RE: [WSG] page layout problems in IE
First item - change your css link to : Graham Cook Standards Manager - Content Integrity Data & Online Telstra Technology 32/300 Latrobe St Melbourne VIC 3000 Ph- (03) 9632 8035 Fax - (03) 8600 9850 Mob - (03) 0417 876 869 Email - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Find out more about Standards : http://telstra.com.au/standards/index.cfm The information contained in this e-mail message may be CONFIDENTIAL and may also be the subject of Legal Professional Privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, interference with, disclosure or copying of this material is unauthorised and prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please reply to this email to advise of the incorrect delivery and then delete both it and your reply. Thank you. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, 28 June 2005 9:58 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] page layout problems in IE Thanks for the link Prabhath. I learned a few things from this tutorial http://www.brainjar.com/css/ positioning I found via Positioniseverything.net. I'm still stuck with IE (Mac) problems though. Could someone at tell me if the display problems in IE are a result of an IE bug or my CSS? Again, my site looks perfect on the latest versions of Mozilla and Safari for the Mac. Thanks! Kara On Jun 22, 2005, at 3:44 AM, Prabhath Sirisena wrote: >> Again, I'm very new to using CSS for page layouts this is my first >> one. I'm looking for suggestions on how to correct the display >> problem and/or tutorials on how to correct this issue. >> > > Welcome to CSS, and IE frustration :) > > Check out PIE [1] for IE bugs and how to fix [2] them - it's a great > resource that you will find very useful as you try to make your > designs IE proof. > > > Prabhath > http://nidahas.com > > [1] http://positioniseverything.net/ > [2] http://positioniseverything.net/explorer.html > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > Hi, I'm new to CSS and this list so bare with me please. My test layout works great in Safari 2.0 and Mozilla 1.7 both for the Mac. However, in IE 5.2.3 (Mac) the layout looks very disjointed. My PC is currently being repaired but the last time I checked It looked disjointed in IE 6.0.2 but ok in both Mozilla 1.7.2 and Firefox 0.9.3. Again, I'm very new to using CSS for page layouts this is my first one. I'm looking for suggestions on how to correct the display problem and/or tutorials on how to correct this issue. Originally, I went through this tutorial http://www.westciv.com/style_master/ academy/hands_on_tutorial/index.html and then built my test layout. URL: http://www.karaspellman.com/test/bg_test3.htm CSS: http://www.karaspellman.com/test/bg3.css Thanks, Kara ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML? [ADMIN]
We're pushing the OT limits with this thread. I understand it's importance to some people but PHP is NOT a standard and we don't want to go too much further into it here. Many list members don't use PHP and this is just noise to them. I'm not closing the thread but please limit your posts on this topic to only crucial information that hasn't been said before. If you move the thread to the CMS list you can go for it as hard as you like without bothering designers and others that have no interest. Peter ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] Survey of Accessible Websites in New Zealand and Australia
Please please send these to the address mentioned ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) and not to the list. Bruce stated that he will post the report to the list when completed so we don't need to see your responses. Peter ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] Survey of Accessible Websites in New Zealand and Australia
Hi Bruce, I'm currently working on a compete re-buld of our organisations website to conform with WACG guidelines, accepted usability, W3C/CSS etc etc, you know the drill. It has been bp0th challenging and rewarding. The dev site is now at a stage where content is being added and it should go live to this domain (www.ashm.org.au) in the next coupe of weeks. You can see it now at http://d81314.i50.quadrahosting.com.au. Regards, Paul -- Technical & Creative Producer, ASHM -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bruce Aylward Sent: Tuesday, 28 June 2005 11:33 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Survey of Accessible Websites in New Zealand and Australia Dear List, I am working on a survey of accessible websites in New Zealand and Australia. If you are particularly proud of an accessible website that you have developed or know of a site that should be included in the survey, please email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include the URL for the site, the level of accessibility achieved and the designer contact details. Once I have collated the information and written it up I will publish the report to the WSG list. Thank you, Bruce Aylward W 3 A Limited http://www.w3a.co.nz Mobile: +64 (0)27 224 3617 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.5/32 - Release Date: 27/06/2005 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
[WSG] Survey of Accessible Websites in New Zealand and Australia
Dear List, I am working on a survey of accessible websites in New Zealand and Australia. If you are particularly proud of an accessible website that you have developed or know of a site that should be included in the survey, please email me at [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include the URL for the site, the level of accessibility achieved and the designer contact details. Once I have collated the information and written it up I will publish the report to the WSG list. Thank you, Bruce Aylward W 3 A Limited http://www.w3a.co.nz Mobile: +64 (0)27 224 3617 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.5/32 - Release Date: 27/06/2005 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] input/text random background color in IE?
Hi Vaska, Could it be that you have the Google seearch bar installed on your browser? It automatically highlights fields that it can complete using the AutoFill feature. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Vaska.WSG Sent: Tuesday, 28 June 2005 1:58 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] input/text random background color in IE? Why is it that IE turns the background of some input/text elements to light yellow? I can't find any information as to why or how it's doing this...and I want to stop it. Anybody know what this is about? Thanks, v ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
On 6/28/05, Collin Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PHP can go hand in hand with Content Negotiation!
As a PHP developer first and a web designer second (sorry, I just
don't have design flare) let me say that PHP goes brilliantly for
XHTML. If you use output buffering then you can indeed convert
between XHTML 1.0 Strict and HTML 4.01 Strict automagically using
str_replace('/>', '>', $output); in your output buffer callback.
I also use HTTP Accept: scanning to determine whether to send as
application/xhtml+xml or text/html. I'm too lazy to run an output
buffer over most of my sites and do the naughty XHTML as text/html
thing then. I figure if a browser doesn't see application/xhtml+xml
it's probably not going to notice that I'm going with something
recommended against ;)
The biggest difficulty you're likely to encounter is your http://mine.mjec.net/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
Quite true - in the script I use, I have this for the W3C validator:
if (stristr($_SERVER["HTTP_USER_AGENT"],"W3C_Validator")) {
$mime = "application/xhtml+xml";
}
As to why, my own personal reasons are three-fold:
1. The W3C is clear that XHTML 1.1 should not (different than must not,
I'm aware) be sent as text/html - http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-media-
types/ (I think that's the right link - I'm using a PDA and browsing is
a pain).
2. Conforming UAs *should* refuse to render invalidly marked up pages if
sent with the proper MIME type - that saves me a lot of time in
development.
3. When dealing with MathML or XHTML Ruby at all - your documents have
to be sent as XHTML (application/xhtml+xml, application/xml or text/xml)
- not HTML, unless of course you want to stick it into an tag.
I do believe that's all for now - however I'm not at work and my mind is
in a different place, so hopefully this came out coherently enough. :)
Cheers,
> On a related note, since the W3C's validator doesn't send an
> "HTTP_ACCEPT" header, you should also look at the "HTTP_USER_AGENT"
> header as well. While I normally would advise against browser
sniffing,
> I make exceptions for the W3C Validator, the W3C CSS Validator, and
the
> WDG Validator.
>
>
>
>
> **
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> **
>
>
>
--
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
RE: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
ARGH! The logo's - the logo's!!! My EYES! -Original Message- Hi This could prove immensely helpful: http://loadaveragezero.com/vnav/labs/PHP/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
Collin Davis wrote: PHP can go hand in hand with Content Negotiation! Check out this link: http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php Read through the article - it explains how it works very well. Since XHTML is merely a reformulation of HTML, you can use the HTTP_ACCEPT header to serve XHTML as application/xhtml+xml to browser that recognize it, and HTML as text/html to those that can't properly recognize XHTML. Also of note, is that the script properly replaces /> with > when serving HTML. My own feeling is that since "text/html" is also a valid content type for XHTML, if "application/xhtml+xml" isn't accepted, I just send it as is with "text/html". For the most part, only IE is the issue since every other browser of note accepts "application/xhtml+xml", and since IE is so used to eating garbage that it couldn't tell the difference between gourmet food and spam, why bother? On a related note, since the W3C's validator doesn't send an "HTTP_ACCEPT" header, you should also look at the "HTTP_USER_AGENT" header as well. While I normally would advise against browser sniffing, I make exceptions for the W3C Validator, the W3C CSS Validator, and the WDG Validator. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] page layout problems in IE
Thanks for the link Prabhath. I learned a few things from this tutorial http://www.brainjar.com/css/ positioning I found via Positioniseverything.net. I'm still stuck with IE (Mac) problems though. Could someone at tell me if the display problems in IE are a result of an IE bug or my CSS? Again, my site looks perfect on the latest versions of Mozilla and Safari for the Mac. Thanks! Kara On Jun 22, 2005, at 3:44 AM, Prabhath Sirisena wrote: Again, I'm very new to using CSS for page layouts this is my first one. I'm looking for suggestions on how to correct the display problem and/or tutorials on how to correct this issue. Welcome to CSS, and IE frustration :) Check out PIE [1] for IE bugs and how to fix [2] them - it's a great resource that you will find very useful as you try to make your designs IE proof. Prabhath http://nidahas.com [1] http://positioniseverything.net/ [2] http://positioniseverything.net/explorer.html ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** Hi, I'm new to CSS and this list so bare with me please. My test layout works great in Safari 2.0 and Mozilla 1.7 both for the Mac. However, in IE 5.2.3 (Mac) the layout looks very disjointed. My PC is currently being repaired but the last time I checked It looked disjointed in IE 6.0.2 but ok in both Mozilla 1.7.2 and Firefox 0.9.3. Again, I'm very new to using CSS for page layouts this is my first one. I'm looking for suggestions on how to correct the display problem and/or tutorials on how to correct this issue. Originally, I went through this tutorial http://www.westciv.com/style_master/ academy/hands_on_tutorial/index.html and then built my test layout. URL: http://www.karaspellman.com/test/bg_test3.htm CSS: http://www.karaspellman.com/test/bg3.css Thanks, Kara ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
Hi This could prove immensely helpful: http://loadaveragezero.com/vnav/labs/PHP/ G/L Chris On Jun 27, 2005, at 2:31 PM, Roberto Gorj Olá a todos! I’ve read Ian Hickson and Stuart Langridge objections to the use of XHTML without serving it as application/xhtml+xml. I also read the article “WaSP Asks the W3C” (http://www.webstandards.org/learn/ askw3c/sep2003.html) and I decided that I sure am not going to create two versions of my sites just for the sake of serving XHTML as it should to browsers which can understand it, as suggested at the W3C tutorial about “Content-Negotiation” (http://www.w3.org/ 2003/01/xhtml-mimetype/content-negotiation). Anyway, I noticed that many of you use XHTML and I sure was beginning to enjoy using it myself, and it seemed to me a good way to practice for the inevitable future… is it? I mean: a good way to practice, as I believe that XML is the inevitable future… I’m initiating now my study on PHP and MySQL and I read some objections about using XHTML with PHP… Will XHTML interfere with my learning of PHP? Would it be a good idea to stick with good old plain HTML? Obrigado! Roberto ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] html nowrap question
On 6/28/05, Drake, Ted C. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here's my question. What is the proper way to put nowrap in a td? > It currently looks like I would think it should be nowrap="nowrap"> or something like that. Yep, that's correct! -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.smoljak.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] html nowrap question
Hi Ted, The nowrap attribute is not a valid Strict element (either in HTML or XHTML doctypes). It is a valid attribute in both HTML 4 and XHTML 1.0 Transitional doctypes. However, in XHTML it must have a value (nowrap="nowrap"). This combination is still valid HTML 4 Transitional. I'd suggest using in preparation for your move to XHTML 1.0 Transitional. When you're ready to move to CSS you can start styling these td elements to avoid wrapping and then remove the attribute altogether (in preparation for your future move to Strict :-) ). Cheers, Damian > Hi All > > I'm working on some old pages and trying to make them as valid as > possible. > We are not ready to begin changing the CSS yet, so I need to keep > attributes > correct at the html level. > > Here's my question. What is the proper way to put nowrap in a td? > It currently looks like I would think it should be nowrap="nowrap"> or something like that. > > The pages are currently html with no doctype. I'm hoping to shift them to > XHTML 1.0 transitional soon and prepare them for future conversion to CSS > layout. It's an enormous site, which explains the slow progress. > > Thanks > Ted > > ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
Roberto, PHP can go hand in hand with Content Negotiation! Check out this link: http://keystonewebsites.com/articles/mime_type.php Read through the article - it explains how it works very well. Since XHTML is merely a reformulation of HTML, you can use the HTTP_ACCEPT header to serve XHTML as application/xhtml+xml to browser that recognize it, and HTML as text/html to those that can't properly recognize XHTML. Also of note, is that the script properly replaces /> with > when serving HTML. Hope this helps, Collin Davis Web Architect Stromberg Architectural Products 903.454.0904 e [EMAIL PROTECTED] w http://www.strombergarchitectural.com -Original Message- From: Roberto Gorjão [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 4:31 PM To: Web Standards Group Subject: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML? Olá a todos! Ive read Ian Hickson and Stuart Langridge objections to the use of XHTML without serving it as application/xhtml+xml. I also read the article WaSP Asks the W3C (http://www.webstandards.org/learn/askw3c/sep2003.html) and I decided that I sure am not going to create two versions of my sites just for the sake of serving XHTML as it should to browsers which can understand it, as suggested at the W3C tutorial about Content-Negotiation (http://www.w3.org/2003/01/xhtml-mimetype/content-negotiation). Anyway, I noticed that many of you use XHTML and I sure was beginning to enjoy using it myself, and it seemed to me a good way to practice for the inevitable future is it? I mean: a good way to practice, as I believe that XML is the inevitable future Im initiating now my study on PHP and MySQL and I read some objections about using XHTML with PHP Will XHTML interfere with my learning of PHP? Would it be a good idea to stick with good old plain HTML? Obrigado! Roberto ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
My 2c worth. I can't see how any scripting language would be considered more or less XHTML friendly than any other scripting language. Once you move to a scripting language and not to just a plain text file with markup in it, you have to use the language to generate the markup. The markup is just strings. The scripting language knows absolutely nothing about the markup language itself (other than what people tell it - i.e. additional libraries or functions to make some of the generation easier). So my call would be that PHP is no more ideally suited (or otherwise) to any particular markup language that is text based (e.g. TEX, ROFF, HTML, XHTML, XML, etc. etc.). Similarly with MySQL as a content manager - markup is just text, store it in a text field in any database and it will all work (assuming you adhere to any character escaping that the databases language requires). Regards,Gary On 6/28/05, Roberto Gorjão <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Olá a todos!I've read Ian Hickson and Stuart Langridge objections to the use ofXHTML without serving it as application/xhtml+xml. I also read the article "WaSP Asks the W3C"(http://www.webstandards.org/learn/askw3c/sep2003.html) and I decidedthat I sure am not going to create two versions of my sites just for the sake of serving XHTML as it should to browsers which can understand it,as suggested at the W3C tutorial about "Content-Negotiation"(http://www.w3.org/2003/01/xhtml-mimetype/content-negotiation ).Anyway, I noticed that many of you use XHTML and I sure was beginning toenjoy using it myself, and it seemed to me a good way to practice forthe inevitable future… is it? I mean: a good way to practice, as I believe that XML is the inevitable future… I'm initiating now my studyon PHP and MySQL and I read some objections about using XHTML with PHP…Will XHTML interfere with my learning of PHP? Would it be a good idea to stick with good old plain HTML?Obrigado!Roberto**The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfmfor some hints on posting to the list & getting help**
[WSG] Will HTML be nicer to PHP than XHTML?
Olá a todos! I’ve read Ian Hickson and Stuart Langridge objections to the use of XHTML without serving it as application/xhtml+xml. I also read the article “WaSP Asks the W3C” (http://www.webstandards.org/learn/askw3c/sep2003.html) and I decided that I sure am not going to create two versions of my sites just for the sake of serving XHTML as it should to browsers which can understand it, as suggested at the W3C tutorial about “Content-Negotiation” (http://www.w3.org/2003/01/xhtml-mimetype/content-negotiation). Anyway, I noticed that many of you use XHTML and I sure was beginning to enjoy using it myself, and it seemed to me a good way to practice for the inevitable future… is it? I mean: a good way to practice, as I believe that XML is the inevitable future… I’m initiating now my study on PHP and MySQL and I read some objections about using XHTML with PHP… Will XHTML interfere with my learning of PHP? Would it be a good idea to stick with good old plain HTML? Obrigado! Roberto ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
[WSG] html nowrap question
Hi All I'm working on some old pages and trying to make them as valid as possible. We are not ready to begin changing the CSS yet, so I need to keep attributes correct at the html level. Here's my question. What is the proper way to put nowrap in a td? It currently looks like I would think it should be or something like that. The pages are currently html with no doctype. I'm hoping to shift them to XHTML 1.0 transitional soon and prepare them for future conversion to CSS layout. It's an enormous site, which explains the slow progress. Thanks Ted ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Vertical Positioning
Hi Tatham,
You can't fix it for IE unless you use a simple table:
This in the middle?
/* Thanks to Rimantas Liubertas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> for suggesting 'td' */
body, html {
margin : 0;
padding : 0;
height : 100%;
}
#layoutgrid{
display : table;
height : 100%;
width : 100%;
}
#layoutgrid td {
vertical-align : middle;
text-align : center;
}
-->
(I think you tried this before - on an early e-oddie?)
HTH
Bob
Tatham Oddie wrote:
Guys / girls,
I’m having some problems with the vertical positioning on
www.whatcanido.com.au
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] input/text random background color in IE?
o, autofill...i bet it has to do with how i name my form elements... ok, then it makes sense and 'no', i wouldn't want to turn that off. i don't see it actually, i'm on a mac. when i'm on a pc testing stuff i see this though and i've always wondered what it is... the mystery has been demystified...thanks... On Jun 27, 2005, at 6:35 PM, Ben Curtis wrote: Why is it that IE turns the background of some input/text elements to light yellow? I can't find any information as to why or how it's doing this...and I want to stop it. Keep in mind when you "want to stop" normal behavior of the browser, if you succeed then people that expect that behavior will become disoriented and perhaps will believe that your site is broken. In essence, the answer to your question may be "IE turns some input/text elements to light yellow because the user wants them that way." You haven't given us enough background to understand if this general rule applies to your circumstance. I'm not sure about IE, but Safari does this to indicate which fields were filled in by the auto-fill and which the user had modified. Without this distinction, the users may submit more incomplete or inaccurate forms. -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] input/text random background color in IE?
Why is it that IE turns the background of some input/text elements to light yellow? I can't find any information as to why or how it's doing this...and I want to stop it. Keep in mind when you "want to stop" normal behavior of the browser, if you succeed then people that expect that behavior will become disoriented and perhaps will believe that your site is broken. In essence, the answer to your question may be "IE turns some input/text elements to light yellow because the user wants them that way." You haven't given us enough background to understand if this general rule applies to your circumstance. I'm not sure about IE, but Safari does this to indicate which fields were filled in by the auto-fill and which the user had modified. Without this distinction, the users may submit more incomplete or inaccurate forms. -- Ben Curtis : webwright bivia : a personal web studio http://www.bivia.com v: (818) 507-6613 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] input/text random background color in IE?
On 6/27/05, Vaska. WSG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why is it that IE turns the background of some input/text elements to > light yellow? I can't find any information as to why or how it's doing > this...and I want to stop it. > > Anybody know what this is about? My guess is: you have google toolbar installed. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
[WSG] input/text random background color in IE?
Why is it that IE turns the background of some input/text elements to light yellow? I can't find any information as to why or how it's doing this...and I want to stop it. Anybody know what this is about? Thanks, v ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
RE: [WSG] Background image alignment - percentages and scalable elements
Thanks everyone, I got it working. One again the standards ninjas prove their worth! Chris -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of russ - maxdesign Sent: 27 June 2005 13:12 To: Web Standards Group Subject: Re: [WSG] Background image alignment - percentages and scalable elements Hi Chris, Not sure exactly what you mean but this quick sample may help: http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/percentage/ The background images scale based on viewport size. Only tested on mac Safari... If this is what you are after, the key is to create large images and use percentages of the images too. In this case I used 1000px wide images (due to laziness) but you should use wider ones in a real site to cover very wide monitors. Russ > Hi, > > I'm having difficult aligning a background image the way I want to. > The markup is like this: > > 19.65% > > I have a collection of classes (called percent0 to percent100) which > have a nice gradiated background image. I'm trying to position the > background image on the left of the element so that it covers, in this > example, 20% of the element. As you will have guessed this is for a > statistics-type application. > > I've tried all sorts - aligning left/right positive/negative margins > etc. As the element needs to be scalable the background should move as > well, but keep it's ratio with regard to the width of the element. > > Does anyone have any ideas? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Background image alignment - percentages and scalable elements
Chris Taylor schrieb: I'm having difficult aligning a background image the way I want to. The markup is like this: 19.65% ... Chris, I don't know if I got the problem right, but I think Zoe's article abut "Creating Liquid Faux Columns" [1] covers a lot of the theme: http://www.communitymx.com/content/article.cfm?page=1&cid=AFC58 Please provide an URL to a _minimal_ test case showing the problem you reported if it's not covered in this article. Another aspect: Due to a severe bug in Opera8, you can't use fractional percentage values for the offset of background images, for example, a background x-offset of 19.65% will be rendered at 1965%, that's really far off :) Ingo ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] Background image alignment - percentages and scalable elements
Hi Chris, Not sure exactly what you mean but this quick sample may help: http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/percentage/ The background images scale based on viewport size. Only tested on mac Safari... If this is what you are after, the key is to create large images and use percentages of the images too. In this case I used 1000px wide images (due to laziness) but you should use wider ones in a real site to cover very wide monitors. Russ > Hi, > > I'm having difficult aligning a background image the way I want to. The > markup is like this: > > 19.65% > > I have a collection of classes (called percent0 to percent100) which > have a nice gradiated background image. I'm trying to position the > background image on the left of the element so that it covers, in this > example, 20% of the element. As you will have guessed this is for a > statistics-type application. > > I've tried all sorts - aligning left/right positive/negative margins > etc. As the element needs to be scalable the background should move as > well, but keep it's ratio with regard to the width of the element. > > Does anyone have any ideas? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
[WSG] Background image alignment - percentages and scalable elements
Hi, I'm having difficult aligning a background image the way I want to. The markup is like this: 19.65% I have a collection of classes (called percent0 to percent100) which have a nice gradiated background image. I'm trying to position the background image on the left of the element so that it covers, in this example, 20% of the element. As you will have guessed this is for a statistics-type application. I've tried all sorts - aligning left/right positive/negative margins etc. As the element needs to be scalable the background should move as well, but keep it's ratio with regard to the width of the element. Does anyone have any ideas? Thanks Chris ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] 'strong' as class name
Hi tee,
W3C do not recommend the tag to set bold, but . It's
semantic in action, resistance is futile :)
Your class will be fine if you use like this:
.strong {
font: 1em bold Arial, "sans-serif";
color: #369;
text-transform: uppercase;
text-decoration: none;
}
EOF XD
On 6/26/05, Richard Czeiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi tee,
>
> I still think the tag is the way to go for you.
> In your example you have inline text that you want to make bold and a diff
> colour and font.
> This *shounds* like you want to strongly emphasis that text. Why not use the
> element to do it?
> You can still apply your styles:
>
> Strong is bold
>
>
> strong {
> font: 1em bold Arial, san-serif;
> text-transform: uppercase;
> text-decoration: none;
> color: #369;
> }
>
>
> I'd make the argument that if you still don't want to use the tag
> then at least think of a different name for your class as i think it might
> get confusing later on.
>
> Cheers :o)
> Richard
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "tee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 9:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [WSG] 'strong' as class name
>
>
> >
> > Thank you Andy, for the link and reminder.
> >> Note that the second font family is 'sans-serif' (with an 's' and
> >> hyphen).
> >> Should be:
> >> Strong is bold
> > They are correct in my files. I should have paid more attention in typing
> > when posting question to the list so to prevent confusion.
> >
> >> FURTHER READING
> >> <
> >> http://www.devarticles.com/c/a/Web-Style-Sheets/CSS-shorthand-at-a-glance/2/
> >> >
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> > tee
> >
> > **
> > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> >
> > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> > **
> >
> >
>
>
> **
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> **
>
>
--
Fellipe Cicconi
http://ruf.rockgrafia.com
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Images not loading...
Hi, I'm using FF-1.0.4 on Windows and it works fine. My TIDY Extension don't find any errors on the W3C syntax, good start! On 6/26/05, Jeff D. Reid <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Here is a listing of the image file names I see: (from top of page to > bottom) > > vinter_header.jpg > quickmap.gif > row of 6 horzontal nav bar mouseovers > aktivitet.gif > aktivitetsmenu.gif (in right sidebar) > colum of 4 javascript links w/small preceding graphic > rightsidetest.jpg > rightsidetest1.jpg > top.gif (at bottom of page) > > > HTH, > Jeff > > - Original Message - > From: "Kim Kruse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 4:53 PM > Subject: Re: [WSG] Images not loading... > > > > Hi Jeff, > > > > Thanks for your reply. Perhaps I would a great idea to mention it's the > > images in the navbar below the header image. > > > > Do they still show? > > > > Kim > > > > Jeff D. Reid wrote: > > > > >All images load just fine using the following: > > > > > >Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.7) Gecko/20050414 > > >Firefox/1.0.3 and Windows XP Pro > > > > > >I am located in Cincinnati, Ohio, USA and it is Sunday, June 26, 2005, > 3:12 > > >pm EST.. > > > > > >HTH, > > >Jeff > > > > > >- Original Message - > > >From: "Kim Kruse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >To: > > >Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2005 2:27 PM > > >Subject: [WSG] Images not loading... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>Hi, > > >> > > >>On this page http://mouseriders.dk/esrum/test.htm I have some sort of > > >>problem in FF and other Gecko browsers. > > >> > > >>The images just don't show up unless I scroll the page, mouseover the > > >>links or reload the page. Does anybody know why? > > >> > > >>I would really appreciate some help as I have no idea what's causing > this. > > >> > > >>Thank you very much > > >>Kim > > >>** > > >>The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > >> > > >> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > > >> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > > >>** > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > >** > > >The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > > > > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > > > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > > >** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ** > > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > > ** > > > > > > > ** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > ** > > -- Fellipe Cicconi http://ruf.rockgrafia.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
Re: [WSG] textarea: why rows and cols?
Some interesting points covering this issue on this list in May: http://www.mail-archive.com/wsg@webstandardsgroup.org/msg17620.html Visible height and width do matter in text-based browsers that won't recognise CSS, to give the end user some indication as to the expected length of his response. A one row text entry area will attract different responses than a 10 row area. Regards, Jachin Sheehy On 6/27/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The rows and cols attributes - mandatory for any textarea > > element - defines the *VISIBLE* height and width of the > > element. So why are they in the mark-up? I've googled long > > and hard and haven't found anything to the contrary. Surely > > these attributes should be defined in the CSS. On 6/27/05, Scott Swabey (Lafinboy Productions) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> replied: > I declare the height/width of textareas in CSS and don't use cols/rows in > the markup. I haven't come across any problems in [ limited ] testing so > far. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help **
