Re: [css-d] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[ray]

No, I overwritten it, just the same name. :)

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Thierry Koblentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > discuss.org] On Behalf Of ray
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:51 PM
> > To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
> > Subject: Re: [css-d] Is overflow:hidden the best?
> >
> > Yeah, I can see the problem. But in most cases we would set a left margin
> on
> > the content div to reserve space for the left column, so this issue may
> not
> > that important.
> > I think the big problem of this clearing way is that the cleared element
> > would stay below *All* previous floats, see this demo:
> > http://fouragency.co.uk/test.html
> > You can see the yellow box of content div extends to below the left
> sidebar,
> > instead of just enclosing the text and the float within its content.
>
>
> Isn't the exact same example I pointed you to when explaining the issue
> with
> this method? ;)
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
__
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] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

ray wrote:
> Yeah, I can see the problem. But in most cases we would set a left 
> margin on the content div to reserve space for the left column, so 
> this issue may not that important.

We would..?
I would hardly ever do that...

Sorry, but I see no point in looking for the best overall method, since
every single method put restrictions on how one can lay out a design.
Looking for the best method for one particular type of layout is another
matter, but then the conditions are given and the restrictions accepted.
If the "overflow: hidden" method works for your case(s), then it is
probably fine to use it there.

The "overflow: hidden" method rarely ever works for me, since I'm almost
always placing content-elements over the edge of containers. Hate to
see those cut off, or having to restrict my positioning to inside
containers.

I have to agree with Thierry in that the "easy clearing" method is more
adaptable and places fewer restrictions on layout. In most cases I use
float to contain floats though, clear these container-floats with
existing content, and keep the "easy clearing" in reserve.

The "best" approach is to know all available methods in depth, so one
can choose the one that works best in each case. One may even have to
spread several methods around in one layout in order to avoid
standardized restrictions - not to mention browser-bugs.

regards
Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no
__
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] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[Thierry Koblentz]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> discuss.org] On Behalf Of ray
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:51 PM
> To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
> Subject: Re: [css-d] Is overflow:hidden the best?
> 
> Yeah, I can see the problem. But in most cases we would set a left margin
on
> the content div to reserve space for the left column, so this issue may
not
> that important.
> I think the big problem of this clearing way is that the cleared element
> would stay below *All* previous floats, see this demo:
> http://fouragency.co.uk/test.html
> You can see the yellow box of content div extends to below the left
sidebar,
> instead of just enclosing the text and the float within its content.


Isn't the exact same example I pointed you to when explaining the issue with
this method? ;)



-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com





__
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] List background in IE 6 and earlier and condition comments

[adamq]

It seems it was my stand alone IE that I was testing with afterall, which 
did not work with conditional comments.  I downloaded an installer from 
elsewhere cited in the book that enables me to install multiple stand alone 
versions of IE 6, and earlier, all in one installer package, and test 
results were different.
Could you double-check my work and test it again?
Also, someone mentioned that because I already added a class to the markup, 
it was not neccessary to fork the CSS. Was there a better way to do this?

I did change the markup slightly by using a class instead of an ID
(Apparently it needs to be more specific by having #breadcrumbs)

#breadcrumbs .list-first {
background: none;
}


Thanks again.

- Original Message - 
From: "Ingo Chao" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "adamq" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:40 PM
Subject: Re: [css-d] List background in IE 6 and earlier and condition 
comments


> adamq wrote:
>> ...
>> Because IE 6 and earlier does not support the first-child element,
>> the books recommends to apply a class to the list item to remove the
>> background image in these browsers. Using conditional comments to
>> apply this workaround seems best, but I cannot figure out why the
>> background still appears in IE6 and earlier. T he rule in my
>> conditional comments style sheet is:
>>
>> #breadcrumbs #list-first { background: none; }
>>
>> I think I also tried just #list-first, as well as a class,
>> .list-first. The conditional comments is linked AFTER my main style
>> sheet.
>>
>> URL:
>> http://home.comcast.net/~adamq/chapter5/breadcrumb-navigation/breadcrumbs.html
>>
>>
> There is no bg image visible on the first LI in a native IE6 install, and 
> tracing the stile shows that IE6 applies the above fix. I
> think the problem is how you test in IE6.
>
> Ingo
>
> -- 
> http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html
> http://www.dolphinsback.com 

__
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] New CSS book

[Jo]

It's a SitePoint book. I have bought it and had a quick read of the PDF
version, and like the rest of their books, it looks great. It explores the
new CSS table solutions, how to cope with old browsers while doing so, CSs
layout, Mulit-column layout, grid positioning and template layout. (I'm
getting all this from the table of contents).

You can always download sample chapters at www.sitepoint.com if you want a
peek inside.

Joanne

__
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/

[css-d] Pop Up Window image not centered in IE7

[Rod Castello]

In IE7 the pop up window image is shifted to the right so only half the image 
shows. I am unable to fix it as I don't have IE7 installed and can't check my 
fixes. I can't view in browsershots.org either, since it has to be "popped up" 
to see the problem.

Here's the link to the page it's popped from: 
http://www.promotionalenergyproducts.com/images.html,  click on the top center 
link"EMAIL FLYER" to see what I'm referring to. If someone can advise a fix, it 
would be greatly appreciated.

Rod Castello

__
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] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[ray]

Yeah, I can see the problem. But in most cases we would set a left margin on
the content div to reserve space for the left column, so this issue may not
that important.
I think the big problem of this clearing way is that the cleared element
would stay below *All* previous floats, see this demo:
http://fouragency.co.uk/test.html
You can see the yellow box of content div extends to below the left sidebar,
instead of just enclosing the text and the float within its content.

Thanks

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 10:38 AM, Thierry Koblentz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Serge Krul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > > What is the best way of forcing a container box enclose its floats?
> > >
> > > From my experience the best way is to use the "easy
> > clearing "
> > > technique. It's far more stable than overflow:auto, and overflow:hidden
> is
> > > not suitable in most cases (for example you wouldn't want your
> horizontal
> > > menu to hide some of your list items when text size is increased).
>
> fwiw, I don't agree. The problem with the easy clearing method is that it
> styles the element differently depending on browsers.
> To understand the issue, check example #2 (The .clearfix method) on my demo
> page:
>
> http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/block-formatting_context/newBFC.asp
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com
>
>
>
>
>
__
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] New CSS book

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

Alan K Baker wrote:

> http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780980455229/?CMP=EMC-E2H238907668#top 
> points to a book "Everything You Know About CSS is Wrong!"
> 
> Has anyone seen this? Is this a ruse by Microsoft to get everyone to 
> switch to IE8? Comments appreciated before I commit $30. :-)

Those who are used to only design for/in IE/win should definitely buy
one. They'll probably learn a lot.

Those of us who have designed in accordance with standards for the last
few years, need not bother. IE8 is, and will stay, way behind anyway, so
we will only be reading 3 to 5 years old stuff.

IMO, of course :-)

regards
Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no
__
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/

[css-d] New CSS book

[Alan K Baker]

Hi all.

http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780980455229/?CMP=EMC-E2H238907668#top points to a 
book "Everything You Know About CSS is Wrong!"

Has anyone seen this? Is this a ruse by Microsoft to get everyone to switch to 
IE8? Comments appreciated before I commit $30. :-)

Regards, 
 
Alan.
 
www.theatreorgans.co.uk
www.virtualtheatreorgans.com
Admin: ConnArtistes, UKShopsmiths, 2nd Touch & A-P, HauptwerkODFWriters groups
Shopsmith 520 + bits
Flatulus Antiquitus

__
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] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[Thierry Koblentz]

> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Serge Krul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> 
> > Hi,
> > > What is the best way of forcing a container box enclose its floats?
> >
> > From my experience the best way is to use the "easy
> clearing "
> > technique. It's far more stable than overflow:auto, and overflow:hidden
is
> > not suitable in most cases (for example you wouldn't want your
horizontal
> > menu to hide some of your list items when text size is increased).

fwiw, I don't agree. The problem with the easy clearing method is that it
styles the element differently depending on browsers.
To understand the issue, check example #2 (The .clearfix method) on my demo
page:

http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/block-formatting_context/newBFC.asp


-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com




__
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] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[ray]

I know this way. But it is not appropriate for the columns layout(one or all
are  float columns), because the cleared element would stay below ALL
previous floats. This problem is mentioned at the bottom of that page(easy
clearing).

Thanks for your reply.

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Serge Krul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi,
> > What is the best way of forcing a container box enclose its floats?
>
> From my experience the best way is to use the "easy 
> clearing "
> technique. It's far more stable than overflow:auto, and overflow:hidden is
> not suitable in most cases (for example you wouldn't want your horizontal
> menu to hide some of your list items when text size is increased).
>
> Serge Krul
>
__
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] Footerstick variation needed

[David Hucklesby]

On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:13:35 -0700, Debbie Campbell wrote:
> I'm using one of the footerstick methods (I forget which one I finally 
> decided to use -
> this one is closest to the effect I want) and I'm having a problem in FF, 
> IE7, Safari
> and Opera. This hasn't been checked in IE6 yet.
>
>> http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/hixon/
>>
> The footer's in the position I want it - with the top of it slicing under the 
> wrapper
> at that exact place - but the bottom's unstuck. Can anyone provide some 
> direction?
>
> I tried the regular 'footerstick alt' method and that works fine, but I don't 
> want the
> footer to ride up any higher than it is right now, if that makes sense.

I don't think you'll get any "FooterStick" CSS to deal with nested DIVS -
not cross-browser, anyway. Those that I know of use a min-height of
100% on a single "non-footer" DIV to get the full height on short pages.

While Opera and FF 3 will obey this 100% when pages are "zoomed"
I have not had any success with IE 7. The entire page expands (except
for a background image set on BODY).

You have several fixed height elements there. Be aware that this is
causing chaos at my end, as several of my browsers have  minimum
font size defined. With your base font size at 62.5% some browsers
scale up all your text to this minimum, breaking your page just as surely
as choosing a larger font size. You'll also find that many high-end
laptops are set to 120 DPI - this makes text 25% larger than usual
in both Opera and Internet Explorer.

FWIW - I have been attempting a scripting solution for this case (of
nested DIVs) and was not successful. So I have no suggestions.

Sorry.

Cordially,
David
--

__
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] page expansion

[Ce Ce]

Thanks Georg for such a thoughtful answer.

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Ce Ce wrote:
>
>> What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed our web
>> pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so that when
>> someone chose a larger font size the page would expand accordingly. Now that
>> browsers have the ability to "page" zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the
>> importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point?
>>
>
> Depends on what a design is supposed to expand in relation to.
> I've always thought it was best if designs adjusted to the environment,
> and the most critical variable is still the width of the browser-window.
>
> The "em-based zooming" you're referring to can be made to work well if
> it isn't locked to font-size, but most existing versions are locked to
> font-size and have therefore never worked well and never will -
> regardless of whether there are changes made to the environment or not.
>
> Font-resizing and page-zooming are minor, but important, variables that
> any design should just be able to take without causing overflow of the
> window to such a degree that they become unusable - too early. What's
> "too early" is up to each designer to decide, and each end-user to
> complain about.
>
>
> FWIW: my preferred browser has had "page-zoom" for so many years that it
> has become second nature both to use the feature and take it into
> account while designing. So, nothing has really changed for the last 8
> years or so.
> As an end-user I usually rely on 'minimum font size', in my preferred
> and all other major browsers except IE, to make content accessible/
> readable though. Sites that misbehaves - like those with "zoom pages"
> most often do, get a dose of "fit-to-width" to break their "zoom-feature".
>
> regards
>Georg
> --
> http://www.gunlaug.no
>
__
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] page expansion

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

Ce Ce wrote:
> What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed 
> our web pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so 
> that when someone chose a larger font size the page would expand 
> accordingly. Now that browsers have the ability to "page" zoom 
> (rather than just text zoom) is the importance of horizontal and 
> vertical expansion a moot point?

Depends on what a design is supposed to expand in relation to.
I've always thought it was best if designs adjusted to the environment,
and the most critical variable is still the width of the browser-window.

The "em-based zooming" you're referring to can be made to work well if
it isn't locked to font-size, but most existing versions are locked to
font-size and have therefore never worked well and never will -
regardless of whether there are changes made to the environment or not.

Font-resizing and page-zooming are minor, but important, variables that
any design should just be able to take without causing overflow of the
window to such a degree that they become unusable - too early. What's
"too early" is up to each designer to decide, and each end-user to
complain about.


FWIW: my preferred browser has had "page-zoom" for so many years that it
has become second nature both to use the feature and take it into
account while designing. So, nothing has really changed for the last 8
years or so.
As an end-user I usually rely on 'minimum font size', in my preferred
and all other major browsers except IE, to make content accessible/
readable though. Sites that misbehaves - like those with "zoom pages"
most often do, get a dose of "fit-to-width" to break their "zoom-feature".

regards
Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no
__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

Brett wrote:
> Georg,
> 
> Thanks.  Of course you are right, there are way too many variables to
>  make every OS and every browser look exactly the same, and it's a 
> fools dream to attempt it.  I really just want to have the text size
>  a bit closer between the two platforms.

Make sure your PC and your Mac have same-size screens set with same
resolution - and that your browsers are set identically, and you
shouldn't be far off. Oh, and decide whether you want to count
screen-pixels or visible size.
I haven't noticed more than */+ 1 screen-pixel deviation in font-size
when same document is evaluated in same browser across my PCs and my
Mac. Depends somewhat on how you declare your font-sizes and other
variables though, as not all methods work equally well across the entire
range.

> I design on a MAC and I try to set text sizes suitable for a "normal"
>  text setting on the PC, and to accommodate up to two increases in 
> text size without drastically altering the layout.

Last time I looked the VCAG advised to allow for at least up to 200%
font-resizing above "normal" at the user-end - without creating problems
for end-users.
IMO: designs that can't take that much are not designed for the web, but
there are plenty of them around.

> I guess this is just another joy of designing for the web.

Yes, and if you want "same size - same look" everywhere it'll only get
"worse" as new software/hardware combinations arrive on the market.
I'm looking forward to having more of these variables, but I know that's
not too common an attitude.

regards
Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no
__
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] page expansion

[Ce Ce]

Thanks Blake. An interesting link.

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Blake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Ce Ce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Now that
> > browsers have the ability to "page" zoom (rather than just text zoom) is
> the
> > importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point?
>
> http://bryanrieger.com/issues/mobile-screens-and-pixel-sizes/
>
> Desktop browsers aren't the only browsers. Just something to think about.
>
> --
> Blake Haswell
> http://www.blakehaswell.com/ | http://blakehaswell.wordpress.com/
>
__
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] Naming conventions

[Thierry Koblentz]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> discuss.org] On Behalf Of Tim Offenstein
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:30 PM
> To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
> Subject: [css-d] Naming conventions
> 
> A general question: is it a really bad idea to use default HTML
> selectors as ID names in CSS. For instance I'm evaluating a site
> where they've designated an ID as "body" and I've seen similar
> examples elsewhere. I always advise against this simply for clarity
> sake but wondered if there were more definitive reasons to avoid this
> (or not).

There are a few you should avoid, but I don't think "body" is one of them

http://meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2005/08/29/reserved-id-values/


-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com




__
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] page expansion

[Blake]

On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Ce Ce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Now that
> browsers have the ability to "page" zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the
> importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point?

http://bryanrieger.com/issues/mobile-screens-and-pixel-sizes/

Desktop browsers aren't the only browsers. Just something to think about.

--
Blake Haswell
http://www.blakehaswell.com/ | http://blakehaswell.wordpress.com/
__
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] page expansion

[Ce Ce]

What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed our web
pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so that when
someone chose a larger font size the page would expand accordingly. Now that
browsers have the ability to "page" zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the
importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point?



On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:04 PM, David Laakso
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Ce Ce wrote:
>
>> These days with the ability of most modern browsers to "zoom" in on an
>> entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or
>> percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are
>> the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance -- would it
>> be best to use pixels for all measurements from now on?
>>
>> Thanks, Ce Ce
>>
>>
>
>
> I think what one uses depends on particular situations and needs at hand --
> what will do for this, may not do for that. "One size fits all, " as they
> say in the clothing industry, does not necessarily work for all situations
> on the Web. And our good friend of the list(s), Georg Sortun, has produced
> some layouts that defy contemporary  reality-- sizing width elements in
> pixels, em's, and percent -- and throwing in min/max width to boot, all
> within one layout...
>
> --
>
> A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.
>
> http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
>
>
__
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/

[css-d] Naming conventions

[Tim Offenstein]

A general question: is it a really bad idea to use default HTML 
selectors as ID names in CSS. For instance I'm evaluating a site 
where they've designated an ID as "body" and I've seen similar 
examples elsewhere. I always advise against this simply for clarity 
sake but wondered if there were more definitive reasons to avoid this 
(or not).

-Tim
-- 
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Tim Offenstein  ***  Campus Accessibility Liaison  ***  (217) 244-2700
 CITES Departmental Services  ***  www.uiuc.edu/goto/offenstein

__
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] page expansion

[David Laakso]

Ce Ce wrote:
> These days with the ability of most modern browsers to "zoom" in on an
> entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or
> percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are
> the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance -- would it
> be best to use pixels for all measurements from now on?
>
> Thanks, Ce Ce
>   


I think what one uses depends on particular situations and needs at hand 
-- what will do for this, may not do for that. "One size fits all, " as 
they say in the clothing industry, does not necessarily work for all 
situations on the Web. And our good friend of the list(s), Georg Sortun, 
has produced some layouts that defy contemporary  reality-- sizing width 
elements in pixels, em's, and percent -- and throwing in min/max width 
to boot, all within one layout...

-- 

A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.

http://chelseacreekstudio.com/

__
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] page expansion

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Ce Ce wrote:

> These days with the ability of most modern browsers to "zoom" in on an
> entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems
> or percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing?

This is a design decision rather than practical CSS authoring (which we try 
to focus on in the list), so I will just try to correct some technical 
misunderstandings:

Zooming a page is quite different from flexible font sizing, so the question 
is really illogical.

> If pixels are the most consistent measurement

Pixel sizes vary.

> and not subject to inheritance -- 

No unit is subject to inheritance in any way. Values specified in pixels are 
inherited by just the same rules as any other values.

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ 

__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[David Laakso]

Brett wrote:
> David,
>
> Yes, both of the browsers are set to display the "normal" text size.
>
>   


Then I suppose the good news is it is highly unlikely any user will be 
running around with a pixel ruler comparing the page's font sizes among 
operating systems or even among browsers on the same operating system.

-- 

A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.

http://chelseacreekstudio.com/

__
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] List background in IE 6 and earlier and condition comments

[Ingo Chao]

adamq wrote:
> ...
> Because IE 6 and earlier does not support the first-child element,
> the books recommends to apply a class to the list item to remove the
> background image in these browsers. Using conditional comments to
> apply this workaround seems best, but I cannot figure out why the
> background still appears in IE6 and earlier. T he rule in my
> conditional comments style sheet is:
> 
> #breadcrumbs #list-first { background: none; }
> 
> I think I also tried just #list-first, as well as a class,
> .list-first. The conditional comments is linked AFTER my main style
> sheet.
> 
> URL:
> http://home.comcast.net/~adamq/chapter5/breadcrumb-navigation/breadcrumbs.html
> 
> 
There is no bg image visible on the first LI in a native IE6 install, 
and tracing the stile shows that IE6 applies the above fix. I
think the problem is how you test in IE6.

Ingo

-- 
http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html
http://www.dolphinsback.com
__
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/

[css-d] page expansion

[Ce Ce]

These days with the ability of most modern browsers to "zoom" in on an
entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or
percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are
the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance -- would it
be best to use pixels for all measurements from now on?

Thanks, Ce Ce
__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[Brett]

David,

Yes, both of the browsers are set to display the "normal" text size.
__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[Brett]

Georg,

Thanks.  Of course you are right, there are way too many variables to 
make every OS and every browser look exactly the same, and it's a fools 
dream to attempt it.  I really just want to have the text size a bit 
closer between the two platforms.  I design on a MAC and I try to set 
text sizes suitable for a "normal" text setting on the PC, and to 
accommodate up to two increases in text size without drastically 
altering the layout.  I guess this is just another joy of designing for 
the web.


__
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/

[css-d] List background in IE 6 and earlier and condition comments

[adamq]

Hi,

I am new to this dicussion board and this is my first question. I'm following a 
tutorial in a book about creating horizontal navigation. Because IE 6 and 
earlier does not support the first-child element, the books recommends to apply 
a class to the list item to remove the background image in these browsers. 
Using conditional comments to apply this workaround seems best, but I cannot 
figure out why the background still appears in IE6 and earlier.
T
he rule in my conditional comments style sheet is: 

#breadcrumbs #list-first {
background: none;
}

I think I also tried just #list-first, as well as a class, .list-first. The 
conditional comments is linked AFTER my main style sheet.

URL: 
http://home.comcast.net/~adamq/chapter5/breadcrumb-navigation/breadcrumbs.html

Thanks.
__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[David Laakso]

Brett wrote:
> For example, Win2000 in IE6 and FF2.0, both browsers display the text 
> much larger.
>
>
>
>   
>> In what PC operating system and in what PC browsers and browser 
>> versions is the text larger than on a Mac?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 


Is IE/6 set at default (text--size "medium") and Firefox/2.0 set at 
default (font-size 16px)?

-- 

A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.

http://chelseacreekstudio.com/

__
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/

[css-d] Footerstick variation needed

[Debbie Campbell]

I'm using one of the footerstick methods (I forget which one I finally
decided to use - this one is closest to the effect I want) and I'm
having a problem in FF, IE7, Safari and Opera. This hasn't been checked
in IE6 yet.

> http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/hixon/

The footer's in the position I want it - with the top of it slicing
under the wrapper at that exact place - but the bottom's unstuck. Can
anyone provide some direction?

I tried the regular 'footerstick alt' method and that works fine, but I
don't want the footer to ride up any higher than it is right now, if
that makes sense.

-- 
Debbie Campbell
www.redkitecreative.com
__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

Brett wrote:
> Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC 
> machines?  Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to 
> adjust all text for the PC to better match the MAC.  Can this be 
> done? I have used the underscore _hack to target IE, but I really 
> need to target all PC/Windows machines.  How can this be done?

Not at all in CSS, and although you can detect environment (OS,
screen-resolution etc) through scripting and inject different base-font
based on that, there's really no way or method you can use to control,
or enforce, font-size at the user-end on any OS and/or browser.

You'll also have a large range to cover, as PCs come with a whole range
of OSes and screen-resolutions and a wide range of browsers. Not all
combinations are transparent enough to be detected correctly, so you'll
probably get it wrong more often than right.

FWIW: the leading underscore only works in IE6 and older, and if users
of those browsers don't like the result they can simply make their
browser ignore all your font-sizing attempts. Other browsers have
somewhat similar defenses against "enforced" font-sizes.

regards
Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no
__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[Brett]

For example, Win2000 in IE6 and FF2.0, both browsers display the text 
much larger.


David Laakso wrote:
> Brett wrote:
>> Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC 
>> machines?  Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to 
>> adjust all text for the PC to better match the MAC.  Can this be 
>> done?  I have used the underscore _hack to target IE, but I really 
>> need to target all PC/Windows machines.  How can this be done?
>>
>>
>>   
>
>
> In what PC operating system and in what PC browsers and browser 
> versions is the text larger than on a Mac?
>
>
>
>



__
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] CSS tables

[Ingo Chao]

Blake wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Ingo Chao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> This will slow down
>> "new inventions" a bit - which is good

Actually, I said: "... which is good since the "conforming" browsers are 
not as free of bugs as some may believe."
> 
> What? Restricting innovation is never ever good. Ever.

You have to use table-layout:fixed in CSS-tables used for layout to get 
predictable widths. Safari has a bug#13339 with paddings on the cells in 
the fixed layout, so you'll have to set up inner divs for padding 
purposes. Firefox has a bug#363326 which basically requires putting a 
div in a div in a div (for cell, row, table). Both bugs add up, you'll 
need 4 divs until you can actually work with one cell for layout 
purposes. Looks ugly, but code is for machines.

The inline-block workaround we described for the missing 
display:table-support does need a few lines of css for IE6+7 in addition 
(ok, alternatively, you could place a sign "Designed with IE Version 8 
or newer in mind", hoping for progress to come).

> This is why the development community has been bashing IE on the head
> with a frying pan for as long as I can remember. IMO it's the
> environment slowing us down, not the tools.

What I'm asking is not a "What?", but a "how to...?", since I was 
testing css-tables in a real-world example and lots of test cases. 
Current implementations seem to be not that ready for this type of 
layout, as you need workarounds for /all/ browsers.

Not too difficult to do, but somewhat restricting, at least for me.

Ingo

-- 
http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html
http://www.dolphinsback.com
__
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] Define text attributes only for Windows

[David Laakso]

Brett wrote:
> Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC 
> machines?  Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to 
> adjust all text for the PC to better match the MAC.  Can this be done?  
> I have used the underscore _hack to target IE, but I really need to 
> target all PC/Windows machines.  How can this be done?
>
>
>   


In what PC operating system and in what PC browsers and browser versions 
is the text larger than on a Mac?




-- 

A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.

http://chelseacreekstudio.com/

__
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] Ordered and Unordered Lists

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Doug Jolley wrote:

> Including a 'type="disc"' attribute in an ol element
> is undoubtedly going to cause the document to fail validation.

No it isn't. Check it. (It passes validation, because the type attribute in 
 is declared as CDATA, which pretty much means "anything goes" as far as 
validation is concerned.)

But that's about HTML, not CSS.

> However, I really don't see any problem with doing it with a style.

You don't? Even after considering what happens when CSS is off?

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ 

__
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/

[css-d] Define text attributes only for Windows

[Brett]

Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC 
machines?  Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to 
adjust all text for the PC to better match the MAC.  Can this be done?  
I have used the underscore _hack to target IE, but I really need to 
target all PC/Windows machines.  How can this be done?

Thanks
__
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] Ordered and Unordered Lists

[Doug Jolley]

> the distinction clearer by specifiying  the available "type"
> attributes for both ol and ul.

And I think that if you do it with the "type" attribute, you are
indeed limited.  Including a 'type="disc"' attribute in an ol element
is undoubtedly going to cause the document to fail validation.
However, I really don't see any problem with doing it with a style.

Thanks again to everyone for the input.

... doug
__
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] Ordered and Unordered Lists

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Drew Trusz wrote:

> No an ordered list can't have a "disc" and an unordered list can't be
> numbered.

Of course they can. Whether you should style them that way is debatable, but 
surely you can, by the specs and in practice.

> When in doubt read the specs:

HTML specs only specify a suggested default rendering of documents, even 
though they may nominally sound like saying otherwise.

And CSS specs explicitly say that all elements have all properties. You can 
set them to any values you like. Not all properties have visible effect in 
all situations, but this depends on CSS specs, not HTML specs.

For example, you can style a list so that it has neither numbers nor 
bullets, or you can style non-list elements in a list-like manner. Again, 
this might not be a wise move, but it's surely possible.

-- 
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ 

__
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/

[css-d] Pop Up Window image not centered in IE7

[Rod Castello]

In IE7 the pop up window image is shifted to the right so only half the image 
shows. I am unable to fix  as I don't have IE7 installed and can't check my 
fixes. I can't view in browsershots.org either, since it has to be "popped up" 
to see the problem.
 
Here's the link to the page it's popped from: 
http://www.promotionalenergyproducts.com/images.html   click on the top center 
link"EMAIL FLYER" to see what I'm referring to. If someone can advise a fix 
that would be appreciated.

Rod Castello
11812 A Moorpark Street
Studio City, CA 91604
(818) 437-7880
http://rodcastello.com
__
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] Ordered and Unordered Lists

[Keith DiSarno]

Also, going back to its HTML history, screen readers (for the handicapped)
recognize the inherent 'orderliness' of a ol, over an ul.

IMHO, listing the ingredients needed in a recipe need not have the same
precedence as the recipe instructions.

Two cents poorer,


Keith D.
__
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/

[css-d] Pop Up Window image not centered in IE7

[Rod Castello]

Rod Castello
11812 A Moorpark Street
Studio City, CA 91604
(818) 437-7880
http://rodcastello.com
__
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] Ordered and Unordered Lists

[Drew Trusz]

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Doug Jolley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I just noticed that apparently the full spectrum of list-style-types
> apply equally to both ordered lists and unordered lists. So, ordered
> lists can have a list-style-type of "disc" and unordered lists can
> have a list-style-type of "decimal".  Does anyone see any reason why
> ALL list-style-types can't be applied to both ordered and unordered
> lists? I guess the only reason that we have 2 types of lists is
> backward compatibility.

No an ordered list can't have a "disc" and an unordered list can't be
numbered. When in doubt read the specs:

"Ordered and unordered lists are rendered in an identical manner
except that visual user agents number ordered list items. User agents
may present those numbers in a variety of ways. Unordered list items
are not numbered."
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/struct/lists.html#edef-UL

Under the heading "10.3.1 Visual rendering of lists" the specs make
the distinction clearer by specifiying  the available "type"
attributes for both ol and ul.

Structurally then, the list-style-type indicates what type of list it
is and how the list information should be understood.

CSS bundles all the options but not all can be applied to each form of
list. It takes two to tango.

drew
__
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] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[Thierry Koblentz]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> discuss.org] On Behalf Of ray
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:01 AM
> To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
> Subject: [css-d] Is overflow:hidden the best?
> 
> Hi, all
> 
> What is the best way of forcing a container box enclose its floats?
> clear:both is not good, because it would make the cleared element below
all
> previous floats. It's inappropriate on a column setup layout.
> I also tested overflow:auto, but in many times an annoying scroll bar
> appears.
> How about overflow:hidden, it's the best way?

I don't know if it is the best way, but it is not enough, as for IE you need
hasLayout. 
This article discusses a few different ways to contain floats: 
http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/clearing-floats_and_block-formatting_conte
xt.asp

The demo is here:
http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/block-formatting_context/newBFC.asp

-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com




__
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/

[css-d] Is overflow:hidden the best?

[ray]

Hi, all

What is the best way of forcing a container box enclose its floats?
clear:both is not good, because it would make the cleared element below all
previous floats. It's inappropriate on a column setup layout.
I also tested overflow:auto, but in many times an annoying scroll bar
appears.
How about overflow:hidden, it's the best way?

Thanks.
__
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] Strange behavior in Firefox

[Mustafa]

 On Nov 5, 2008, at 20:01 wlb wrote:


Thanks to Mustafa and Philippe, my problem is now solved. I added the
> overflow:hidden
>
> to the li and it worked like a charm.
>
> I guess there is no way to get rid of the red/blue focussing rings
> altogether. I thought that "no-decoration" would do it, but that didn't
> work. Not a really big deal, but a slight annoyance.
>
> This is an area of CSS I'm not so familiar with. I must say that when I
> looked through my CSS reference books, the answer wasn't immediately
> apparent. That's why this CSS list is such a godsend.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> Bill Boletta
>


It can be done using this rule in your stylesheet:

:focus { outline: 0; }
>


However, as Philippe said:

The blue/red lines are focusing rings, indicating that the link is
> focused. It is a useful accessibility aid.  Removing it using *:focus* is
> not a good idea, as it takes away any indication to keyboard users that the
> link has been focused.
>
> You should make sure to define an outline or a carefully considered,
> stylistic indication (using *a:focus*) selector that the link has been
> focused.
>


(Replied here to help continuity)

- Mustafa
__
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/

[css-d] Help using the mailing list with Outlook Mail Filtering

[MEM]

This is a meta-css question: :)


Any of you are using this mailing list with Outlook and a rule to filter
mails from this mailing list ?

If so, can you please give me the configurations that work with you.

I have tried to make a lot of rules but, the message does not goes out from
my main inbox. I want the message to go to "List css-d" mail folder.
I have successfully configured other mailing-list, but I can't do it with
this one.

Please any help?


Kind Regards,
Márcio

__
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/

[css-d] CSS and cookie

[Nicolas Graner]

Hello all,

I am not sure if this is a HTTP question or a CSS question.
The situation :

1) a static HTML page at domain1.com references a CSS stylesheet at
domain2.com

2) the user agent has previously received a cookie for the domain2.com
domain

Questions : will the user agent send the cookie to the domain2.com
server when retrieving the stylesheet? Will it send it again if the
page is refreshed?

Thanks for your answers or a pointer to where I can find some.

Nicolas
__
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] help for an IE bug

[ray]

yeah, it works.
This is the second bug I encountered whose root cause is the hasLayout
problem. What a stupid bug.

Thanks.

On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> ray wrote:
>
>  Look at this page http://www.soundbowl.com/test.html in IE7. The outer
>> div has a padding of 6px, but the inner div seems not respect to this
>> padding, its background covers the left padding of its parent
>> div.
>>
>
> Add a 'hasLayout' trigger to #inner...
>
> #inner {
> height: 1%;
> }
>
> ...so IE/win understands that it should relate to its own parent and
> cover a defined area inside it.
>
> Sounds like a great explanation, doesn't it? :-)
> More important: it works.
>
> regards
>Georg
> --
> http://www.gunlaug.no
>
__
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/

[css-d] Firefox Focus prob. solved

[wlb]

Thanks to Mustafa and Philippe, my problem is now solved. I added the
overflow:hidden

to the li and it worked like a charm.

I guess there is no way to get rid of the red/blue focussing rings
altogether. I thought that "no-decoration" would do it, but that didn't
work. Not a really big deal, but a slight annoyance.

This is an area of CSS I'm not so familiar with. I must say that when I
looked through my CSS reference books, the answer wasn't immediately
apparent. That's why this CSS list is such a godsend.

Thanks again.

Bill Boletta
__
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/