Hi Jeff,
Looks like it may have worked...thanks very much...and to all the
others that could've helped if I'd included the URL!
Nick
Hi Nick
Try:
H1 {position: relative;}
This might help; I came up against the same problem in IE6 and found
that this fixed the problem.
Jeff
Ive found that coding a new site in XHTML 1.0 transitional is easy after
some practice, but requires great effort when retrofitting an old site.
So now im comfortable using XHTML 1.0 transitional how hard would moving
to 1.0 strict and then onto 1.1 be?
I already know that moving to XHTML 1.0
Neerav wrote:
So now im comfortable using XHTML 1.0 transitional how hard would
moving
to 1.0 strict and then onto 1.1 be?
The move from transitional to strict you wont find hard.
This list of tags shows what is and isn't allowed in XHTML 1.0 strict, I
do not know of any browser quirks
The quick test is to simply change the doctype and hit a validator to see
what issues arise from your code and then work through them.
Remember though that if you're changing from XHTML 1.0 Transitional, then
you really need to change the way the document is sent to the browser, the
mime type
One thing i just noticed about W3Schools...
http://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_a.asp
It states:
Differences Between HTML and XHTML
NONE
but as we all know - XHTML doesnt allow the TARGET attribute...
Chris Stratford
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Http://www.neester.com
Peter Firminger wrote:
The
Chris Stratford wrote:
but as we all know - XHTML doesnt allow the TARGET attribute...
Neither does HTML 4.01 Strict. However, there are many differences
between XHTML and HTML [1].
[1] http://hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
Hi Martin,
1. Coding methodology
---
I would recommend coding to standards, but checking across as many browsers
as possible throughout the process of building layouts. The keys are (a) use
as many browsers as possible, (b) check often and (c ) deal with layout
issues
I recently had a client who insisted I implement drop-down menus for the navigation on their site, even though I gave them all the reasons why I thought they were unnecessary in their case - and I was wondering what the list's thoughts were on this method of navigation.
Personally think that in
On Monday, March 22, 2004, at 07:00 AM, Martin E wrote:
1.So, IYHOs,
Is it better to code, then check, code some more, then check
again,
using a much more standards-
compliant browser like Mozilla, or go with ie, then tweak for
the
rest?
Yes. Start with something compliant
Hi Justin!
Where can I get the Opera 7.5 Beta? Couldn't see an obvious link on the site...
This site (not my own) has published links to all preview versions:
http://opera-fansite.de/tiki-read_article.php?articleId=134
Although it's german, I'm quite sure you can find the link you need. As a
Hi Martin!
This may seen OT, but the underlying question is valid :~)
:-) Good one.
As I am an Opera fan, Opera is of course the best browser on earth (although I have to admit that Firefox 0.8 has some *very neat* features). I am a mathematical maniac, so I design my sites computing the widths,
Hi Peter,
I feel the same way however I'm working on tidying a variation of
drop-down navigation at http://www.amcs.org.au right now and this one
does have some benefits.
For one since it's just an HTML list it actually places what's almost a
site map on every page which should be good for
Hi,
I'm working on a new site for a friend, and I'm having trouble getting the
horizontal nav list working in Opera (7/Win).
HTML: http://headoverheels.org.uk/index.html
CSS: http://headoverheels.org.uk/css/screen.css
(the design's still being done, ignore scrappiness ;-)
I'm floating the li
On Monday, March 22, 2004, at 09:29 AM, Universal Head wrote:
I recently had a client who insisted I implement drop-down menus for
the navigation on their site, even though I gave them all the reasons
why I thought they were unnecessary in their case - and I was
wondering what the list's
Title: Message
Here is a site with accessible menus http://www.udm4.com/
I was going to recommend this drop down menu that I have used
- www.brainjar.com -as it gives a real windows look and feel (if that is
what the client is after) except thatone looks better as it works in IE 5.01,
a drop down menu is like a site map on every page...
which could actually be quite helpful. I used to loathe them but I'm
being turned around as I realise that like flash, my hate was caused by
too many poor implementations rather than a flawed concept to begin with
Hi Gyrus!
I'm working on a new site for a friend, and I'm having trouble getting the horizontal nav list working in Opera (7/Win).
First of all, I couldn't see anything by viewing the HTML-Link in Opera. Was the CSS linked?
Anyone know Opera's quirks enough to help here?
As I'm a bit too tired
Hello Gyrus,
It was foretold that on 22-3-2004 @ 00:01:50 GMT+ (which was
1:01:50 where I live) Gyrus would mumble:
snipped a bit
G I'm floating the li elements left,
Do they have to be floated? Why not using display:inline? That way the
li are forced onto 1 line.
Maybe this helps
Chris Stratford wrote:
but as we all know - XHTML doesnt allow the TARGET attribute...
Let's not perpetuate misinformation here. You _can_ use the TARGET
attribute in XHTML. Check the replies to your 8/2/04 post titled XHTML
(OT??)
You'll find good information in the W3C's XHTML Abstract
Title: Message
Hello,
I have just joined the group and I must say I have enjoyed
the posts I have read through so far today (being the first day of membership
and all). I hail from across the sea in Portland, Oregon and even y'all are
Aussie's (one could say that is far better than beinga
On Mar 21, 2004, at 5:08 PM, theGrafixGuy wrote:
When a screen resolution is 800 x 600 - what is the Actual width of
the browser viewing area (taking the window borders into account). If
the page extends beyond the depth of the page and the browser adds a
scroll-bar, what is the width of the
Although menus have obvious benefits in access to a
large number of items, I'm not sure that they
translate well to web navigation.
Outside of a web page, drop-down menus are used for
function points, not navigation: change text size,
cut, copy, view source, etc. They're one-off actions
that
Hi Brian,
Welcome to the list!
How wide is each browser's viewport when set to 800x600? I know one way to
find out. Here is a link to screen shots of 20 different browsers:
http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=38651
You could (if you were incredibly keen) click on each thumbnail and
Title: Message
It
pays not to make sweeping statements about nationalities. You can't guarantee
that everybody is Aussie.
-Original Message-From:
theGrafixGuy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, 22
March 2004 12:09 PMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject:
RE: [WSG] drop down menus
Build you site flexable and not fixed, let it
expand from 640x480 to 1024x768
- Original Message -
From:
Cameron Adams
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2004 6:29
PM
Subject: RE: [WSG] Actual page width
(was: drop down menus)
I generally design to
I recently put up my first two commercial sites. I just ran them through
iCapture and on one of them the menu is not showing. The clients wanted a
dropdown, flyout menu so it is a JavaScript menu and takes a tad longer to
download - would this be the reason it is not showing or do you think there
Why is it some one always pipes up with that
answer?One would almost be led to believe that "flexible" is the answer to
everything.
Flexible will not be inscribed on the Pearly Gates and it
is not the Holy Grail of site design.
Flexible sites
are nice in certain cases,but as I inferred
On Mar 21, 2004, at 6:20 PM, Universal Head wrote:
Can anyone enlighten me on this ... my thumbnail pics have about 5
pixels space at the bottom in IE6 that I can't work out how to remove.
In the CSS I have specified height and width, and padding is 0, so who
knows where its coming from.
I ran
640 x 480 seems a bit big, how am I meant to view it
on my 320 pixel phone?
--
Cameron Adams
W: www.themaninblue.com
--- Bernie Howe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Build you site flexable and not fixed, let it expand
from 640x480 to 1024x768
- Original Message -
From: Cameron
The space is *within* the border (ie padding), not outside it (ie margin). These margins allow the floated thumbnails to stay 5px from each other.
Thanks anyway!
Peter
On 22/03/2004, at 1:50 PM, Maureen Beattie wrote:
I am not sure Peter if this is what you mean but you have specified margin:
Although I truly respect trust Russ' methods, I have to agree with
Justin on this one because IE on the mac is so notoriously uncompliant
and quirky it makes the stylesheet too hard to manage. Justin's
comment usage is a better way, although I was unaware of it and will
need to study up on
Maureen,
The clients wanted a
dropdown, flyout menu so it is a JavaScript menu and takes a tad
longer to
download - would this be the reason it is not showing or do you think
there
is a problem on the Macs/Safari? I would appreciate it if someone on a
Mac
could do a quick site check for me
Hi Peter,
The problem with this method is that it confuses the user. I looked at
this
site last night with your previous problem and was very surprised by
the
action when I clicked on About AMCS.
Clicking on a navbar item should do what all other navbars do, take
you to
the page.
Visually,
Damn - doesn't seem to work for me despite trying out several permutations! Any other ideas?
Peter
Can anyone enlighten me on this ... my thumbnail pics have about 5 pixels space at the bottom in IE6 that I can't work out how to remove. In the CSS I have specified height and width, and padding
Maureen,
The drop-down menu does have a problem on IE5.3 Mac. I get a Microsoft
JScript error message:
Line: 196
Char: 2
Error: Invalid procedure call or argument.
This error message is triggered when rolling the cursor over the menu.
IE Mac also treats your picture badly, running its frame
Maureen,
I found the site was extremely slow to load in both Safari and Firefox
on Mac, and still pretty slow on IE Win. However, the problem only
existed on the first page, which suggests that whatever the problem is,
it's being cached so that future pages don't suffer from the same
Peter
From an interface building POV it's a matter of audience function. If
your site has reference-based informational content and caters to a
large percentage of users who need this information and time is
important to them, then one-click popup menus are necessary. However,
as a artistic
On Sunday, March 21, 2004, at 08:08 PM, theGrafixGuy wrote:
and even y'all are Aussie's
This list might be based in AU but it is international. Like myself (New York) there are over 50 members in the USA represented on this list.
Leo
Peter
Sounds like a trip on the Magical Mystery Whitespace Tour (sponsored by
Microsoft). I had this problem while back with a nested list, threw
things at the screen in the end to try and fix it. Luckily calmness
(counted to 32768 backwards) prevailed and I ended up rejigging the
complete
Peter
I'd try neutralizing the default for the span tags that you're using in the html in place of list items. Set a rule for those specific spans to margin 0 because IE screws the rendering in default. And to be safe 0 the padding as well.
Leo
On Sunday, March 21, 2004, at 10:24 PM,
James, I greatly appreciate you getting stuck into this. I'll let you know how it goes.
Thanks again
Peter
On 22/03/2004, at 3:09 PM, James Ellis wrote:
Peter
Sounds like a trip on the Magical Mystery Whitespace Tour (sponsored by Microsoft). I had this problem while back with a nested list,
Maureen
The site 's sidebar menus work find in Safari 1.0 However the
horizontal rollover menu at the top right of the page has a flickering
problem probably due to a CSS sizing error.
Leo
On Sunday, March 21, 2004, at 09:29 PM, Maureen Beattie wrote:
a problem on the Macs/Safari? I would
Justin,
You make a lot of very good points.
However, a lot depends on the layout you are doing. For many layouts, I
don't think this should be necessary.
I generally do not run into major IE problems, or at least problems that are
not well documented (3 pixel jpg, box model, double margin,
Universal Head wrote:
Can anyone enlighten me on this ...
my thumbnail pics have about 5 pixels space at the bottom in IE6
that I can't work out how to remove. In the CSS I have specified
height and width, and padding is 0,.
http://www.cinema4duser.com/tech_feature01.html
Try adding
This maybe OT, but should be useful to all web developers on the list,
because a site ight well be standards compliant but if it takes 30
seconds to load than its still failing ...
http://www.webpageanalyzer.com/ - Web Page Analyzer - 0.82
Test your web site speed with our free web-based
Hey I wasn't meaning anything by saying y'all are Aussie's!
I was simply acknowledging the Aussie origination of the
group and the Kiwi proximity with out resorting to "baa-aa-aad" jokes relating
to sheep. Additionally, my typing faster than my eyes could catch the missed
letters, led to
A general note to all.
Due to the increase in traffic, probably better to send Thanks emails that
contain nothing else directly to the sender rather than to the list.
Thanks,
Peter
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
I use this tool a lot when I am optimizing my code to see how much I saved
(every byte adds time!).
Using this tool, you can see just how much fat there is in your code. I have
literally shaved off 50% off of some pages.
Unfortunately, while it is possible to build a web page that will get
Neerav blurted out:
This maybe OT, but should be useful to all web developers on the list,
because a site ight well be standards compliant but if it takes 30
seconds to load than its still failing ...
I wouldn't say it was offtopic. Something like this could be used to
demonstrate the
Or...how about drawing a clear conclusion to the problem. It's a bit
frustrating going through list/forum archives when a thread covering a
problem that seems to be like your own suddenly dries up.
If the thanks specifies the solution to the problem then I think it's
very valuable. Perhaps we
Robert Moser wrote:
Something like this could be used to
demonstrate the advantages of using CSS vs table layout.
The only problem I can see is images referenced in the CSS are not taken
into account
Jason
*
The discussion list for
Thanks for your reply Justin - I was a bit surprised when you said it was
slow loading as I hadn't noticed that. I checked it out with on
www.websiteoptimization.com and one of the things they cautioned on was the
size of the CSS file. I didn't realise that could be an issue so it is
something
Thank you Hugh for your reply.
you wrote ..I get a Microsoft JScript error message: This error
message is triggered when rolling the cursor over the menu
Not too sure about that, I will have to look into it further. Also your
comments on the highlinks is noted. Not sure why I put a
Nor is the fact that stylesheets (and images, for that matter) are
cached. You're only comparing a first hit on one page. One of the
beauties of CSS is that once you're past that first page, and into
other pages on the site, you're not going to be downloading table code
again and again and
I think the reason for that is that the structure of the page is built and
the images can d/l while the the content is in place and the reader can
begin seeing something atleast.
This tool (which I discovered last month as part of a plug-in for Mozilla
and Firefox) sold me the rest of the way on
I don't know what the usual procedure is, but the float property does
require a width to be specified, so I think you probably have two choices.
Not anymore. CSS 2.1 changes this, because browsers didn't bother when
'width' isn't specified.
--
Anne van Kesteren
http://annevankesteren.nl/
You could incase it in a div and float the div then the image doesn't
need a width
Leo
On Monday, March 22, 2004, at 01:46 AM, Hugh Todd wrote:
Maureen,
I don't know what the usual procedure is, but the float property does
require a width to be specified, so I think you probably have two
57 matches
Mail list logo
