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
Hi Folks,
I have just inherited a bands website which places all of the navigation
(both top and bottom links) in iframes. I don't 100% understand why the
developer chose to do this unless it is emulating php includes in static
html, anyway, it seems like a bad idea to me and is high on my list
On Nov 20, 2007 7:04 PM, Jermayn Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In coming in late to the discussion:
Do we really need a sitemap? I recently read an article were it talked
that if all the seo was done properly and it was smallish, you
probably do not need a sitemap.
I remember that article
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 being 15
pages or so.
On 22/11/2007, at 1:31 AM, James Leslie wrote:
Hi Folks,
I have just inherited a bands website which places all of the
navigation (both top and bottom links) in iframes. I don't 100%
understand why the developer chose to do this unless it is emulating
php includes in static html,
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
The accessibility issues relating to frames are often overstated, although
they can cause difficulties with user agents that only support one window,
such as Lynx. You can usually still use the site but it is not as convenient
because you have to keep going back to the list of frames in order to
Not at all. You know that the site only has 15 pages but your visitors
don't. The sitemap gives the visitor an immediate indication of the size of
the site, so why deny them that? It can be a big help in determining their
strategy for browsing the site.
Steve
-Original Message-
From:
I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another
machine in order to view them in IE.
I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than
Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors in my
html that Firefox has happily ignored but IE has
I would begin by installing Firebug and Yslow extensions in FF.
There's also a HTML validator based on Tidy that could be handy, but
you get the same level of validation w/ Firebug so no need to install
both (although I happen to have).
Other extensions worth having: Web developer Toolbar. I
Hi Chris,
That seems like an odd scenario to me, firefox is pretty tight compared
to IE I thought, but I'll take your word for it :-)
You could try using a plug-in such as HTML validator for Firefox that
will put a little icon on the bottom right of your firefox browser to
show you if a page is
James Leslie wrote:
You could try using a plug-in such as HTML validator for Firefox that
will put a little icon on the bottom right of your firefox browser to
show you if a page is valid or not and it will show you errors too. It
uses the HTML tidy software
Thanks Steve, and John for your thoughts on this. I'll speak to the
client and make the suggestion.
James
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Steve Green
Sent: 21 November 2007 15:12
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG]
Chris Price wrote:
I build websites on a Mac and have to check my websites on another
machine in order to view them in IE.
I experience the usual issues with IE applying css differently than
Firefox but my biggest frustrations, lately, have come from errors in
my html that Firefox has
James' advice is it -- there are gobs of plug-ins for FireFox.
There are plug-ins to not only validate HTML but whole singular
toolkits for working with the entire plethora of site spewage:
cookies, CSS, images, links, Id tags, div orders, stack levels,
anchors, block sizes, frames,
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007 14:44:15 +, 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.
Yes, its got to be total
The pixel-based min/max version is a much easier solution then, but
yours needs adjustments. The 4% missing with a fluid state of 96% width,
is not identical to the 18px you have between attack and max-width
values, and same goes for the 'min-width' part. It is percentage of the
body-width you're
Firefox is also a little naughty when it comes to Javascript parsing.
A friend of mine pointed out how he always gets caught out when
declaring objects in JSON:
var JsonObject{
objectFunction:function() {
// blah
}, // extra comma here...
}
Firefox will happily parse this
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 just continued
What are you putting the max-width declaration on? a div for example?
adam
On Nov 22, 2007 9:17 AM, Tee G. Peng [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
I thought the site map was clear and it was easy to discern if what you want os
on the site - saves time and effort.
Good job
Julie Hale
Senior Consultant
SMS Managment and Technology
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris Taylor
The way I personally do sitemaps (if i decide to do them) is use the
google sitemaps tool and keep it as a xml document and just make sure
that your navigation is easy enough so people can access the content
without getting lost.
IMO if you create a sitemap so people can get to a location, the
Jermayn,
That one person may find the sitemap useful does not mean that the site
navigation is broken - all that we do know for sure is that one person likes to
use the sitemap.
If everyone uses the sitemap, then the navigation could well use some work.
Similarly - if some internal users find
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 09:07:16 +0900, Jermayn Parker wrote:
The way I personally do sitemaps (if i decide to do them) is use the
google sitemaps tool and keep it as a xml document and just make sure
that your navigation is easy enough so people can access the content
without getting lost.
XML
Andrew wrote:
Jermayn,
That one person may find the sitemap useful does not mean that the
site
navigation is broken - all that we do know for sure is that one person
likes to use the sitemap.
If everyone uses the sitemap, then the navigation could well use some
work.
Similarly - if
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 just continued expanding until it reaches 1680px
full screen.
This is because em is a measuring unit relative to the font size of the
On Nov 21, 2007, at 3:30 PM, Adam Martin wrote:
What are you putting the max-width declaration on? a div for example?
adam
I have something like this right now:
#wrapper {max-width: 60em; min-width: 600px;margin:0 auto; }
#container, #btm_wrap { margin:0 auto;position:relative;text-
On Nov 21, 2007, at 5:02 PM, Jermayn Parker wrote:
good example of this is:
http://www.456bereastreet.com/
It behaves the same as mine as well as the think vitamine.
This is because em is a measuring unit relative to the font size of
the
page, so as you increase the font size, the
good example of this is:
http://www.456bereastreet.com/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 22/11/2007 9:53:08 am
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 just continued expanding until it
I have something like this right now:
#wrapper {max-width: 60em; min-width: 600px;margin:0 auto; }
#container, #btm_wrap { margin:0 auto;position:relative;text-align:left;}
It was this:
#wrapper {width: 100%}
#container, #btm_wrap { margin:0
On Nov 21, 2007, at 5:05 PM, David Laakso wrote:
This site uses min/max width and the behaviour I see is the same
as mine.
Oops, forgot to post the url in my previous post.
http://www.thinkvitamin.com/ (one of the best layout I even seen!)
tee
The purpose of max-width loses if it can't overruled the ems behavior.
It's not a case of max-width overruling ems. Ems is related to font-size
which is why it's used for fluid/elastic layouts - it's *supposed* to
increase as you increase the text size. If you don't want your layout to
This page has a Suckerfish dropdown menu:
http://www.blinn.edu/sbdc/_notes/blinn/index.htm
Its stylesheet: http://www.blinn.edu/sbdc/_notes/blinn/index-css.css
The left two dropdown menus (correctly) overlap the form that's below
them in FF, Opera IE7, but in IE6 those two menus drop down
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
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?
On Thu, 22 Nov 2007 11:33:06 +1000, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
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...
36 matches
Mail list logo
