Re: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Philippe Wittenbergh]

On Aug 29, 2007, at 12:43 PM, Kepler Gelotte wrote:


And if the link text were to long for the space allowed by the table
(e.g. a very very long word), the table should expand, unless the
table has 'table-layout: fixed' specified.


The table should expand even though he specified width="175"? I learn
something new every day.

Try this:


And yes that is the expected behaviour. 'Width' on table and td/th is  
more like 'min-width' (idem dito for 'height').


Philippe
---
Philippe Wittenbergh






***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Kepler Gelotte]

> And if the link text were to long for the space allowed by the table  
> (e.g. a very very long word), the table should expand, unless the  
> table has 'table-layout: fixed' specified.

The table should expand even though he specified width="175"? I learn
something new every day.

Regards,
Kepler



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Philippe Wittenbergh]

On Aug 29, 2007, at 10:47 AM, Kepler Gelotte wrote:


I don’t think it is a bug. First of all you are not overriding the
white-space property buy assigning it to child elements or parent  
elements.
You just create a conflict. Then precedence takes affect. According  
to the

CSS2 spec:

'white-space'
Value:  normal | pre | nowrap | inherit
Initial:  normal
Applies to:  block-level elements
Inherited: yes
Percentages:  N/A
Media: visual

Since you applied the “white-space: normal” to a  element  
which is not
a block-level element it is ignored. By changing the  to a  
 *or*
adding “display:block” to the span’s style, you will get the effect  
you were

expecting.


But in the testcase, the white-space property is applied to the   
(in the head: a {white-pace:nowrap})

Firefox 2.0.0.x should _ignore_ that as well.

Anyway, my Gecko trunk builds (Minefield 20070828 and Camino trunk  
build) correctly wrap the text the same way Safari and WebKit wrap  
the text (ignore the white-pace:nowrap).

So Firefox 3.0 will display correctly.

And if the link text were to long for the space allowed by the table  
(e.g. a very very long word), the table should expand, unless the  
table has 'table-layout: fixed' specified.


Philippe
---
Philippe Wittenbergh
<http://emps.l-c-n.com>





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

RE: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Kepler Gelotte]

Hi, 

I don’t think it is a bug. First of all you are not overriding the
white-space property buy assigning it to child elements or parent elements.
You just create a conflict. Then precedence takes affect. According to the
CSS2 spec:

'white-space' 
Value:  normal | pre | nowrap | inherit 
Initial:  normal 
Applies to:  block-level elements 
Inherited: yes 
Percentages:  N/A 
Media: visual

Since you applied the “white-space: normal” to a  element which is not
a block-level element it is ignored. By changing the  to a  *or*
adding “display:block” to the span’s style, you will get the effect you were
expecting.

Regards,
Kepler



From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Julián Landerreche
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 9:10 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

Hi all.
First: sorry, I'm double posting this on two lists so anyone can confirm
this (before reporting to Mozilla).

The issue is simple (you will "see it better" by just creating a testing
html with the snippet below): 

- there is a "white-space:nowrap" property (in the stylesheet) applied to
the  element .
- then, that rule is override with some inline styling applied
("white-space:normal") on two elements: one that wraps the  elements and
one that is wrapped by the  element (that also contains the text). 
- the text  inside the  elements is a very very very long link.
- and the link is inside a table with a fixed with.
- every tested browser (but FF) honors both the width of the table and the
"white-space:normal" applied to both the parent and children of the 
elements. 
- but Firefox just expands the table width and doesn't break the link in
multiple lines as expected.
 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Nick Gleitzman]

Julián Landerreche wrote:


I have tested this in:
 - Firefox 2.0.0.6 (both Win and Linux)


Hmm. Not convinced that it's a bug; your line-wrapped link appears as 
you want in FF2.0.0.6/Mac OSX - ?


To look at the issue laterally, if your fixed-width table requires that 
long links wrap, why invoke the no-wrap rule at all? Obviously this 
snippet gives no clue as to the broader context, but what if you leave 
white-space at its default setting of normal - by omitting it?


N
___
omnivision. websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

[WSG] Firefox bug on CSS white-space property

[Julián Landerreche]

Hi all.
First: sorry, I'm double posting this on two lists so anyone can confirm
this (before reporting to Mozilla).

The issue is simple (you will "see it better" by just creating a testing
html with the snippet below):

- there is a "white-space:nowrap" property (in the stylesheet) applied to
the  element .
- then, that rule is override with some inline styling applied
("white-space:normal") on two elements: one that wraps the  elements and
one that is wrapped by the  element (that also contains the text).
- the text  inside the  elements is a very very very long link.
- and the link is inside a table with a fixed with.
- every tested browser (but FF) honors both the width of the table and the
"white-space:normal" applied to both the parent and children of the 
elements.
- but Firefox just expands the table width and doesn't break the link in
multiple lines as expected.

The snippet:

http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="es" lang="es">


Test

   table {background-color: #efefef;}
   a {white-space:nowrap;}







Very very very very very very very
very very very very very very very long link







I have tested this in:
- Firefox 2.0.0.6 (both Win and Linux)
- IE6
- IE7
- Opera 9.22/Win
- Safari 3 beta.

The only one that isn't working as expected is Mozilla Firefox.

Please, if someone can confirm this issue as a bug and tell me exactly how
to report it to Mozilla (or even better, if someone has some experience
reporting bugs to Mozilla)...

Thanks and sorry for my english.
Julián


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Understanding Apache Logs

[Marghanita da Cruz]

Pierre-Henri Lavigne wrote:

Good day all,

Do you know an online resource please where i can get informations to 
understand in a better way apache logs ?



You could check out AWSTATS and Webalizer - which provide statistical analysis 
of Apache Logs.


I've just read this odd stuff for example : 
80.118.33.228 - - [28/Aug/2007:10:37:25 +0200] "GET /img/bg_body.gif HTTP/1.1" 404 14360 "-" "Mozilla/4.5 [fr]C-CCK-MCD   (WinNT; I)"

80.118.33.228 - - [28/Aug/2007:10:37:26 +0200] "GET /img/bg_containerOuter.gif HTTP/1.1" 404 
14360 "-" "Mozilla/4.5 [fr]C-CCK-MCD   (WinNT; I)

In the css :
body { background:#fff url(../img/bg_body.gif) repeat-x top left; 
font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:71%; color:#66; }
#containerOuter { background:url(../img/bg_containerOuter.gif) no-repeat top 
center; min-height:684px; height:auto !important; height:684px; }

I suppose it's an error with browsers that misunderstood the  added by Typo3 ?
Solution is using as usual absolute url in css file I suppose.

About my previous post with select in IE 6, no solutions, and my try with 
line-height doesn't change anything.

Regards,

Pierre-Henri



 






  Faites des appels de PC à PC dans le monde entier ! Essayez le nouveau Yahoo! Québec Messenger avec Voix. 
http://cf.messenger.yahoo.com/



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***





--
Marghanita da Cruz
http://www.ramin.com.au
Phone: (+61)0414 869202


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] will Eric Meyer?s CSS SCULPTOR put me out of job?

[Terrence Wood]

Tee G. Peng:
what you do guys think of [CSS Sculptor]... PVll CSS layout Magic,  
and the Google Blueprint?


Using pencil and paper to write won't make you a great novelist.  
Using better tools, like a computer, to write still won't make you a  
great novelist.


Same deal with ready made libraries - they won't replace great  
craftmanship, and in most circumstances you need to understand the  
craft to make the most of them anyway.


Personally, I have used code snippets (from single lines, to complete  
generic layouts) for as long as I can remember - it just makes sense.


For the record blueprint is not a google product, it's just hosted   
at google code.


kind regards,
Terrence Wood.





***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] Understanding Apache Logs

[Matthew Cruickshank]

Pierre-Henri Lavigne wrote:

I suppose it's an error with browsers that misunderstood the  added by Typo3 ?
  


Paths in CSS are resolved relative to the CSS, not to the HTML, so I'd 
think that  wouldn't have any effect.


(by the way... is four dots even valid? Presumably it should be "../.." ?)



.Matthew Cruickshank
http://docvert.org/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

[WSG] Understanding Apache Logs

[Pierre-Henri Lavigne]

Good day all,

Do you know an online resource please where i can get informations to 
understand in a better way apache logs ?

I've just read this odd stuff for example : 
80.118.33.228 - - [28/Aug/2007:10:37:25 +0200] "GET /img/bg_body.gif HTTP/1.1" 
404 14360 "-" "Mozilla/4.5 [fr]C-CCK-MCD   (WinNT; I)"
80.118.33.228 - - [28/Aug/2007:10:37:26 +0200] "GET /img/bg_containerOuter.gif 
HTTP/1.1" 404 14360 "-" "Mozilla/4.5 [fr]C-CCK-MCD   (WinNT; I)

In the css :
body { background:#fff url(../img/bg_body.gif) repeat-x top left; 
font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size:71%; color:#66; }
#containerOuter { background:url(../img/bg_containerOuter.gif) no-repeat top 
center; min-height:684px; height:auto !important; height:684px; }

I suppose it's an error with browsers that misunderstood the  added by Typo3 ?
Solution is using as usual absolute url in css file I suppose.

About my previous post with select in IE 6, no solutions, and my try with 
line-height doesn't change anything.

Regards,

Pierre-Henri



 





  Faites des appels de PC à PC dans le monde entier ! Essayez le nouveau 
Yahoo! Québec Messenger avec Voix. 
http://cf.messenger.yahoo.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] W3C CSS Validation Service

[Devi Web Development]

The online validators are all still kept separate, although work on unicorn
( http://www.w3.org/QA/Tools/Unicorn/ ) is moving, if slowly. However, the
LogValidator is a server tool which includes html, xhtml, and css
validators. It can be found at http://www.w3.org/QA/Tools/LogValidator/


--
Daniel Brumbaugh Keeney
Devi Web Development
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

On 8/25/07, Joyce Evans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>  I used to validate my XHTML at one W3C URL, and then there was another
> URL where I validated my CSS style sheet(s).  It seems this has been
> combined so that I can now validate both my CSS style sheet and my XHTML
> markup at this URL:  http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/.  I'd like to
> verify that this is a correct observation on my part.
>
>
>
> Also, I used to think I had to validate every single page of a website I
> developed (they've all been small websites).  Today, I typed in only the URL
> for the website I wanted to validate, and I received the message that no
> error was found.  I'd like to verify this as well – that I only need to type
> in the website's URL and not each individual page.
>
>
>
> Thank you for responding to what are probably elementary questions.
>
>
>
> Joyce
>

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***

Re: [WSG] will Eric Meyer's CSS SCULPTOR put me out o f job?

[Al Sparber]

From: "Tee G. Peng" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Al, I am not afraid you CSS Layout Magic will put me out of job  because I 
saw some of your customers managed to mess up your layout  and I actually 
helped a few to clean up their messes :)


Why didn't you just say what you meant, then :-)

Not saying  your extension is not good or not as good as  the CSS 
Sculptor,  besides, I am in no position to compare because I never use 
either of  them.


What prompted me to ask this question is because, I guess, the  impression 
I got is the way it's being advertised- "The ultimate Web  standards 
compliant CSS layout"


I own both and prefer mine. I believe they prefer theirs. We try not to use 
words like "best" and certainly never use "ultimate", though "definitive" is 
cool so long as someone else is describing your work as such.



I see so many web designers using CSS without a bit of understanding  of 
semantical and structural markup, and the way I see it, the way  they do 
with the div classes is nothing different than the table  layout, so I 
always thought extension like yours provides a good  ground however, 
exactly like you're saying "You have to have a basic  understanding of CSS 
and markup to use these tools to their full  potential".


Yeah. Whether you get that info from our free support channels, or from 
lists like this one, or from people like you, it's the same thing. We make 
our living selling tools for Dreamweaver users and sometimes we get hammered 
for it in subtle and not-so-subtle ways... but we are no different from any 
good web developer, even the ones who assert that everything should be open 
source and free except for the bills they send their clients.



Guess it probably just a marketing gimmick to market an extension  as 
"The ultimate Web standards compliant CSS layout", but I respect Eric 
Meyer so much (no he doesn't know my existence) that I want to  believe 
"The ultimate Web standards compliant CSS layout" is exactly  as it 
advertised, that it really can help many web designers to use  the CSS and 
markup correctly, semantically and structurally. If so, I  may even 
consider to purchase it myself to help enchance my  production :)


It is a gimmick, and I do respect Eric too, but sometimes when talent meets 
marketing hyperbole reigns. I'm old enough to remember when one of my 
favorite acronyms was still fresh:


K.I.S.S.

"Keep it simple, stupid".

Web developers can sometimes over-code and web tool developers sometimes 
over-program.


--
Al Sparber - PVII
http://www.projectseven.com
Extending Dreamweaver - Nav Systems | Galleries | Widgets
Authors: "42nd Street: Mastering the Art of CSS Design"




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
***