Hi All,
I m facing
this problem
Run the application in Internet Explorer and then
increase the text size,
the application is not affected by the size change.
Now run the application in Mozilla or Mozilla Firefox
and then increase
the text size, the application is affected
TuteC wrote:
Hello everyone. I have a web page that I use as a public favorites. I
have around a hundred different links to outside sites, and I use the
target=blank for each one. I searched at W3schools for a way to making
all the links in the page target=blank with CSS but couldn´t find one.
TuteC wrote: Hello everyone. I have a web page that I use as a public favorites. I have around a hundred different links to outside sites, and I use the target=blank for each one. I searched at W3schools for a way to
making all the links in the page target=blank with CSS but couldn´t find
Bob,
I know that you didn't intend any offence, and I appreciate that I did
not give the answer that the poster was hoping for, but do I need to
remind everyone of the title of this forum?
As long as we fail to implement existing standards such as
border-radius, IE can legitimately say there is no
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Bob,
I know that you didn't intend any offence, and I appreciate that I did
not give the answer that the poster was hoping for, but do I need to
remind everyone of the title of this forum?
As long as we fail to implement existing standards such as
border-radius, IE can
Dean, about FieldSet
its going to become Deprecated: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.10
Chears
Shlomi.A
On 7/17/06, Dean Matthews [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tried my first table-less form but it's breaking in Firefox.
On 7/25/06, Shlomi Asaf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dean, about FieldSet
its going to become Deprecated:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.10
Fieldset is not going to be deprecated... the presentational align
attribute of the fieldset element is.
--
Kay Smoljak
Shlomi Asaf
Dean, about FieldSet its going to become Deprecated:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.10
aehno it wont. the *align attribute* in fieldset is deprecated,
not the fieldset itself...
P
Patrick H. Lauke
Web Editor / University
Shlomi Asaf wrote:
Dean, about FieldSet
its going to become Deprecated:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.10
This is not true. The ALIGN attribute is depreciated, but fieldset
surely is not.
On 7/17/06, *Dean Matthews* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so how could we align the legend in the fieldset? only using CSS?
On 7/25/06, Kay Smoljak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/25/06, Shlomi Asaf [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dean, about FieldSet
its going to become Deprecated: http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.10Fieldset is not going to
thank you all :)
On 7/25/06, russ - maxdesign [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dean, about FieldSet its going to become Deprecated:
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.10Shlomi,The fieldset and legend elements are not deprecated. It is the ³align²attribute associated with the legend that
Patrick if you don't mind my asking, Why do you shake your head at this? Is
the good, bad or what?
I tried this on my xhtml strict page. It passes validation but generates
several warnings for nested emphasis and empty trimmings.
As I try dislike my pages to have errors or warnings of any
I have not been following this thread so much so bare with me here! If I am totally in left field ignore me. =)I cannot speak for Patrick, but what I think that he is shaking his head at is the class names, the amount of class names, and markup that lacks semantic value. I realize that the
Enlightenment is something that will happen while you are haging around here. There are a lot of very tanlented people here and asking for a critique, may hirt a little, but will also get you a lot of wonderful ideas. You might receive ideas and solutions that you have never thought of before. Do
Ian Pouncey wrote:
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
No hook needed:
http://www.tjkdesign.com/articles/popup_window_with_no_extra_markup.asp
This is the same idea as the PPK code, as there is still a hook
required - the wrapper element.
No, it is not required.
Using a DIV as a hook is not for making
Ian Pouncey wrote: This is the same idea as the PPK code, as there is still a hook required - the wrapper element.Thierry Koblentz wrote: No, it is not required. Using a DIV as a hook is not for making the script work but to make sure
we do not parse *every single link* in the document (i.e.,
NICE ONE, really , NICE TO SEE but not nice to to fill...
ABout the issue of TABLE or TABLELESS i will not comment in that case
i thing, if you try both and it weighs them you will see. That's it's
just one i would talk in others people who can acess that from others
ways than a common
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thierry,
To quote from the resource you linked to:
Authors may wish to define additional link types not described in
this specification. If they do so, they should use a profile to cite
the conventions used to define the link types. Please see the profile
attribute
One last email at the risk of boring the rest of the list! I think it's
just down to you and I now Thierry.
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
Ian,
I'm not saying my approach is better or cleaner I'm just saying that it does
not work the way you describe it.
AFAIK, PPK is "tagging" the external
Ian Pouncey wrote:
According to http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/global.html#h-7.5.2
The class attribute has several roles in HTML:
* As a style sheet selector (when an author wishes to assign
style information to a set of elements).
* For general purpose
Hi Thierry
Microformats use classes to define objects. Granted, this is adding another
layer of complexity as the classes tell the parser that the content within
the container is x.
In General, class names should be given thoughtful names to make them easier
to understand and more
I don't see how a class could describe an element (for UAs, not authors).
If there was a known convention on possible values, then I'd agree to say
that it could convey information (other than style), but AFAIK this is not
the case.
I may be missing something though, so I'd be happy to hear what
James O'Neill wrote:
Validating is a great start.
But doesn't guarantee anything other than you've used the right
syntax. It's the same as running a spell check in your word processor:
it can tell you if you've misspelled words, but it can't tell you if
what you've written makes any sense
This was it: base target=_blank in the head of the document.
I didn´t use the JS solution, I thought it did this same job but I
think it doesn´t. Any way, if it does, this is simpler and lighter! :)
It saved 6kb of the document, and it validates as transitional.
Thank you all!
Eugenio.
On
Maybe using different pages... not very comfortable but neither scary! :)
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
That is exactly what I think. I wish (as anyone) that every browser
was standards compliant, but they aren´t. And sometimes we ('common'
developers) weigh heavier non standards or purely accesible solutions,
knowing that 95% of the visitors uses x configuration and that the
site work there,
You should take a look at this link, you may find useful informations:
http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_15.html
Let me know if that helps!
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
Hello all -
I know this is OT for this group, but I'm at my wits end.
Development URL:
27 matches
Mail list logo
