Re: [css-d] Site check please IE9/10
Thanks for the feedback, had it fixed. Turned out to be a problem with closing a button tag. I closed it like this: button type=submit title=Search class=searchbutton / which completely(!) messed up the page. Now it's closed this way button type=submit title=Search class=searchbutton /button and everything's fine :) I'm aware of the validation errors, there's a div that's not closed. But that's an error in the Magento code rendering the banner block on the right - have to track that down. Best, Albert Op 03-09-13 14:20, Albert van der Veen schreef: Hi all, I'm working on a new site and just found out it looks (and works, as you can't even click any link) awful in IE8/9 and good in IE10. Can anyone see whether IE8/9 are choking on something that IE10 has no problems with? I can't imagine css differences between IE9 and 10 being so huge it looks this awful. http://ideabooks.albertvanderveen.com/ Thank you for your time! best regards, Albert __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please IE9/10
On 11/09/2013 7:01 PM, Albert van der Veen wrote: Thanks for the feedback, had it fixed. Turned out to be a problem with closing a button tag. I closed it like this: button type=submit title=Search class=searchbutton / which completely(!) messed up the page. Now it's closed this way button type=submit title=Search class=searchbutton /button and everything's fine :) I'm aware of the validation errors, there's a div that's not closed. But that's an error in the Magento code rendering the banner block on the right - have to track that down. Best, Albert Why are you asking for and IE9 and IE10 site check when the default mode is IE9 standards mode? Since the page Doctype is XHTML 1.0 Strict (being serve as text/html), you can only use the ' /' closing on empty element [1]. button is not one of them. 1. http://justinsomnia.org/2005/12/there-are-only-10-legal-xhtml-empty-tags/ Alan -- Alan Gresley http://css-3d.org/ http://css-class.com/ __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please IE9/10
David, I really don't see how the three HTML errors would case his problem. And, you might want to check the CSS before running a validation. He's using CSS3 that validation does not appear to have been run under CSS3 but rather CSS2.1 making the error irrelevant. And, even if they were the only time I've run into problems like he describes they had to do with overlapping elements and the use of z-index, which validation won't find. On September 3, 2013 at 8:59 AM David Postill david.post...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:20:01 +0200, Albert van der Veen wrote: | Hi all, | | I'm working on a new site and just found out it looks (and works, as you | can't even click any link) awful in IE8/9 and good in IE10. Can anyone | see whether IE8/9 are choking on something that IE10 has no problems | with? I can't imagine css differences between IE9 and 10 being so huge | it looks this awful. | | http://ideabooks.albertvanderveen.com/ Validation? http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A%2F%2Fideabooks.albertvanderveen.com%2F 3 errors http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css21warning=0uri=http%3A%2F%2Fideabooks.albertvanderveen.com%2F 42 errors -- David Postill Dance your Life - Biodanza in Alkmaar, Holland - http://www.danceyourlife.eu __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please IE9/10
Albert, I'm not seeing your problem. Have your fixed it? On September 3, 2013 at 8:20 AM Albert van der Veen albert.lijs...@xs4all.nl wrote: Hi all, I'm working on a new site and just found out it looks (and works, as you can't even click any link) awful in IE8/9 and good in IE10. Can anyone see whether IE8/9 are choking on something that IE10 has no problems with? I can't imagine css differences between IE9 and 10 being so huge it looks this awful. http://ideabooks.albertvanderveen.com/ Thank you for your time! best regards, Albert __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please IE9/10
On Tue, 03 Sep 2013 14:20:01 +0200, Albert van der Veen wrote: | Hi all, | | I'm working on a new site and just found out it looks (and works, as you | can't even click any link) awful in IE8/9 and good in IE10. Can anyone | see whether IE8/9 are choking on something that IE10 has no problems | with? I can't imagine css differences between IE9 and 10 being so huge | it looks this awful. | | http://ideabooks.albertvanderveen.com/ Validation? http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A%2F%2Fideabooks.albertvanderveen.com%2F 3 errors http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?profile=css21warning=0uri=http%3A%2F%2Fideabooks.albertvanderveen.com%2F 42 errors -- David Postill Dance your Life - Biodanza in Alkmaar, Holland - http://www.danceyourlife.eu __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please
Can you please view this website and give me your comments? Especially from technical point of view. Any quirks or strange behaviour or whatever? I hope i will get an overview of how this site works/acts on different browsers and platforms. http://beta.sterrenhofje.nl If you wish to allow users with bigger font sizes to read the information on your site, and if you wish to target your site for other platforms other then a specific standard view, I will start thinking about digging into the world of fluid css design. I'm a beginner myself on those matters, but I believe that, according the your goals, that's the way your site, technically speaking, should go. Thank you, Erik Visser Cheers, mem __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 6:00 AM, Erik Visser e...@erikvisser.net wrote: I hope i will get an overview of how this site works/acts on different browsers and platforms. http://beta.sterrenhofje.nl Thank you, Erik Visser The pages in the site seem to perform as expected in a Windows notebook in the current versions of Safari, Chrome, Opera, FF, IE/9, and IE/8. If of any concern there are some hasLayout issues with the navigation block in IE 6/7. Bset, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check www.wecweddings.com
Noah Learner wrote: Hi All, I have just made http://www.wecweddings.com live. Any usability feedback is greatly appreciated especially on mobile devices. Many Thanks, Noah Learner I see no grave CSS problem in your site cross-browser in a laptop other than the shift-left of the menu when clicking the portfolio link. You want to correct the few correctable CSS errors and a number of markup errors. It is relatively functional when viewed in the iPhone simulator iPhoney. And probably easier to read the nav menu in landscape view. Great difficulty may arise in the less than very high-end mobile devices. For these you may want to investigate the very simple mobile method Global Authoring Practices for the Mobile Web by Luca Passani http://www.passani.it/gap/. Best, ~d -- desktop http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ mobile http://chelseacreekstudio.mobi/ __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
Hi Theresa, Thank you for the email, the LOGO.jpg is not uploaded that is why it is not showing. I do have an issue on IE though at the moment, the text string: Header2 and the text below is not showing within the confines of the grey background image. How can I make sure that this shows in the right place? Thank-you very much, Kind Regards, Ed - Original Message - From: Theresa Mesa trixiesirishe...@gmail.com To: Norman Fournier nor...@normanfournier.com Cc: CSS Discuss css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [css-d] Site check please Well, according to your source code, there's supposed to be a logo there, called LOGO.jpg. Doesn't look like the image is on the server. Did you upload the images folder to the server? Is the logo in the images folder? Theresa On Nov 5, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Norman Fournier wrote: Safari 4.0.3 shows me an image missing icon in the upper left and corner. On 4-Nov-09, at 4:46 PM, Theresa Mesa wrote: What kind of things are you looking for us to find? On Nov 4, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Ed Goodson wrote: Hi all, Please could someone kindly test this on IE- especially 6. It looks fine to me on ff The page is tentatively passed xhtml strict. http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html Thank-you very much, Cheers, Ed __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
- Original Message - From: Theresa Mesa trixiesirishe...@gmail.com To: Norman Fournier nor...@normanfournier.com Cc: CSS Discuss css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [css-d] Site check please Well, according to your source code, there's supposed to be a logo there, called LOGO.jpg. Doesn't look like the image is on the server. Did you upload the images folder to the server? Is the logo in the images folder? Theresa On Nov 5, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Norman Fournier wrote: Safari 4.0.3 shows me an image missing icon in the upper left and corner. On 4-Nov-09, at 4:46 PM, Theresa Mesa wrote: What kind of things are you looking for us to find? On Nov 4, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Ed Goodson wrote: Hi all, Please could someone kindly test this on IE- especially 6. It looks fine to me on ff The page is tentatively passed xhtml strict. http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html Thank-you very much, Cheers, Ed __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/ Hi Theresa, Thank you for the email, the LOGO.jpg is not uploaded that is why it is not showing. I do have an issue on IE though at the moment, the text string: Header2 and the text below is not showing within the confines of the grey background image. How can I make sure that this shows in the right place? Thank-you very much, Kind Regards, Ed http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
That's why Safari is giving you the missing image icon. The image your code is calling is missing, because it's not on the server. ;-) Which version of IE are you having the header issue with? To be honest, my attempts at making stuff work on IE are all hail Mary passes, but I'm learning. I'm thankful IE7 and 8 pretty much behave. OTOH, first of all, your site is XHTML Transitional. You should get out of the habit of doing your tags (in your CSS) in caps. I'm thinking your problem would be with how IE handles the box model, especially earlier versions of IE. Someone more studied than me is going to need to figure it out. All I know is the things look really tight in there looking at it through the FF Web Developer toolbar CSS menu (View Styles), and your h2 and p edges are so wide, they're going under your red box. IE may not be handling it the way you want it to. I'm reposting the link to your site here so others can maybe help. http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html Theresa On Nov 8, 2009, at 4:21 PM, Ed Goodson wrote: Hi Theresa, Thank you for the email, the LOGO.jpg is not uploaded that is why it is not showing. I do have an issue on IE though at the moment, the text string: Header2 and the text below is not showing within the confines of the grey background image. How can I make sure that this shows in the right place? Thank-you very much, Kind Regards, Ed - Original Message - From: Theresa Mesa trixiesirishe...@gmail.com To: Norman Fournier nor...@normanfournier.com Cc: CSS Discuss css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Saturday, November 07, 2009 8:20 PM Subject: Re: [css-d] Site check please Well, according to your source code, there's supposed to be a logo there, called LOGO.jpg. Doesn't look like the image is on the server. Did you upload the images folder to the server? Is the logo in the images folder? Theresa __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
Ed Goodson wrote:
http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html
I do have an issue on IE though at the moment, the text string: Header2 and
the text below is not showing within the confines of the grey background
image. How can I make sure that this shows in the right place? Thank-you
very much, Kind Regards, Ed
http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html
I assume the issue are talking about is in XP IE/6.0 and IE/7.0, and
that the specific issue in those two IE browsers is the slightly larger
horizontal gutter under h2 and the list beneath it. And that IE/8.0 is
rendering it as you intend.
If so, #navlist is your target selector and this change brings IE/6.0
and IE/7.0 on-board:
#navlist
{
margin-left: 0; :: delete ::
margin:0;-- :: add ::
padding-left: 0;
list-style: none;
}
~d
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site check please
Well, according to your source code, there's supposed to be a logo there, called LOGO.jpg. Doesn't look like the image is on the server. Did you upload the images folder to the server? Is the logo in the images folder? Theresa On Nov 5, 2009, at 3:01 PM, Norman Fournier wrote: Safari 4.0.3 shows me an image missing icon in the upper left and corner. On 4-Nov-09, at 4:46 PM, Theresa Mesa wrote: What kind of things are you looking for us to find? On Nov 4, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Ed Goodson wrote: Hi all, Please could someone kindly test this on IE- especially 6. It looks fine to me on ff The page is tentatively passed xhtml strict. http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html Thank-you very much, Cheers, Ed __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
Hi all, Please could someone kindly test this on IE- especially 6. It looks fine to me on ff The page is tentatively passed xhtml strict. http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html; Seems to look the same for me in FF and IE 6 on windows. Posted screen shot here for IE6 for you: http://www.koolfish.com/test/ie6.gif Lisa __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
What kind of things are you looking for us to find? On Nov 4, 2009, at 3:16 PM, Ed Goodson wrote: Hi all, Please could someone kindly test this on IE- especially 6. It looks fine to me on ff The page is tentatively passed xhtml strict. http://www.copywritecolombia.com/test.html Thank-you very much, Cheers, Ed __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check
On 2009/10/08 16:39 (GMT-0400) David McGlone composed:
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 00:49 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
Even in Firefox it needs some work to take it towards resolution
independence.[...]
Do you have any pointers on how I can accomplish this? I've only been
using CSS for about a year or a little more. I'm still learning.
The goal is resolution independence. Web pages should look, and work,
similarly, regardless of resolution. There should be no need to know the
visitor's resolution (though it can be effectively used to serve up natively
smaller or larger images).
To maximize resolution independence, until (someday maybe) it is built into
the average OS desktop:
1-Forget how designing and using anything works on paper or other immutable
media. The web has many significant differences from other media.
2-Remember that users have ultimate authority over how your work looks in
their web browsers and web viewing appliances. Resist any temptation to
enforce your controls. CSS is a language of suggestion, not demand.
3-Forget everything you know or ever heard about px for sizing anything in
CSS. Replace that with this: px can be used in CSS to size various objects,
but only objects expected to be less than 8px in any dimension, which means
text can never be sized in px, ever. Px come in a wide range of physical
sizes that neither you nor the average user can control. Pixel perfect for
web documents is impossible, and should not be in your vocabulary.
4-You can fix or set sizes, but only by using an object the size of which
is under users' control. That means you can control the size of objects with
reference to each other only, never absolutely. The best user-controlled
object is generally the em unit, but others are available too, such as %, ex
and the font absolute-size keywords.
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-size-props
5-When sizing, think like a computer instead of a human. That means
forgetting base 10 arithmetic, and using hex instead. 10 only divides evenly
by 1, 2, 5 itself. 16 divides evenly by 1, 2, 4, 8 itself, so makes a
better base unit. Hex more often remainders to a whole pixel than does 10 in
a CSS sizing environment. Plus, 16 just happens to be the most common number
of pixels in a document root's em. If you think you want something to be 11px
in size, you suggest 11/16 of an em (.6875); 13px, 13/16 of an em (.8125);
24px, 1 1/2 em (1.5). If you have an image that should be 600px wide in your
own environment, divide 600 by your base sizing unit (1em, which is probably
16px), which comes out to 37.5 (if your em is 16px), and set {width: 37.5em}.
With a little practice, this new math should become second nature.
I have a few simple examples that demonstrate:
http://fm.no-ip.com/indexx.html
http://fm.no-ip.com/auth/Sites/dlviolin.html
http://fm.no-ip.com/auth/Sites/ksc/
Some more elaborate examples can be found at: http://www.cssliquid.com/
--
A patriot without religion . . . is as great a
paradox, as an honest man without the fear of God. . . .
2nd U.S. President, John Adams
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site Check
While I agree, its ashame that many designers choose the rigid My size,
without thinking about the user, and feel its more important to make the
screen look beautiful. On the other hand, I applaud sites like Yahoo that
attempt to keep the control in the hands of the user. Perhaps the only time
this will change is if users begin to voice their distaste for such poor
design tactics.
Joe
On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:29 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 2009/10/08 16:39 (GMT-0400) David McGlone composed:
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 00:49 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
Even in Firefox it needs some work to take it towards resolution
independence.[...]
Do you have any pointers on how I can accomplish this? I've only been
using CSS for about a year or a little more. I'm still learning.
The goal is resolution independence. Web pages should look, and work,
similarly, regardless of resolution. There should be no need to know the
visitor's resolution (though it can be effectively used to serve up
natively
smaller or larger images).
To maximize resolution independence, until (someday maybe) it is built into
the average OS desktop:
1-Forget how designing and using anything works on paper or other immutable
media. The web has many significant differences from other media.
2-Remember that users have ultimate authority over how your work looks in
their web browsers and web viewing appliances. Resist any temptation to
enforce your controls. CSS is a language of suggestion, not demand.
3-Forget everything you know or ever heard about px for sizing anything in
CSS. Replace that with this: px can be used in CSS to size various objects,
but only objects expected to be less than 8px in any dimension, which means
text can never be sized in px, ever. Px come in a wide range of physical
sizes that neither you nor the average user can control. Pixel perfect
for
web documents is impossible, and should not be in your vocabulary.
4-You can fix or set sizes, but only by using an object the size of which
is under users' control. That means you can control the size of objects
with
reference to each other only, never absolutely. The best user-controlled
object is generally the em unit, but others are available too, such as %,
ex
and the font absolute-size keywords.
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#font-size-props
5-When sizing, think like a computer instead of a human. That means
forgetting base 10 arithmetic, and using hex instead. 10 only divides
evenly
by 1, 2, 5 itself. 16 divides evenly by 1, 2, 4, 8 itself, so makes a
better base unit. Hex more often remainders to a whole pixel than does 10
in
a CSS sizing environment. Plus, 16 just happens to be the most common
number
of pixels in a document root's em. If you think you want something to be
11px
in size, you suggest 11/16 of an em (.6875); 13px, 13/16 of an em
(.8125);
24px, 1 1/2 em (1.5). If you have an image that should be 600px wide in
your
own environment, divide 600 by your base sizing unit (1em, which is
probably
16px), which comes out to 37.5 (if your em is 16px), and set {width:
37.5em}.
With a little practice, this new math should become second nature.
I have a few simple examples that demonstrate:
http://fm.no-ip.com/indexx.html
http://fm.no-ip.com/auth/Sites/dlviolin.html
http://fm.no-ip.com/auth/Sites/ksc/
Some more elaborate examples can be found at: http://www.cssliquid.com/
--
A patriot without religion . . . is as great a
paradox, as an honest man without the fear of God. . . .
2nd U.S. President, John Adams
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site Check
Sometimes it's not the designer, it's the client. Since it's their money, ultimately it's their decision. The designer can try to direct them, advise them, cajole them, but the client will get what the client wants, in the end. On Oct 9, 2009, at 11:43 AM, JG wrote: While I agree, its ashame that many designers choose the rigid My size, without thinking about the user, and feel its more important to make the screen look beautiful. On the other hand, I applaud sites like Yahoo that attempt to keep the control in the hands of the user. Perhaps the only time this will change is if users begin to voice their distaste for such poor design tactics. Joe __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check
On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 00:49 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: On 2009/10/06 18:44 (GMT-0400) David McGlone composed: Hi all, Can I get a site check @ http://www.premierfirst.org I only have Firefox and Opera and IE 8. I am suspecting my images in the top left are going to be messed up in IE6, but I'm pretty confident the layout should be good across all browsers. Even in Firefox it needs some work to take it towards resolution independence. Here's a look at moderately high resolution, along with some context: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/SC/sc-davmcg01.png image http://fm.no-ip.com/tmp/sc-davmcg01.html image source Do you have any pointers on how I can accomplish this? I've only been using CSS for about a year or a little more. I'm still learning. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check
David McGlone wrote: On Wed, 2009-10-07 at 00:49 -0400, Felix Miata wrote: On 2009/10/06 18:44 (GMT-0400) David McGlone composed: Hi all, Can I get a site check @ http://www.premierfirst.org I only have Firefox and Opera and IE 8. I am suspecting my images in the top left are going to be messed up in IE6, but I'm pretty confident the layout should be good across all browsers. Even in Firefox it needs some work to take it towards resolution independence. Here's a look at moderately high resolution, along with some context: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/SC/sc-davmcg01.png image http://fm.no-ip.com/tmp/sc-davmcg01.html image source Do you have any pointers on how I can accomplish this? I've only been using CSS for about a year or a little more. I'm still learning. The way it is accomplished is a matter of opinion. Some of us, myself among them, think honoring user default is a step in the right direction. In plain English, let the user decide if the fonts are just right, too big, or too small. Set color in like manner: easy to read text on landing. In addition, the criterion of success is often dependent on valid markup/css. Fwiw, please see: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/normal.htm It's you call. Not mine. ~d __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check
Chris Blake wrote: Hi, http://www.redrunner.co.uk/rr/ Battling with Drupal and Javascript, but it's getting there. Let me know of any problems and if you have any fixes for them. There are a few niggles in IE7, but nothing major as far as I can see. Cheers, Chris Let the list know when you've validated and have no js errors. It is difficult enough to debug Drupal proper. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check
Hi, In IE6 it falls apart. Sidebar is pushed down below of contents and the top photo disappears. I also think that the top title lacks some contrast. The red one over the blue grayish background. HTH. Roberto David McGlone wrote: Hi all, Can I get a site check @ http://www.premierfirst.org I only have Firefox and Opera and IE 8. I am suspecting my images in the top left are going to be messed up in IE6, but I'm pretty confident the layout should be good across all browsers. Blessings David M. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check
David McGlone wrote:
Hi all, Can I get a site check @ http://www.premierfirst.org
I only have Firefox and Opera and IE 8. I am suspecting my images in the
top left are going to be messed up in IE6, but I'm pretty confident the
layout should be good across all browsers.
Blessings
David M.
Let's approach IE/6 with arms wide open.
This is not to correct all that browser needs, but it may get it on the
same book and page as compliant browsers. Functional. But not perfect. Yet.
The difficulty is IE/6 drops the right column float, /among other things/.
What to do? Short of taking a coil of rope to the woods, try...
Add selector to correct em font scaling bug in IE:
html {font-size: 100%;}
And target IE/6 with these hacks for margin-doubling, box-model
correction, float clearing, and whatever...
* html .subheader {display:inline;}
* html #sublinks { margin: -70px 0 0 0; float: right; }
* html #left_side_container {display:inline;overflow-x: hidden;width:
668px; }
* html #left_side_container p {clear:both; }
IE/6 reference links:
http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/onhavinglayout.html
http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer.html
Best,
Creed
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site Check
On 2009/10/06 18:44 (GMT-0400) David McGlone composed: Hi all, Can I get a site check @ http://www.premierfirst.org I only have Firefox and Opera and IE 8. I am suspecting my images in the top left are going to be messed up in IE6, but I'm pretty confident the layout should be good across all browsers. Even in Firefox it needs some work to take it towards resolution independence. Here's a look at moderately high resolution, along with some context: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/SC/sc-davmcg01.png image http://fm.no-ip.com/tmp/sc-davmcg01.html image source -- A patriot without religion . . . is as great a paradox, as an honest man without the fear of God. . . . 2nd U.S. President, John Adams Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
Lorraine Barte Nepomuceno wrote: Hi guys, So far, I've tested this layout in Mac Firefox Safari, and Windows Firefox IE8. I'd love any feedback you might have- especially viewed in other browsers and resolutions. http://www.splashscreen.com/sample/sample.html Thanks very much, Lorraine Right column float drop at 800 in all compliant browsers. Right column float drop at 640 in all compliant browsers; and, left-column nowhere to be found. All browsers render the rivers-- they are more pronounced with font-scaling, making the text unreadable. Left column crossing over the center column in IE/7. The columns are rail to rail in IE/6; the left column is touchy sometimes dropping on a drag in the 1680 to 1280 range; left column crosses over center column at 640. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 10:18 PM, David Laakso da...@chelseacreekstudio.com wrote: David Laakso wrote: Lorraine, Getting your page functional in IE 6/7 required hacking it from here to Havana. And it still was not right. If you need to keep your current markup, then someone else on the list may provide a better solution than I could. If, on the other hand, you can live with a different layout structure and faux columns, it's a breeze to pull-off without any hacks. Please see: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/tres.html Checked in: IE 6/7/8. opera/10b, ff/3.5, ff/2x, safari, camino, seamonkey, and chrome. Best, ~d Thank you, David! That was based on AListApart's Holy Grail, which I thought I'd try using. I usually stick to Layout Gala's or IronMeyers. But thank you, thank you for that link. I am most grateful. :) Lorraine __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
David Laakso wrote: Lorraine Barte Nepomuceno wrote: Hi David, Can you reload the page? I've made some changes (I think my calculations for layout size were wrong :-))... please let me know if it's better now: http://www.splashscreen.com/sample/sample.html thanks very much Lorraine Lorraine, Getting your page functional in IE 6/7 required hacking it from here to Havana. And it still was not right. If you need to keep your current markup, then someone else on the list may provide a better solution than I could. If, on the other hand, you can live with a different layout structure and faux columns, it's a breeze to pull-off without any hacks. Please see: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/tres.html Checked in: IE 6/7/8. opera/10b, ff/3.5, ff/2x, safari, camino, seamonkey, and chrome. Best, ~d __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:57 PM, Lorraine Barte Nepomucenowebmistr...@splashscreen.com wrote: So far, I've tested this layout in Mac Firefox Safari, and Windows Firefox IE8. I'd love any feedback you might have- especially viewed in other browsers and resolutions. http://www.splashscreen.com/sample/sample.html In Safari 3 (Mac) and Firefox 3 (Mac), if the browser window is narrower than 797px, the left sidebar vanishes. In IE 6, you run into some scary overlapping issues as the window narrows: http://files.getdropbox.com/u/23489/ie6_view.png Erik __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
Lorraine Barte Nepomuceno wrote: Thanks for your reply, David- although I do admit I am confused by some of it... what are rivers? I'd appreciate any ideas you might have on what I've done wrong in my CSS as well... thanks again :) Lorraine Think of the text-block as a piece of fine tapestry. Squint your eyes at it. You'll see the rivers cascading down the tapestry. Scale the fonts and it will be even more obvious. The correction is to set the text and headings flush-left (text-align: left;). __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
Lorraine Barte Nepomuceno wrote: Hi David, Can you reload the page? I've made some changes (I think my calculations for layout size were wrong :-))... please let me know if it's better now: http://www.splashscreen.com/sample/sample.html thanks very much Lorraine For a lot of reasons, reply to the list, and bottom post. OK. You ditched the rivers. This is good. Your page proper still has issues. Opera/10b and Safari/4 drop the right-column float on a drag to a narrower window. IE/7 still rendering the left-column crossing over the center column on drag. IE/6 does not support min or max width: consequently, the columns are rail rail; and, additionally, the left column is clipped on the left. Wait. Do not change anything. Hitting a moving target is difficult. I'll be back. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check in IE + background image issue
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 10:12 AM, Ron Zismanronzis...@mac.com wrote: i'm also having issues with a background image (a slight gradation on the red background) You should try to use much higher resolution for the background image if you want to see a more smooth gradation in the background. What you see in photoshop is definitely not what you get! I have had such an issue before, but I cant achieve perfect smoothness in gradient, except for small gradients. - divya http://nimbupani.com/blog/ __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
snak detek+0r wrote:
Nothing silly about that page in my humble opinion. The page is
short because there is not much content on it. If you want it, and
other pages that may have little content, to appear deeper-- get
creative and add a generic image beneath the text of same.
sigh. Adding unneeded images? That's certainly not very semantic.
Hmm. On the short page, add a class to the last line with a padding
bottom on it to drive the footer down, something like: p.last
{padding-bottom: whatever px;}
Thanks for the heads up on the right margin problem, too. Actually
trasnfered this to the 'live server' before noticing that, but I'll
have you know that I did finally catch and fix this problem several
days ago
Good :-) !
And thanks for the earlier (still continuing) lesson on font scaling.
Typography is not a rocket science. It is about making content readable.
Nothing more.
josh
~d
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
yes yes, i know. but that will break my background image. that's what i
was trying to say before: the only reason i used overflow:hidden is that
it somehow made the bg work (what i'm talking about visually is that the
main/middle section of that vertical silver divider line).
i see now that this was the wrong way to get the image to tile; what's
the right way?
thanks!
josh
David Laakso wrote:
snak detek+0r wrote:
trimmed
actually, since i got to check this on ie6 today, i did notice a huge
problem (perhaps better asked under separate cover; not sure?). the
problem can be easily seen here:
http://tinyurl.com/nd27cr
IE/6 does not support min-height and is honoring height:500px;
The correction is to let content determine height. Compliant browsers,
and IE/7 will all go along with this; and, IE/6 will follow suit.
#content { border: 1px solid red (4 position only--delete);
width:580px;
overflow:hidden;
margin: 0 0 0 190px;
min-height:500px (delete rule);
height:auto !important (delete rule);
height:500px (delete rule);
}
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
snak detek+0r wrote: yes yes, i know. but that will break my background image. that's what i was trying to say before: the only reason i used overflow:hidden is that it somehow made the bg work (what i'm talking about visually is that the main/middle section of that vertical silver divider line). i see now that this was the wrong way to get the image to tile; what's the right way? thanks! josh Seems to tile fine in all my browsers, including IE 6/7/8, leaving it where you had it, on #container. Please see: http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/snak.htm What browser on your end does not tile it as you intend? PS Please bottom post in reply __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
snak detek+0r wrote:
trimmed
actually, since i got to check this on ie6 today, i did notice a huge
problem (perhaps better asked under separate cover; not sure?). the
problem can be easily seen here:
http://tinyurl.com/nd27cr
IE/6 does not support min-height and is honoring height:500px;
The correction is to let content determine height. Compliant browsers,
and IE/7 will all go along with this; and, IE/6 will follow suit.
#content { border: 1px solid red (4 position only--delete);
width:580px;
overflow:hidden;
margin: 0 0 0 190px;
min-height:500px (delete rule);
height:auto !important (delete rule);
height:500px (delete rule);
}
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
That's good to know. I guess it's not surprising; it is, however, rather disconcerting. My basic instinct is to set the base at 10px, simply so i can work in units that I'm used to. If everything is multiples of ten it makes ems a much more intelligible unit too. I guess I've been going about this all wrong all along. Better late then never, though! Felix Miata wrote: On 2009/05/30 09:45 (GMT-0700) David Hucklesby composed: FWIW - I have set a modest minimum font size of 12px on my browsers. My primary browser, Opera 9.6 on Mac, scales up _all_ fonts on pages that have the seemingly popular 62.5% font-size set on BODY. It amazes me how many pages break with that slight increase. :( .625 * 16 is 10. 12 is 120% of 10. I wouldn't call 20% particularly slight in a context where people notice as little as 1px differences. My minimum font sizes vary between 15px 18px depending on resolution and default setting (between 20px 24px). Few 62.5% body pages fail to at least partially disintegrate for me unless I make them useless by disabling minimum font size. :-( Good thing modern browsers allow to disable styles entirely. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
David Laakso wrote:
...
IE/6 does not support min-height and is honoring height:500px;
The correction is to let content determine height. Compliant browsers,
and IE/7 will all go along with this; and, IE/6 will follow suit.
#content { border: 1px solid red (4 position only--delete);
width:580px;
overflow:hidden;
margin: 0 0 0 190px;
min-height:500px (delete rule);
height:auto !important (delete rule);
height:500px (delete rule);
}
Oh, I understand what you're suggesting now. And yes, that doesn't
interfere with my tiling background. But it does end up with certain
pages looking a little silly:
http://tinyurl.com/mfyyuf
That's why I started using that min-height hack in the first place. Sure
you can just add line breaks, but since this is a CMS site, I'd like to
give the client something that is easier to use than that.
Isn't there an easier way? Or perhaps the question is: is there a better
way of achieving min-height? Or perhaps the best I'm going to get is to
make ie6 just work, and no more, while the other browsers will
actually work AND look good.
...josh
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
On 2009/05/31 18:14 (GMT-0400) snak detek+0r composed: My basic instinct is to set the base at 10px, simply so i can work in units that I'm used to. If everything is multiples of ten it makes ems a much more intelligible unit too 10 does seem easy on the surface, as most of us are used to using metric values by now, it's preached by the Clagnut 62.5% article and its progeny, and practiced by a lot of sites, including some biggies. However, puters aren't so happy with base 10 as with base 2. When they need to divide 10px by 3, 4 or 6, they get fractions, which the browsers typically handle not too consistently. It's not as big a problem if you use the default default font size (1em=16px) as the base. That em is evenly divisible by 2, 4, 8 16, so you can work in 1/4's (.25), 1/8's (.125) /or 1/16's (.0625) and always be working in whole px. -- A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man keeps himself under control. Proverbs 29:11 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
Index and all inside pages: Neither Opera or The IEs are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. Try a raw number for line-height. wow. didn't even know i could do that. the w3 site doesn't even mention that you can use px, but everyone and their mom seem to, including ALA, some grid-layout people, etc. sheesh. i normally use em, when starting from scratch, but apparently that's wrong too? No, 'em' for line-height isn't wrong. The resulting line-height is just calculated different from when raw numbers are used. For line-height:'em' values gives line-heights based on actual font-size for an element's parent, which is ok if that's what you want. When raw numbers (no unit) are used, line-height is calculated from actual font-size of the element itself, which in most cases gives the best result. Since I'm still trying to get my mind around this (and the w3 rules are quite hard to parse IMO), I was just playing around with my own styles when I noticed that the original base line-height value for this project was set using %: font-size: 100%; This is taken directly from Eric Meyer's reset stylesheet http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/css/reset/index.html And I always assume he knows what he's doing. Since he's also not changing the font size (100% pretty much means say the same), is this rule simply included to dictate the way line-height is calculated on descendants? josh __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
snak detek+0r wrote: Oh, I understand what you're suggesting now. And yes, that doesn't interfere with my tiling background. But it does end up with certain pages looking a little silly: http://tinyurl.com/mfyyuf Nothing silly about that page in my humble opinion. The page is short because there is not much content on it. If you want it, and other pages that may have little content, to appear deeper-- get creative and add a generic image beneath the text of same. And if you are really concerned with what is truly silly consider your content text is clipped on the right side of pages whose text runs deeper than that short page; and, that landing on pages whose horizontal and vertical navigation is larger or more important than the primary content text that is set as mousetype is a real PITA. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
On 2009/05/31 19:19 (GMT-0400) snak detek+0r composed: Since I'm still trying to get my mind around this (and the w3 rules are quite hard to parse IMO), I was just playing around with my own styles when I noticed that the original base line-height value for this project was set using %: font-size: 100%; This is taken directly from Eric Meyer's reset stylesheet http://meyerweb.com/eric/tools/css/reset/index.html And I always assume he knows what he's doing. Since he's also not changing the font size (100% pretty much means say the same), is this rule simply included to dictate the way line-height is calculated on descendants? Nothing to do with line-height, just insurance against IE bugs: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=InternetExplorerWinBugs -- A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man keeps himself under control. Proverbs 29:11 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
snak detek+0r wrote: Index and all inside pages: Neither Opera or The IEs are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. Try a raw number for line-height. wow. didn't even know i could do that. the w3 site doesn't even mention that you can use px, but everyone and their mom seem to, including ALA, some grid-layout people, etc. sheesh. i normally use em, when starting from scratch, but apparently that's wrong too? No, 'em' for line-height isn't wrong. The resulting line-height is just calculated different from when raw numbers are used. For line-height:'em' values gives line-heights based on actual font-size for an element's parent, which is ok if that's what you want. When raw numbers (no unit) are used, line-height is calculated from actual font-size of the element itself, which in most cases gives the best result. Index: Minimum font-size 24px breaks the h-nav and does a little number on the text in right column. i'm not sure what you mean by this? i don't have any fonts nearly that big. and i also couldn't see what you're talking about in ff/chrome. today i got ahold of ie6, and still didn't see it. David is referring to a browser setting - 'minimum font size' option - that some end-users set to resize text on _all_ sites... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_1_03_04.html http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_37.html ...without having to bother with resizing or zooming on individual sites. Observations across the web indicates that few web designers know about, or test for, this option. The result is that many sites break under the stress of browsers' 'minimum font size'. (Note: Fx 3+ resizes text more or less like Safari does for the 'minimum font size' option in most but apparently not in all cases. Google Chrome doesn't seem to have this option.) regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote: snak detek+0r wrote: [...] Index: Minimum font-size 24px breaks the h-nav and does a little number on the text in right column. i'm not sure what you mean by this? i don't have any fonts nearly that big. and i also couldn't see what you're talking about in ff/chrome. today i got ahold of ie6, and still didn't see it. David is referring to a browser setting - 'minimum font size' option - that some end-users set to resize text on _all_ sites... http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_1_03_04.html http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_37.html ...without having to bother with resizing or zooming on individual sites. Observations across the web indicates that few web designers know about, or test for, this option. The result is that many sites break under the stress of browsers' 'minimum font size'. [...] FWIW - I have set a modest minimum font size of 12px on my browsers. My primary browser, Opera 9.6 on Mac, scales up _all_ fonts on pages that have the seemingly popular 62.5% font-size set on BODY. It amazes me how many pages break with that slight increase. :( Cordially, David -- __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
On 2009/05/30 09:45 (GMT-0700) David Hucklesby composed: FWIW - I have set a modest minimum font size of 12px on my browsers. My primary browser, Opera 9.6 on Mac, scales up _all_ fonts on pages that have the seemingly popular 62.5% font-size set on BODY. It amazes me how many pages break with that slight increase. :( .625 * 16 is 10. 12 is 120% of 10. I wouldn't call 20% particularly slight in a context where people notice as little as 1px differences. My minimum font sizes vary between 15px 18px depending on resolution and default setting (between 20px 24px). Few 62.5% body pages fail to at least partially disintegrate for me unless I make them useless by disabling minimum font size. :-( Good thing modern browsers allow to disable styles entirely. -- A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man keeps himself under control. Proverbs 29:11 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
snak detek+0r wrote: Subject: [css-d] site check, particularly on ie6 ? there are two different layouts, front page http://tinyurl.com/pxgydd and all other pages http://tinyurl.com/msyk76 fingers crossed, thanks! No amount of finger-crossing will solve the 404s on both style sheet links. Mark P.S. My posts have been coming through rather intermittently of late - including the occasional lengthy delay - so if by the time you receive this the question has been answered, you know why! __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
David, thanks for your gracious feedback. unfortunately, i'm not sure if i understand much of what you had to say (my comprehension stats are usually pretty decent too); explanation below. also, at the bottom is a newly discovered problem its the sort of thing i can't reason, but that i know this list has a ready answer for. David Laakso wrote: Index and all inside pages: Neither Opera or The IEs are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. Try a raw number for line-height. wow. didn't even know i could do that. the w3 site doesn't even mention that you can use px, but everyone and their mom seem to, including ALA, some grid-layout people, etc. sheesh. i normally use em, when starting from scratch, but apparently that's wrong too? at least if the following is equivalent to what you said: w3.org : This differs from a percentage value in the way it inherits: when a numerical value is specified, child elements will inherit the factor itself, not the resultant value. Index: Minimum font-size 24px breaks the h-nav and does a little number on the text in right column. i'm not sure what you mean by this? i don't have any fonts nearly that big. and i also couldn't see what you're talking about in ff/chrome. today i got ahold of ie6, and still didn't see it. All pages: Minimum font-size 24px does a little number on the vertical-nav and the text in right column. ditto. sounds bad but i can't see it. IE 6/7/8 look relatively similar and in good order on a very quick and cursory check. actually, since i got to check this on ie6 today, i did notice a huge problem (perhaps better asked under separate cover; not sure?). the problem can be easily seen here: http://tinyurl.com/nd27cr my page content get's cut off on ALL pages w/ content longer than the containing div. this is due to an interpretation of a overflow:hidden, and i can certainly remove this *except* that it is there to get my vertical silver divider bar thing to correctly repeat-y all the way down. i rendered this page on browsershots, and it looked like ie7/8 don't have this problem. (can anyone reading verify this?) in any case, i need to fix this. perhaps you or another can tell me the correct way to do this? i'm sure this one is a known quantity. PS Not nice to put IE users at the mercy of putting your stuff in accessibility mode in order to get their font-size preference -- rather than yours :-) . no doubt! if i can only figure out what it was i did! after all, i've got nothing against the ie USERS thanks so much again, josh __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check, particularly on ie6 ?
snak detek+0r wrote: there are two different layouts, front page http://tinyurl.com/pxgydd and all other pages http://tinyurl.com/msyk76 Index and all inside pages: Neither Opera or The IEs are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. Try a raw number for line-height. Index: Minimum font-size 24px breaks the h-nav and does a little number on the text in right column. All pages: Minimum font-size 24px does a little number on the vertical-nav and the text in right column. From the inside pages, there is no (obvious) way to get back to the index (I guessed and clicked the header). IE 6/7/8 look relatively similar and in good order on a very quick and cursory check. Validating the markup and CSS could be a nice touch... PS Not nice to put IE users at the mercy of putting your stuff in accessibility mode in order to get their font-size preference -- rather than yours :-) . __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
2009/5/20 David Laakso da...@chelseacreekstudio.com: Ib Jensen wrote: Dunno, but it may be IE/6 is not honoring the advanced selector for the missing icons-- but does it really matter? Of more importance (?), may be that neither of the more important content images in the right column, reside in their respective containers in IE/6. . Apart from that the Template was _not made_ for IE6, I would like it to behave nice. About the icons, They don't matter, but if they _could_ be shown And, if push came shove, I'd consider setting a fixed width of 990px on the page outermost wrapper for IE/6.0 (only). This will prevent the float drop in narrow windows, in IE/6. And, it will resolve that IE/6 does not support min/max width. That should then be in a CC in the header or in a ie.css ? I do not know, as well, why you need be particularly concerned with the zoom toy in IE. Unless you are willing to start from scratch with a different layout concept, it may be beneficial to accept IE's zoom toy for what it is: *page zoom. * I was just testing how it behaved in a large size, but should problably instead have used browsershot.com? to test it in. -- Regards / Mhv. Ib K. jensen - http://ikjensen.dk __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please
Ib Jensen wrote:
2009/5/20 David Laakso da...@chelseacreekstudio.com:
Ib Jensen wrote:
Dunno, but it may be IE/6 is not honoring the advanced selector for the
missing icons-- but does it really matter? Of more importance (?), may be
that neither of the more important content images in the right column,
reside in their respective containers in IE/6. .
Apart from that the Template was _not made_ for IE6, I would like it
to behave nice.
This star html hack will set the fixed width for IE/6. Leave it in the
CSS file. Or, if you prefer, put it in an IE/6 conditional comment. It
will work either way.
* html div#side {width:990px;} /* for IE/6 */
The division ( .manchet ) in the right column that has the float right
images needs to be cleared for IE/6. Add this to the style sheet to do
that (this will not adversely effect other browsers, so no need to put
it in a CC):
.manchet:after
{
content: '.';
display: block;
height: 0;
clear: both;
visibility: hidden;
}
.manchet {
display: inline-block;
}
About the icons, They don't matter, but if they _could_ be shown
IE/6 does not support this css selector:
a[href^=mailto:;] {background-image:url(email000.png);}
IE/8, and IE/7, do support it and show your icons.
If it is necessary to have those two icons in IE/6 you'll need to feed
them to it with a simple selector. Seems more trouble than it is worth
(to me) for a browsers that is on death row. But it is your call...
I do not know, as well, why you need be particularly concerned with the
zoom toy in IE. Unless you are willing to start from scratch with a
different layout concept, it may be beneficial to accept IE's zoom toy for
what it is: * page zoom. *
I was just testing how it behaved in a large size, but should
problably instead have used browsershot.com? to test it in.
A static screen capture from browsershot will not show how the fonts
scale. IETester only enables page zoom, not font-scaling. To test the
IEs for font-scaling on a native box or the standalone versions
http://tredosoft.com/IE7_standalone.
In IE/6 it is: viewtext sizelargest. In IE 7/8 it is: pagetext
sizelargest
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site check please
2009/5/20 David Laakso da...@chelseacreekstudio.com:
Ib Jensen wrote:
2009/5/20 David Laakso da...@chelseacreekstudio.com:
Ib Jensen wrote:
This star html hack will set the fixed width for IE/6. Leave it in the CSS
file. Or, if you prefer, put it in an IE/6 conditional comment. It will
work either way.
* html div#side {width:990px;} /* for IE/6 */
The division ( .manchet ) in the right column that has the float right
images needs to be cleared for IE/6. Add this to the style sheet to do that
(this will not adversely effect other browsers, so no need to put it in a
CC):
.manchet:after
{
content: '.';
display: block;
height: 0;
clear: both;
visibility: hidden;
}
.manchet {
display: inline-block;
}
Thank you, I will use it.
IE/6 does not support this css selector:
a[href^=mailto:;] {background-image:url(email000.png);}
IE/8, and IE/7, do support it and show your icons.
If it is necessary to have those two icons in IE/6 you'll need to feed them
to it with a simple selector. Seems more trouble than it is worth (to me)
for a browsers that is on death row. But it is your call...
No need for them in IE6.
I was just hoping :(
A static screen capture from browsershot will not show how the fonts scale.
IETester only enables page zoom, not font-scaling. To test the IEs for
font-scaling on a native box or the standalone versions
http://tredosoft.com/IE7_standalone.
In IE/6 it is: viewtext sizelargest. In IE 7/8 it is: pagetext
sizelargest
Thanks for this information
I know that anything you put on a webpage is sometimes shown
differently in any browser. And even more differently if the user are
using a homemade configuration of the browser
To Val Dobson
Thanks for the correction.
--
Regards / Mhv.
Ib K. jensen - http://ikjensen.dk
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site check please
Ib Jensen wrote: Hi Link: http://ikjensen.dk Tested locally in FF 3.0.10 - IE 6/78 (IETester 0.3.3) Locally known issues: IE6 dont show my link-icons IE7 - 8 behave rather ok. As FF3. At 190% Page- or Text-zoom?: IE6: Arghhh The template _are_ not made for IE6! IE7: Page got a horizontal scroll-bar, and continues out of the viewport. IE8: Page continues out of the viewport, but no horizontal scroll-bar. I like sort of have no wild and bad issues with your site (other than trying to find relevant selectors, in that CSS maze, ain't easy). Dunno, but it may be IE/6 is not honoring the advanced selector for the missing icons-- but does it really matter? Of more importance (?), may be that neither of the more important content images in the right column, reside in their respective containers in IE/6. . And, if push came shove, I'd consider setting a fixed width of 990px on the page outermost wrapper for IE/6.0 (only). This will prevent the float drop in narrow windows, in IE/6. And, it will resolve that IE/6 does not support min/max width. I do not know, as well, why you need be particularly concerned with the zoom toy in IE. Unless you are willing to start from scratch with a different layout concept, it may be beneficial to accept IE's zoom toy for what it is: *page zoom. * __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
Chris Blake wrote: And 'stop the presses' is wrong, 'press' is plural. Uhh, not always, and certainly not when used as Jody is using it: as part of the age old saying: Stop the presses. This goes way back to the days of the printing press and refers literally to stopping the printing presses during the printing process because some new vital piece of information needs to be added to the news. -- !-- ! Bill Brown macnim...@gmail.com ! Web Developologist, WebDevelopedia.com -- __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
wow, thank you for the screen shot. I will adjust. On May 17, 2009, at 9:06 PM, David Laakso wrote: Jody Levinson wrote: Hi, all, I've created this site: http://evamoon.net and it looks all right as far as I can see in FF and current versions of IE, but when I open the pages in DreamWeaver the left sidebar appears in the lower right and the navbar position overlaps the top of the content area. I don't really care if it looks odd in DW, but the fact that it does makes me worried that it might be broken elsewhere and I just haven't seen it. Would you all mind terribly having a look and letting me know if there are problems with the CSS? The CSS validates, though there are some warnings and the HTML mostly validates except for things related to the flash slide show. Thanks so much! (and btw, Eva Moon is my stage name) Jody Jody, I do not think you can trust how anything looks in any editor's viewer-- including DW's. While someone else may bring up the issue you wrote about, I do not see it on this end in Mac FF, Mac Opera, Mac SeaMonkey, or Mac Safari. Nor in XP IE 6/7/8. As an unrelated aside, I prefer my font-size preference (default), rather than yours. And, mind that, neither Opera nor the IE browsers are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. A raw number for line-height will suffice. Please see http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/eva.png (shot at 32px min-font size in Opera). Best, Samuel Langhorne Clemens, (better known by the pen name Mark Twain) -- TroutDream Graphics, Inc. Always fresh. Never canned. http://troutdream.com 425-883-8277 928-833-8277 fax __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
Hi Chris Actually, as Bill points out, stop the presses is correct in this sense. It refers to when a late breaking important news story would come in to a newspaper after the edition was already on the printing press. They'd stop the printing presses to update. The image at the bottom is just a plain old transparent gif with a black mask. I'm not wild about how the mask shows over a light background, but no mask leaves jaggedy edges on the hands. It's a tradeoff. As for the menu titles, I know the common wisdom is to make them straightforward, but since this is a site for a comic musician and supposed to be fun I thought it would be all right to play. The pages are light and few, so it's hard to get too lost. If many people disagree, I might reconsider. Thanks! On May 17, 2009, at 10:34 PM, Chris Blake wrote: On 18/05/2009, at 12:06 PM, David Laakso wrote: Jody Levinson wrote: Hi, all, I've created this site: http://evamoon.net and it looks all right as far as I can see in FF and current versions of IE, but when I open the pages in DreamWeaver the left sidebar appears in the lower right and the navbar position overlaps the top of the content area. I don't really care if it looks odd in DW, but the fact that it does makes me worried that it might be broken elsewhere and I just haven't seen it. Would you all mind terribly having a look and letting me know if there are problems with the CSS? The CSS validates, though there are some warnings and the HTML mostly validates except for things related to the flash slide show. Thanks so much! (and btw, Eva Moon is my stage name) Jody Jody, I do not think you can trust how anything looks in any editor's viewer-- including DW's. While someone else may bring up the issue you wrote about, I do not see it on this end in Mac FF, Mac Opera, Mac SeaMonkey, or Mac Safari. Nor in XP IE 6/7/8. As an unrelated aside, I prefer my font-size preference (default), rather than yours. And, mind that, neither Opera nor the IE browsers are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. A raw number for line-height will suffice. Please see http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/eva.png (shot at 32px min- font size in Opera). Best, Samuel Langhorne Clemens, (better known by the pen name Mark Twain) I agree, Don't worry what Dreamweaver makes of it. It looks fine on my Safari (Version 4 Public Beta (5528.17)). If I want to know the 'scoop' I should go to the 'Snoop' button in the menu? And 'stop the presses' is wrong, 'press' is plural. Nice use of transparency in the bottom fixed image. What technique did you use? CB __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/ -- TroutDream Graphics, Inc. Always fresh. Never canned. http://troutdream.com 425-883-8277 928-833-8277 fax __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
On May 17, 2009, at 7:30 PM, Jody Levinson wrote: Hi, all, I've created this site: http://evamoon.net and it looks all right as far as I can see in FF and current versions of IE, but when I open the pages in DreamWeaver the left sidebar appears in the lower right and the navbar position overlaps the top of the content area. I don't really care if it looks odd in DW, but the fact that it does makes me worried that it might be broken elsewhere and I just haven't seen it. Would you all mind terribly having a look and letting me know if there are problems with the CSS? The CSS validates, though there are some warnings and the HTML mostly validates except for things related to the flash slide show. Thanks so much! (and btw, Eva Moon is my stage name) Jody Thanks everyone for your feedback. There is one page on the site that is broken in FF: http://evamoon.net/sl/index.html When I validate the HTML, it tells me there's a /div missing: # Error Line 87, Column 7: end tag for div omitted, but OMITTAG NO was specified /body You may have neglected to close an element, or perhaps you meant to self-close an element, that is, ending it with / instead of . # Info Line 42: start tag was here div id=wrapper But the page uses the exact same template as the other pages, though it's the only one that's in a subdirectory. All the code looks the same and the divs match up - I went through the template line by line and matched them up. There are some validation errors due to the iframe, but the iframe is not causing the problem. The page is broken without it and I've used the same iframe on another site page with no problem. I'm missing something! Help please! Thank you, Jody -- TroutDream Graphics, Inc. Always fresh. Never canned. http://troutdream.com 425-883-8277 928-833-8277 fax __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
On 19/05/2009, at 3:57 AM, Jody Levinson wrote: The image at the bottom is just a plain old transparent gif with a black mask. I'm not wild about how the mask shows over a light background, but no mask leaves jaggedy edges on the hands. It's a tradeoff. The way around this is to save the file as an alpha transparent png. This would allow antialiasing of the arms so that they look right over any coloured background. You probably know that alpha pngs aren't supported in IE6 but there are a number of techniques for forcing it to play ball. __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
On 2009/05/17 19:30 (GMT-0700) Jody Levinson composed: I've created this site: http://evamoon.net and it looks all right as far as I can see in FF and current versions of IE, but when I open the pages in DreamWeaver the left sidebar appears in the lower right and the navbar position overlaps the top of the content area. I don't really care if it looks odd in DW, but the fact that it does makes me worried that it might be broken elsewhere and I just haven't seen it. Would you all mind terribly having a look and letting me know if there are problems with the CSS? The CSS validates, though there are some warnings and the HTML mostly validates except for things related to the flash slide show. Thanks so much! (and btw, Eva Moon is my stage name) As I normally do, I looked at it first in my routine browsing browser, with practical font size default, minimum size enforced, user stylesheets, and no Flash. I rather like it there. It's one of those rare sites that is not over-styled via classes and ids, with the result that a generic user stylesheet can undo most designer's CSS damage. The most noticeable thing my defenses failed to do was widen enough that the last link in the nav row doesn't spill onto a new line. Also they failed to zoom the H2 text to a legible size. All the rest of the text not embedded in an image, as a consequence of my defenses, is nicely sized to my needs. I generally don't like light on dark color schemes, but this one is an exception. :-) -- A fool gives full vent to his anger, but a wise man keeps himself under control. Proverbs 29:11 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
Jody Levinson wrote: Hi, all, I've created this site: http://evamoon.net and it looks all right as far as I can see in FF and current versions of IE, but when I open the pages in DreamWeaver the left sidebar appears in the lower right and the navbar position overlaps the top of the content area. I don't really care if it looks odd in DW, but the fact that it does makes me worried that it might be broken elsewhere and I just haven't seen it. Would you all mind terribly having a look and letting me know if there are problems with the CSS? The CSS validates, though there are some warnings and the HTML mostly validates except for things related to the flash slide show. Thanks so much! (and btw, Eva Moon is my stage name) Jody Jody, I do not think you can trust how anything looks in any editor's viewer-- including DW's. While someone else may bring up the issue you wrote about, I do not see it on this end in Mac FF, Mac Opera, Mac SeaMonkey, or Mac Safari. Nor in XP IE 6/7/8. As an unrelated aside, I prefer my font-size preference (default), rather than yours. And, mind that, neither Opera nor the IE browsers are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. A raw number for line-height will suffice. Please see http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/eva.png (shot at 32px min-font size in Opera). Best, Samuel Langhorne Clemens, (better known by the pen name Mark Twain) __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] site check please?
On 18/05/2009, at 12:06 PM, David Laakso wrote: Jody Levinson wrote: Hi, all, I've created this site: http://evamoon.net and it looks all right as far as I can see in FF and current versions of IE, but when I open the pages in DreamWeaver the left sidebar appears in the lower right and the navbar position overlaps the top of the content area. I don't really care if it looks odd in DW, but the fact that it does makes me worried that it might be broken elsewhere and I just haven't seen it. Would you all mind terribly having a look and letting me know if there are problems with the CSS? The CSS validates, though there are some warnings and the HTML mostly validates except for things related to the flash slide show. Thanks so much! (and btw, Eva Moon is my stage name) Jody Jody, I do not think you can trust how anything looks in any editor's viewer-- including DW's. While someone else may bring up the issue you wrote about, I do not see it on this end in Mac FF, Mac Opera, Mac SeaMonkey, or Mac Safari. Nor in XP IE 6/7/8. As an unrelated aside, I prefer my font-size preference (default), rather than yours. And, mind that, neither Opera nor the IE browsers are capable of scaling line-height set in pixels. A raw number for line-height will suffice. Please see http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ca/cssd/eva.png (shot at 32px min-font size in Opera). Best, Samuel Langhorne Clemens, (better known by the pen name Mark Twain) I agree, Don't worry what Dreamweaver makes of it. It looks fine on my Safari (Version 4 Public Beta (5528.17)). If I want to know the 'scoop' I should go to the 'Snoop' button in the menu? And 'stop the presses' is wrong, 'press' is plural. Nice use of transparency in the bottom fixed image. What technique did you use? CB __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check please...
Michael Beaudoin a écrit :
I'm fleshing out a new site. I thought I'm doing this is as simple a
manner as possible to not induce any anomalies, but I'm having some
issues.
What I can see off the bat...
- In Safari, the logo on the right doesn't show (it does in Firefox
IE)
This one ?
background-image:url(file:///Terminator/Users/badoyn/Desktop/Projects/Simmons%20Design/Meeks%20Site%20v2/website/images/mdg_logo_topright.gif);
The path should be something like that
background-image:url(images/mdg_logo_topright.gif);
I guess you have included this image with a soft like Dreamweaver and
you forgot to give a relative path
- I've put the large type (our firm) at then end and using positioning
tried to make it place over the photo. Good to an extent. In Firefox
it seems to be positioned correctly, but in Safari/IE, it's closer to
the bottom of the image. Also, there seems to be a large space under
the photo I can't seem to understand why. It happened when I started
to position the large type.
In Opera your text wraps in 2 lines. Try something like this
#container #imageArea .largeText {
color:#FF;
display:block;
font-family:Helvetica,Verdana,Arial,sans-serif;
font-size:128px;
font-weight:bold;
float: right;
position:relative;
top:-120px;
}
Luis
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site check please...
Subject: [css-d] Site check please... I'm fleshing out a new site. I thought I'm doing this is as simple a manner as possible to not induce any anomalies, but I'm having some issues. What I can see off the bat... - In Safari, the logo on the right doesn't show (it does in Firefox IE) - I've put the large type (our firm) at then end and using positioning tried to make it place over the photo. Good to an extent. In Firefox it seems to be positioned correctly, but in Safari/IE, it's closer to the bottom of the image. Also, there seems to be a large space under the photo I can't seem to understand why. It happened when I started to position the large type. - I'm sure there is more that you all will point out, and I appreciate it. Go to: http://ba-doyn.com/junk/meeks_test/ Looks the same in Safari as in Firefox (Vista) to me. I don't see any logo at all. Large print is at bottom of image in both browsers. You might also fix your html (mainly mistyping of Javascript stuff) Cheers Ian __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check: Can this DIV be vertically centered in theviewport?
From: Stephen Tang clowwizarder...@gmail.com Yes, I am aware about enlarging the font. Unfortunately, the center image is a fixed height and it didn't look good if the box became vertically longer as the font size increased. http://www.isadoratang.com/index.php I'm kind of surprised at that thought because I would think that enlarging the box so that the text was still on the white background (when font size is increased) would be preferable to having the text shoot out the bottom of the fixed-height box, as it does now. For what it's worth, I could not comfortably read your text as set, and HAD to increase the font size, causing the behavior described above. I have no idea what the text on that image says, it is too small to read. Page zoom in Opera (to 180%) allowed me to read some of the image text, but not all of it, as the font used is narrow and squished together. I have no idea what it says under Sage College of Albany because if I zoom the page much further the top of the image scoots out the top of the viewport and is unviewable, and the text does not become more readable anyway. The page navigation (portfolio, about, contact) begins leaving the viewport as well at this page zoom on my machine. I realize that these issues depend on the size of someones monitor and browser, but perhaps they are worth considering. As a reference, most of the time I do not wear glasses, only for reading books and the like (not the computer screen). ~holly __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check: Can this DIV be vertically centered in the viewport?
David Laakso wrote: I built this site, http://www.isadoratang.com/index.php, but I've been trying to determine if I can center the div id=page vertically in the viewport. Yes, I think it is possible with CSS (I seem to recall a method Georg Sortun created but can't find it at the moment) or possibly with scripting. Although I am not so sure what vertical centering will buy you with a fixed height wrapper enclosing movable type. Try your page at minimum font-size 24px in FF for example... Demo with no declared height: http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/moa_15a.html Article on how: http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_20.html ...with more demos linked in. (I'll have to update that article, as IE8 does of course line up perfectly with the other CSS2.1 capable browsers.) regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check: Can this DIV be vertically centered in the viewport?
Hi David, Thanks for the reference to Georg's site. Yes, I am aware about enlarging the font. Unfortunately, the center image is a fixed height and it didn't look good if the box became vertically longer as the font size increased. --Stephen On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 1:51 AM, David Laakso da...@chelseacreekstudio.com wrote: Stephen Tang wrote: Hello, I built this site, http://www.isadoratang.com/index.php, but I've been trying to determine if I can center the div id=page vertically in the viewport. Any advice on this would be helpful. Sincerely, Stephen Yes, I think it is possible with CSS (I seem to recall a method Georg Sortun created but can't find it at the moment) or possibly with scripting. Although I am not so sure what vertical centering will buy you with a fixed height wrapper enclosing movable type. Try your page at minimum font-size 24px in FF for example... __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check: Can this DIV be vertically centered in the viewport?
Georg, Thank you for the link to your website on this. Will this work on a DIV with a declared height? I'll see what happens to my site when I remove my declared height on the DIV. --Stephen On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Gunlaug Sørtun gunla...@c2i.net wrote: David Laakso wrote: I built this site, http://www.isadoratang.com/index.php, but I've been trying to determine if I can center the div id=page vertically in the viewport. Yes, I think it is possible with CSS (I seem to recall a method Georg Sortun created but can't find it at the moment) or possibly with scripting. Although I am not so sure what vertical centering will buy you with a fixed height wrapper enclosing movable type. Try your page at minimum font-size 24px in FF for example... Demo with no declared height: http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/moa_15a.html Article on how: http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_20.html ...with more demos linked in. (I'll have to update that article, as IE8 does of course line up perfectly with the other CSS2.1 capable browsers.) regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check: Can this DIV be vertically centered in the viewport?
Stephen Tang wrote: Will this work on a DIV with a declared height? I'll see what happens to my site when I remove my declared height on the DIV. Check the demos (links on top of side column in my article), and, yes, it'll work literally no matter what - when done right. The advantage is that nothing will end up in unreachable places off screen on small windows, since scrolling becomes active for the whole page when necessary. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site Check: Can this DIV be vertically centered in the viewport?
Stephen Tang wrote: Hello, I built this site, http://www.isadoratang.com/index.php, but I've been trying to determine if I can center the div id=page vertically in the viewport. Any advice on this would be helpful. Sincerely, Stephen Yes, I think it is possible with CSS (I seem to recall a method Georg Sortun created but can't find it at the moment) or possibly with scripting. Although I am not so sure what vertical centering will buy you with a fixed height wrapper enclosing movable type. Try your page at minimum font-size 24px in FF for example... __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check: List Item menu in different browsers
Hi Scott, It seems to be a function of text size. It works at some settings (small), but falls apart as you enlarge. Your text height is set in ems, whereas your margins etc are in pixels. HTH, Bob - Original Message - From: scott.blanch...@sungard.com To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 4:40 PM Subject: [css-d] Site check: List Item menu in different browsers My site is located here: http://www.eco-tune.net http://www.eco-tune.net/ The menu at the top should look like it does in this image: http://www.eco-tune.net/images/menu.jpg As you can see from the image, their should be a 1 pixel white separator between the top menu and the submenu beneath it. I've tested it in Chrome, Firefox 3 and IE 7 from my work PC and it looks perfect (just like in the picture above). However, from home, there is a wider gap between the two menus when viewed in these same browsers. My text size is the same in all browsers (default: medium). Any ideas what's happening? __ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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] Site check: List Item menu in different browsers
scott.blanch...@sungard.com wrote:
http://www.eco-tune.net/
The menu at the top should look like it does in this image:
http://www.eco-tune.net/images/menu.jpg
You're positioning the wrong way round for such a construction, which
makes it weak for the slightest changes in browser-environment,
resolution, font resizing etc.
I think you want it more like this...
http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/alien/sb/test_09_0303.html
...where the gap is pretty stable under stress. The rest of the
header/nav layout can't take much though.
Changes are:
.header {height: 142px;}
.header .subnav {top: 100%; bottom: auto;}
.header #nav {bottom: 6px;}
...which effectively turns positioning of .subnav upside down and
preserves the gap.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Site Check Please - Cedar Lake Inn
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote: 11/13/2008 I'd appreciate a check of these four pages, http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIbanquetmenu.html, http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIbanquetpolicies.html, http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIbanquetphotogallery.html. Peter On all four pages in XP IE/7 and IE/6 there is a sliver of white showing in the top border. Aside: A text block on top of an image (that becomes unrecognizable because of it) and that is less deep than the text-block is sometimes pulled-off in high end, and avant-garde, print media circles. I don't think it's quite appropriate for your clients site (it just creates the illusion the page is broken, even though it is not). -- 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
hard time getting a handle on how to ensure all of my content is in the right place in Internet Explorer 7 and 6. . You are running Proprietary HTML not XHTML strict. The resolution of this issue is best left to a list pro. I assume you are referring to the DOCTYPE ? Is the HTML proprietary because of the javascript for flash ( from Adobe) ? Should this be transitional or another HTML Doctype altogether ? I'm not a list pro and this may offer little in terms of resolution, but... As I understand it, Internet Explorer doesn't support XHTML, so even if you specify XHTML in the doctype and even if you made server-side adjustments to _ensure_ that you were sending XHTML to the browser, IE simply won't render it as XHTML, using instead it's own HTML interpretation. I've yet to see the real benefit to using XHTML over well-formed HTML and tend to use this doctype for everything as a consequence: !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd; It seems to deliver more consistent and predictable results cross-browser. Hope it helps. --Bill -- ~~~ Bill Brown, MacNimble.com :: From dot concept to dot com since 1999 WebDevelopedia.com, TheHolierGrail.com, Cyber-Sandbox.com, Anytowne.com The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. -- Albert Einstein ~~~ __ 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
From: Bill Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2008 10:18:55 -0500 To: SuzT808 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org, David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check for IE layout issues I'm not a list pro and this may offer little in terms of resolution, but... As I understand it, Internet Explorer doesn't support XHTML, so even if you specify XHTML in the doctype and even if you made server-side adjustments to _ensure_ that you were sending XHTML to the browser, IE simply won't render it as XHTML, using instead it's own HTML interpretation. I've yet to see the real benefit to using XHTML over well-formed HTML and tend to use this doctype for everything as a consequence: !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd; It seems to deliver more consistent and predictable results cross-browser. Hope it helps. --Bill That's not my understanding at all! I used the following for a number of years: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; and recently switched to: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd; Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quirks_mode http://www.alistapart.com/stories/doctype/ Could someone else please verify? --- Alyda __ 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
Alyda Gilmore wrote: That's not my understanding at all! I used the following for a number of years: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; and recently switched to: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd; Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quirks_mode http://www.alistapart.com/stories/doctype/ Could someone else please verify? Hi Alyda-- I should add that IE reads XHTML, so it supports it in that sense, but it serves the pages as text/html not as application/xml+xhtml. I interpret that to mean that it's going to serve the pages as html, regardless of whether or not I've specified an xhtml doctype. Source: http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2005/09/15/467901.aspx It used to be possible to trick IE into serving documents as application/xml, but I'm not sure if this is still possible (or even used). Source: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#ie Two other useful questions on that page: http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#texthtml http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/xhtml-faq#mime11 Hope that helps. --Bill -- ~~~ Bill Brown, MacNimble.com :: From dot concept to dot com since 1999 WebDevelopedia.com, TheHolierGrail.com, Cyber-Sandbox.com, Anytowne.com The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift. -- Albert Einstein ~~~ __ 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
SuzT808 wrote: www.cocomomi.com/index8.html http://www.cocomomi.com/index8.html Hi, I assume you are referring to the DOCTYPE ? Is the HTML proprietary because of the javascript for flash ( from Adobe) ? Should this be transitional or another HTML Doctype altogether ? Thanks You are running Proprietary HTML. Changing the doctype will not fix the issues at hand regardless of what doctype you use. The resolution of this issue is best left to someone who knows more about this than me. -- 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
On Sat, 08 Nov 2008 06:18:47 -1000, Alyda Gilmore wrote: From: Bill Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] [...] As I understand it, Internet Explorer doesn't support XHTML, so even if you specify XHTML in the doctype and even if you made server-side adjustments to _ensure_ that you were sending XHTML to the browser, IE simply won't render it as XHTML, using instead it's own HTML interpretation. I've yet to see the real benefit to using XHTML over well-formed HTML and tend to use this doctype for everything as a consequence: !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd; It seems to deliver more consistent and predictable results cross-browser. Hope it helps. --Bill That's not my understanding at all! I used the following for a number of years: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd; and recently switched to: !DOCTYPE html PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd; To bring this on-topic (CSS) note that browsers use a DOCTYPE as a mode switch only. This has most effect in IE, which not only reverts to the old box model without a DOCTYPE, but does not even pretend to support CSS 1. Other browsers are less affected, and still apply full CSS 2+ as far as they are able.[1] In brief, I don't think HTML vs XHTML DOCTYPE makes much difference to CSS rendering. Just make sure you use a valid DOCTYPE for IE's sake. I think David means that Flash is proprietary. He may be saying he cannot debug a page that includes Flash - nor can I. Sorry. As far as XHTML vs. HTML issues go:- As long as your page has a name ending in .html or .htm all browsers see your code as HTML unless you have done something strange on your server. If you change the filename extension to .xhtml browsers will try to treat it as XHTML. This is true for pages viewed locally, and true on many, but not all servers. XHTML 1.1 is *only* intended to be used as XHTML. I suggest you not use this for pages seen as HTML - although it does not matter much, since XHTML is designed to be interpreted as HTML as well as XHTML. Fortunately, since that's what a majority of pages are doing. Bottom line - use a valid DOCTYPE for IE and for the validator. When the validator recognizes the HTML 5 DOCTYPE, you can use that one instead, as it does the mode switch in all browsers, as far as I can tell: !DOCTYPE html [1] http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_34.html 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
I'm not too sure what is causing that problem in MSIE... but this is the code... /div !-- end wbott_inner-- /div div class=clearfix/div !-- mcontent done -- !--footer-- FRYNGE here is where the spacing is taken place in the page in MSIE 7, Just before the home and talk to us - hope this helps div id=footera href=http://www.globalfusionproductions.com/index.html; title=Global Fusion ProductionsHome/a // a href=mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title=contact us Talk to Us/a !-- a href=productsofgf.html title=Products of Global Fusion Coming SoonProducts/a | a href=fusiontv title=Global Fusion TVglobalfusiontv/a | a href=contact.html title=Pin-Pin Huang Su ContactContact/a -- Kelly Sigethy - Frynge.com Web Design - Hosting - Advertising http://www.frynge.com 1-403-251-9486 (Calgary) 1-866-331-9684 (Toll Free - Canada and the USA) +44 (0)8717 206 505 (United Kingdom) - Original Message - From: SuzT808 To: Frynge Customer Support Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2008 2:56 AM Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check for IE layout issues On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Frynge Customer Support [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In my internet explorer 7, there are large spaces under the email and the radio In firefox, it shows the player right under the stamp. You have a bit of java script that can be put in to a script instead of inside the main source code Kelly Sigethy - Frynge.com Web Design - Hosting - Advertising http://www.frynge.com 1-403-251-9486 (Calgary) 1-866-331-9684 (Toll Free - Canada and the USA) +44 (0)8717 206 505 (United Kingdom) - Original Message - From: SuzT808 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 2:35 PM Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check for IE layout issues Hello I may be sending this twice, as it doesn't appear as though it reached the list. Hello I would appreciate a review of the following page as I am having a hard time getting a handle on how to ensure all of my content is in the right place in Internet Explorer 7 and 6. I am trying to leave 5 out and IE 8 looks okay, I believe this is a fairly simple design and perhaps I may have overcomplicated it so that I can either start fresh or have a clearer indication of what to do and not do next time. Please ignore ( or if you have suggestions on a better approach) the slideshow being blank or the duplicate music player.. www.cocomomi.com/index8.html Thank you in advance Suz Kathy, Is the javascript you are referring to the script for flash ? is that causing problems with the layout ? __ 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
Hi Suze, I hate to throw a wrench into the works but have you checked this page in Safari 3.03 or Firefox 3 on the Mac? It looks kind of odd to me, there are 3 empty blocks in the middle of the page and the radios are stacked on top of each other under the footer. In Safari the play all button is on top of the in Welcome to the World of Global Fusion Productions Inc. I can send you screenshots if you like. What is it supposed to look like? Tracey On Nov 8, 2008, at 4:39 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: - Original Message - From: SuzT808 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 2:35 PM Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check for IE layout issues Hello I may be sending this twice, as it doesn't appear as though it reached the list. Hello I would appreciate a review of the following page as I am having a hard time getting a handle on how to ensure all of my content is in the right place in Internet Explorer 7 and 6. I am trying to leave 5 out and IE 8 looks okay, I believe this is a fairly simple design and perhaps I may have overcomplicated it so that I can either start fresh or have a clearer indication of what to do and not do next time. Please ignore ( or if you have suggestions on a better approach) the slideshow being blank or the duplicate music player.. www.cocomomi.com/index8.html Thank you in advance Suz __ 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
Hello I may be sending this twice, as it doesn't appear as though it reached the list. Hello I would appreciate a review of the following page as I am having a hard time getting a handle on how to ensure all of my content is in the right place in Internet Explorer 7 and 6. I am trying to leave 5 out and IE 8 looks okay, I believe this is a fairly simple design and perhaps I may have overcomplicated it so that I can either start fresh or have a clearer indication of what to do and not do next time. Please ignore ( or if you have suggestions on a better approach) the slideshow being blank or the duplicate music player.. www.cocomomi.com/index8.html Thank you in advance Suz __ 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
In my internet explorer 7, there are large spaces under the email and the radio In firefox, it shows the player right under the stamp. You have a bit of java script that can be put in to a script instead of inside the main source code Kelly Sigethy - Frynge.com Web Design - Hosting - Advertising http://www.frynge.com 1-403-251-9486 (Calgary) 1-866-331-9684 (Toll Free - Canada and the USA) +44 (0)8717 206 505 (United Kingdom) - Original Message - From: SuzT808 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Friday, November 07, 2008 2:35 PM Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check for IE layout issues Hello I may be sending this twice, as it doesn't appear as though it reached the list. Hello I would appreciate a review of the following page as I am having a hard time getting a handle on how to ensure all of my content is in the right place in Internet Explorer 7 and 6. I am trying to leave 5 out and IE 8 looks okay, I believe this is a fairly simple design and perhaps I may have overcomplicated it so that I can either start fresh or have a clearer indication of what to do and not do next time. Please ignore ( or if you have suggestions on a better approach) the slideshow being blank or the duplicate music player.. www.cocomomi.com/index8.html Thank you in advance Suz __ 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-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] Site Check for IE layout issues
SuzT808 wrote: Hello I would appreciate a review of the following page as I am having a hard time getting a handle on how to ensure all of my content is in the right place in Internet Explorer 7 and 6. . www.cocomomi.com/index8.html Suz You are running Proprietary HTML not XHTML strict. The resolution of this issue is best left to a list pro. -- 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] Site Check for IE layout issues
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 9:58 PM, David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: SuzT808 wrote: Hello I would appreciate a review of the following page as I am having a hard time getting a handle on how to ensure all of my content is in the right place in Internet Explorer 7 and 6. . www.cocomomi.com/index8.html Suz You are running Proprietary HTML not XHTML strict. The resolution of this issue is best left to a list pro. -- A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming. http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ Hi, I assume you are referring to the DOCTYPE ? Is the HTML proprietary because of the javascript for flash ( from Adobe) ? Should this be transitional or another HTML Doctype altogether ? 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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn - Round #2
The height issue is definitely fixed in IE6.
The entity issue is only an issue in the address line, but is not an
issue in the times that the restaurant is open, yet uses some of the
same bullets. Can you use the same coding for the bullets in the
address line that you use in the times that the restaurant is open
line?
Nancy
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 10:30 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David Laakso wrote:
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com
1/ Dunno. Clear the cache? No got Avant here. I do not see the large
gap you mention in any of my XP or Mac OS X 10.4.11 browsers.
Avant uses existing Trident (MSIE) - the IE7 version in this case.
Check in IE7 - big gaps.
Declare...
#bottomnav {height: 1%;}
...directly - no '* html' hack - and Avant/IE7 will behave itself.
You can then delete the '* html #bottomnav' below '#bottomnav '.
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-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] Site Check.
Nic Pulford wrote: Just release a site that I thought was fully tested, but someone complained that the did not get a complete page load. They got no banner image and none of the menu links acted as a link. They are not terribly IT literate but could at least tell me they were using IE7. Any ideas? The pages have the pair of chars identifying the file as Unicode, code that be it? The site is www.lasadev.com http://www.lasadev.com/ Nic All pages loaded the banner image and the links seemed to work on this end in XP IE/6 and IE/7 (although the jumping on link click is a little nerve wracking). Your editor (Dreamweaver?) has to be configured not add the byte-order mark (BOM) to your stylesheet; and html, javacript, or php documents. Some of your pages have an XHTML 1.0 Transitional doctype: others have an XHTML 1.1 doctype. XHTML 1.0 Strict' may be a more suitable doctype for all of your pages. -- 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] Site Check.
Nic Pulford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: = Hi All, Just release a site that I thought was fully tested, but someone complained that the did not get a complete page load. They got no banner image and none of the menu links acted as a link. They are not terribly IT literate but could at least tell me they were using IE7. Any ideas? The pages have the pair of chars identifying the file as Unicode, code that be it? The site is www.lasadev.com http://www.lasadev.com/ Any help appreciated. Nic = Nic Pulford wrote: Just release a site that I thought was fully tested, but someone complained that the did not get a complete page load. They got no banner image and none of the menu links acted as a link. They are not terribly IT literate but could at least tell me they were using IE7. Any ideas? The pages have the pair of chars identifying the file as Unicode, code that be it? The site is www.lasadev.com http://www.lasadev.com/ Nic Just a thought...but when you mention they are not terribly IT literate, the first thing that came to my mind was that: 1. They are trying to click on Services, About Us, Contact, etc instead of the actual links listed below the titles. 2. They are expecting to see a banner looking graphic and not a header graphic. 3. They have scrolled to the bottom of the browser window and do not see the full page since it scrolls up behind the top graphic. Maybe you do not have issues with the site build and display, just the terminology used in discussions with the client. Jeff __ 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] Site Check.
--- On Tue, 10/28/08, Nic Pulford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Nic Pulford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [css-d] Site Check. To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2008, 10:44 AM Hi All, Just release a site that I thought was fully tested, but someone complained that the did not get a complete page load. They got no banner image and none of the menu links acted as a link. They are not terribly IT literate but could at least tell me they were using IE7. Any ideas? Can anyone explain why the font-size gets smaller when the browser window size is decreased in width? I viewed it on Firefox 2 on a Mac. Nic, is this something that you planned in your design? 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-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] Site Check.
Hi Thanks for5 the feed back, I'll work on the jumping I use Dojo I guess it trying to do too much or not using the shrunk version. I was aware of the UTF-8 characters at the from, I'll sort that. Surprised about the version of XHTML as all main pages come from one template in Expression Web. I'll sort that. I now suspect that the person who has the problem has a problem with the PC. It does not seem to display Gif's and when asked to look at the source, IE could not find Notebook. Thanks again, Nic -Original Message- From: David Laakso [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 28 October 2008 12:18 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check. Nic Pulford wrote: Just release a site that I thought was fully tested, but someone complained that the did not get a complete page load. They got no banner image and none of the menu links acted as a link. They are not terribly IT literate but could at least tell me they were using IE7. Any ideas? The pages have the pair of chars identifying the file as Unicode, code that be it? The site is www.lasadev.com http://www.lasadev.com/ Nic All pages loaded the banner image and the links seemed to work on this end in XP IE/6 and IE/7 (although the jumping on link click is a little nerve wracking). Your editor (Dreamweaver?) has to be configured not add the byte-order mark (BOM) to your stylesheet; and html, javacript, or php documents. Some of your pages have an XHTML 1.0 Transitional doctype: others have an XHTML 1.1 doctype. XHTML 1.0 Strict' may be a more suitable doctype for all of your pages. -- 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] Site Check.
At 8:14 AM -0700 10/28/08, Rod Castello wrote: Can anyone explain why the font-size gets smaller when the browser window size is decreased in width? I viewed it on Firefox 2 on a Mac. Nic, is this something that you planned in your design? Yeah, the guy is using a javascript routine that sets the size of the text and graphics to be proportional to the size of the browser window. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.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] Site Check.
tedd wrote: Yeah, the guy is using a javascript routine that sets the size of the text and graphics to be proportional to the size of the browser window. Good thing browsers can override, or ignore, that auto-resizing for text, without turning off script-support - graphics still gets resized. FWIW: smaller browser-window often means: intentionally lowered screen-resolution because one wants larger text. 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] Site Check.
Yes the font changes with screen size. The idea is to compensate for the different screen sizes, but left it as browser window size. I(t does have a min and max though. I guess its my old age on my screen on some sites I really struggle to read them, so this me compensating. Nic -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rod Castello Sent: 28 October 2008 15:14 To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check. --- On Tue, 10/28/08, Nic Pulford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Nic Pulford [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [css-d] Site Check. To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Date: Tuesday, October 28, 2008, 10:44 AM Hi All, Just release a site that I thought was fully tested, but someone complained that the did not get a complete page load. They got no banner image and none of the menu links acted as a link. They are not terribly IT literate but could at least tell me they were using IE7. Any ideas? Can anyone explain why the font-size gets smaller when the browser window size is decreased in width? I viewed it on Firefox 2 on a Mac. Nic, is this something that you planned in your design? 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-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-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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn - Round #2
Hi Peter,
I clicked through the links on your site and found a malformed tag at
the bottom of the page in the menu section.
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIfoodmenu.html
It says clearboth at the bottom of the page. Thought you might want
to know.
Cheers,
Tracey
On Oct 28, 2008, at 3:26 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 03:30:07 +0100
From: Gunlaug S?rtun [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn - Round #2
To: Peter Hyde-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org, David Laakso
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
David Laakso wrote:
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com
1/ Dunno. Clear the cache? No got Avant here. I do not see the large
gap you mention in any of my XP or Mac OS X 10.4.11 browsers.
Avant uses existing Trident (MSIE) - the IE7 version in this case.
Check in IE7 - big gaps.
Declare...
#bottomnav {height: 1%;}
...directly - no '* html' hack - and Avant/IE7 will behave itself.
You can then delete the '* html #bottomnav' below '#bottomnav '.
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/
End of css-d Digest, Vol 71, Issue 26
*
__
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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn
The height attribute in IE6 are not displaying correctly, The image
on the homepage is 1/2 high and the first line of address is cut so
only the bottom half shows.
It could be because IE6 doesn't recognize min-height.
Nancy
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 7:25 PM, David Laakso
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
10/25/2008
Nefore I get much further, would appreciate a site check of new Cedar Lake
Inn index page and one
interior page here,
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIresetcss.css
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIpagecss.css
Some funkification of double borders in most browsers, and loss of #footer
top margin in Opera. Education by the code and art elves always welcome.
Cheers,
Peter
www.fatpawdesign.com
developing in: WinXP/SP2 + FF3.0.3 at 1024x768 and 1280x1024
checking in: IE8.0beta/O9.61/Av11.6/Cr0.2/Orca1.1
validated (X)HTML and CSS
In God we trust, all else bring data...
Only checked in Mac Opera and Mac FF.
Changes made live in FF-- no guarantee cross-browser (or in FF, for
that matter)
Re-set:
#content{
height: 323px;
}
To read (in order to prevent text from heading for the Equator with
scaling):
#content{
min-height: 323px;
}
* html #content{
min-height: 323px;
}
#topnav, #dinnernav {
padding: 0; :: not needed?
padding-bottom: 20px; :: add
}
#topnav li a, #bottomnav li a, #dinnernav li a{
line-height: 1.6; -:: delete
line-height: 0.7; -:: add -- less horsey when scaled
}
#bottomnav {
/*float: right;*/float:left; :: amend
margin-top: /*8px*/120px; :: amend
}
#addressblock{
line-height:0.5; --- :: less lead
margin-top: /*18px*/30px; --- more lead
}
#footer{ border-top: 1px solid fuchsia/*test only*/;
clear:both;
margin: 280px 0 0 0;--:: delete
font-size: 0.80em;--:: delete
padding: 16px 0;
}
#footer p{
font-size: 0.7em; - :: add
margin-left: 16px;- :: add
margin-bottom: 8px;--:: delete
}
Fwiw, line-height usually needs no unit of measure-- a raw number will do.
--
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-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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn
Banquet menu and policy are linked wrong on this page or missing http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIbanquet.html Kelly Sigethy - Frynge.com Web Design - Hosting - Advertising http://www.frynge.com 1-403-251-9486 (Calgary) 1-866-331-9684 (Toll Free - Canada and the USA) +44 (0)8717 206 505 (United Kingdom) - Original Message - From: Peter Hyde-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Saturday, October 25, 2008 3:27 PM Subject: [css-d] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn 10/25/2008 Nefore I get much further, would appreciate a site check of new Cedar Lake Inn index page and one interior page here, http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIresetcss.css http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIpagecss.css Some funkification of double borders in most browsers, and loss of #footer top margin in Opera. Education by the code and art elves always welcome. Cheers, Peter www.fatpawdesign.com developing in: WinXP/SP2 + FF3.0.3 at 1024x768 and 1280x1024 checking in: IE8.0beta/O9.61/Av11.6/Cr0.2/Orca1.1 validated (X)HTML and CSS In God we trust, all else bring data... __ 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-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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn
Nancy Johnson wrote:
The height attribute in IE6 are not displaying correctly, The image
on the homepage is 1/2 high and the first line of address is cut so
only the bottom half shows.
It could be because IE6 doesn't recognize min-height.
Nancy
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
Peter
I hope this will bring IE/6 on board and level out some compliant
browsers issues
* html { :: delete ::
overflow: hidden;
}
* html #content{:: delete ::
min-height: 330px;
}
* html #content{ :: add ::
height: 330px;
}
#addressblock{
line-height: /*0.5*/1.1; :: amend::
float: left; display: inline; ---:: delete both::
}
#bottomnav {
float: left; display: inline;---:: delete both::
}
* html #bottomnav {
height: 1%;---:: add::
border:1px solid fuchsia;---:: 4 position only::
}
#bottomnav li{
float: left; :: add ::
float: right;display: inline;---:: delete both::
}
#footer{
padding: 16px 0;:: delete ::
}
#footer p{
padding-left: 16px;:: delete ::
padding: 16px 0 16px 16px; :: add ::
}
#topnav li a, #bottomnav li a, #contentnav li a{ :: amend::
line-height: /*0.7*/1;
}
__
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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn
You could try that. I have done the same thing and it works.
Nancy
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:49 AM, David Laakso
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Nancy Johnson wrote:
The height attribute in IE6 are not displaying correctly, The image
on the homepage is 1/2 high and the first line of address is cut so
only the bottom half shows.
It could be because IE6 doesn't recognize min-height.
Nancy
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
Peter
I hope this will bring IE/6 on board and level out some compliant browsers
issues
* html { :: delete ::
overflow: hidden;
}
* html #content{:: delete ::
min-height: 330px;
}
* html #content{ :: add ::
height: 330px;
}
#addressblock{
line-height: /*0.5*/1.1; :: amend::
float: left; display: inline; ---:: delete both::
} #bottomnav {
float: left; display: inline;---:: delete both::
} * html #bottomnav {
height: 1%;---:: add::
border:1px solid fuchsia;---:: 4 position only::
} #bottomnav li{
float: left; :: add ::
float: right;display: inline;---:: delete both::
}
#footer{
padding: 16px 0;:: delete ::
}
#footer p{ padding-left: 16px;:: delete ::
padding: 16px 0 16px 16px; :: add ::
}
#topnav li a, #bottomnav li a, #contentnav li a{ :: amend::
line-height: /*0.7*/1; }
__
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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn - Round #2
- Original Message -
From: David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Peter Hyde-Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Nancy Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]; css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Sent: Monday, October 27, 2008 10:49 AM
Subject: Re: [css-d] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
In addition to comments from Nancy Johnson and Kelly Sigethy, David Laakso
wrote:
I hope this will bring IE/6 on board and level out some compliant browsers
issues
/snip a bunch of implemented code/
* html #bottomnav {
height: 1%;---:: add::
border:1px solid fuchsia;---:: 4 position only::
}
/snip a bunch of other implemented code/
Thanks to everyone for the site check. I knew I was in trouble this morning
when I checked the site at work on Win2K/IE6. Uggh. Hence, I have made the
recommended changes and revalidated the lot. Avant was showing the
decapitated text last night, the line-height fix resolves that. Also, I'm
not killing anything at +/-2 page and +/-2 text zoom in FF3.0.3 (sounds like
I am using a Lee-Enfield). A few further issues/questions/comments:
1. In Avant, I am getting a large gap between the #bottomnav and the
#footer, like the large top-margin of the nav is being applied to the footer
as well.
2. For my edification, does the border: solid 1px fuchsia; in the * html
bottomnav declaration actually force something into position, or is it just
a marker? It is not visible in any of my browsers.
3. My WinXP/IE8 nor Win2K/IE6 do not render the *there4;* (or *#8756;*)
character entity. I ran across an article by Jukka Korpela that seems to
confirm this issue with math entities (among others). Any suggestions
besides picking one that works or using an image in its place?
4. Regarding the non-working links on the banquet page; yes, I knew those
were dead. I have to convert an extensive written food menu and booking
contract into something web post-able.
Thanks again, and bottom posting as always,
Peter
www.fatpawdesign.com
developing in: WinXP/SP2 + FF3.0.3 at 1024x768 and 1280x1024
checking in: IE8.0beta/O9.61/Av11.6/Cr0.2/Orca1.1
In God we trust, all else bring data...
__
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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn - Round #2
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote: http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html http://www.fatpawdesign.com 1/ Dunno. Clear the cache? No got Avant here. I do not see the large gap you mention in any of my XP or Mac OS X 10.4.11 browsers. 2/ * html (star html) preceding a selector is a hack to feed a specific rule to IE/6 and down; consequently, the border will only be seen if you are viewing the page in IE/6, IE/5.5, or IE5.01. The purpose of the border (a background color could have been used instead) is to see if the correct selector has been targeted and that its position has in fact been corrected in IE/6, IE/5.5, or IE5.01. The border can then be deleted. 3/ Might be easier for patrons of the restaurant to read if you spell that stuff out line for line-- no (flaky, personal opinion) character entities needed? Something like... Address and Telephone Number: 4919 Highway 144 Hartford, Wisconsin 53027 262 644.4400 Open: Monday through Thursday 3pm to 10pm Friday and Saturday11am to 11pm Sunday 11am to 9pm We accept: VISA, MC, AmEx, DISC __ 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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn - Round #2
David Laakso wrote:
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com
1/ Dunno. Clear the cache? No got Avant here. I do not see the large
gap you mention in any of my XP or Mac OS X 10.4.11 browsers.
Avant uses existing Trident (MSIE) - the IE7 version in this case.
Check in IE7 - big gaps.
Declare...
#bottomnav {height: 1%;}
...directly - no '* html' hack - and Avant/IE7 will behave itself.
You can then delete the '* html #bottomnav' below '#bottomnav '.
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] Site Check Please: Cedar Lake Inn
Peter Hyde-Smith wrote:
10/25/2008
Nefore I get much further, would appreciate a site check of new Cedar Lake
Inn index page and one
interior page here,
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIindex.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIdining.html
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIresetcss.css
http://www.fatpawdesign.com/CedarLakeInn/CLIpagecss.css
Some funkification of double borders in most browsers, and loss of #footer
top margin in Opera. Education by the code and art elves always welcome.
Cheers,
Peter
www.fatpawdesign.com
developing in: WinXP/SP2 + FF3.0.3 at 1024x768 and 1280x1024
checking in: IE8.0beta/O9.61/Av11.6/Cr0.2/Orca1.1
validated (X)HTML and CSS
In God we trust, all else bring data...
Only checked in Mac Opera and Mac FF.
Changes made live in FF-- no guarantee cross-browser (or in FF, for
that matter)
Re-set:
#content{
height: 323px;
}
To read (in order to prevent text from heading for the Equator with
scaling):
#content{
min-height: 323px;
}
* html #content{
min-height: 323px;
}
#topnav, #dinnernav {
padding: 0; :: not needed?
padding-bottom: 20px; :: add
}
#topnav li a, #bottomnav li a, #dinnernav li a{
line-height: 1.6; -:: delete
line-height: 0.7; -:: add -- less horsey when scaled
}
#bottomnav {
/*float: right;*/float:left; :: amend
margin-top: /*8px*/120px; :: amend
}
#addressblock{
line-height:0.5; --- :: less lead
margin-top: /*18px*/30px; --- more lead
}
#footer{ border-top: 1px solid fuchsia/*test only*/;
clear:both;
margin: 280px 0 0 0;--:: delete
font-size: 0.80em;--:: delete
padding: 16px 0;
}
#footer p{
font-size: 0.7em; - :: add
margin-left: 16px;- :: add
margin-bottom: 8px;--:: delete
}
Fwiw, line-height usually needs no unit of measure-- a raw number will do.
--
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] site check
At what resolution are you comparing font sizes? 1280x1024 on a 20 inch laptop Firefox 3.0.3 At 96dpi Firefox has slightly larger font size than IE, probably because of different font-size rounding - +/- 1px difference. Hitting the middle-ground is easy enough on 96dpi, but not relevant if resolution is 120dpi. Don't think Firefox compensates - changes to larger base for font-size - on 120dpi, but IE does. Good point. Yes that seems to be the case. One thing we do in these situations, is create a detection script for each main browser. If you want to get detailed, this is how you can control it, with multiple browsers. Browsers are at different stages for how to handle resolution-induced problems and differences, so any solution _we_ introduce now is likely to break as new browser-versions arrive. What we do is just update the style sheet then for new browser releases. Its not too hard. Depends on how detailed you want to be. Kelly Sigethy - Frynge.com Web Design - Hosting - Advertising http://www.frynge.com 1-403-251-9486 (Calgary) 1-866-331-9684 (Toll Free - Canada and the USA) +44 (0)8717 206 505 (United Kingdom) Kelly Sigethy - Frynge.com Web Design - Hosting - Advertising http://www.frynge.com 1-403-251-9486 (Calgary) 1-866-331-9684 (Toll Free - Canada and the USA) +44 (0)8717 206 505 (United Kingdom) - Original Message - From: Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Frynge Customer Support [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Ed Pybus [EMAIL PROTECTED]; CSS-D css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 4:07 PM Subject: Re: [css-d] site check http://www.slrecords.net/new.php Frynge Customer Support wrote: Fix your style sheets for firefox, the fonts display quite a bit smaller for that browser. At what resolution are you comparing font sizes? At 96dpi Firefox has slightly larger font size than IE, probably because of different font-size rounding - +/- 1px difference. Hitting the middle-ground is easy enough on 96dpi, but not relevant if resolution is 120dpi. Don't think Firefox compensates - changes to larger base for font-size - on 120dpi, but IE does. You can set a detection script to detect firefox or msie and have a style sheet for both Serving browsers different stylesheets is likely to create more problems than it solves. Browsers are at different stages for how to handle resolution-induced problems and differences, so any solution _we_ introduce now is likely to break as new browser-versions arrive. We ma have to split between resolutions - one way or another, and perform extensive cross-browser testing on all resolutions. CSS mediaqueries may solve such resolution-dependent cases, but I don't think Gecko supports those yet. Any news on that? IE doesn't support mediaqueries, and it will only work if we can also affect the browser's base for font-size - which isn't such a good idea IMO. Conclusion: better leave font-size more or less as is - for all browsers, for now. 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] site check
Fix your style sheets for firefox, the fonts display quite a bit smaller for that browser. You can set a detection script to detect firefox or msie and have a style sheet for both Kelly Sigethy - Frynge.com Web Design - Hosting - Advertising http://www.frynge.com 1-403-251-9486 (Calgary) 1-866-331-9684 (Toll Free - Canada and the USA) +44 (0)8717 206 505 (United Kingdom) - Original Message - From: Ed Pybus [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: CSS-D css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Sent: Saturday, October 18, 2008 3:42 PM Subject: [css-d] site check Hi, I've just kinda finished my (first) new website - if anyone fancies giving a check over and letting me know of any problems they see that'd be much appreciated. http://www.slrecords.net/new.php Thanks Ed __ 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-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/
