Either a
On 11/3/05, Patrick Roane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hey folks
>
> www.cpcconstruction.net/1/homes.html
>
> I have to be able to click the image and have it
> remain in the main box.
>
> Does anyone have any suggestion on how I can
> accomplish this?
You could use a CSS solution with :
This is an annoying problem, that crops up a lot on this list. I'll
add it as a wiki entry if no-one has a problem with that? I'm not
particularly knowledgable about the subject but I can probably knock
something up.
The problem is that some elements (drop-downs, and flash objects,
maybe more) i
On 11/11/05, Christian Heilmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The easier option is to hide the elements when you open your popout,
> that way you keep the fix at least in the JavaScript and not in CSS,
> HTML and JavaScript.
That solution hadn't occurred to me before, its rather elegant
solution I
> > >>http://www.cssplay.co.uk/menu/gallery.html
> > >
> > > the examples are not really ready for web sites that may need
> > > maintenance by other people.
> > >
> > > With a few lines and a clever ID hook via DOMscripting this can be
> > > achieved a lot easier - and accessible via keyboard and
Opera has an emulation mode for small screen devices, you press Shift-F11.
IIts not perfect, but it gives you a pretty good idea.
Sam
On 27/04/06, cj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> msdn had a web series dealing with mobile devices a while ago, and
> their web casts are saved and available to repla
I shoud imagine its these two rules that is causing a bit of ambiguity :
.album *
{
position: absolute;
z-index: 0;
}
.albumSub
{
z-index: 100;
position: absolute;
/* other stuff */
}
I am guessing that the first rule is given a higher specificity,
however according to [1] the * should not
On 02/05/06, Bostjan Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
(snipped my first attempt at a fix)
> I tried the above solution, but the bottom element is still overlapping
> the top and
>
> Any other ideas folks?
Hmm odd! I don't know what is causing this behaviour. But before I
posted my earlier r
On 19/06/06, Dave Goodchild <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all, I am building a back end admin system for our new venture and like a
> fool only checked in FF as it will only ever be used by us and I never use
> IE locally. However, my business partner refuses to install IE and seems to
> get a bl
Sorry, sent this to the OP rather than the list by mistake.
---
Ed Seehouse said :
> I think it would be a lot easier. If everyone learned with a strict
> doctype we'd have faster development and lots of much better pages, I
> think.
Personally I don't think it makes a jot of difference. You c
Hi,
I'm not able to do much testing in Safari because I don't own a mac. I
do occasionally get access to one, and for the most part my site looks
ok, although not perfect. I'm happy with that for the time being, as
long as it's functional.
However there is one really serious bug in my calendar.
Hi there,
On my sites calendar page, I need a way of easily choosing the current
month/year. The way I had hoped to do this was to have the title (h1)
of the page, which reads "Calendar " have a (suckerfish)
drop down on both the and .
Of course one isn't allowed to have block level elements
e of the
months (August) twice, even though its in the markup only once.
Any ideas? The markup validates xhtml.
I'm still stuck on the validator issue as well, any thoughts
gratefully received.
Sam
On 9/21/05, Sam Partington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> On my s
> Hope that helps,
It did, thank you very much!
Anybody got any ideas on the validator problem, its really got me
stumped. Its as if the markup isn't referencing the stylesheets
properly, but if that were the case then it wouldn't validate would
it?
> Also, my CSS validation tests have recently
> >>Also, my CSS validation tests have recently stopped working correctly.
> >> The validator now reports "No style sheet found". The xhtml
> >>validates, and shows 4 or 5 styles sheets on each page. As far as I'm
> >>aware I've changed nothing, and yet every one of my pages now shows
> >>fail on
>
>
>title='Standard' />
>
> The 's with the ' type="text/css" ' attribute set were picked up
> by the w3c validator. The links without the type attribute set were
> not validated. The validator must be looking for the type attribute to
> determine what should be checked.
Spot on. Adding
> BTW - you may like to specify a background color in the default style. The
> default background set on my browser rather clashes with the other colors.
Oh, I thought I had done, is it better now?
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This should do the trick :
div.article div.article-image img
{
display: none; /* or however you want to do the hiding */
}
div.article-first-child div.article-image img
{
display: inline; /* or however you want to do the showing */
}
But guess what? :first-child is not not supported in IE.
showing */
}
note the : after article in the second selector
Sam
On 10/5/05, Sam Partington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This should do the trick :
>
> div.article div.article-image img
> {
> display: none; /* or however you want to do the hiding */
> }
>
> div.a
> > Problem is that if I do it like this, the text in the ul also has the
> > opacity applied. That's not supposed to happen.
>
> Actually, that *is* supposed to happen. Opacity affects the entire element
> and all its children.
Is there a way around that? I've tried specificity tricks and
!import
> One of the problems we get is release major updates to our new
> website (once every 3 months), recent visitors who come back to the
> website use their disk-cached css file and only after a reload does
> the page in order to cache the new css file.
Hi,
I've come across this problem from time t
20 matches
Mail list logo
