Brett Walsh wrote::
I thought there might be a restriction on the number of sheets
allowed. Is there?
The number of stylesheets is obviously not the problem in your case, but
maybe someone like to know...
Don't know of any standard limit, but I tested it a while back.
- 50 link rel= / no problem
Hi Gunlaug,
That was pretty well it. Note in your example the width is applied to
the ul#subscribe li a which when taken literally was pretty silly and
IE 5 took it literally; widening just the link in the ul to 285px.
All I needed to do was move that width setting to the ul and the column
is
Hi Anura,
According to WCAG20, the ALT text for English should be less than 100
characters. Here is the link:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/test3.html
If memory serves me right, for Section 508, the limit is 80 characters.
Regards,
-Vlad
http://xstandard.com
Standards-compliant XHTML
Anyone out there got any experience of adding a fully devised compliant
template to Contribute to let the content owners manage their own pages ?
Is it simply a case of defining the editable regions or should you build the
site and then define the content that can be changed?
Was planning on
Hi Sam
Whilsts not completely off-topic, this is relevant:
It depends on the complexity of the CSS code for layout
Macromedia's Contribute uses the same page-render engine as Dreamweaver, and we
all know what that's like to work with ;)
Well, provided your design doesn't use floats, different
John Allsopp wrote:
OK,
thanks for all the answers, I buy them :-)
That would be four cents then, please. Anything else?
;-)
Jeroen Visser
--
vizi fotografie grafisch ontwerp - http://www.vizi.nl/
**
The discussion list for
Hi All,
I just launched a site for a client that is database driven and uses an
external style sheet site to control the site's design. I granted my
client permission to update only the content using Contribute for certain
interior pages, which won't effect the page's layout.
Also, I must admit
Hallo!
From about 10 minutes worth of internet research and Googling, one can come to the conclusion that despite the iframe tag being depreciated (read: invalid), you can quite easily bring back the functionality with the object tag
Well, we all know that said method simply doesn't work :) (Once
On 16/12/04 3:04 AM, david [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Sam
Whilsts not completely off-topic, this is relevant:
It depends on the complexity of the CSS code for layout
Macromedia's Contribute uses the same page-render engine as Dreamweaver, and
we all know what that's like to work with
Return Receipt
Your Re: [WSG] Modular XHTML with iFrames, eh?
document
:
On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine as
Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with the
layout.
Are you sure? Some time ago there was a deal between Macromedia and Opera:
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2002/07/20020702.dml
(oh, and
Your two example pages look identical to me.
Running Firefox 1.0 on Windows XP
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 00:18:49 +0100, JohnyB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It looks that the body style is applied only to the content area, not to
the whole viewport, as it used to. It can be solved by styling html
Hi guys,
I was just wondering whether any of you have used the Dean Edwards
Javascript for IE7 (http://dean.edwards.name/ie7) and what the general
opinion on it is?
To be honest I am bit hesitant to use it, as I don't want to rely on my
users having javascript turned on, but I guess the worst
yes but your second link is re-adobe on apple and the first is only
for Macromedia products on the Mac also:
Opera and Macromedia will work together to develop and maintain an
application programming interface (API) for an embedded browser on the
Mac platform, enabling further technical
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:40:49 +1100, Lindsay Evans [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Your two example pages look identical to me.
Running Firefox 1.0 on Windows XP
No difference in my Linux version of Firefox 1.0 too...
**
The discussion list for
Your two example pages look identical to me.
Running Firefox 1.0 on Windows XP
Sorry, my fault... Now it should be OK. (You've seen another interesting
fact - if html element has an attached bg, body always shrinks to fit
only the content)
--
Jan Brasna :: alphanumeric.cz | webcore.cz |
I've used IE7 a few times, but mainly just for enabling the :hover
psuedo-class on elements other than anchors.
I don't really have much of an opinion on it, considering that its stil
in Beta (0.7 last time I checked).
But as soon as the script supports more exotic CSS, such as attribute
difference between HTML and XHTML. This is usually referred to as BODY
not being magical anymore, and it's expected behaviour.
OK, thank you for information, I found it mentioned also in
http://www.mozilla.org/docs/web-developer/faq.html#xhtmldiff - new
feature to me, so I just wanted to find
The behaviour is correct, although my following eplanation may not be =-).
In xml body is just another tag -- the root element is html. When
sent as html the body tag is the root element. So when sending xml you
need to apply styles to html to style the entire viewport.
Terrence Wood.
On
On 16/12/04 10:50 AM, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wouldn't even be relying on my users having IE7, let alone JS being on or
off.
Hi Natalie,
Andreas is not referring to MS's official IE7 here, but an extensive
JavaScript solution (confusingly called IE7) that attempts to make
need to apply styles to html to style the entire viewport.
Well, actually this behavior is also somehow magic :) - html is just
another element and is not connected to the viewport... So it might
someday be threated the same as now the body is :)
// Yes, I agree this behavior is alright and I
I Know - I think everyone missed my second post that states as much :)
From: Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:54:13 +1100
Subject: Re: [WSG] using IE7 script
Oh Hang on, I just read the MS forum on the issue.
IE7 isn't
I can say with 99% certainty the rendering is not IE nor Safari it is
Macromedia's own rendering engine. In C3 when you browse web pages you get
Safari or IE but when you click edit it flips to MM's own rendering engine.
C3 was an improved rendering engine over Dreamweaver MX 2004 and the upgrade
I wouldn't even be relying on my users having IE7, let alone JS being on or off.
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 15:41:50 -0800, Andreas Boehmer
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
I was just wondering whether any of you have used the Dean Edwards
Javascript for IE7 (http://dean.edwards.name/ie7) and
On 16/12/04 11:16 AM, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I Know - I think everyone missed my second post that states as much :)
Actually, a little bit OT, but I often receive posts out of order or out of
sync, so my post actually went off long before your second post arrived. I
think this
On 14 Dec 2004, at 23:10, Barry Beattie wrote:
we're building a large web app where JS is vital to make it work.
Things
like modal windows, tabbed data entry forms, RPC data exchange with
xmlhttprequest, xml manip within the page, etc.
[snip]
Trying to run it on NN4, PDA's and mobile devices just
Hi
Can anyone tell me why when using classes sometimes I can style the a by
itself (e.g. .myclass a) and other times this doesn't work and I have to
style a:link (i.e. .myclass a:link)
Any pointers would be appreciated.
Thanks
Helen
***
Helen Rysavy
isn't the DWMX editor essentially homesite anyway? I'm a mac user so
I've never seen or used homesite.
Terrence Wood.
On 2004-12-16 2:39 PM, heretic wrote:
Realistically... we probably could have stuck with HomeSite :)
--
You know you've achieved perfection in design, not when you have
nothing
a:link is for a href
a is for a mailto or a id or similar.
a:link only applies if there is an href within the a.
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 12:02:10 +0930, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
Can anyone tell me why when using classes sometimes I can style the a by
itself (e.g. .myclass
Hi all
This is a good discussion, lets try and keep it on how to apply the
mentioned software to create standards compliant content rather than a
rundown of its various features and comparison to other software.
Cheers
James
admin
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 13:41:42 +1100, Natalie Buxton
Start at the beginning. If you want to style every a element on the page,
you can do:
a:link { color: red;}
If you want to style a particular link, you can do it using a direct id or
class applied within a link like this:
HTML - a class=foo href=#text/a
CSS - a:link.foo { color: green;}
Or
russ - maxdesign wrote:
If you want to style a particular link, you can do it using a direct id or
class applied within a link like this:
HTML - a class=foo href=#text/a
CSS - a:link.foo { color: green;}
Although the above CSS seems to work, I believe that the more correct
form for this selector
Alright, so, I am out of ideas...
page : http://apathy.jtsage.com/
css: http://apathy.jtsage.com/wp-layout.css
is there any way that the effect achieved in firefox / mozilla can be
achieved in IE/Win as well? (that of the multiple background images
with the one under the content div being
Although the above CSS seems to work, I believe that the more correct
form for this selector is
a.foo:link
Quite correct! Written in a hurry.
My apologies
Russ
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?) not sure which
browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect is the one in
firefox.
Actually, you were referring to:
background-attachment:
On 16/12/04 2:29 PM, Jonathan T. Sage [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alright, so, I am out of ideas...
page : http://apathy.jtsage.com/
css: http://apathy.jtsage.com/wp-layout.css
is there any way that the effect achieved in firefox / mozilla can be
achieved in IE/Win as well? (that of the
Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
Alright, so, I am out of ideas...
...
My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?) not sure which
browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect is the one in
firefox.
anyway, would
This may be too obvious to mention, but one reason why the formatting
of a:link doesn't work might be that it's actually an a:visited and
therefore *supposed* to be a different colour.
The developers' toolbar in FireFox will reset all links for you
(under Miscellaneous) so that you can at
Thanks for that link, it makes interesting reading.
There are two options for passing this requirement The ALT attribute
value must be less than 100 characters for English text or the user
must confirm that the Alt text is as short as possible.
Well, I am trying to describe some complex images,
On Wed, 15 Dec 2004 21:46:55 -0600, Charles Martin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jonathan T. Sage wrote:
My problem is that IE/Win does not support background-position: fixed
in the same way that gecko does (or at all maybe?) not sure which
browser 'get's it right' here, but the desired effect
Just to add into the conversation... the Queensland Government has
done HEAPS in regarding to CUE across most (but still not quite) all.
The best place to start is:
http://www.qld.gov.au/departments/index.html
You'll note that even when you move sites (which often means moving
departments)
I went to do a search on public holidays (which I am compiling from
all Government Websites) and being a proud WA girl, thought our site
would be the best.
Visit
http://www.docep.wa.gov.au/lr/LabourRelations/Content/Wages%20and%20Conditions/Public%20Holidays/Public_Holidays.html
for the
Hi Nick
Your site (docep) is fine, it's the main site that is a killer. It is
completely un-accessible to say the least.
I understand it hasn't been touched since 2001 - and that would
certainly explain it.
Regarding that link - that was another of my peeves. The average
person isn't going to
Nick Lo wrote:
I've just released...
http://www.mccn.org.au/
...and realised a little late that some last minute tweaks (possibly)
have thrown out the Stay Informed column on the home page in PC IE
5.
Some stuff in there widens the column in IE5/win.
For a start, take out (or hack) the width:
Just installed this. Very cool. :-)
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
mlinc.com
russ - maxdesign wrote:
Well, John and Maxine must have been busy...
Westciv's Complete CSS Guide is now available as a free CSS podGuide for
the iPod:
http://www.westciv.com/news/podguide.html
Interesting
From about 10 minutes worth of internet research and Googling, one can come to
the conclusion that despite the iframe tag being depreciated (read:
invalid), you can quite easily bring back the functionality with the
object tag
Well, we all know that said method simply doesn't work :) (Once
Hi Mario and all,
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 7:45 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Standards Macromedia Contribute
Also, I must admit I'm growing rather weary of all the negative remarks
about Dreamweaver. From my humble perspective I use
Sort of:
http://pole.uwaterloo.ca/cpadev/engtest/index.html
I am currently working on a template that keeps to KISS so not to drive some
folks insane but can be maintained in C3. Just about to hit it with JAWS and
the ilk. I have had a couple students that rely on JAWS try it out and they
have
On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine as
Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with the
layout.
However, your client would have to have a Mac. :)
-Hugh Todd
On 16/12/2004, at 3:04 AM, david wrote:
Macromedia's Contribute uses the same
Kevin Futter wrote:
Actually, at a Macromedia seminar I attended last year, Bob Regan told us
that the Contribute render engine was definitely NOT the same as
Dreamweaver's
My bad, I was thinking of Contribute 2
Still... there isn't a single renderer out there that is 100% standards
compliant,
Hi all,
I've come across a weird thing - Gecko browsers in XHTML 1.1 with
Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml render the visual style of the body
element in a bit different way than without this header (so the SGML
parser processes it differently than the XML parser). You can see it
here -
Kornel,
Yes, I'm sure.
http://www.macromedia.com/software/contribute/productinfo/features/
static_tour/mac/
On the Mac, Contribute uses the same (system-level) rendering engine
as Safari, which means you should not get any nasty surprises with
the layout.
Are you sure? Some time ago there
JohnyB wrote:
I've come across a weird thing - Gecko browsers in XHTML 1.1 with
Content-Type: application/xhtml+xml render the visual style of the body
element in a bit different way than without this header
[...]
It looks that the body style is applied only to the content area, not to
the
Oh Hang on, I just read the MS forum on the issue.
IE7 isn't actually IE7, its a JS. My Badtrade;
To quote:
Re: Firefox Users IE 7 is coming
In: microsoft.public.windowsxp.general
As far as I can tell, this isn't an official new browser. It's merely the
name of a JavaScript API that
Kornel,
Opera is the only browser I know that supports replacing elements with
generated content and positioning of generated content.
Safari supports this:
http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/hyatt/archives/2003_12.html#004377 (see
note 18). Dave Hyatt is the development leader on Safari.
:) Hugh
Are you sure? Some time ago there was a deal between Macromedia and
Opera:
http://www.opera.com/pressreleases/en/2002/07/20020702.dml
(oh, and Apple: http://www.macminute.com/2003/09/30/opera)
Not Apple. Adobe.
oops. It was supposed to be and Adobe.
Test it:
body {content: It's Opera;}
You
Hi all (hmm, this would be a de-lurk..),
Also, I must admit I'm growing rather weary of all the negative remarks
about Dreamweaver. From my humble perspective I use Dreamweaver MX 2004
I must say I agree. As with all tools, you find out how best to use them and
what (if any) downsides there
I did install it briefly to check it out. I think I found it to be slow?
I didn't really investigate it. I also think it was an all or nothing
solutions? Maybe it wasn't. I would like a version
that I could scale to alow do a few small things like sibling selectors
and such. I was thinking of
Andreas Boehmer wrote:
Does anybody have prior experiences with it?
We use it for all our sites, and have found it to be excellent. We only
load it for IE, so other browsers are not forced to download it, and we
have configure Apache to force the browsers to cache the javascript
file, so it is
This is probably getting OT...
The DW editor isn't much like homesite at all anymore.
Many more advanced features. It is worth downloading the free demo and
having a look using CODE VIEW. Lots of built in things I like - the
Oreilly's pocket guides, the inbuilt validation controls and the
http://www.wa.gov.au/
Has anyone here been to this site recently?
I went to do a search on public holidays (which I am compiling from
all Government Websites) and being a proud WA girl, thought our site
would be the best.
Alas, I was wrong and it's killing me how poor it is in relation to
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:05:49 +1100, Natalie Buxton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip http://www.wa.gov.au/ snip
Alas, I was wrong and it's killing me how poor it is in relation to
standards, accessibility and usability.
I know some of the people involved with upgrading the web sites for
the entire
62 matches
Mail list logo
