After examining a previews reply this was my logic. And thank you for the
tip, Clear:both would make it work beautifully.
So basicly clear:both means.. obey the height of the longest div.
Thanks for the tip!
-Original Message-
From: Lauke PH [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Guys hate to rain on your parade but if your browser can understand
that obfuscation what makes you think that a email address harvestor
is not going to be able to?
These guys are writing complex viruses that harvest email addresses
directly from people's Outlook contact lists, surely they can
Just a thought:
Are you writing,
@import url('%styles.css%')
or,
@import url('%styles.css%');
???
The semi-colon is absolutely essential.
Roy
- Original Message -
From: Sean M. Hall AKA Dante [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, June 03, 2004 7:53 PM
Subject:
I have been using the obfuscation method for some time now, and while it may
not totally eliminate spam harvesting, IMHO it certainly does slow the
harvesting down.
I have used the javascript method also, with the addition of a gif
displaying the e-mail address for folks that have javascript
On 6/4/04 2:05 AM Mike Pepper [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent
this out:
There is no doubting professional harvesters will easily circumvent the
obfuscation. This is a damage limitation exercise. In this war of attrition,
any counter-measure is better than none. A 'What's the point attitude' is
Mark is quite correct when he says that complex e-mail harvesters will
probably work around these methods, but it appears that most of the
harvesting is done by very basic programs that are looking only for e-mail
addresses stored in conventional format.
Indeed, Alan, as I mentioned:
However,
It does now...
why not use the content: selector and set your email in there ;)
Shame IE dont like Content: tho!
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 17:41:32 +1000, Alan Harrison wrote:
Mark is quite correct when he says that complex e-mail harvesters will
probably work around these methods, but it appears that most of the
harvesting is done by very basic programs that are looking only for e-mail
addresses stored in
Ok, this thread is way off topic now.
As it seems of-interest to a section of members, rather than close it we
have moved it to the discussion room:
http://discuss.webstandardsgroup.org/archives/17.htm
Any further discussion on this thread can take place in there but NOT on
list.
Thanks
Russ
Peter Firminger wrote:
I totally disagree. IE (with it's problems) is the dominant browser and it's
absolutely your problem (the web developer) to make sure the site you build
for a client works on the most likely user-agent.
Didn't nay not to make the site work in IE. What I'm suggesting is
El vie, 04-06-2004 a las 12:59, Mordechai Peller escribió:
As far as non-IE extras, they should be exactly that--extra. A site need
to have a 100% lever of functionality and a 100% look in IE, but in a
compliant browser, maybe the look could be 110%? Users would only know
they were missing
Title: RE: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
I agree word for word with Mark on this
Jamie Mason: Design
-Original Message-
From: Mark Harwood WebMail [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 04 June 2004 12:23
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Make em' pay for IE
Im sorry but you
Sean M. Hall AKA Dante wrote:
At first I though it was this:
@import url('screenstyles.css') screen;
I use single quotes so IE5/Mac won't see the stylesheet. But I switched to double quotes and still no luck. Removed the screen; part. Nein. not yet. Removed the conditional comments for IE in the
Thanks Jamie, i know this is off topic, but you dont happen to work at the sky
offices in Hudderfeild do you?
I had the pleasure of being offered a job there when i was about 19/20 and bodged
it by requesting to much salary...
they never got back to me _
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 12:43 , Jamie Mason
On 04/06/2004, at 10:02 PM, Jamie Mason wrote:
What's the difference of linking by;
@import url(styles.css);
And
link rel=stylesheet type=text/css href=styles.css /
If any?
@import(...) is not recognised by some older browsers (like NN4), it's
helpful for keeping old browsers away from the
Manuel González Noriega wrote:
FYI, that concept is called MOSE and described here
http://www.mezzoblue.com/archives/2003/06/25/mose/
Thanks. So someone with more clout than me said it about a year ago.
What I'm adding is that we should let the client know we're doing it,
but not charging
Mark Harwood WebMail wrote:
Im sorry but you never ever suggest to a client that the site will not work in
IE, 9 time out of 10 a client will only know about IE. If your suggesting
standards you should know what and what not to do to make a standard site work
accross all browsers.
I said the
In other words, you'll lie to your client because you think they're too
stupid to understand that dealing with the problems in IE is one of the
costs of doing business and no less real than paying taxes and the
electric company.
Im sorry but i can safely say that i have no need to lie to my
Sadly, with Lotus Domino the only reliable
way to control DOCTYPE (as far as I can tell) is to generate the entire
page from scratch with an agent. If your first print is a DOCTYPE, then
Domino won't generate headers. But if you use Forms you get stuck with
what Domino decides is best for you.
Hi Folks,
I was wondering if anyone has ideas for a simpler way of dealing with
this issue than I have.
The issue:
I like to set my font sizes in ems. I also use ems a lot to position
block elements so that my designs work better as people expand
contract their text sizes. The problem is for
Title: Message
Hi
Sean,
Interesting. Especially this
bit:
"For my new History Website redesign, I worked hard on creating a valid XHTML
1.0"
Allow
me to quote this from Simplebits a month ago...
"23. On May 6, 2004 8:08 PM,
Dante
said:
D: Dont use XHTML at
all.
Seriously though
I could be wrong here but don't you just need to use descendant
selectors here?
#header h1{font-size: 1.5em;}
#content h1{font-size1.2 em; font-color: red;}
On 05/06/2004, at 1:13 AM, Bill McAvinney wrote:
The solution I've come up with is to enclose non-1em sized text in a
span tag and assign
Bill,
funnily enough, this is a problem I've come across recently myself.
The only way around it that I can think of is to do the calculation
of padding/margin based on your font size by hand.
In your example, if you want a 10em margin around your h1, but
you've already set your h1 to 1.5em
I would recommend you do both - have a standards
compliant accessable site, but include an interactive area.
A xhtml/css php/mysql"photobook" with
the club at certian nights - preferably the peak holiday periods.
Give them the best of both worlds. a quick loading
site with an area where
24 matches
Mail list logo
