Ben Lau wrote:
http://www.hellobenlau.net/wsg/index.html
I'm wondering if there was a way to top align the text to its
line-height. So say, with text size 20px, could the top of the 'T' be
aligned to the top of the pink box?
Is this what you want?
Ben Lau wrote:
This is what I'm trying to achieve: http://hellobenlau.net/wsg/eg.gif
So there'll be a div with padding top and bottom of 20px, and with
text inside. If I do:
div style=padding:20px 0 psome text/p /div
The gap would include both the padding and the anonymous inline boxes
tee wrote:
Two divs wrap - background image not showed up in iE6/7
http://lotusfromthemud.com/gbtv/products.html
Old IE usually doesn't render an absolute positioned element when it is
next to a float in the markup.
In that particular case: move the div class=tvimg below the div
class=clear
Eyemax Studios wrote:
You can have a look, it's www.studiojunkyard.com I would be more
inclined to fix it, when have time hehe.
Well, it definitely isn't what Microsoft believes the Standards should
be. All KHTML/WebKit and Presto browsers agree with IE8 (in Standards
mode), and only Gecko
James Ducker wrote:
Can you not use a conditional?
Of course one can.
It's far more reliable than CSS hacks, which may cause problems in
future browsers.
I don't agree with that assessment, providing one work a bit on
selecting the right CSS hack and don't just use any hack because it
michael.brocking...@bt.com wrote:
To my mind, that is the definition of a CSS hack - it is abuse of a
bug that is believed to only apply to the required browser(s)
Mmm. One exploits a bug to kill/fix another bug, and triggers an unknown
number of bugs in various browsers - present and future
Alex wrote:
I dont understand why anyone needs to hack anything. If you design to
web standards and use a logical structure/layout with good use of
floats or positioning, you can develop a page/layout that works in
all browsers. It usually takes a bit of tweaking but it can be done.
Sure,
Prashant wrote:
I have tried the following but for some reason IE7 is picking IE6
hacks only -
Which means IE7 is in Quirks Mode - on level with IE5.5.
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
***
List Guidelines:
Alex wrote:
Blimey, you norwegians are a tad opinionated.
Nah, we just just like to be given a valid reason for changing our
minds. Comes with the territory - we never take the easy way out since
there isn't any in this country :-)
What does 'one' actually think 'one' is going to acheive in
Prashant wrote:
I need to implement a padding-left:65px in IE7.
Which mode is IE7 in for your document?
Hacks like...
*:first-child+html #foo .bar {...}
...will only work in IE7 Strict Mode. If it doesn't work in Strict
Mode, then something is overruling it.
Georg
--
michael.brocking...@bt.com wrote:
http://www.calcresult.com/reference/text/unicode-reference.html
The rendering of that page is slightly broken (at the moment) in IE6
and IE7 in that the right-hand column overlaps some of the content.
What confused me though, was that IE8 insisted on
tee wrote:
Sorry for my ignorant, is IE8 out?
Yes, as of March 19th.
Keep an eye on a site like this...
http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/
...and you'll at most only be a few days off regarding new releases.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
James Leslie wrote:
Using meta http-equiv=X-UA-Compatible content=IE=8 / will also
have the same effect (getting rid of the compatibility view button
and forcing standards mode), but may be a bit more stable against
future releases of IE.
But, may also lock documents to IE8's rendering
tee wrote:
By the way, Google Chorme behaves as Safari does.
Not during my testing, but that may be conditional.
Conditional is problematic since that mean behavior may change with
factors like OS and connection speed = highly unreliable.
Tested Chrome, OmniWeb and Arora - all complete
Mike Kear wrote:
For the first time since I started building web sites, IE is not the
most prominent browser on my two highest traffic sites.
Of course other sites will have a different pattern, depending on the
audience.
Not entirely new, but much broader...
tee wrote:
Thanks for checking. Adding the above rule makes the thumbnail
unclickable when no thumbnail shows up. If I refresh the browser to
make thumbnail shows up, then it's clickable.
Yeah, the various Safari versions show very different behavior for the
script.
- Safari 3.2.x indeed
tee wrote:
On this site, in Safari (PC and Mac) you will see that the
thumbnail(s) in the gallery (jquery galleria) is either not showing
up or the image gets distorted (should be 80px). You may not see it
from the first visit, should this be the case, please click on other
page, then come back
daniel wrote:
it would be much more interesting to discuss IE8's compliance again.
All compliant sites that I've made render fine in Safari 3 4 and
FIrefox 3 but always fail to work 100% on IE...
It isn't about standard compliance for your sites, but which standard
IE8 is limited to - CSS
Jon Gunderson wrote:
http://faetest.dres.uiuc.edu
Please let me know what you think of it.
First impression: good.
Informative page reports.
A few points...
1: i and b can in many cases not be replaced by h1..h6 or em and strong.
Both i and b are valid - span-like (no implied semantics) -
David Dorward wrote:
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
2: according to specs (and browsers) a character encoding stated in
an xml declaration is good, and further stating unnecessary. No
warning should be given in such a case.
An ?xml ? declaration (or anything else before the Doctype) will
trigger
Brett Patterson wrote:
Will a div tag pick up the height of an image that is floated left?
Only if the div is styled to contain floats...
http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_example_01.html
Lots of options linked in on that page.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Ben Lau wrote:
But as far as i know, screen readers do not pick up IDs or classes?
So even by declaring a div ID=mainNav, it's still not enough to
describe what's inside the div?
I'm starting to get awfully confused...
A div is an element primarily intended for grouping blocks of content -
Ben Lau wrote:
Are there any (seriously) bad implications of having empty DIVs
around your HTML document?
I understand from that that you mean nested divs, for multiple
backgrounds etc.
A few extra divs means nothing other than extra weight, but I have
managed to break a few older browsers
Brett Patterson wrote:
[...] Now I realize where most of my problems have stemmed from.
Note that nearly all such designer bugs will be caught if you follow
WCAG2 recommendations and resize text in a browser to at least 200% of
browser default. (Default is 16px on 96dpi screen resolution in
tee wrote:
IS 200% one time font size increasement or two?
200% is twice the default size, and the number of steps to get there
varies from browser to browsers.
Again: _default_ isn't whatever size you have declared in/for your
document, but the browsers' own defaults. This default font size
Brett Patterson wrote:
Okay, one quick question. You say 200% is twice the default size, but
in browsers like Firefox 3, there is only the (shortcut) Ctrl++ to
zoom in, and I cannot find the percentage of that zoom, so is 200%
font size increasement one or two clicks?
Much more than that,
default (100%) to reach the
text-size and line-height they're at (at 200%), as shown below.
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Side-by-side comparison and measuring on various OSes (96dpi res.
all to avoid any misunderstandings) reveals the following:
- Firefox (3.0.5 3.1b2) seems to increment in 10
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Maybe someone can do a control check, measure the actual sizes on
screen for zoom values and mouse-wheel resizing steps for 'text
resizing' vs 'full page zoom' set at shown values, and let us know
the results.
Just to make sure we're resizing the same way: notice that I
Brett Patterson wrote:
If my site is visited in Firefox or Internet Explorer first, you can
see that everything aligns perfectly.
Not if that browser is called IE8, I'm afraid. IE8 agrees with
Opera10alpha.
http://ttcharriman.edu/TTCH07/iftprojects/brettpatterson/index.html
It's a
Christian Montoya wrote:
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 2:41 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun gunla...@c2i.net
IE7 is dead - meaning: stable,
Ah, well, most people would consider dead and stable to be two
entirely different things. Dead is more akin to abandoned or
unsupported.
OK, guess my choice of word
Brett Patterson wrote:
You should rethink the positioning method, and forget about
deviations
between browsers until you have stabilized it in one.
I do not understand this either, unless you are talking about using
margin as the positioning method. I have stabilized it one browser.
This
)
compatibility view.
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Besides: one should only target/hack dead browsers, like IE7 and
older. Targeting/hacking live browsers like Opera, Firefox, Safari
etc. for real, will only create maintenance-problems as new
versions arrive.
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Paul Collins wrote:
I can add a class of clear to every third list item, which is
great, but I'm still having troubles in getting them to behave in IE.
Has anyone got a solution, or seen on online lately?!
Didn't check for the actual case, but it's usually safer to declare
'clear: left' than
James O'Neill wrote:
We are a small county displaying our ordinances and parens are
important for legal notations and references.
If such details are important, they should be written in plain text.
Regardless of whether a method is found or not, one can not rely on
browsers support for
Paul Hudson wrote:
Doesn't ie6's highest security setting turn js off?
Yes, and all that goes with it - like IE-expressions.
I haven't looked at ie7 but would assume similar.
IE7 same as IE6.
From the look of it - brief testing - IE8b2 also turns off
script-support in high security mode.
Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
I'm running into big rendering differences between Google Chrome and
Safari 3.1/PC. They are said to render pages the same, given that
they're using the same Webkit engine.
They're using the WebKit engine, not necessarily the same version.
Safari is at version 3.2.1 last
Naveen Bhaskar wrote:
I have seen a page where all the divs are positioned with position
relative and with top , bottom attributes instead of margin.. Is
this a good method?
Depends entirely on the actual layout. I often use both relative offset
and margin push/pull on the same elements.
Ben Lau wrote:
Are there any major downfall in doing so apart from increasing page
size? I'd like to be able to convince our designer to simplify the
design...
No UA will have problems with a dozen or so extra wrapper-divs around
every single element in a page - doesn't even have to be valid
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis wrote:
David Hucklesby wrote:
The validator still needs a DTD though.
If you mean the W3C validator, then no, it just got experimental
HTML5 support.
And the W3C validator misinterprets XHTML5 to be some lesser XHTML
flavor...
Andrew Maben wrote:
XML is not going away, so by all means hope for an XHTM revival
somewhere down the road, but for now, if it's text/html then
shouldn't it be HTML as HTML, and not XHTML treated as HTML?
IMHO, naturally, and of course YMMV.
Of course. We have choices and preferences :-)
Brett Patterson wrote:
From the few recent posts, I have become so far confused, as anyone
would as to why, Gunlaug, you keep stating xHTML5 or as above you say
XHTML5? HTML and xHTML/XHTML are different. xHTML is XHTML, albeit
1.0 or 1.1 or 2.0 etc. So, is it a typo?
No typo, but I
Christian Montoya wrote:
Unless anyone here knows what good would come of applying negative
margins to legends, I'm going to remove them for good.
Probably this you're looking for...
http://www.gunlaug.no/tos/moa_18a.html
regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Christian Montoya wrote:
Could someone please read the body of my email instead of just
looking at the title and then post a response that is on-topic?
OK :-)
CSS2's 'font-size-adjust' support is limited to Gecko/Fx IIRC, and is
probably put on hold by the W3C CSS group for the time being -
Christian Montoya wrote:
Could someone please read the body of my email instead of just
looking at the title and then post a response that is on-topic?
OK :-)
CSS2's 'font-size-adjust' support is limited to Gecko/Fx IIRC, and is
probably put on hold by the W3C CSS group for the time being -
Brett Patterson wrote:
So, Gunlaug, in essence, (essence being the operative word), you do
validate your site by using tidy? Correct? I mean if you trust tidy
to correct your code and all the code that tidy puts out is, as you
say, 99.9% effective then that is kinda like validating, right?
tee wrote:
I cannot control or foresee how long the content in the
'set-minheight' div be. What do I do to have the p tag always stay
at the bottom of the block?
For the example it's pretty strait forward as the p will always stay
below the 'set-minheight' div, no matter how much or how
tee wrote:
'min-heigh' talls enough is the problem. If I can't forsee how long
the content will be, how do I decide the set the value of min-height?
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/opera-test/mh.html
The design is the fixed width, but even with fuild layout, it's a
problem not knowing how tall
tee wrote:
Hi, I am just curious how many people in this list actually spend
extra time making a validation error free page for the sake of
validation when third party's code is embedded. Surely the above
example is an easy fix, but how about embedding google calendar or
other scripts?
I
Taco Fleur wrote:
http://www.onlinemarketingplatform.com.au/ In Internet Explorer there
is a 1px difference in the evolution image.
IE6 doesn't like odd numbers so it rounds off 'height: 135px' on h3 to
134px - making the h3 1px too short.
IE7 handles odd numbers better so it gets the height
Taco Fleur wrote:
The cause of this problem is something I've never encountered in my
14 years of web dev, this is amazing to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Well, IE moves in mysterious ways, but one can always follow its path
and figure out which bugs we're dealing with :-)
What IE6 does with odd
kevin mcmonagle wrote:
Floating the images/ anchors contained in the li's left next to each
other is what im trying to do. But right now each li streches to the
width of the ul so the cant float left. Even distributing them evenly
would be fine though.
You're running into specificity
Andrew Brown wrote:
Does anyone know what would fix this? I exhausted my self with
various solutions. The live demo is here:
http://monsterboxpro.com/dump/webtemp/index.html
Stiffen up IE's backbone with a 'hasLayout'[1] triggering declaration.
Add...
div.footer_wrap {height: 1%;}
...and
Joe Chiang wrote:
Perhaps, implement something like 'sticky sidebar' or 'position
fixed' to present the 'Return to top' link rather than adding it
after each section is another option I look favourably at. Obviously,
I need to work out on IE6 for this.
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
http://www.koisis.com/.clients/asdem/dev/index.php?cmd=001001
The height of the body image (the hiroshige painting) - rather than
showing in full - seems to be getting cropped by the height of my
wrapper div.
Add...
body{
padding: 1px 0;
min-height:
Joe Chiang wrote:
I have some VERY long pages in the website I maintain. Currently, I
insert 'Back to Top' after every section in the page. Sometimes, I
feel they are disturbing and am not sure if there is any better way
to do it or don't insert them at all.
Unless clients insist on having
May I suggest that we fix an Up link at the bottom and a series of
section tabs and Skip to ... at the top of the window - 'position:
fixed' that is.
Should work on all but the smallest windows and in all the latest
browsers, and are easy to reposition or turn off for print.
IE6 will have to
tee wrote:
As far as SEO concerns, it seems to have an advantage because google
image search and a few other image search engines (can't remember
their names). This seems to be very useful for sites that sell
products, image stock and photographers
Have to keep that in mind when I'm looking
kevin mcmonagle wrote:
cheers george. i thought the !important; fixed that but apparently
not. menus height ok in ie6, just have to give it a conditional
comment for the width now.
Suggest you add this package instead of something in a CC...
#mainMenu li ul {padding: 0; }
* html #mainMenu li
tee wrote:
I was thinking maybe it's a SEO question and shouldn't post it here,
however, the more I think about it, the more I feel it deserves a
semantical perspective and wonder if it creates obstacle for screen
reader.
Might be seen as noise, but can't see any other problems with
Kristine Cummins wrote:
I have a div container that has a background image (gradation) which is
displaying fine in IE7 Mozilla, but it's not displaying in IE5 IE6.
http://www.cpwrehab.com/test/index.html
Add...
* html #container,
* html #headercontainer {
height: 1%; overflow: visible;
}
tee wrote:
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/opera-test/opera.html [1] input element
or class has background color borders - no checkmark (or tiny
checkmark depending on the width/height of the class for input
element) in checkbox.
Padding seems to cover the area, and does so until the padding
tee wrote:
Is it just me kept running into issues with Opera? I really don't
remember having these problems so obvious with pre-version 9.5 that I
can't tolerate. I am getting this impression that the evolution of Opera
has come to an end and now it's rapidly reversing back to the buggy
tee wrote:
Hi Georg, very nice to 'see' you :)
:-)
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/opera-test/opera-has-issue.png
I am narrowing down to the % and em that are causing many problems I
have encountered. The site is in my localhost therefor I can't post
it, but I will move it to a webserver
John Unsworth wrote:
So my questions to the group are; Was the decision to write the
markup in the order I did correct or pedantic? Because if I didn't
then I wouldn't have the layout issues I'm having I'd guess.
Positioning out of visual order on a detailed level, can easily create
more
David McKinnon wrote:
For a while now, I've been operating on the principle Code for
Firefox, hack for IE.
Is this the way anyone works?
Apart from that I code for the most standard compliant browsers
(plural) at present time, and then hack for various IE versions, I
think I'll go along
Fred Ballard wrote:
For problems with box alignment, I know I usually turn on
background colors to clearly see the size and position of the boxes
the browser is using.
Or is that a newbie answer?
Definitely not a newbie method. Setting backgrounds is one of the
quickest ways to check
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
Hello All -
I'm developing a new framework for my projects and have come across
something I can't get rid of.
Go here: http://www.koisis.com/.framework/-public/index.php
If you look at the purple float that contains a beige main content
area, you'll see that the beige
Jens Nedal wrote:
[...] If you ask me, i would say that a double br is a p already.
Look at word processing programs. When you wish for a double br
you will simply type Enter. If you want a line-break you will
mostly do a Shift+Enter.
Word processing isn't web design, and one has to look
Rob Enslin wrote:
Although not a standards-based question (I think) I wonder if anyone
has the 'fix' for it?
The page: http://www.servicemanagement.co.uk/new.htm
Maybe better to trigger standard mode in browsers first, and add fixes
later.
The combination of declarations you have now is a
Must you Australian's *always* have the last say? ;)
not always, but often. esp if it ends in beer and a party
Is that why what you say most often makes no sense?
:-)
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
***
List
Hayden's Harness Attachment wrote:
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.terasengas.com%2FHomes%2Fdefault.htm
I am really confused. Can anyone explain?
What the validator says:
There's one end-tag too many for a link on line 91. Delete one /A in
that line.
Darren West wrote:
An alternative could be to develop with relative sizes for all
measurements, allowing the interface to be scaled to any screen
resolution. Examples can be seen at http://www.linkedin.com and
http://www.sky.com
Dysfunctional examples, but they clearly show what many mean by
Susie Gardner-Brown wrote:
But when the link has sub-menu items under it, all of those get the
same treatment! Because the styles are applied to the list item. Can
anyone think of a way to do this that would not affect the sub-menu?
http://crunchie.tedi.uq.edu.au/trials/UCTLC/stLucia.html
Susie Gardner-Brown wrote:
Re the font-resizing - sigh!! For a lot of the websites we develop at
the university here, we're supposed to use this awful template,
which includes the lefthand menu like this. In the template it's all
in tables!! I got the way of doing this menu from
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what's the general consensus on the use of null or empty alt
strings as per the reasons outlined in the article below?
http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/archives/accessible_alternatives.html
The choice between alt-text or no alt-text depends entirely on whether
an
Designer wrote:
I'm getting confused now - on MY IE6, the title is displayed on
hover, not the alt. I was originally testing with my standalone IE6,
so I checked on my laptop, (with 'real' IE6) and got the same
result!
Me too. IE/win shows title-text on images when such exists, otherwise it
Darren West wrote:
There is the argument that you are changing the behaviour of IE,
however wrong it is, it could be what users expect. I believe Jaws
ignores empty attributes so all good there ...
I do not think one should meddle with a browser's behavior in minor
cases like showing alt-text
tee wrote:
Tell me, what do you like for Christmas gift ?
An internet-connection that is extremely fast and works all the time ;-)
(Maybe I'll get one before Christmas, but I'm not holding my breath.)
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Susie Gardner-Brown wrote:
http://crunchie.tedi.uq.edu.au/trials/UCTLC/index6.html
That big image on the right is a bg image in a container that has
absolute positioning. It works fine in Firefox on my Mac, but IE6 it
drops down.
Can anyone see what I'm doing wrong?
You're trying to
tee wrote:
My brain isn't working. I thought I have the answer but it's not
working :-(
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/menu.html
Missing base-position...
#menu li a {background-position: left top;}
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
Quirks mode is the best mode for the old bugger known as IE6,
IMO,
Care to clarify why, exactly?
I listed a few reasons down this page some time ago...
http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_16.html
...and nothing seems to have changed
Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
Did anyone do some more testing with IE8?
Yes, and I've concluded here...
http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_32.html
Do we know any better release date than mid year?
The later the better, as the IE-team got plenty left to fix if they want
IE8 to end up as a
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
On top of using a correct Doctype, authors need to make sure that
nothing (e.g., XML prolog or HTML comment) comes before the DTD or it
will send IE into Quirks mode.
Quirks mode is the best mode for the old bugger known as IE6, IMO,
which is why I make sure to always
Likely, James A. wrote:
The footer on the page is not appearing, but the space that it is
meant to hold the footer is present. I know about the peek-a-boo
effect for IE, but this does not seem to be the case. Does any one
have any suggestions on how to fix this?
Example:
Rob Enslin wrote:
I've recently built a website trying to move towards more
standards-compliant code. After the delight at pushing the site live
my world 'caved in' (a little over-dramatic maybe) this morning when
a colleague noticed rogue 'ls. text some way down the home page.
Live site:
tee wrote:
I am about to start coding for a new site, and client asked me to
make sure my code will work for IE8, meaning when IE 8 comes out, she
doesn't need to pay me extra to fix any problem that may occur in IE
8.Client is from a web media company, though I understand her
concerns and
Lea de Groot wrote:
Joel Spolsky has published an ... interesting article
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2008/03/17.html
Microsoft failed to follow the evolutionary trail and keep up with
common standards - to the degree that such exists, and now they try to
catch up without causing a
Web Dandy Design wrote:
[...] However the client's French distributor says that the site
doesn't look right when they are using Opera v9.26, revision 8835,
Win32, Windows XP.
Has anyone ever come across this problem before?
www.charis.uk.com http://www.charis.uk.com/ .
Breaks the same
Web Dandy Design wrote:
Can you advise what would need to be done to the site to 'make it
work' in Opera?
Add...
#left-col {clear: left;}
...and the problem is solved in all browsers and on all resolutions.
The problem was that the left-col got hung up on the horizontal nav's
right edge when
tee wrote:
http://lotusseedsdesign.com/firefoxbug.html
I have not tested this page in IE as my Parallels desktop has
networking issue and I can't connect to the Internet from Windows
XP, so I am not 100% sure if the problem only occur in Gecko
browsers.
IE/win handles it like Firefox.
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
I think it's going to be a fun ride...
I really don't think it's time to saddle up yet :-)
http://tjkdesign.com/test/ie8/links.asp
So, they still have those stacking-bugs to sort out.
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no
dwain wrote:
On 3/1/08, Melissa Forrest [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
aaah no, there is nothing invalid about more than one stylesheet
link tag in the markup
do you have a link for your side?
Validity isn't a problem, but don't add too many stylesheet links or
style elements in the markup -
dwain wrote:
On 3/1/08, Matthew Pennell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Mar 1, 2008 at 12:47 PM, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
do you have a link for your side?
validator.w3.org?
what about the w3c specs?
http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/present/styles.html#h-14.3
I think this gives us
dwain wrote:
if accessibility isn't cracked up to what it's supposed to be, then
why are there laws about the subject?
The laws are probably there to prevent accessibility from falling
through the cracks. Consciously or unconsciously ignoring access for
all is after all more the norm than the
Cole Kuryakin wrote:
First, go here under IE 6: http://www.crewasia.ph/index.php
The drop down menuing system at the very top of the screen DOES work
(it drops down correctly). You can even select the FIRST menu item on
each drop down menu. But, when you try to cursor over any other menu
Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
thanks very much for your solution - it works perfectly. Could you
please explain how the margin works with IE6? I wonder how the top
margin eliminates the left margin when I apply it. Thank you.
Not sure I understand your question - which margin eliminates what,
since
Jens-Uwe Korff wrote:
I have restyled a timeline but have come stuck with IE6's 3-pixel
jog.
I cannot apply the usual remedy (floating the paragraph) as I need
any element next to the floated offender to be indented. Hence the
paragraph has a left margin which cannot be zero.
Designer wrote:
Maybe, but coding in xhtml1.1 makes you MUCH more fussy about syntax
etc. and it shows up any 'well formed' errors as soon as you browse.
So, whilst the user will know nothing about all this, it makes you as
a designer get lots of practice in using the stricter syntax, ready
for
Well, apart from that I don't like IE/win version targeting one bit, if
MSIE uphold this version targeting strategy in future versions, we may
as well use it to our advantage.
Sidelining IE/win while designing for standards and better browsers,
doesn't have to become a problem for designers or
Ben Buchanan wrote:
Implementation specifics aside (yes I still think it's spam), the
version target feature offers us a chance to lock our sites to the
most convenient version of IE. MS has invited us to ignore their
newer products. We can opt to save our energy for standards-based
browsers
1 - 100 of 472 matches
Mail list logo
