Hi All. I hope someone can help me with my problem but it isn't exactly
on topic so replies off list are encouraged.
The markup below is far from semantic but necessary for floating
elements and alignment. It will come out of a publishing system and may
repeat any number of times. For each cat
On 9/19/05, Stuart Sherwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> autocomplete="off"
I would check MSDN to see if there's a meta tag equivalent you can
use. I know with their imagetoolbar parameter, you can put a meta tag
in the head of the document to apply the same effect.
--
Kay Smoljak
http://kay.zom
Hello,
I have just been looking in a few logs to make sure I am not about to
talk complete rubbish but I am now confident that most browsers handle
style sheets exactly the same way as they do images in that they cache
the style sheet/image but every time it is called by the HTML they check
b
Bert Doorn wrote:
G'day
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded
once!
b) you can reformat your whole site just by changing the CSS file!
and what, we just hope nobody notices that they contradict each
other?
To me it's only a contradiction if you read "once" t
Stuart Sherwood wrote:
autocomplete="off"
Any suggestions for a valid alternative?
Injecting the attribute via javascript, or just weighing up what's more
important: a single validation error in the name of security, or having
a perfectly valid document that may cause serious issues?
--
Pat
Sorry to be thick, I get it now.
I guess you have to use the SSI if you want to be absolutely sure.
Though if you are only changing the styles, does it matter? The content will
still be correct (unless the html is also cached...)
cheers,
Geoff.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PRO
autocomplete="off"
I have recently used this invalid attribute on a credit card field for
security in IE.
IE will try to complete the field and show
a small drop down box under text fields containing all entries
which have been entered previously. This "autocomplete"
feature means that credit
John,
There's no need for a server-side include to do this. Just use a
linked stylesheet
Intra-corporate controversy! Fair enough, but as Jake has pointed
out, this isn't absolutely guaranteed, because "screen.css" may still
get cached, leaving users with the old @import statements.
Cachi
But my point was that in this situation (proxies caching out of date
stylesheets) the proxy will hold an old version of the importing
stylesheet and so only link to the old sheets. This won't solve the
initial probelm, but I haven't seen it happen all that often and I
don't really think it's all
What about setting the content expiration in the HTTP headers, you can do
this from within the webserver.
Isn't that how it was intended to work?
Taco Fleur - Pacific Fox
an industry leader with commercial IT experience since 1994 .
http://www.pacificfox.com
> -Original Message-
> From:
You can still change the filenames of the imported stylesheets as needed to get
around the cache issues.
The point was to avoid the SSI and do it all on the client side with link and
import.
Geoff.
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of
There is a simply option:
1. add a link to a generic css file:
2. inside this file, import any css file you need:
@import "advanced.css";
The advantages are:
1. by using two media types in first link you will stop NN4 from following
the link and (in specific NN4 cases) from crashing on the @imp
Except that then that stylesheet gets cached (more likely cached on the
proxy) and you have the same problem all over again.
Jake
On 19/9/2005, "Geoff Pack" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>John,
>
>There's no need for a server-side include to do this. Just use a linked
>stylesheet to import the
The other "solution" is that you use a server side scripting language (which means everytime you produce your page you can dynamically change what is returned - e.g. Coldfusion, ASP, Perl, PHP, etc.).
On 9/19/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Changing the css filename is not a good
John,
There's no need for a server-side include to do this. Just use a linked
stylesheet to import the real stylesheet:
i.e. in your html pages:
in screen.css:
@import url("nav.css");
@import url("main.css");
...
This has the additional benefit of excluding NS4.
cheers,
Ge
Changing the css filename is not a good idea as you would then need
to edit every html file to point to the updated file?
Well, that's the point of my trick, unwieldy though it is.
Every html file would have a server-side include, which contained a
client-side include. Next, a rabbit out of a
I wrote:
Changing the css filename is not a good idea as you would then need to
edit every html file to point to the updated file?
Unless like you (John) mentioned, one uses an include (I missed that bit).
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loa
Browser DO go back out and update files (according to the policy set by either a network admin or the user - which may mean NEVER).
BUT - the biggest problem is all the Proxy Servers inbetween the user and the site.
You cannot always gaurantee that the policy on the proxy is set correctly (or i
G'day
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded
once!
b) you can reformat your whole site just by changing the CSS file!
and what, we just hope nobody notices that they contradict each other?
To me it's only a contradiction if you read "once" to mean "once in yo
That might be an issue if you're changing the stylesheet all the time
(although even then browsers should still update the cached file if
it's changed) but generally people are talking about updating it
infrequently and irregularly. In that case it might take a while to
filter down to everyone's c
I was thinking this morning that we constantly tell people two things
about CSS, as in this wonderful presentation:
http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/ (pages 9 and 10)
we tell them
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded once!
and then we tell them
b) you
On 9/19/05, Titanilla <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> strangely enough, the lovely tutorial seems pretty different from the
> stylesheet of the site...
> E.g. the tutorial starts with
>
> div#outer {
> width:94%;
> min-width:40em;
> max-width:70em;
> }
>
> explaining the benefits of using per
Oops - always test in IE before posting, eh? ;~)
Changed the css code of sidebar to:
#sidebar {
position:absolute;
top:0;
left:0 !important;
left:-190px;
width:140px;
padding:10px;
font-size:90%;
}
To deal with IE.
Mani Sheriar
S
This works as long as the side column is shorter than the main column.
View it here: http://www.manisheriar.com/wsg/twoColumn/
html:
This is the Head
This is the content.
Ryan,
strangely enough, the lovely tutorial seems pretty different from the
stylesheet of the site...
E.g. the tutorial starts with
div#outer {
width:94%;
min-width:40em;
max-width:70em;
}
explaining the benefits of using percentage and em. Hurray!
So why does the actual css of the
LOL! I forgot to put the page address in. DUH.
Here it is: www.norfolkwholesalefloral.com
The current css is very minimal with only font style, link colors, and
that's about it.
Thanks again! JoAn
- Original Message -
From: "JoAn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, September 18,
Thanks for all the replies about two column layouts. It certainly helps.
Alas, I see I need more. I am trying to change a current html page with
massive tables to the css layout. I inherited this page. There are some
things I don't know how to switch to the css style. For instance, just under
27 matches
Mail list logo
