I will be out of the office starting 20/08/2007 and will not return until
27/08/2007.
In my absence, for Web assistance please email
[EMAIL PROTECTED] or call x46001.
NOTICE - This message is intended only for
There is a way to do that but it won't be CSS valid, since you'd have to use
custom mozilla transparency and since the child will inherit the
transparency properties make it outside the transparent div and movie it
with position left right top and bottom, that should work I have a site that
should
/Slightly/ off-thread, but...
On 21/8/07 (04:02) Joseph said:
Safari will sometimes show a different hue of your color than other
browsers will when .png images set as backgrounds.
I believe that this is a product of PNGs containing a built-in gamma
profile; many browsers ignore it (as they
This is probably one of those questions that divides the audience (no,
it doesn't involve brussel sprouts), but here goes:
As exponents of web standards, we all know that one of the bedrock
basics is that our code should validate -- both (x)html and css.
But we also know that IE(win) is something
Hey rick,
This happened to me as I mentioned in the last issue, and When I spoke to my
client and explained to him the reason he accepted it and chosen design and
cross browser compatibility to complete valid CSS and the only thing that
doesn't validate is the mozilla custom opacity:
Parse Error
Are you serving up your hacked stylesheet to everyone, or just to those
crippled by IE?
The latter is far more acceptable than the former, in my opinion.
Mike
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rick Lecoat
Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2007
Rick Lecoat wrote:
So, is it considered 'okay', in a web standards sense, to have a non-
valid bug-fixes stylesheet working alongside your perfect,
pristine, uiber-valid main stylesheet?
It is considered bad, but necessary and therefore acceptable by most
web designers/developers.
To give
If its only to get around bugs in IE then id also have to say its ok, its
the not the developers fault bill gates still cannot get anything right
(well not bill gates but his developers, seen as he has shown alot of
interest in web standards, his browsers still suck).
Anything apart from this id
On 22/8/07 (12:12) [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Are you serving up your hacked stylesheet to everyone, or just to those
crippled by IE?
The latter is far more acceptable than the former, in my opinion.
Just the victims of IE.
I'm of the opinion that hacks -- ie. workarounds exploiting browser bugs
On 22/8/07 (12:12) Georg said:
It is considered bad, but necessary and therefore acceptable by most
web designers/developers.
That's what I thought, Georg, but it's good to hear it confirmed --
seeing as how we don't live in that 'ideal world' that I keep hearing so
much about.
'Conditional
Rick,
The key thing to consider is this:
• Invalid *ML will force browsers into defective behaviour. If your
markup isn't written according to the very clear spec, the browser has
to make assumptions. Different browsers make different assumptions at
different times – you are leaving yourself
On 22/8/07 (12:57) Barney said:
? Invalid *ML will force browsers into defective behaviour. If your
markup isn't written according to the very clear spec, the browser has
to make assumptions. Different browsers make different assumptions at
different times - you are leaving yourself open to
Hi List
http://actemp.sipu.anglia.ac.uk/steve/transcript/d59.html
My colleague is trying to produce a print style sheet for IE only for a page
of student results which will vary considerably in length from one student to
another. He's using JS to work out how much of the table can be displayed
You may want to double-check you maths - I make it around 800px high at
72dpi:
295mm / 25.4mm = 11 inches * 72 dpi ~ 800px after margins.
Mike
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rachel Campbell
Sent: Wednesday,
Rick Lecoat wrote:
[..] However, I'm curious about why your personal preference is for
NOT using Conditional Comments; you seem to equate them with trying
to hide embarrassing non-valid code, and I'm sure that some designers
might use them for that.
The hiding effect gained by 'CC' is used
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
The real reason for me to not use 'CC' for separation, is that the
versioning goes on on HTML level and adds unnecessary garbage to every
single page.
If you happen to be designing an XHTML site and decide you want to use
server-side scripting to deliver your pages as
On 22/8/07 (14:41) Georg said:
The real reason for me to not use 'CC' for separation, is that the
versioning goes on on HTML level and adds unnecessary garbage to every
single page.
That's a very good point.
And, I was about to follow it up with I wish there was a way to use
conditional
On 21/8/07 (04:02) Joseph said:
Safari will sometimes show a different hue of your color than other browsers
will
when .png images set as backgrounds.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 1, Rick Lecoat replied:
/Slightly/ off-thread, but...
I believe that this is a product of PNGs containing a built-in
On 21/8/07 (04:02) Joseph said:
Safari will sometimes show a different hue of your color than other browsers
will
when .png images set as backgrounds.
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 1, Rick Lecoat replied:
/Slightly/ off-thread, but...
I believe that this is a product of PNGs containing a built-in
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:27:11 +0100, Rick Lecoat wrote:
[...]
So, is it considered 'okay', in a web standards sense, to have a non- valid
bug-fixes
stylesheet working alongside your perfect, pristine, uiber-valid main
stylesheet?
Personally, after working with separate style sheets for IE,
On 23 Aug 2007, at 3:07 AM, David Hucklesby wrote:
After all, if I write about the Sheraton Centre in Manhattan, my
U.S. spell checker tells me I misspelled Centre. So do I change
the spelling? I think not.
Hmm. Interesting example. 'Sheraton Center' is a placename - a proper
noun.
Have
On Aug 22, 2007, at 1:00 PM, David Hucklesby wrote:
...all the gunk
with which Adobe products infest PNG files.
I may be mistaken here, but I think the gunk can be dispensed with
by using Save For Web rather than simply Save or Save As.
Although it may be gunk on the web, this information
On 22/8/07 (20:15) Andrew said:
I may be mistaken here, but I think the gunk can be dispensed with
by using Save For Web rather than simply Save or Save As.
I believe that a PNG's gamma information is retained in a Save For Web
operation -- certainly I've seen colour casts in PNGs that I've
Hi all,
Half of this is a plug and half of this is a call for testing and
suggestions for improvement.
I've been developing a command panel for Fireworks that generates the
HTML and CSS for a horizontal menu that uses the sprite-background
technique for hover/active states. Obvious examples
If it's name was Sheraton Center that's how it should be spelt.
--
Stuart Foulstone.
http://www.bigeasyweb.co.uk
BigEasy Web Design
69 Flockton Court
Rockingham Street
Sheffield
S1 4EB
Tel. 07751 413451
On Wed, August 22, 2007 6:07 pm, David Hucklesby wrote:
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 11:27:11
25 matches
Mail list logo
