Is there a way to accurately and seamlessly position this image over
the background? At the moment, a percentage left position doesn't
quite do the job.
Or am I barking up the wrong tree?
http://www.janelehrer.co.uk/uwish/girls.html
**
The
Hi guys
Sorry this is a WE05 specific question...
In Eric Meyer's presentation at WE05, he talked through the decision-making
process
of constructing AListApart. It was a good presentation, but lost me at one
point.
The challenge was:
* three columns of content
* no guarantee which would be
Donna Maurer wrote:
This is where I lost the point... I understand this is hard because you don't know which
column to use as a reference for the footer positioning. But couldn't you wrap the three
columns in an relatively positioned div and position the footer relative the the whole
thing?
Sorry to seemingly use this group to have a conversation with myself
but I have been working on my problem and floated the image within the
wrapper and then used relative positioning! Is this a valid method?
The site works in IE for PC and Safari and Firefox for Mac. In Mac IE,
though, the
Looking at this.
http://developers.technorati.com/wiki/XOXO
The examples are puzzling.
ol class='xoxo'
liSubject 1
ol
lisubpoint a/li
lisubpoint b/li
/ol
/li
liSubject 2
ol compact=compact
lisubpoint c/li
lisubpoint d/li
/ol
Thanks, now I remember how it works! I have used positioning before (it is on
my
current site), but do find it a bit tricky to think around!
Feeling silly...
Donna
On 5 Oct 2005 at 11:23, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Donna Maurer wrote:
When you position something absolutely, you remove it
Hi all,
I've just used a little absolute positioning inside an div for the first time
in years.
Is it common practice to add position:relative to the body element to get
relative objects to behave when resizing the browser?
During this project I also found a solution to centre content that
BTW the floated page is here:
http://www.janelehrer.co.uk/uwish1/girls.html
On 05/10/05, Adam Morris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry to seemingly use this group to have a conversation with myself
but I have been working on my problem and floated the image within the
wrapper and then used
Adam Morris wrote:
Is there a way to accurately and seamlessly position this image over
the background?
http://www.janelehrer.co.uk/uwish/girls.html
.tornpic {
width:350px;
height:316px;
float: right;
margin: -113px -24px 0 0;
background: url(tornpic0.jpg) no-repeat;
position: relative;
}
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:18:15 -0400, Jan Brasna [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Umm, is this related to Jello exclusively?
Yes.
However, I managed to get the designer to go another direction with
reguards to full height. But full height using Jello Mold is tricky
because one of the key
That's great! Using margins instead of relative positioning has placed
the image in IE Mac too!
What is this bug in IE/Win that you need position: relative; for?
On 05/10/05, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Adam Morris wrote:
Is there a way to accurately and seamlessly position this
Hi
This is a bit late, the internet broke for me for the last few days...On 9/30/05, Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:James Ellis wrote: Conditional statements in HTML such as those used by IE/Windows are a
slippery slope and they seriously break a central tenet of programming. They
Hey
The MS true type fonts core fonts are available for any system (that
supports TTF) to download via
http://kde-look.org/content/show.php?content=19259
I'm sure they are available elsewhere but I pick most of my eyecandy stuff for KDE from here.
If you specify sans-serif as the fallback font,
Mugur Padurean wrote:
As an added note to Linux fonts:
It may be useful for some of you guys to know that on some major Linux
distros ( Fedora, Debian, Slackware) in all browsers available through
the KDE or Gnome fonts appear to be rendered slightly bigger than on
WIN. Up to 5 % bigger.
I've found I can't take advantage of conditional comments as the stand
alone versions of old ie browsers i have don't support them, they all
think they are ie6!
Doing some research into this to, mostly because I wanted to avoid the
* html selector, I came across this fantastic article:
I am also a bit late in the process of giving my humble advice on this thread.
Being a C programmer for almost 20 years, I would like to cover my developer's
hat for a few minutes. I strongly discourage using comments to obtain ...
conditional compilation/interpretation.
In many languages,
On 5 Oct 2005, at 10:19 pm, Tom Livingston wrote:
However, I managed to get the designer to go another direction with
reguards to full height. But full height using Jello Mold is tricky
because one of the key structural elements must have a height of 0
within a Holly Hack for IEWin.
Adam Morris wrote:
What is this bug in IE/Win that you need position: relative; for?
Parts of the float that's overflowing the outer container when pulled
like this, will become invisible.
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
**
The discussion list
I did an experiment with the full height thing about a year ago. I was
absolutely baffled but what I found out, is if you leave out the
doctype, full height will work in IE. But does not work with a doctype.
Obviously because the browser has kicked into the dtd's mode.
You can see the final
http://www.zachinglis.com/ZachInglis.html
The h3's I've tried it with them OUTSIDE the h3/h3 tags but
that doesn't work either. At the moment i'm only modding the top post
before you ask.
**
The discussion list for
Not sure what exactly you're asking, but:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A//www.zachinglis.com/ZachInglis.html
It's broken code, which may explain why you are having problems.
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading,
If all heck is breaking loose on your floated objects in IE.
Add position:relative and it may cure the problem.
Sure, it is better to break it all down and try a more bullet-proof design.
But sometimes its better to just go with the quick fix.
Ted
-Original Message-
Adam Morris
Paul Sturgess wrote:
I've found I can't take advantage of conditional comments as the stand
alone versions of old ie browsers i have don't support them, they all
think they are ie6!
You can tweak the registry to fix that:
http://labs.insert-title.com/labs/article809.aspx
If you don't want to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have taken the decision to step away from this weird possibility of
IE ... simply because I do not want to be obliged, in a year or two,
to change a bulk of web sites built on that feature.
Pat,
As long as the vector version in the conditional expression does not
James Ellis wrote:
Conditional statements in HTML such as those used by IE/Windows are
a slippery slope and they seriously break a central tenet of
programming. They are contained with !-- HTML comments -- and
comments in code are not meant to be parsed as code. It's just plain
badness.
I
Hi Terrence
I try to avoid personal attacks and I thought twice before sending and once
before the graphic designer attack. After sending it I realized I should
have at least re-read the thing before hitting the send button.
What I was referring to was this line:
why you would search
On Oct 5, 2005, at 3:06 AM, Donna Maurer wrote:
The challenge was:
* three columns of content
* no guarantee which would be longer
* vertical lines between them
* a footer that spanned the full width of the screen
As part of the decision, he was discussing whether he would use
absolute
Hey
I don't think there is, but is there any sort of consensus of the use of
zoom layouts?
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/lowvision/
http://www.joeclark.org/atmedia/atmedia-NOTES-2.html
http://www.stopdesign.com/log/2005/06/24/zoom-layout.html
In particular:
1) How do you signal that
1) How do you signal that one is available? I'd like to use text (as
opposed to an icon) but who is going to know what zoom layout means?
Perhaps low-vision layout or low-vision version work better?
The new Amnesty International Australia site uses a zoom layout option. The
icon can be seen
I can't seem to fix the UTF problem. Any ideas?
On 5 Oct 2005, at 16:13, Bert Doorn wrote:
Not sure what exactly you're asking, but:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A//
www.zachinglis.com/ZachInglis.html
It's broken code, which may explain why you are having problems.
Joe Clarke did a speech on it earlier this year at @media... his
slides can be found at http://joeclark.org/atmedia/atmedia-NOTES-2.html
On 5 Oct 2005, at 16:53, Mike Brown wrote:
Hey
I don't think there is, but is there any sort of consensus of the
use of
zoom layouts?
Mike Brown wrote:
I don't think there is, but is there any sort of consensus of the use of
zoom layouts?
1) How do you signal that one is available? I'd like to use text (as
opposed to an icon) but who is going to know what zoom layout means?
Perhaps low-vision layout or low-vision version
G'day
I can't seem to fix the UTF problem. Any ideas?
If you mean the first of the 35 validation errors, have a look at what
the validator suggests:
...perhaps you meant to self-close an element, that is, ending it
with / instead of .
So, meta . / instead of meta
Regards
Patrick H. Lauke said:
I actually had a bit of a discussion with Joe Clark on this issue
during his London workshop last month. I'd argue that users of things
like screen magnifiers, who are the target audience for zoom layouts,
don't need excessively larger fonts and that the reversing of
BBEdit had a / at the end, I don't know why the source didn't. Fixed
now though. Cheers
On 5 Oct 2005, at 17:36, Bert Doorn wrote:
G'day
I can't seem to fix the UTF problem. Any ideas?
If you mean the first of the 35 validation errors, have a look at
what the validator suggests:
Mike Brown wrote:
Meaning that the value of zoom layouts is what? Just that it's putting
content is a single column to prevent overlap etc?
Not just overlap, but mainly that things aren't positioned off to the
right, where users with screen magnifiers won't normally look for them.
And
Hi All
I'd like to replace this:
a[hreflang=sp]:after, a[hreflang=sp-mx]:after,
a[hreflang=sp-us]:after, a[hreflang=sp-sp]:after,
a[hreflang=sp-hn]:after, a[hreflang=sp-cu]:after,
a[hreflang=sp-co]:after, a[hreflang=sp-ec]:after,
a[hreflang=sp-gt]:after, a[hreflang=sp-pa]:after,
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
As for naming, imho it would also make sense to simply call it single
column / large size or similar...
..or *linearized* / large text-size...
Thierry | www.TJKDesign.com
**
The discussion list for
Hi all
I recently stumbled across a site (sorry lost the reference now) that
made reference to the fact that an asterisk should be used inside an ALT
attribute (eg alt=*) when the image is only used for presentation
purposes.
Apparantly this is helpful for screen readers.
Can anyone reaffirm
On 10/5/05, Drake, Ted C. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a[hreflang=sp]:after, a[hreflang=sp-*]:after {content:\A0(In Spanish);
font-size:90%; color:#666;}
Is there a way to use the wildcard inside a selector like this?
a[hreflang*=sp]::after { ... }
See:
On 10/5/05, Rob Mientjes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a[hreflang*=sp]::after { ... }
See: http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/CR-css3-selectors-2003/#selectors
Or a[hreflang^=sp]::after { ... } just to make sure it only selects
attributes starting with sp and nothing else.
On 10/5/05, Sarah Peeke (XERT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I recently stumbled across a site (sorry lost the reference now) that
made reference to the fact that an asterisk should be used inside an ALT
attribute (eg alt=*) when the image is only used for presentation
purposes.
Maybe it was
I have a div inside
a table cell that needs to align to the bottom but can't get it to work.
Can anyone help?
http://www.sgi.com/tempie/box.html
Janelle ClemensWeb
Programmer, SGI[EMAIL PROTECTED](650) 933-9362
2 options spring to mind:
(1) give the div margin-top to push it to the bottom. This way, even if the
above content expands, the div *should* still appear at the bottom of the table
cell
(2) Rowspan the other two cells and split the third (containing the div) into
two rows eg:
Thanks Paul. I was hoping to find a solution without having to split
the cell. But I might have to go that route.
:-)
Janelle
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Bennett
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 2:51 PM
To:
Hi Mike,
Seems that making user's aware of what 'zoom', 'single column',
'high/low contrast', 'low graphics' or any of the other alternatives
is another issue like that of educating new users about browser 'Text
size' options.
From personal experience, when first stumbling upon issues of
Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote:
I recently stumbled across a site (sorry lost the reference now) that
made reference to the fact that an asterisk should be used inside an ALT
attribute (eg alt=*) when the image is only used for presentation
purposes.
Apparantly this is helpful for screen readers.
Andy Kirkwood|Motive said:
Perhaps an icon that indication of a single column (maybe with an
obviously enlarged 'T')?
Might I suggest a magnifying glass over the 'T', or a '+' as an icon?
kind regards
Terrence Wood.
**
The discussion list
Thank you for the update and link Patrick, that's good to know.
It's an outdated piece of advice. Old screen readers did not cope with
empty alts, so alt=* was suggested as a viable default: screen
readers apparently didn't read that out on normal settings.
However, nowadays the suggested
That's what makes selecting a suitable representation difficult. With a 'T' and
magnifying-glass icon, would the user expect to have their layout transformed
from 2 or 3 columns to a single column or a high/low contrast layout? Perhaps
the type size, layout and contrast options should be
James Bennett wrote:
On 10/3/05, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Most Linux systems have neither Verdana
nor Arial installed, at least not by default.
True, but these days nearly every Linux distribution ships the free
Bitstream Vera font set, which includes a sans-serif with metrics
Because it's an ugly bastard of Helvetica?
I'm no typographist but my sister absolutely hates that font. However,
Windows donsn't really have any nice looking fonts anyways.
T. R. Valentine wrote:
On 04/10/05, Christian Montoya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMO arial isn't so hot for the web
52 matches
Mail list logo
