Patrick Lauke wrote:
>> John Foliot - WATS.ca
>
>> There is no such thing as a stupid question (although
>> occasionally we will see stupid responses...)
>
> You tell 'em John :)
>
> P
As a point of clarification, when I say stupid responses, I meant in the
form of condescending or mean respons
> John Foliot - WATS.ca
> There is no such thing as a stupid question (although
> occasionally we will see stupid responses...)
You tell 'em John :)
P
__
Patrick H. Lauke
Webmaster / University of Salford
http://www.salford.ac.uk
__
SunUp wrote:
> I do realise this is probably a very stupid question, and it's more
> than a little scary asking a stupid question on this list, but I'll
> wear the result if it means I can understand what I've done wrong.
>
> Thanks,
> sunny.
Goodness Sunny,
There really is no such thing as a st
> CSS 2 - W3C recommendation
> CSS 2.1 - Working draft
>
> Until CSS 2.1 becomes a recommendation, which shouldn't be too long
> (deadline for comments was July), the W3C validator will use what ever
> the current recommendation is.
Just to be a touch pedantic, CSS2.1 only needs to become a 'cand
CSS 2 - W3C recommendation
CSS 2.1 - Working draft
Until CSS 2.1 becomes a recommendation, which shouldn't be too long
(deadline for comments was July), the W3C validator will use what ever
the current recommendation is.
Regards
Jason
**
The d
My style sheet contains this line:
.clearfix {display: inline-block;}
When I validate I get one error: "Invalid number : display
inline-block is not a display value : inline-block"
The word "display" links to
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visuren.html#propdef-display.
That's CSS2, right?
I then