/news/2008/12017945171.html
It's obviously not meant to do this and
Rob Emenecker wrote:
And remember this about logs: If you design a site that
doesn't work in browser X, after awhile, you won't have
anyone using browser X visit your site *because your site
doesn't work.* Then you'll pat yourselves on the back
and say, See - no one uses browser X. ;-)
Maybe a dumb question, but is the text in column (2) defined to be left
aligned?
Other than that, I cannot think of a reason - if all table rows are in
one table and not in separate ones - why that should happen. Could you
provide a link to an exemplary page showing your problem? Does it
Jim Davis wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 6:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to have an image showing a picture frame and have that
as part of the css style sheet.
Here is a way to have the frame in as a background in the css and adding the
image in the body of
* Christian Kirchhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008:03:07:10:51:12+0100] scribed:
Maybe a dumb question, but is the text in column (2) defined to be left
aligned?
Other than that, I cannot think of a reason - if all table rows are in
one table and not in separate ones - why that should happen.
I agree with everything your saying David.
I was simply having one of those crap-tacular days and was trying to inject
some witty sarcasm into the thread.
It wasn't meant as a 'poo poo, why do you worry about that old text
browser?' comment. The exact opposite is true, we should worry about it
Mike Schleif wrote:
Go here:
http://hb.platinumaire.net/form_4.aspx
Enter this string:
{A8D5CDDA-972F-4D33-A7E8-B5342AAE1350}
and submit.
The server is throwing errors when I try this. Do you have a spot to
post just a static copy of the page in question?
-- Scott
Okay, I swear I've done this a thousand times, and seen it ten thousand,
but I've having problems with a straightforward layout problem. I'm
wondering if anyone has a similar layout laying around...
I'm looking for a two-column layout. The left (#nav) column should be
fixed width and the
Scott Sauyet schrieb:
Okay, I swear I've done this a thousand times, and seen it ten thousand,
but I've having problems with a straightforward layout problem. I'm
wondering if anyone has a similar layout laying around...
I'm looking for a two-column layout. The left (#nav) column should
Scott Sauyet wrote:
I'm looking for a two-column layout. The left (#nav) column should be
fixed width and the right (#main) one fluid. I'd like to have a footer
that sticks to the bottom of the viewport or the bottom of the document,
whichever is lower. And I'd like the main content to
I'm curious as to why you're targeting various IEs with hacks when
conditional comments let you do the same thing? Especially if the hacks
are used to import external sheets in the first place, it seems to me
it's easier to just use CCs to load browser-specific fix-up sheets in
the first place.
Wow. Sorry Scott - you'll be getting this twice! I keep forgetting
when I hit reply to this list, it only replies to the original person
- not the whole list.
I wanted to re-send because I thought this might help someone else
looking for the same thing - otherwise I wouldn't bother. I just
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wanted to re-send because I thought this might help someone else
looking for the same thing - otherwise I wouldn't bother. I just did
this *exact* layout for a client the day before yesterday. You can get
the vanilla version here:
David Laakso wrote:
Scott Sauyet wrote:
I'm looking for a two-column layout. The left (#nav) column should be
fixed width and the right (#main) one fluid. I'd like to have a footer
that sticks to the bottom of the viewport or the bottom of the document,
whichever is lower. And I'd like
* Scott Sauyet [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008:03:07:08:59:00-0500] scribed:
Mike Schleif wrote:
Go here:
http://hb.platinumaire.net/form_4.aspx
Enter this string:
{A8D5CDDA-972F-4D33-A7E8-B5342AAE1350}
and submit.
The server is throwing errors when I try this. Do you have a spot to
Hello,
A look at your html code shows me that the rows are in separate tables.
For a start try to combine evrything in one single table by dropping the
extra:
/table
table cellpadding=5 cellspacing=5 width=100%
in between the four rows.
Otherwise: Try setting width: 180px; for .Image, and
* Christian Kirchhoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008:03:07:18:11:45+0100] scribed:
Hello,
A look at your html code shows me that the rows are in separate tables.
For a start try to combine evrything in one single table by dropping the
extra:
/table
table cellpadding=5 cellspacing=5 width=100%
Setting the X-UA-Compatible response header has some aspects I find
remarkable.
meta http-equiv=X-UA-Compatible content=IE=6
or
meta http-equiv=X-UA-Compatible content=IE=5
...
- content=IE=5 or content=IE=6 throws IE8b1 in quirksmode, even if
the document has a standards Doctype.
while
-
So the meta-switch is able to take precedence over the doctype switch in
any case.
Definitely! That's by design.
Doctype switching will continue to work as usual; you can choose
between Quirks (IE5.5) and Standard (IE8). However, any meta switch
will ALWAYS overrule any doctype.
Setting
Gunlaug Sørtun[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Alan Gresley wrote:
I know the fix/bug. As I said previously this is deeper.
Not deeper than how a rendering engine (all rendering engines) splits up
and treats elements as a set of layers which are stacked in a certain
order depending on rules - of which
If you guys wouldn't mind, could I get a site check on this?
http://www.cgraytaylor.net
It seems to check out okay for me in Firefox, IE 7, and Opera. I had
to lower the font size in the gallery photo descriptions for Opera to
lay out the text correctly which makes it a touch small for my
Thank-you all for the great collection of ideas.
I'm going though them now and will let you know how it turns out.
You have expanded my vision of what is possible though css.
thank-you
chris
On 7-Mar-08, at 6:07 AM, T wrote:
If you want an ornate frame, for example, where parts of it
If you guys wouldn't mind, could I get a site check on this?
http://www.cgraytaylor.net
It seems to check out okay for me in Firefox, IE 7, and Opera. I had
to lower the font size in the gallery photo descriptions for Opera to
lay out the text correctly which makes it a touch small for
http://brassblogs.com/templates/2col.stickyfoot.leftsidebar/
This is pretty close to what I'm looking for. The only thing I see
missing is that the main column is supposed to be fluid. I might play
around with altering it.
Actually it's based off a fluid layout. If you remove the
Alan Gresley wrote:
http://css-class.com/articles/ursidae/bears5ddh-kbaccess.htm
Sorry, no use for testing anything, since you've tailored it to only
target the anchors - not every element in the page.
I'll do deep testing of IE8' element-layer stacking and handling when I
get around to
Ingo Chao wrote:
- content=IE=5 or content=IE=6 throws IE8b1 in quirksmode, even
if the document has a standards Doctype.
The real IE5 and IE6 have many differences in their support and
interpretation of CSS in quirks mode. Does IE8 reflect these differences
- as the meta-number suggests?
So
Mark -- I increased the padding a little. Good tip to start combining
the padding. I need to think making things more compact in the coding
on future projects.
I didn't increase it quite as much as you had. I'm thinking about
adding a glossary of terms, especially for the folders, ie - what
Phoebe Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dwayne -- Actually, I'd like to eventually work with some sort of
elastic layout, where it can expand to a certain point. I'm not sure
I'm entirely comfortable with filling up all the browser real estate,
but more would be nice, I agree.
Well... a
http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/cssjunk/ie8/xua
In a nutshell, IE8's emulation of IE6 and IE5 does not appear to be
off to a flying start.
1. Box model not honoured when targeting IE6 and in standards mode
2. Parsing errors not replicated when targeting IE5.
Can someone confirm that the results
Phoebe Taylor wrote:
If you guys wouldn't mind, could I get a site check on this?
http://www.cgraytaylor.net
Phoebe
Quick look: quick thoughts... One method of checking the structural
integrity of a page is to set minimum font size of 24 or larger; and/or
to test at +1, +2, or
Phoebe Taylor wrote
If you guys wouldn't mind, could I get a site check on this?
http://www.cgraytaylor.net
It seems to check out okay for me in Firefox, IE 7, and Opera. I had
to lower the font size in the gallery photo descriptions for Opera to
lay out the text correctly which makes
This one's new to me: I don't recall IE6 messing up margins
on a statically positioned container before, but this appears to be
what I've got:
http://weston.canncentral.org/web_lab/Arteis/MoboUbiq/
The box with the yellow border is the one I'm having trouble with.
It's styled like so:
http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/cssjunk/ie8/xua
In a nutshell, IE8's emulation of IE6 and IE5 does not appear to be
off to a flying start.
IE8 cannot emulate IE6, only IE5 and 7.
1. Box model not honoured when targeting IE6 and in standards mode
2. Parsing errors not replicated when
Hello all,
In developing this menu I have encountered a problem with a couple different
implementations of the code. Everything look fine in Firefox, Opera, and
Safari yet IE (6 and 7) displays a 2-pixel gap underneath the li whenever
a second-level menu item contains and 3rd level menu.
My
IE8 cannot emulate IE6, only IE5 and 7.
WTF?
So IE=6 is actually the same as IE=5. Genius.
Of course, I believe you, but I'm having difficulty tracking down
where Microsoft say this. Any pointers?
2. Parsing errors not replicated when targeting IE5.
Which parsing errors exactly? The IE
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Ingo Chao wrote:
- content=IE=5 or content=IE=6 throws IE8b1 in quirksmode, even if
the document has a standards Doctype.
The real IE5 and IE6 have many differences in their support and
interpretation of CSS in quirks mode. Does IE8 reflect these
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
discuss.org] On Behalf Of Alex Robinson
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2008 4:50 PM
To: Peter-Paul Koch
Cc: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Subject: Re: [css-d] X-UA-Compatible - discrepancies between targeted
behaviour in
CSS-d,
I have two issues in Explorer 7.
If you look here, you can see how the page should look in the two Safari
examples:
http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=411750
Please be forgiving on the style, as I'm still in the process of
deciding placement and colour.
In any case, in
IE8 cannot emulate IE6, only IE5 and 7.
WTF?
So IE=6 is actually the same as IE=5. Genius.
Yup. In fact, I argued for the inclusion of IE=6 for consistency's
sake. It pointing to IE5 is not perfect, but better than having
something really weird happen when you use that value.
Of course,
Based on the Versioning and Internet Explorer Modes whitepaper,
making the assumption that Microsoft just kept the old IE7 Quirks
mode, it seems like we have four modes: IE7 Quirks (versions7), IE7
Standards (version=7), IE8 Standards (version =8) and Best possible
(version=edge), with
Scott Sauyet wrote:
Jim Davis wrote:
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 6:57 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it possible to have an image showing a picture frame and have that
as part of the css style sheet.
Here is a way to have the frame in as a background in the css
... as all previous versions of IE have done
http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/hacks/fuzzyspecificity
(Reported to the Microsoft beta forum)
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List
Thank you Dave and Peter for the critiques. I have been fiddling with
it and took out the height on the #main css, so the text won't shoot
out the bottom now. Also, I darkened the text color a little and went
with percent on the font rather than an absolute font size according
to the suggestions
Of course, I believe you, but I'm having difficulty tracking down
where Microsoft say this. Any pointers?
Not yet, but I'm 100% certain this is the case.
Ah, ok. I see the answer in liorean's post. In the white paper /
technology overview
On Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:09:40 -0800, Weston C wrote:
This one's new to me: I don't recall IE6 messing up margins on a statically
positioned
container before, but this appears to be what I've got:
http://weston.canncentral.org/web_lab/Arteis/MoboUbiq/
The box with the yellow border is the one
Phoebe Taylor wrote:
I have been fiddling with...]
I'm a bit OCD when it comes to how things look, but I guess I need to
learn to give up some of that control for the sake of the overall
project. :)
re: http://www.cgraytaylor.net/
You're looking good, and standing tall. If you're up
47 matches
Mail list logo
