Re: [css-d] css validation error

[Ingo Chao]

The html validator indicates a BOM in addition


-- 
http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html
http://www.dolphinsback.com
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] [ADMIN - OFF TOPIC] Re: New CSS/html tools?..

[Alex Robinson]

>Aren't Mac people always bragging about how their machines can run Windows
>better than a PC can? Shouldn't be a problem then... :)


This is all completely off topic. It would have been ruled so earlier 
but evidently us moderators were either sleeping or dead.

This list has 8500+ members and a
purpose to discuss CSS, rather than one's choice of editor /
scripting language / operating system / monitor and desktop
arrangement etc...

 http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=OffTopic


We have a perfectly good page on the wiki

http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=CssEditors


Discussion of editors stays there please.

ie. this thread now over. Thanks.



Alex Robinson
css-d moderator
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Curious question inspired by the X-UA compatible thread

[david]

Alex Robinson wrote:
> At 22:36 -1000 9/3/08, david wrote:
>> If you have an HTML document that happens to contain another HTML
>> document in an iframe - and one of the two documents triggers quirks
>> mode when rendered by itself - is each one rendered in the same mode or
>> does the browser somehow do one in standards mode and one in quirks mode?
> 
> I've updated (and moved, but the previous address still works)
> 
> http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/cssjunk/ie8/xuas
> 
> You can now change the X-UA target and the mode of the document that 
> calls the iframed documents.
> 
> I can see no difference at all in how the iframe content is rendered 
> regardless of the containing document's X-UA or mode.
> 
> So, in answer to your question, the latter. Iframed documents 
> rendering is exactly the same as if they were being displayed outside 
> of an iframe.

Thanks, Alex. It's something I realize that I was wondering about, but 
have only twice in my whole life actually used an iframe for anything!

> NB. of course there may be some as yet undiscovered condition that 
> does cause things to break down (and I make no claims about what the 
> different versions of javascript are doing in each iframe).

I would guess that Javascript is independent of document type. Also, any 
given brower has only ONE Javscript implementation ... but, yes, maybe 
there could be a difference, depending on what version of Javascript 
being indicated by a script's type.

-- 
David
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authenticity, honesty, community
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Diff between display:none and visibility:hidden

[Jeff Gates]

Last night I replaced visability:hidden with display:none in my 
implementation of Lightbox's slideshow. It works fine (and just as 
described, the extra space that the visibility property put on my page has 
now been eliminated with the display property).

It's not necessary for accessibility for a reader to "see" this code as 
it's only required to make the slideshow feature work. I haven't, in all 
honesty, looked into the accessibility issues with Lightbox per se. 

> > I know that one difference between display:none and visibility:hidden is 
> > that the former does not leave space in the layout where the code exists 
> > on the page, while the latter does. Are there other differences?

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] Missed the obvious Re: IE7 spacing blowout problem on Stu Nicholls' "Snazzy Borders" code

[Eriol Hiragizawa]

Hi Susan,
Thanks for pointing that out.  I completely missed something that obvious.  Ugh.
Thank you again.

--Stephen

On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Susan Grossman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>  You need to remove padding/margin from the form itself:
>
> form {
> margin:0;
> padding:0;
> }
>
> --
> Susan R. Grossman
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Targeting IE8 (was: IE8 is better but still slightly broken)

[Thierry Koblentz]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> discuss.org] On Behalf Of Alan Gresley
> Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 7:50 AM
> To: Mark Richards
> Cc: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
> Subject: Re: [css-d] Targeting IE8 (was: IE8 is better but still slightly
> broken)
> 
> 
> > > /*\*//*/
> > > @import url("test-ie8.css");
> > > @import("test-ie.css");
> > > /**/
> > > @import test-ie; /* For IE5~7/Win */
> >
> > You seriously feel the above code is more readable, maintainable, and
> > logical compared to this:
> >
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Yes I do. I have changed my import slightly.
> 
> 
> /*\*//*/
> @import url("test-ie8.css");
> @import("test-ie.css"); /* IE/Mac */
> @import test-ie; /* For IE5~7/Win */
> 
> 
> The above code appears on "one" CSS file. I know exactly what it does.
First
> we have the beginning of the IE/Mac pass band filter. Both IE/Mac and IE8
see
> /*/ as /**/ so they parse there respective imports. The filter is closed
here
> /* IE/Mac */ and IE7 uses the next import. Only the first import is valid.
> 
> Anyhow, I was surfing and I have stumbled on to a new IE8 hack. Some list
> member (Thierry!) has discovered that IE8 doesn't need the beginning
/*\*/. I
> haven't tested but I could just have.
> 
> /*/
> @import url("test-ie8.css"); /* IE8 */
> @import test-ie; /* For IE5~7/Win */
> 
> 
> I find all those linked style sheet redundant. You only need one. Even if
you
> had an extra one for IE, why can't you use the star html (* html) or
escapes
> within the style sheet to target or filter the difference versions of IE?
> 
> Thierry, come on, share what you discovered. :-)

Hi Alan,

I shared the "position:relative" fix for links, but that one is not my
finding.
I'm pretty sure this ie8 filter is called the Bruno hack ;)


-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com



__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] New CSS/html tools?..

[Cynthia M. Brumbaugh]

On 3/10/08 10:46 PM, "Karl Hardisty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On 11/03/2008, at 3:38 PM, Kathy Wheeler wrote:
> 
> On 11/03/2008, at 12:34 PM, Michael Stevens wrote:
>> WeBuilder from Bluementals
>> http://www.blumentals.net/webuilder/
> 
> WeBuilder is windows only.
> 
>> -Original Message-
>> Karl Jacobs
>> 
>> I'm really ready to dump BBedit, ...
> 
> BBedit is Mac only.
> 
> Unless Kar is dumping the Mac as well, WeBuilder will be of no use.
> 
> Pity, otherwise it looks interesting and I'm always on the lookout
> for better OS X editors with current doctype, CSS, javascript, DHTML
> (and optionally PHP) support myself.
> 
> Cheers,
> KathyW.
> __
> 
> As Karl suggested, I replied off list, and I recommended he take a
> look at Coda.  I'm taking a look myself (again) and hope it has moved
> on from infancy to perhaps a petulant teen, with the maturity that
> comes with age.  It is one of the few apps that does everything he
> requested.
> 
> One aspect to keep in mind is BBEdit has been around a very long
> time, and has the features and completeness that goes with this age.
> 
> Karl
> 
> mothership - http://mothership.co.nz

I have just started using Coda in the last few months and find it quite
useful. I am weaning myself away from Dreamweaver with some hand coding and
tables after 11 years and trying to learn css and all hand coding. I looked
at a few options and Coda just seemed to have everything I needed in one
tool. But I was already a huge fan of Transmit so I admit to a little bias.
Jeez, I just have to say, I remember when 'we' were thrilled BBEdit came out
and you didn't have to just use a text editor anymore. Things do come full
circle. I am really feeling old now.

Cynthia



> __
> css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
> List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
> List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
> Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

-- 
Cynthia M. Brumbaugh
Chek-Med Systems, Inc.
200 Grandview Avenue
Camp Hill, PA 17011
717-731-0717
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] how big is a space in ems?

[Jason Crosse]

I've got a pretty basic question. How wide is a typographical space 
in relative units? I want to pad a one-line element's left side so 
it looks like a space has been inserted.

Is there a reliable way of doing this (e.g 0.5ex;), or does is just 
depend on how big a given font's space is?

If it's dependent on the font, is there a traditional proportion 
that's widely used across popular fonts?
-- 
http://antanova.blogspot.com
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] how big is a space in ems?

[Nick Fitzsimons]

On Tue, March 11, 2008 4:58 pm, Jason Crosse wrote:
> I've got a pretty basic question. How wide is a typographical space
> in relative units? I want to pad a one-line element's left side so
> it looks like a space has been inserted.
>
> Is there a reliable way of doing this (e.g 0.5ex;), or does is just
> depend on how big a given font's space is?
>
> If it's dependent on the font, is there a traditional proportion
> that's widely used across popular fonts?

I don't know what tends to be the case in computer typography, but harking
back to my days of letterpress printing, apart from the em and en (0.5em)
spaces, there were thicks, mids and thins, also known as three-to-em,
four-to-em and five-to-em. Unless one was setting type with full
justification, when the spacing had to vary on a line-by-line and
word-by-word basis, the most common word spacing was a thick, or 1/3 of an
em - 0.33em should be accurate enough :-)

HTH,

Nick.
-- 
Nick Fitzsimons
http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/


__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] how big is a space in ems?

[Rob Emenecker]

> but harking back to my days of letterpress printing

And you've got the lead burn scars to prove it, right?



__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] how big is a space in ems?

[Rob Emenecker]

The width of a word space will vary depending upon the font you are working
with. In most cases it falls somewhere between a thin (1/3 em) and an en
(1/2 em) space. For web page treatments I usually just use 0.4em or 0.5em
for a standard width word space.

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jason Crosse
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 12:59 PM
To: CSS-Discuss
Subject: [css-d] how big is a space in ems?

I've got a pretty basic question. How wide is a typographical space 
in relative units? I want to pad a one-line element's left side so 
it looks like a space has been inserted.

Is there a reliable way of doing this (e.g 0.5ex;), or does is just 
depend on how big a given font's space is?

If it's dependent on the font, is there a traditional proportion 
that's widely used across popular fonts?


__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] how big is a space in ems?

[Jason Pruim]

On Mar 11, 2008, at 1:57 PM, Rob Emenecker wrote:

> The width of a word space will vary depending upon the font you are  
> working
> with. In most cases it falls somewhere between a thin (1/3 em) and  
> an en
> (1/2 em) space. For web page treatments I usually just use 0.4em or  
> 0.5em
> for a standard width word space.

I may be getting off topic but is there a specific reason you don't  
let the browser handle all of this? In other words, Why bother setting  
the space size on a fluid design rather then going for pixel perfect  
reproduction in print?

--

Jason Pruim
Raoset Inc.
Technology Manager
MQC Specialist
3251 132nd ave
Holland, MI, 49424-9337
www.raoset.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED]



__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] how big is a space in ems?

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Jason Crosse wrote:

> I've got a pretty basic question. How wide is a typographical space
> in relative units?

It's an interesting question, though not a CSS question as such. It may 
be relevant in CSS authoring, though, since you can turn a space into an 
element and then try to set its width. This would be somewhat tricky, 
though; instead, you would normally set padding or other properties for 
non-blank elements.

The width of the Ascii SPACE character varies by font. Moreover, when 
justification (text-align: justify) is applied, spaces may get stretched 
as needed.

Other space characters may have specific widths assigned to them, but 
they are generally more or useless in web authoring; see
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/chars/spaces.html

> I want to pad a one-line element's left side so
> it looks like a space has been inserted.

If I understand you correctly, you can just put a NO-BREAK SPACE 
(U+00A0) there, either as such (if you know how to type it - e.g., 
Alt+0160 works in most applications on Windows) or as the entity 
reference  . As a character, it is a clone of SPACE with the added 
feature that it is "non-breaking" when formatting text into lines. In 
practice, it has the same width as SPACE, though it is not stretchable 
in justification.

> Is there a reliable way of doing this (e.g 0.5ex;), or does is just
> depend on how big a given font's space is?

The ex unit is not really reliable for anything, because IE incorrectly 
implements it as half of em whereas e.g. Firefox correctly implements it 
as the x-height of the font, which is in practice always either smaller 
or larger than 0.5em. I have a web page about this, don't I... 
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/x-height.html

But you don't need the ex unit here, or CSS at all for this purpose, 
unless I misunderstood your question.

> If it's dependent on the font, is there a traditional proportion
> that's widely used across popular fonts?

Microsoft's typography page (which is not to be taken as an authority, 
just as a description of an important manufacturer's approach) says:

- The minimum value should be no less than 1/5 the em, which is 
equivalent to the value of a thin space in traditional typesetting.

- For an average width font a good value is ~1/4 the em.

- For a wide width font a good value is ~1/3 the em.

- The maximum width should be no greater than 1/2 the em, which is 
equivalent to the en space of a typeface.

http://www.microsoft.com/typography/developers/fdsspec/spaces.htm

So if you had a situation where you wanted, for some reason, to set e.g. 
the left padding of an element to match the width of a space, then
padding-left: 0.25em
would probably be the best guess in general.

Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ 

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Targeting IE8

[Alan Gresley]

> > Thierry, come on, share what you discovered. :-)
> 
> Hi Alan,
> 
> I shared the "position:relative" fix for links, but that one is not my
> finding.
> I'm pretty sure this ie8 filter is called the Bruno hack ;)
> -- 
> Regards,
> Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com

I have notice a few passing bugs. Take this one that hides rule sets from IE8.


* {}

E {}/* this rule set will be hidden from IE8 */

F {}/* this rule set will be applied by IE8 */


So anyone who has empty declarations blocks in there style sheets will have to 
remove them now. Also IE8 tries to download a full string of multiple 
background images. I think this is only when two such images are given for one 
element. Test case.

http://css-class.com/test/css/backgrounds/multiple-backgrounds.htm


I though they would have fixed all the parsing errors but new ones have crept 
in. :-)


Alan

http://css-class.com/


__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] Site Check Please

[Matthew Stoneback]

Hello everyone -

I have had some help through this list in getting this site to where it is,
now I need some help debugging it.  My main areas of concern are IE 6 and 7,
but any other browser checks would be great.

My specific concerns:

In IE 6 - The right column gets pushed down and under the left column in the
main content area.  The orange navigation bar is too far right.  The green
header backgrounds are too tall in the main content area.

In IE 7 - The 3px border under the orange navigation bar is missing  The
bar sits tight against the green border.

>From what I can tell, it looks good in Firefox, Opera, and Netscape (I know,
it is no longer supported).  The new beta version of Safari for Windows has
some issues with it.  I have never seen this site on a Mac, can someone out
there hook me up with any issues.

Here is the HTML address:
http://www.eddysound.com/rrc/index_help.html(validates to Strict
1.0)

Here is the CSS link: http://www.eddysound.com/rrc/main_help.css (has a few
issues / warnings when validated)

Thanks in advance for any help.  I am starting to move out of the
development stage of this site to adding content and I want everything to be
tight and looking good.

Matt Stoneback
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Site Check Please

[David Laakso]

Matthew Stoneback wrote:
>  I have never seen this site on a Mac, can someone out
> there hook me up with any issues.
>
>
> http://www.eddysound.com/rrc/index_help.html
>
>
> Matt Stoneback
>
>   


In Mac OS X 10.4.11


Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; en-US; rv:1.8.1.12) 
Gecko/20080201 Firefox/2.0.0.12;
Opera Version 9.24 Build 3707;
and Safari Version 3.0.4 (523.12.2)

"Contact Us" is dropped. Shaving the width (FF live) in #topNav #contact 
from 116 to 114px corrected it.

Best,
~dL


-- 
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] buttons elements that are kickass in IE6

[corey deep]

Hello all,

I have been trying to accommodate a design spec involving intricately styled
buttons w/ rounded corners  I have been sourcing out best of practices
and after trial and error,  am leaning towards the use of  image as form
button element ...  however the techniques I have tested use text indent to
hide value text, and this is not working in IE6. Does anyone have experience
overcoming this obstacle, or possibly a better technique for presenting form
button elements consistently cross browser ( including ie6 )...


thanks in advance !

.some_btn {
position: relative;
background:transparent url(../images/some_btn.gif) no-repeat scroll left
top;
border:0pt none;
cursor:pointer;
height:26px;
margin:0pt;
overflow:hidden;
padding:0pt;
vertical-align:middle;
width:99px;
text-indent: -px;
}

.some_btn:hover {
background: transparent url(../some_btn.gif) no-repeat 0 -27px;
}
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] buttons elements that are kickass in IE6

[Rob Emenecker]

Using a negative text indent to "hide" the button label, is not what I would
label as a "best practice" -- IMO. Are the button values dynamically
changing? If not, why even have text for the value attribute? There's no
reason -- scripting-wise that it makes sense to do it.

Why? Simple. In most all cases -- save dynamically changing the "value" of
the button -- you taking specific actions based on specific buttons. Those
actions should be determined based on the button ID, not the value
attribute. 

If I click on a "Make Background Color Red" button, I have an onclick,
onmousedown, or mouseup handler attached to
document.getElementById("changeBgRed_btn").

If you're striving towards "best pratices" make it an all-around success by
avoiding this type of hackish use to accommodate what is possibly a poor
scripting practice. Just fix the scripting so that you don't need to worry
about text-indent: -(0.01-E50px).

...Rob

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] X-UA-Compatible - Discrepancies between targeted behaviour in IE8 resolved

[Bruno Fassino]

Alex Robinson wrote:

> Now, as an aside and not being particularly expert on quirks mode
> rendering, are there any specific differences (other than the ones
> just discussed) that anyone is aware of between IE6 quirks mode and
> IE7 quirks mode? (I'm fully aware of their being many standards mode
> issues ;)


The few cases that I'm aware of are all cases where IE7 in standard mode has
improved behavior, and in quirks mode it shows some mixed behavior, not
exactly equal to IE6 quirks.
One example is the box expansion caused by italics. In IE7 standards mode
some cases are fixed. In IE7 quirks they are not fixed (I guess
intentionally), but they react to the various display values differently
than IE6 quirks (so limiting the set of workarounds good for both.)
I have a (very unfinished) page showing some of these differences [1].

Bruno

[1] http://brunildo.org/test/IE6_7_quirks.html


--
Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Targeting IE8 (was: IE8 is better but stillslightly broken)

[Bruno Fassino]

Thierry Koblentz wrote:

> I shared the "position:relative" fix for links, but that one is not
> my finding. I'm pretty sure this ie8 filter is called the Bruno hack
> ;)


I guess (and hope) this will be a very short-lived filter, so it can remain
unnamed :-)
(Btw, it was Ingo that mentioned here that IE8 reads the IE5/Mac band pass
filter, simplifying it into a IE8b1 only filter is just a consequence.)

Bruno

--
Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] buttons elements that are kickass in IE6

[Lisa Onizuka]

Hi Corey,

I would simplify your button code to something like this:

.some_btn { background:transparent url(../images/some_btn.gif) no-repeat
center center; border:none; cursor:pointer; height:26px; line-height:26px;
text-align:center; margin:0; overflow:hidden; padding:0; width:99px; 
}

Then use html like this:



By setting line-height and button height the same, and centering the
background and the text, the button text should be positioned correctly.
Also use px font size rather than pt when layering over a px sized image if
you want precise control, but please make sure it's big enough to read...and
realize it might grow. Best to use your blank background button image and
let the input value determine what text is on the button.

Good luck!
Lisa

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of corey deep
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 3:49 PM
To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Subject: [css-d] buttons elements that are kickass in IE6

Hello all,

I have been trying to accommodate a design spec involving intricately styled
buttons w/ rounded corners  I have been sourcing out best of practices
and after trial and error,  am leaning towards the use of  image as form
button element ...  however the techniques I have tested use text indent to
hide value text, and this is not working in IE6. Does anyone have experience
overcoming this obstacle, or possibly a better technique for presenting form
button elements consistently cross browser ( including ie6 )...


thanks in advance !

.some_btn {
position: relative;
background:transparent url(../images/some_btn.gif) no-repeat scroll left
top; border:0pt none; cursor:pointer; height:26px; margin:0pt;
overflow:hidden; padding:0pt; vertical-align:middle; width:99px;
text-indent: -px;
}

.some_btn:hover {
background: transparent url(../some_btn.gif) no-repeat 0 -27px; }
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies --
http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] how to make this DIV lay over a Flash animation?

[Francesco (Sin City Creative)]

http://edu.olyortho.com/

Please tell me there is some way to fix this!  Go to the above page,
type a letter into the search box, and an autocomplete DIV will
appear.  Problem is, the Flash animation below it seems to take
priority and cover the DIV.

Is there any way to fix this, maybe using z-index or something?

Thanks,

Francesco
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] buttons elements that are kickass in IE6

[corey deep]

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 3:00 PM, Rob Emenecker <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Using a negative text indent to "hide" the button label, is not what I
> would
> label as a "best practice" -- IMO. Are the button values dynamically
> changing? If not, why even have text for the value attribute? There's no
> reason -- scripting-wise that it makes sense to do it.
>
> Why? Simple. In most all cases -- save dynamically changing the "value" of
> the button -- you taking specific actions based on specific buttons. Those
> actions should be determined based on the button ID, not the value
> attribute.
>
> If I click on a "Make Background Color Red" button, I have an onclick,
> onmousedown, or mouseup handler attached to
> document.getElementById("changeBgRed_btn").
>
> If you're striving towards "best pratices" make it an all-around success
> by
> avoiding this type of hackish use to accommodate what is possibly a poor
> scripting practice. Just fix the scripting so that you don't need to worry
> about text-indent: -(0.01-E50px).
>
> ...Rob
>

Hi,
 instead of best practices lets say, " least damaging practices"... it isn't
that a value is so important from the developers perspective ( in my office
) I  think form elements should be mostly left alone. mostly. I am
loathe to hack together something to hide buttons when they are fine as is.
However the design specs are what they are. thanks for the response !  you
raise a good point.
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] IE6 z-index position element stacking problem

[Ingo Chao]

Sandy wrote:
> or so i think.
> 
> http://accuray.com/
> 
> my flash menu is in an absolutely position div.  in ie6 ONLY, when you 
> roll over "products" or "patients", the menu is cut off at the bottom of 
> the drop down.
> I tried fooling around with the other positioned elements or removing 
> them altogether but it doesn't seem to help.
> Also, this issue occurs SOMETIMES.. rolling over it or refreshing the 
> page will eventually trigger the bug.


No, the bug is constant in IE6 here. The submenus have different 
heights.  It depends on what entry you start hovering over the menu.

After a refresh: If you start with the entry that holds the longest 
submenu (Patients), nothing is clipped at the other submenus. If you 
start with the shortest submenu (Careers), all the others are clipped. 
And clipping happens for only some of the submenus in between these 
extremes. Again, it depends on the first hovered menu button.

I guess this is more likely a javascript problem with refreshing some 
calculated height settings. Though I do not understand why the menu is 
clipped at all.

Ingo

-- 
http://www.satzansatz.de/css.html
http://www.dolphinsback.com
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] forcing an entire to be a link

[linojon]

Here's a demo of my problem http://www.parkerhill.com/hover-test.html

When this page is viewed in Firefox or Safari, and you hover over any  
of the list items, you can link to the 'overlaid' link. But in IE7,  
you must only hover over whitespace to have a link; if you hover over  
text it wants you to select text. Changing the order of elements, or  
using nested div's doesnt seem to help.

Is there a way to force IE to make the entire  a link?
or a better way to accomplish this that works in all browsers?
(and preferably without using javascript)

Thanks
linoj

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] forcing an entire to be a link

[Jim Davis]

Take a look at this article and demo:
http://www.smileycat.com/miaow/archives/000230.php

Jim

On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 9:27 PM, linojon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Here's a demo of my problem http://www.parkerhill.com/hover-test.html
>
> When this page is viewed in Firefox or Safari, and you hover over any
> of the list items, you can link to the 'overlaid' link. But in IE7,
> you must only hover over whitespace to have a link; if you hover over
> text it wants you to select text. Changing the order of elements, or
> using nested div's doesnt seem to help.
>
> Is there a way to force IE to make the entire  a link?
> or a better way to accomplish this that works in all browsers?
> (and preferably without using javascript)
>
> Thanks
> linoj
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] forcing an entire to be a link

[Thierry Koblentz]

> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> discuss.org] On Behalf Of linojon
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 9:27 PM
> To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
> Subject: [css-d] forcing an entire  to be a link
> 
> Here's a demo of my problem http://www.parkerhill.com/hover-test.html
> 
> When this page is viewed in Firefox or Safari, and you hover over any
> of the list items, you can link to the 'overlaid' link. But in IE7,
> you must only hover over whitespace to have a link; if you hover over
> text it wants you to select text. Changing the order of elements, or
> using nested div's doesnt seem to help.
> 
> Is there a way to force IE to make the entire  a link?
> or a better way to accomplish this that works in all browsers?
> (and preferably without using javascript)

Try this:

a.selectable {background:url(nada);}

You can use a transparent gif if you want, but it is not necessary


-- 
Regards,
Thierry | http://www.TJKDesign.com




__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] forcing an entire to be a link

[Gunlaug Sørtun]

linojon wrote:
> Here's a demo of my problem http://www.parkerhill.com/hover-test.html
>  Is there a way to force IE to make the entire  a link? or a
> better way to accomplish this that works in all browsers? (and
> preferably without using javascript)

With a few additional properties/values in there - and the
background-trick, all 4 methods will work in IE7 and everywhere else.


IE/win has the usual list-marker problems, and IE6 will need some more
help to stretch the link vertically.

regards
Georg
-- 
http://www.gunlaug.no
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] forcing an entire to be a link

[Alan Gresley]

linojon wrote:

> Here's a demo of my problem http://www.parkerhill.com/hover-test.html
> 
> When this page is viewed in Firefox or Safari, and you hover over any  
> of the list items, you can link to the 'overlaid' link. But in IE7,  
> you must only hover over whitespace to have a link; if you hover over  
> text it wants you to select text. Changing the order of elements, or  
> using nested div's doesnt seem to help.
> 
> Is there a way to force IE to make the entire  a link?
> or a better way to accomplish this that works in all browsers?
> (and preferably without using javascript)
> 
> Thanks
> linoj


This seem to be a problem in IE handling of list, IE8 still has this bug.




I first noticed it ironically on Live Search last night while using IE8. :-)




Hovering over any of the search links will show no pointer. But clicking the 
links work. In your test case clicking the text does nothing. Here is a work 
around.

http://css-class.com/x/list-items-and-hover.htm

The only changes I made was with new CSS. Note the t1.png image which is a 
transparency on the anchors. IE8 needed the anchors to be move to the bottom of 
the list. I did this since they were showing a gap at the top when located at 
the top.

I have tested in IE7 toggle mode and appears to works. You may want to add a 
transparent png hack for IE6. 

I hope this works for you.

Alan

http://css-class.com/

__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/