Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread hariharan k
Hi,

Try it out by
#foo .bar {
  padding-left:60px; /* For mozilla  safari */
#padding-left:65px; /* IE 7 */
_padding-left:60px; /* IE 6 */
}



On Thu, Apr 2, 2009 at 5:37 AM, Prashant prashantshr...@gmail.com wrote:

 Hi,

 I need to implement a padding-left:65px in IE7. I have following -

 #foo .bar {
   padding-left:60px;
 }

 I have tried adding following 3 options one at a time immediately after the
 one above and in all the cases IE7 picks padding-left:60px;

 *+html #foo .bar {
   padding-left:65px;
 }

 *:first-child+html #foo .bar {
   padding-left:65px;
 }

 *+html #foo .bar {
   padding-left:65px !important;
 }

 Any suggestions how do I fix this issue? Help appreciated.

 Regards,
 Prashant

 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***




-- 
Hariharan. K
Web Designer


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread James Ducker
Can you not use a conditional? It's far more reliable than CSS hacks, which
may cause problems in future browsers.
!--[if IE 7]
  link rel=stylesheet type=text/css href=iehax.css /
![endif]--


- James


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

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
seems to work.

However, I have problems seeing why one would want/need to serve IE7 a
different padding anyway - regardless of method, so I won't discuss
hacking-method without seeing the case it is supposed to solve.

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



RE: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread michael.brockington
-Original Message-
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org on behalf of Gunlaug Sørtun
Sent: Thu 4/2/2009 6:15 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix
 
 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
seems to work.

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)
There is almost never a direct correlation between the bug and the 'fix' that 
is being applied.

Conditional comments aren't pretty, and generally I try to use CSS that does 
not require different versions for different browsers, but if nothing else, a 
conditional comment makes its purpose entirely clear - no chance of a future 
editor tidying up and breaking the hack.

Mike


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
winmail.dat

RE: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Alex
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. I thought this group was 
discussions of all things relating to standards and not support of people using 
non-standard ways i.e. hacking/conditional comments.
 
 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
seems to work.

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)
There is almost never a direct correlation between the bug and the 'fix' that 
is being applied.

Conditional comments aren't pretty, and generally I try to use CSS that does 
not require different versions for different browsers, but if nothing else, a 
conditional comment makes its purpose entirely clear - no chance of a future 
editor tidying up and breaking the hack.

Mike


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***


Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

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 versions - in
the process. Before one knows it one has a complete bug-house :-)

There is almost never a direct correlation between the bug and the 
'fix' that is being applied.


True. Not a problem if the hack is proven to only work in the
browser/version that needs the fix, but few test and study progress in
standards and implementations in browsers well enough to make sure a
hack can't misfire and end up serving the fix to the wrong
browser/version.
Even many CC for IE are made universal, and end up serving bogus fixes
to the wrong versions.

Regarding future editors: in my experience there's more of a chance that
they'll break the entire work while tidying up, than that they'll
break just a hack or two.

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

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, but such tweaking often ends up on level with what the weakest
browser can handle, and thereby holds back better browsers. No progress
in that, IMO.

When one wants more, one has to aim for what works in better browsers
and correct/nudge/fix weaker browsers until they appear to do reasonably
well - without disturbing better browsers in the process. Simple
tweaking usually falls short then, and one may have to look at other
options.

I thought this group was discussions of all things relating to 
standards and not support of people using non-standard ways i.e. 
hacking/conditional comments.


There's nothing much to discuss about existing standards apart from
obvious unclear and/or incomplete passages and the occasional typo in
same documents. Anyone can read the relevant documents on standards for
themselves.

Browser-support, or lack of same, for standards, is what most often
triggers discussions, and I believe that's the case in this thread too.

(Of course: this thread may have been initiated by a designer bug, but
there's no proof of that yet.)

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



RE: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Chris Pearce
Alex [ag...@inactu.co.uk] wrote:

I don’t 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. I thought this group was 
discussions of all things relating to standards and not support of people using 
non-standard ways i.e. hacking/conditional comments.

I agree somewhat to the above comment however there’s bugs that exist in 
browsers (mainly talking about the evil IE6 here) that you simply have to fix 
when building websites in the commercial world and its completely out of your 
control no matter how standards compliant your HTML/CSS is e.g. the IE6 double 
margin float bug, if left unfixed then expect your clients to complain (if 
you’re still supporting IE6 that is which most of still are). But if you’re 
littering your style sheets with heaps and heaps of hacks then you need to 
improve on your HTML/CSS.

-Original Message-
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On 
Behalf Of Alex
Sent: Friday, 3 April 2009 7:37 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

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. I thought this group was 
discussions of all things relating to standards and not support of people using 
non-standard ways i.e. hacking/conditional comments.

 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
seems to work.

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)
There is almost never a direct correlation between the bug and the 'fix' that 
is being applied.

Conditional comments aren't pretty, and generally I try to use CSS that does 
not require different versions for different browsers, but if nothing else, a 
conditional comment makes its purpose entirely clear - no chance of a future 
editor tidying up and breaking the hack.

Mike


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Prashant
Thanks everyone.

I don't want to use conditionals at this stage as I am new to the system and
using conditionals would mean modifying a global template which I am not
comfortable doing right now.

I have tried the following but for some reason IE7 is picking IE6 hacks only
-

#foo .bar {
  padding-left:60px; /* For mozilla  safari */
#padding-left:65px; /* IE 7 */
_padding-left:60px; /* IE 6 */
}


2009/4/3 James Ducker james.duc...@gmail.com

 Can you not use a conditional? It's far more reliable than CSS hacks, which
 may cause problems in future browsers.
 !--[if IE 7]
   link rel=stylesheet type=text/css href=iehax.css /
 ![endif]--


 - James


 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Alex
Gunlaug wrote: 
 When one wants more, one has to aim for what works in better browsers
 and correct/nudge/fix weaker browsers until they appear to do reasonably
 well - without disturbing better browsers in the process. Simple
 tweaking usually falls short then, and one may have to look at other
 options.

Blimey, you norwegians are a tad opinionated. What does 'one' actually think 
'one' is going to acheive in developing for modern browsers over the older 
ones? You make it sound like modern browsers have a host of features that are 
going to turn your website/s into an all dancing and singing awe inspiring 
experience that the older browser is just going to merely mimick after you have 
bodged it up with hacks and tweaks. The majority of businesses use typically 
older versions of ie that are typically on XP builds and they 'typically' 
couldnt give a monkies or even have any knowledge about better or newer 
browsers. Anyway...thought I would give Gunlaug something to chew on...(cheer 
up son).

- Original Message -
From: Gunlaug Sørtun [mailto:gunla...@c2i.net]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 23:35:31 +0200
Subject: Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

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, but such tweaking often ends up on level with what the weakest
browser can handle, and thereby holds back better browsers. No progress
in that, IMO.

When one wants more, one has to aim for what works in better browsers
and correct/nudge/fix weaker browsers until they appear to do reasonably
well - without disturbing better browsers in the process. Simple
tweaking usually falls short then, and one may have to look at other
options.

 I thought this group was discussions of all things relating to 
 standards and not support of people using non-standard ways i.e. 
 hacking/conditional comments.

There's nothing much to discuss about existing standards apart from
obvious unclear and/or incomplete passages and the occasional typo in
same documents. Anyone can read the relevant documents on standards for
themselves.

Browser-support, or lack of same, for standards, is what most often
triggers discussions, and I believe that's the case in this thread too.

(Of course: this thread may have been initiated by a designer bug, but
there's no proof of that yet.)

regards
Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***


Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

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: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

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 
developing for modern browsers over the older ones?


Progress. It may be slow, but it is inevitable and sure better than nothing.

You make it sound like modern browsers have a host of features that 
are going to turn your website/s into an all dancing and singing awe 
inspiring experience that the older browser is just going to merely 
mimick after you have bodged it up with hacks and tweaks.


Oh, old browsers can't do much dancing and singing no matter what, so
'one' (or another) may as well stop trying so hard.

Yes, modern browsers do, obviously, provide a more complete and bug free
standard support platform. Dancing and singing is slowly edging its
way into standards too, so those who like that kind of stuff may have a
go at it - but of course only in the very latest and more experimental
browser versions...
http://www.css3.info/four-new-w3c-modules/
Broader support may be provided tomorrow, if there's a demand for it.

The majority of businesses use typically older versions of ie that 
are typically on XP builds and they 'typically' couldnt give a 
monkies or even have any knowledge about better or newer browsers.


Thanks for presenting the (very well known) state of the business
world - stagnation and regression everywhere. (No wonder the world as a
whole is in such a mess right now.)

Sorry, but this Norwegian can't see the point in being stuck in the past
just because someone else thinks that's good enough.
Life's too short, and after having worked in front of these screens for
nearly thirty years I'm getting a bit bored and impatient.

Anyway...thought I would give Gunlaug something to chew on...(cheer 
up son).


Yummy :-)
Got more?

regards
Georg
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-02 Thread Andrew Maben

On Apr 2, 2009, at 9:49 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:

Sorry, but this Norwegian can't see the point in being stuck in the  
past

just because someone else thinks that's good enough.
Life's too short, and after having worked in front of these screens  
for

nearly thirty years I'm getting a bit bored and impatient.


+ 1 Georg

The only good enough is excellent.

Andrew

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***


[WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-01 Thread Prashant
Hi,

I need to implement a padding-left:65px in IE7. I have following -

#foo .bar {
  padding-left:60px;
}

I have tried adding following 3 options one at a time immediately after the
one above and in all the cases IE7 picks padding-left:60px;

*+html #foo .bar {
  padding-left:65px;
}

*:first-child+html #foo .bar {
  padding-left:65px;
}

*+html #foo .bar {
  padding-left:65px !important;
}

Any suggestions how do I fix this issue? Help appreciated.

Regards,
Prashant


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***

Re: [WSG] IE7 CSS fix

2009-04-01 Thread Gunlaug Sørtun

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
--
http://www.gunlaug.no


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***