Thierry Koblentz wrote:
Does your approach deal with any column any order? Is this a
possibility?
As it says on this page [1]: The sequence of the columns depends on
the source order... As far as I know, display:table doesn't let us
play with columns the same way we can do with floats.
We
kevin mcmonagle wrote:
So do you separate your styles into quirks mode styles and strict
styles in different css documents?
No, I make only one set of styles - not necessarily in one stylesheet,
making sure mode doesn't matter. Controlling where those
margins/paddings go is usually all that's
kevin mcmonagle wrote:
If i can ask an old question, whats the best way to get margins and
padding to be set the same across all browsers.
In standard mode with all other variables equal, margins and paddings
_are_ the same, so I guess that's not what your question is about.
Standard mode vs.
Mike Brown wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/home/beta
Thoughts/praise/comments :)
Overall, better, but, worse than good.
Oh come on, let's not be so blinkered that we can't appreciate really
good work in most areas!
Since the example comes out like this...
Lyn Patterson wrote:
stacking bugs ? something for me to research.
You'll find few references to that bug under that name. It's rather a
description of how the bug works - individual layers of an element get
wrongly stacked relative to individual layers of other elements
_visually_ in the
Al Sparber wrote:
[...]
Reducing the disparities is not the same as eliminating disparities.
It is human nature to make mistakes. It's often the best way to
learn.
Yes, it is. However, it is not human nature to make use of what they
have, or should have learned, if they can get away with
Al Sparber wrote:
From: Michael Horowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Personally I'm looking forward to buying computers with virtually
nothing pre installed. I always end up deleting most of it anyway.
Alot of people start off by reinstalling the OS to get rid of all
the junk the PC manufacturers put
Lyn Patterson wrote:
http://www.westernwebdesign.com.au/bluelightning/gallery.html
It is fine in Fx, IE7 and Opera. In IE6, ul#img li is not
displaying. This is the bit that supplies the background and room
for a large caption.
Can anyone tell me why this is so?
IE6 has stacking bugs,
John Faulds wrote:
Delivering their OSes with half a dozen pre-installed
standard-compliant alternatives to IE/win isn't a technical
problem, so why not?
I'm no lawyer and I'm also no MS fanboy, but I think 'why?' is as
equally a valid question as 'why not?'.
Indeed. Which would make any
John Faulds wrote:
I had that there because the top link in the sidebar seems to get
partially obscured by the transparent PNG of the ball. I'm sure it
was working at some point, but doesn't seem to be now. :/
You can keep the...
#sidebar {
position: relative;
z-index: 200;
}
..._if_ it
Chris Taylor wrote:
But even for a relatively small site having a sitemap will help some
users find what they want quickly. Those people are the same ones who
will scan the index of a book before flicking through the pages.
I've done that on this site: http://www.2plan.com/ despite it only
Tee G. Peng wrote:
I thought max-width tells the browser: This is the limit of the
width you can expand, regardless how big the screen is.
But my testing shows that, with a max-width of 60em, a 1680px wide
monitor, when a browser is opened in full screen, with fontsize
increases, the page
John Faulds wrote:
I appreciate all your efforst so far Georg, but could I impose a little
bit more and ask you to put a version of the page you've made online so
I can compare because I'm still getting a noticeable shift at my end?
Sure...
John Faulds wrote:
I've got a page shift happening when you hover over certain elements in
the right column on this page:
http://www.gbjt.org.au/competitions/enrolment/
Can you provide a link directly to your IE stylesheet? It's a bit
difficult to track down from the outside.
Looks like
John Faulds wrote:
http://www.gbjt.org.au/competitions/enrolment/
http://www.gbjt.org.au/css/IE.css
1: the large shifting is easiest solved by deleting all R:P styles on
sidebar...
#sidebar {
position: relative; -- delete
z-index: 200; -- delete
}
...which leaves a very small shift that
Designer wrote:
Any links or pointers to creating such an index/map would be most
welcome. Needless to say, standards and accessibility are important
. . .
I split them up in section-maps - table of contents - and produce them
manually. An automated process is probably the only practical
Rob Mason wrote:
(www.spongeproject.co.uk )
Opera displays the image as intended, but also repeats 50px or so of
the same image again, about half way up the page.
I have no idea what's going on. On a local copy I gave the image a
roundtrip through photoshop without making /any/ changes to
Rob Mason wrote:
I am looking for a really basic, plain English guide to JavaScript.
Either on or offline will do.
A little of both...
http://www.howtocreate.co.uk/tutorials/javascript/important
http://beginningjavascript.com/
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Bob Schwartz wrote:
I have a windows box for testing IE6, what I don't have is a good
memory for IE6 bugs, especially since they only show up when I'm
doing a tight pixel perfect design.
Don't memorize ... use online resources...
http://www.positioniseverything.net/explorer.html
Rahul Gonsalves wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_blindness#Prevalence
However, the statistics given there seem misleading -- as according
to this linked page [1], there are 10 million men in the US alone who
are colour blind, while this page [2] suggests that in the US, there
Rahul Gonsalves wrote:
I'm searching for first-hand, authoritative statistics on colour
blindness, for use in a formal, academic document. Would anyone be
able to point me in the right direction?
Maybe this will help in the search...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colour_blindness#Prevalence
Bob Schwartz wrote:
I have a site in progress that is currently pixel perfect in all
real browsers, it's all over the screen in IE 6 (don't yet know about
IE7).
IE7 is doing fine :-)
http://www.fgtestserver.net/rain/index.html
IE6' margin-doubling on floats bug is causing most damage.
Bob Schwartz wrote:
http://www.fgtestserver.net/rain/index.html
The other problems in IE6 are related to the white-space bug and IE's
need for 'Layout'.
#outerWrapper, #innerWrapper {height: 1%;}
...will act as 'hasLayout' triggers where necessary.
The white-space bug is caused by empty
Bob Schwartz wrote:
I'm still getting a problem with the area under the tabs, IE is showing
about 25px of the content background (con-cen) above the top content
curve (con-top)
I can't see that in IE6 for my (original) test case...
http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/alien/bs-1/test_07_1110.html
Michael Vogt wrote:
html: http://michaelvogt.eu/flow.html
I have 2 questions:
- is there a better way to do the html structure for this?
You'll have to make some structural/sequential changes to get the visual
effect you're after, since CSS alone can't handle such effects with any
Philippe Wittenbergh wrote:
On Nov 6, 2007, at 7:48 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/alien/mv/test_07_1106.html
...
Otherwise: no problem.
No problems ? With Fx Mac and Safari 2.04, 3.03beta and the latest
WebKit builds, the is a slight overlap: the top part
Rob Enslin wrote:
Is there a way, a logical procedure or rule which I should adopt to
prevent me from going forwards and backwards and constantly patching
it up?
A few: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=MaintainableCss
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Rick Lecoat wrote:
[...] I'm not sure how to specify media types when most of my
stylesheets are referenced by @import rules from inside a single
stylesheet called import.css.
You can leave the @import without a media type, and use @media wrappers
around the entire set of relevant styles in
Tee G. Peng wrote:
teesworks.com/
Been working on this site in the last 2 days, I find that I am
getting so annoyed by the surprise' everytime the hover pops up.
If I, the site builder, find it annoying, what will the users find ?
As a user I find that kind of visual flicker highly
Tee G. Peng wrote:
[...] In the same page more than one article is listed, that means
more than one title attribute with 'continue reading', as a result I
am unable to pass the Priority 2: 13.1 Clearly identify the target
of each link.
http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/#tech-meaningful-links
Is it an Idiotic error?
Imagine you're blind...
And my blind tester says: it's an idiotic error - must have been
implemented by non-blind people for the sole purpose of satisfying
non-blind people's imagination of what it's like to be blind.
My blind tester can't even read such a title
Rick Lecoat wrote:
Is there a prevailing wisdom in this matter? Content first? Or
navigation first?
Point 4 in this article...
http://www.afb.org/Section.asp?SectionID=57TopicID=167DocumentID=2757
...seems to indicate content first as best, with the navigation first
with skip link to content
Gary Barber wrote:
You ask do you want a good quality web site. The clients replies,
quality means expensive. As long as it looks good I don't care.
Here in lies the problem.
That shouldn't be seen as a problem.
For me at least it takes longer, and cost more, to create a site
consisting of
Steve Green wrote:
The complexity and cost of accessible design increase significantly
when the content is more complex, such as very large forms (we have
discussed a few real examples in this list), multimedia and
interactive e-learning (especially when it is discovery-based rather
than
Tee G. Peng wrote:
I want to build accessible sites because that is the right thing to
do and I have pride in what I do.
Pride may be a costly commodity in more than one way. It sure beats
money as driving-force for real growth though.
Sometimes I do wonder, are some people (including me) in
Mike Brown wrote:
So, I want to position a background-image. It's a single px image. I
want it to start on the left-hand-side of its containing div, and
120px from the top. I want it to repeat downwards.
Setting 'repeat-y' means: repeat vertically - both up and down - from a
starting-point.
Tee G. Peng wrote:
Opera 9.02 has a problem with :hover span, part of the popup box
overlapping the link element's background on hover. When link is
clicked, the popup box shows up fine.
In my experience: Opera only reliably reveals a pop-up element from
inside a link, if the link itself is
Tee G. Peng wrote:
I have a concern regarding accessibility on this technique, if
show/hide result isn't so much of a concern,would 'title' attribute a
better choice? Because, if style sheet is disable or pag viewed in
Lynx Viewer, content in the span class is revealed. But we don't
always
Joshua Street wrote:
Hi all,
I've got this design that requires equal height columns *and*
background images positioned at the bottom of each column.
The heights are fluid, the widths is fixed.
The Companion column method...
http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/companions.html
...allows for
ben van 't ende [netcreators] wrote:
Ik looks like both M$ browsers have the same problem. Only IE6
crashes on it. IE7 acts weird with the left column. I will try to
focus on the ie specific stylesheet with the width:expression .
thingies. to solve it.
More case-specific information,
ben van 't ende [netcreators] wrote:
http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/moa_16.html
The only thing is ie6 crashes on resizing. That is a weird
phenomenon. Not much you can do about that i guess.
Probably a whole lot if I could isolate the IE6/OS/service-pack
combination - with settings - the crash
ben van 't ende [netcreators] wrote:
Hey List,
[...] When I drop the borders all is well AFAICS in all browsers. I
can see that in the two Linux browsers mentioned before the width of
the center column is 2px more than in other browsers. This means to
me the width is calculated differently
ben van 't ende [netcreators] wrote:
Wow! Gunlaug. Amazing I knew there had to be a solution. I am still
wondering why this works. Isn't CSS wonderous?
Yes, CSS can be wondrous at times.
A block-element occupy space to the outside of its margins. Floats are
no exception, but negative
Designer wrote:
I think we are just splitting hairs now.
I agree (to a degree), but I wanted to paint it out with a smaller
brush :-)
a) I personally do use alt tags, every time : (In other words, I
agree with you in principle)
Principles are good when aiming for best practices, but are
Michael Yeaney wrote:
I find it interesting that everyone responding to this thread has
failed to mention one very important aspect of any
design-for-accessibility debate: Until you actually test it with a
target audience/persona (i.e., someone who actually **is** blind),
we're all just
Designer wrote:
I notice that no-one has taken up the challenge of providing an
emotional alt tag . . . :-)
We have emoticons already, but I think they are optional... ;-)
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
***
List
Designer wrote:
http://www.nga.gov/feature/rothko/classic1.shtm.
Using this arbitrary example, I still maintain that a site of images
such as any of these will be of no more value to a blind user for
having alt tags, other than to point out that 'there is a picture
there'. Of what, the
Jixor - Stephen I wrote:
Sorry, the point I'm making is why use 100 and 102, is there any
visible difference?
Normally not, and 100% is the intended size. The reason for the
slightly more than 100% for h5 is that whatever the size 102% is
calculated from the h5 should end up _as large as or
Tony Crockford wrote:
I'm still looking for a best practice solution to reducing font size
to the *norm* and not causing problems when I do so.
The most cross-browser reliable method is to declare 'font-size: 100%'
as base, and size *down* _only_ on the text-carrying elements.
This approach
Rick Lecoat wrote:
This bring into question the advice of the W3C tips page http://
www.w3.org/QA/Tips/font-size#goodcss where it states: 1em (or 100%)
is equivalent to setting the font size to the user's preference.
The above statement makes the implicit assumption that 'Browser
Default'
Jixor - Stephen I wrote:
Wouldn't all those heading sizes would look fairly similar,
especially 102%?
Indeed, but those are the sizes I found suitable for my own site, and I
have only *suggested* (over at css-d) those values for use on other
sites - as part of a method for inheriting
Designer wrote:
[...] there is such a thing as a site whose prime function is visual.
The only 'information' in the site I mentioned is what something
'looks like'. If you can't see it, there is nothing you can do to
help that.
Sure you can.
Being unable to see something doesn't mean
Rob Crowther wrote:
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
The hiding effect gained by 'CC' is used by many to justify
hacking and to declare their solutions valid - because the
validator doesn't complain.
It is ultimately laziness, but I don't want to have to expend the
mental effort to distinguish between
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
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
James Jeffery wrote:
When i said design, i was referring to the hi-end graphical content.
The sites that are there to amaze people and go 'how did they do
that' which is they way alot of people seem to be heading due to
convention.
That's the visual design part of a visual design. Much like
Tee G. Peng wrote:
[...]
Checked your perfect equal height page in IE6, there is a big gab
between the first and second column. I don't see you have a print
style sheet but the equal height column declaration doesn't get in
the way. How come?
I use '@media screen' wrappers for existing
Tee G. Peng wrote:
A 3 column layout used the display table equal height technique
I am not going to worry the IE at this moment yet ( I understand I
can use Conditional comment for print style sheet too?), but want
to know if there is a way I can make the logo and the middle/right
Joyce Evans wrote:
http://www.nichemktghouston.com/mneiman/physician.html
So far, It looks proper in IE7, but in Mozilla, the horizontal
navigation links do not center but rather move to the right so that I
don't see the full Contact link.
Add...
ul {padding: 0;}
...to zero out Gecko's
Tony Crockford wrote:
However, I do agree we shouldn't be preventing users adjusting font
sizes.
Such a prevention is only relevant for IE-users who don't know how to
use their browsers to prevent such prevention from taking effect.
Actually, most pages break in IE because the designer think
Tee G. Peng wrote:
On Aug 3, 2007, at 8:19 PM, Philippe Wittenbergh wrote:
Unless my copy is sick, the default is 9px
Mine is 12px. I don't remember I ever altered the fontsize in Opera
(9.22), as I only use this browser for testing.
Monitor Screen resolution: 1680 x 1050.
According to
Nick Fitzsimons wrote:
2. I trashed my Opera preferences and installed the latest version,
and it has a minimum font size of 13px, which ties in with what I
remember seeing previously.
On a brand-new, never-run Windows XP SP 2 install (gotta love
Parallels): download and run Opera, minimum
Tee G. Peng wrote:
I got an impression that setting 100.1% fontsize in body tag is a
better approach and have been doing so for many sites. Also, with the
100.1% in the body, I usually declare .85em (.95 for my site as I
love big fontsize :) ) for paragraph and lists. I also find that I
get a
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Ah, a misunderstanding of terminology. I thought minimum font-size
settings referred to things like Firefox's preference setting for
disallowing fonts, even when resized by the user, to fall below a
certain fixed size...while in this case y'all seem to mean the default
Paul Collins wrote:
http://www.method.com.au/newWebsite/
... The problem is that semantically this is not correct, the second
level here is relating to the home link and therefore should be a
sub-list contained in the LI of the home link. If you look at my
example link, this is how the code
Taco Fleur wrote:
http://web-strategists.com:888
Could do with suitable 'min-width' and 'max-width'.
Not well prepared for regular 'minimum font size', or even for 'font
resizing' in IE/win.
Also, I get the off-screen text for the click here to start selling
in at the left side on really
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
ANYWAY ... I really don't know what's causing the problem ... pretty
straight forward stuff that I recall accomplishing in other designs.
Nothing is straight forward in IE/win when 'position: absolute' is used
- especially next to floats.
I suggest you change to...
Jermayn Parker wrote:
let us know how you go
I myself are in the middle of a website were I need something similar
and it works fine in ie7 and firefox but breaks and looks horrible
in ie6
Maybe this is the way to go...
kevin mcmonagle wrote:
I noticed on browser cam this page is breaking in ie6.
http://www.nwtc.ie/home.html
http://www.nwtc.ie/training.htm
Basically: the 'xml declaration' on top makes IE6 run in quirks mode.
You have not compensated for box-model differences, so the #wrapper
becomes too
Quintin Stoltz wrote:
I would assume that the reason it doesn't work, is because you are
using a method called parseint. JavaScript is case-sensitive... The
method is actually parseInt. But changing that makes IE hang, as
someone pointed out earlier... This I think is caused by the fact
Stuart Foulstone wrote:
I've not used these expressions much, but is the use parseInt
necessary?
I had the impression that offsetHeight returns an integer value of
px. Am I missing something?
The method has the purpose of keeping the calculations alive in IE/win.
Compare this _with_
Designer wrote:
http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/elc.html
The basics...
http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/alien/d/Structure%20template.html
...but far from finished.
Now you have to ask IE/win how tall an em is - regardless of font-size
and resizing, and subtract the padding-top/-bottom on
http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/elc.html
Correction:
The em to px part of the calculation - needed for correct subtraction
of that padding, can be extracted here...
http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_14.html
...where I use it to simulate 'em-based min/max-width' in IE6. IE7
http://sitesbyjoe.foodzoomer.com/homepage.htm
Thanks for taking a look at this. I think I still have 100% widths
on those items
Yes, but when the page becomes wider than the window, and you scroll out
to the right... :-)
I'm not sure how to deal with IE/Mac. I may opt to hide all
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
FWIW, I'm not for limiting the width of an em-based layout to the
window's width. I'd keep this behavior and may be implement a zoom
layout to make everybody happy.
Is this where I turn on my browser's 'Fit to width' option? :-)
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Sarah Peeke (XERT) wrote:
When I resize http://geofeat.com/ to 800x600 the H3 heading
*Featured Advertisers* (third heading on page content) floats right.
If you don't want to run into more serious problems, the addition of...
h3 {clear: both; }
...is a must.
All differences that may occur
Designer wrote:
http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/index_cc.html to see the
action. It all validates. I've used standard code to include display
: table and display : table cell for compliant browsers, and the
conditional comment for IE. Works in FF, Opera 9, IE6 and IE7.
Safari is
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Designer wrote:
http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/sandbox/index_cc.html
The window being too small to display the top of the page is not a
problem using this approach, as there isn't any absolute
positioning..
Yes, it is. Check again.
You get a negative margin-top half
Designer wrote:
Aw, flip!
I look forward to seeing what you come up with! :-)
These two:
#3: mode-independent conditional IE-expression for container sized in
'em'...
http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/alien/test_07_3814.html
#4: mode-independent conditional IE-expression for container sized in
Designer wrote:
However, in this exercise ( a learning one!) I want the CSS to validate
- and it won't if you use a MS expression to make IE conform. Whilst
this is a learning thing, I do want:
a) everything to validate
b) it to work in all (OK, most :-) ) browsers. (Not asking much! :-))
Designer wrote:
Most of the methods (non-tables) for centering a div vertically (and
horizontally) suffer from the same problem: they use the div height
to attach a top margin and use percentages. The result is that, when
the window size gets to be smaller than the div size, the top of the
Bob Schwartz wrote:
In light of that bit of news, would tdnbsp;/td still be
considered the wrong answer?
pony warning
Of course!
You should _always_ follow standard, even when it doesn't work...
...but, if reality kicks in, then you _can_ use td!--[if
IE]nbsp;![endif]--/td and apply the
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
Question is, however, are all -- or just a few -- of these properties
currently supported by standards-compliant browsers ... as well as
ie6?
CSS table support is missing in all IE/win versions.
If only a few are supported by all browser types, can someone provide
a
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
I'm just not comfortable with the way I've achieved this (same
padding on both ULs and LI's) I can't imagine this is the
***correct*** way to accomplish this and would really appreciate
anyone's guidance.
http://www.x7m.us/_problems/test.htm
I don't know much about
Designer wrote:
So I repeat : 20 items for sale would have to be:
Buy now,
Buy it now,
Buy this now,
Now buy it,
.
No, it doesn't.
It should rather be:
Buy product A now,
Buy product B now,
Buy product C now,
Buy product D now,
.
Your own page should then probably have something
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
Georg -
Wow, that's great! There's a number of things I'm going to have to study on
this (particularly the li+li - I've never seen that before).
I used that '+' selector to add a top border to a li only when the li is
preceded by a li. Prevents adding border to the first
Bob Schwartz wrote:
How and why did the web get singled out from among all of the other
publishing mediums to be by law accessible?
It's a relatively new medium, and they may have a (very) slight chance
to get it right.
Isn't saying one can't (shouldn't) use, for example, a popup window
on
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
President..John Smith
Vice-president.Janet Jones
I see this as something that could be, or even should be, presented
(styled) in a table-like manner, but I would normally not mark something
like this up in a
Bob Schwartz wrote:
I'm reworking a site to get it up to web standards.
Tables should be used only to contain tabular data
The simplest expansion of this is:
- do *not* use tables to lay out a page.
- use tables _within_ a page when dealing with tabular data.
Would this be acceptable for
Michael Cordover wrote:
I've got a page at http://youth.afairerworld.org/ which comes up with
a 4em space above the div.content despite me doing everything
imaginable to get rid of it.
Not sure since I didn't bother to deconstruct everything, but a copy
shows that the margin on h1#banner is
Michael Cordover wrote:
There is a file: default.ie.css, linked from an IE conditional
comment and contains exactly that rule already.
Well, I didn't use that - or any other - conditionally commented
stylesheet, and it all lined up just fine in IE/win.
_If_ I use default.ie.css, then the
Tee G. Peng wrote:
http://lotusseeds.com/index.php
Two elements are set to absolute position, one is 'skip to content'
which uses background image with text link, another one is 'top'
button that uses inline image .
In Safari and PC IE 7 (standalone), both links are working.
'Top' is not
Tee G. Peng wrote:
Without a name=top/a Safari and IE 7 still works...hummm...
these two browsers are more lenient? I always check Safari first, so
when eveything works as expected, I forgot to check the markup for
clue. Got to get rid of this habit.
Don't trust a browser - any browser :-)
Ricky Onsman wrote:
When it comes down to it, I think most people (and yes, that means
people using IE) will just left-click on a link. If you want
something particular to happen, you'd better code it in.
I think we're going in circles here, and it doesn't look like they are
entirely within
Designer wrote:
http://www.rhh.myzen.co.uk/gam/altgam/sbox/template.php
My Safari 2.0.4 does support CSS tables, but it doesn't signal that it
is capable of showing xhtml properly (which it is). Thus, it is served
4.01 Strict with float CSS.
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Designer wrote:
I don't understand that. If Safari is capable of handing the correct
mime type, how can (why would) it serve 4.01 strict?
Probably because Safari is cheating :-)
I don't know much about Safari - only use it for basic testing, but the
following turned up in my archives from
Better yet, use the character U+200B ZERO WIDTH SPACE (though, you'd
need to check browser support)
Something along those lines...
HTML:
i class=wbrv#8203;/i
CSS:
* html .wbrv {font-family: Arial Unicode MS; visibility: hidden;}
...is what I use when everything else fails.
Georg
--
Designer wrote:
In an endeavor to 'be good', I've been putting tabindex on links just
lately. Certainly the WAI validator gives me a warning if I don't.
However, it looks to me as though 'modern' browsers tab through the
links even without the tabindex (certainly Firefox, Opera and even
Jay Gilmore wrote:
I think many standards oriented people have moved or stayed with HTML
4.0X and those who are using XHTML are either using it incorrectly
and unknowing of its proper application or the minute few who are
actually serving it as application/xhtml+xml.
Don't forget those of
Mike at Green-Beast.com wrote:
I didn't understand the cut-off thing you mentioned. I'm not seeing
anything cut off. Could you elaborate, please.
It's that 'AD: Contact Us...' image.
Not much you can do about it, I guess.
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
101 - 200 of 472 matches
Mail list logo
