Re: [css-d] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread genericmaillists 
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:56 PM, Ed Seedhouse  wrote:
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM,   wrote:
>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Ed Seedhouse  wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM,   wrote:
 Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want.
>
>>> The "standard" way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side
>>> processing, such as ASP, PHP, "server side includes" or several other
>>> methods.
>
>> I think maybe you missed something, I am not wanting to use frames
>> just make the pages behave in a manner similar to frames.
>
> And that's what we normally use server side processing for, as I said.
>
>> The pages I currently working on will not be on a public server but
>> the design concept will be used later on a public server.
>
> Well it's perfectly easy to install Apache with PHP included on a
> Windows machine, and of course if you are using Linix you either
> already have it installed or can do so in just a few minutes.
>
>> When the time is right I will find a web sever source where PHP is available.
>
> Just install it on your own local machine.  I think everyone who is
> developing with html/css should have their own local web server
> installed.  Any machine less than five years old can handle this
> easily.
>
> --
> Ed Seedhouse
>

Like I said, "You missed something." How does server side scripting
have anything to do with my original question? If you are going to
join the conversation maybe you should go back and read my OP and the
replies.

Which is anchors in HTML and, position: fixed; in CSS. The behavior I
was hoping to get in Firefox does happen in IE with just HTML and CSS
no PHP or JavaScript and no ugly work arounds with HTML and CSS.

And for the record, I have been running Apache on Linux on my local
network for around seven years when I switched from MS to Linux.

-- 
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the
people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on
the continent their fathers conquered."
-Thomas Jefferson

This has been happening for the last 100 years.
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread Thierry Koblentz 
> >>> Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want.
> 
> >> The "standard" way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side
> >> processing, such as ASP, PHP, "server side includes" or several
> other
> >> methods.
> 
> > I think maybe you missed something, I am not wanting to use frames
> > just make the pages behave in a manner similar to frames.
> 
> And that's what we normally use server side processing for, as I said.

The OP's problem is about the positioning of named anchors so I don't see how 
server-side processing can solve his problem.


--
Regards,
Thierry
www.tjkdesign.com | www.ez-css.org | @thierrykoblentz






__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread david 
Ed Seedhouse wrote:
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM,   wrote:
>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Ed Seedhouse  wrote:
>>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM,   wrote:
 Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want.
> 
>>> The "standard" way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side
>>> processing, such as ASP, PHP, "server side includes" or several other
>>> methods.
> 
>> I think maybe you missed something, I am not wanting to use frames
>> just make the pages behave in a manner similar to frames.
> 
> And that's what we normally use server side processing for, as I said.
> 
>> The pages I currently working on will not be on a public server but
>> the design concept will be used later on a public server.
> 
> Well it's perfectly easy to install Apache with PHP included on a
> Windows machine, and of course if you are using Linix you either
> already have it installed or can do so in just a few minutes.

Well, might take more than a few minutes configuring things. (Says David 
the longtime Linux user). But a real web person could do it in a few 
minutes. ;-)

>> When the time is right I will find a web sever source where PHP is available.

GoDaddy's entry-level web hosting includes Apache with PHP and MySQL ... ;-)

> Just install it on your own local machine.  I think everyone who is
> developing with html/css should have their own local web server
> installed.  Any machine less than five years old can handle this
> easily.

Even machines older than that can handle it. I used Apache2Triad on old 
IBM PS/2 machine for over 10 years, running Windows 98. Worked just fine 
for develepment work.

-- 
David
gn...@hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread Ed Seedhouse 
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:39 PM,   wrote:
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Ed Seedhouse  wrote:
>> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM,   wrote:
>>> Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want.

>> The "standard" way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side
>> processing, such as ASP, PHP, "server side includes" or several other
>> methods.

> I think maybe you missed something, I am not wanting to use frames
> just make the pages behave in a manner similar to frames.

And that's what we normally use server side processing for, as I said.

> The pages I currently working on will not be on a public server but
> the design concept will be used later on a public server.

Well it's perfectly easy to install Apache with PHP included on a
Windows machine, and of course if you are using Linix you either
already have it installed or can do so in just a few minutes.

> When the time is right I will find a web sever source where PHP is available.

Just install it on your own local machine.  I think everyone who is
developing with html/css should have their own local web server
installed.  Any machine less than five years old can handle this
easily.

-- 
Ed Seedhouse
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread genericmaillists 
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Ed Seedhouse  wrote:
> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM,   wrote:
>> Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want.
>
> The "standard" way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side
> processing, such as ASP, PHP, "server side includes" or several other
> methods.
>
> It can be done with pure html/css at the expense of having to re-edit
> every page every time you want a change in the common parts of the
> pages.
>
> A straightforward language like PHP is easy to learn and available
> from most ISP providers.  Overall it is much more straightforward to
> do things that way than to do it with frames.

I think maybe you missed something, I am not wanting to use frames
just make the pages behave in a manner similar to frames. CSS does
this well with the exception of anchors on a page unless IE is being
used.

The pages I currently working on will not be on a public server but
the design concept will be used later on a public server. If I put
them on my personal web space available through my ISP I can only use
HTML, CSS and JavaScript. They won't provide any server scripting
engines of any kind.

When the time is right I will find a web sever source where PHP is available.

-- 
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the
people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on
the continent their fathers conquered."
-Thomas Jefferson

This has been happening for the last 100 years.
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread genericmaillists 
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 2:05 PM, Thierry Koblentz  wrote:
>> >> I believe what the OP is after is to achieve the same behavior as if
>> the
>> >> banner/header was a top frame.
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Thierry
>> >
>> > Whoops. Then perhaps these will give him some ideas to play with...
>> > 
>> > 
>>
>> Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want. Hopefully the URLs
>> you gave as well as the ones on those pages will provide the answer. I
>> have a basic understanding of how to do it. Maybe I will discover
>> something new or discover an error in my code. I have a lot of reading
>> to do. Thanks.
>
> These URLs won't help you.
> To find a solution, you need first to understand the problem.
> A browser scrolls a document until the named anchor reaches the top of the
> "window/frame" it is in.
> So as long as your header is part of that document, named anchors will move
> behind it. Padding, margin, top, whatever you want to use will not change
> that behavior. Unless of course you are ok to increase the gap between the
> sections.
> Because in this case, you could use *top padding* on the paragraphs. That
> way the anchor position does *not* changed, but the position of the text
> will. And that can "clear" the header.
> But do you want a gap between those sections?

What you are describing is almost exactly what I am doing now, which I
learned from trial and error. The wide margin has to be around the
anchor and the anchor has to above the text that would normally have
the anchor. Apparently this wasn't planned or thought of by the W3C.
The only browser that does this without a work around with HTML and
CSS is IE. That is about the only thing IE does that I like. Hence the
initial reason for my question. I thought it could be done and I was
just not finding what I needed. I wonder how IE does it?

I hate MS so much that I use Linux and refuse to use any MS based
software on a daily bases. I am glad I am NOT in a situation that I
don't have a choice. I only use a legal copy of W2K pro in a VM on a
few occasions when I get a project that can't be done any other way.
Sometimes I have to use Autodesk software which is deliberately
designed to work on windows only.

-- 
"If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue
of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks
and corporations that will grow up around them, will deprive the
people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on
the continent their fathers conquered."
-Thomas Jefferson

This has been happening for the last 100 years.
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] "position:fixed" and the spec: is that a miss?

2010-05-09 Thread Thierry Koblentz 
> > Section 9.4.1 [1] does not say that fixed positioned elements
> establish a
> > new block formatting context.
> >
> > Is that a miss?
> > Is it another case of "fieldset"? (not in the spec as a "nbfc"
> trigger but
> > always implemented that way).
> > Or is there another reason I'm missing?
> >
> > I know that CSS3 spec [2] includes it as a flow root "trigger".
> >
> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#block-formatting
> > [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-box/#block-level0
> 
> 
> It could be that 'fixed' positioning is considered as included in
> 'absolute' positioning.
> 9.6.1 states:
>   "Fixed positioning is a subcategory of absolute positioning"
> 
> Also in chapter 10 there are cases where position 'fixed' is not
> mentioned explicitly, at least in the sections titles, but included in
> 'absolute'.

Thanks a lot Bruno for the pointer.
I think the answer is in this paragraph (9.6):
 
"References in this specification to an absolutely positioned element (or
its box) imply that the element's 'position' property has the value
'absolute' or 'fixed'."


--
Regards,
Thierry
www.tjkdesign.com | www.ez-css.org | @thierrykoblentz

__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] "position:fixed" and the spec: is that a miss?

2010-05-09 Thread Bruno Fassino 
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Thierry Koblentz  wrote:
> Section 9.4.1 [1] does not say that fixed positioned elements establish a
> new block formatting context.
>
> Is that a miss?
> Is it another case of "fieldset"? (not in the spec as a "nbfc" trigger but
> always implemented that way).
> Or is there another reason I'm missing?
>
> I know that CSS3 spec [2] includes it as a flow root "trigger".
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#block-formatting
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-box/#block-level0


It could be that 'fixed' positioning is considered as included in
'absolute' positioning.
9.6.1 states:
  "Fixed positioning is a subcategory of absolute positioning"

Also in chapter 10 there are cases where position 'fixed' is not
mentioned explicitly, at least in the sections titles, but included in
'absolute'.


Regards,
Bruno

-- 
Bruno Fassino http://www.brunildo.org/test
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread Thierry Koblentz 
> >> I believe what the OP is after is to achieve the same behavior as if
> the
> >> banner/header was a top frame.
> >> --
> >> Regards,
> >> Thierry
> >
> > Whoops. Then perhaps these will give him some ideas to play with...
> > 
> > 
> 
> Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want. Hopefully the URLs
> you gave as well as the ones on those pages will provide the answer. I
> have a basic understanding of how to do it. Maybe I will discover
> something new or discover an error in my code. I have a lot of reading
> to do. Thanks.

These URLs won't help you.
To find a solution, you need first to understand the problem.
A browser scrolls a document until the named anchor reaches the top of the
"window/frame" it is in. 
So as long as your header is part of that document, named anchors will move
behind it. Padding, margin, top, whatever you want to use will not change
that behavior. Unless of course you are ok to increase the gap between the
sections.
Because in this case, you could use *top padding* on the paragraphs. That
way the anchor position does *not* changed, but the position of the text
will. And that can "clear" the header. 
But do you want a gap between those sections?

--
Regards,
Thierry
www.tjkdesign.com | www.ez-css.org | @thierrykoblentz


__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread Ed Seedhouse 
On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM,   wrote:
> Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want.

The "standard" way to achieve this is with some kind of server-side
processing, such as ASP, PHP, "server side includes" or several other
methods.

It can be done with pure html/css at the expense of having to re-edit
every page every time you want a change in the common parts of the
pages.

A straightforward language like PHP is easy to learn and available
from most ISP providers.  Overall it is much more straightforward to
do things that way than to do it with frames.

-- 
Ed Seedhouse
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] "position:fixed" and the spec: is that a miss?

2010-05-09 Thread Thierry Koblentz 
Section 9.4.1 [1] does not say that fixed positioned elements establish a
new block formatting context. 

Is that a miss? 
Is it another case of "fieldset"? (not in the spec as a "nbfc" trigger but
always implemented that way).
Or is there another reason I'm missing?

I know that CSS3 spec [2] includes it as a flow root "trigger".

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visuren.html#block-formatting
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-box/#block-level0

TIA

--
Regards,
Thierry
www.tjkdesign.com | www.ez-css.org | @thierrykoblentz

__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread genericmaillists 
>> I believe what the OP is after is to achieve the same behavior as if the
>> banner/header was a top frame.
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Thierry
>
> Whoops. Then perhaps these will give him some ideas to play with...
> 
> 

Yes, Frames without frames is exactly what I want. Hopefully the URLs
you gave as well as the ones on those pages will provide the answer. I
have a basic understanding of how to do it. Maybe I will discover
something new or discover an error in my code. I have a lot of reading
to do. Thanks.
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread David Laakso 
Thierry Koblentz wrote:
>> genericmailli...@gmail.com wrote:
>> 

 
>>> http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/sample.html
>>>   
>>
>> 
> David,
>
> I believe what the OP is after is to achieve the same behavior as if the
> banner/header was a top frame. 
>
> --
> Regards,
> Thierry
>
>
>
>   





Whoops. Then perhaps these will give him some ideas to play with...


Best,
~d


-- 
desktop
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
mobile
http://chelseacreekstudio.mobi/

__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread Thierry Koblentz 
> genericmailli...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>> I have not been able to find a solution to my problem.
> >>>
> >>  Or, yet better, a
> >> clickable link to the actual page in question.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/sample.html
> 
> 
> I hope this is what you are after...
> 
> Quick checked in IE 6/7/8, Safari, Opera, Firefox:
> 

David,

I believe what the OP is after is to achieve the same behavior as if the
banner/header was a top frame. 

--
Regards,
Thierry
www.tjkdesign.com | www.ez-css.org | @thierrykoblentz

__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] Anchor offset ?

2010-05-09 Thread David Laakso 
genericmailli...@gmail.com wrote:
>   
>> 
>>> I have not been able to find a solution to my problem.
>>>   
>>  Or, yet better, a
>> clickable link to the actual page in question.
>>
>>
>> 
> http://webpages.charter.net/jlgates/sample.html
>
>   





I hope this is what you are after...

-- floats will do, the fixed positioning is not needed
-- most new pages carry a strict doctype
-- to work properly both the markup and css need to be valid
-- the navigation is set as an unordered list (list of places to go or 
"jump" to) ul/li tags, no break tags needed
-- the text is set with paragraph ...  tags not break tags
-- to get the page to jump where you want the herf attribute thingy 
needs to be included (yours were empty)
-- the css is in the head of the document for my convenience only, call 
it from your directory as you did in your orginal file

Quick checked in IE 6/7/8, Safari, Opera, Firefox:


HTH.

Best,
~d





-- 
desktop
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
mobile
http://chelseacreekstudio.mobi/

__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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] need another pair of eyes..

2010-05-09 Thread bryan 
Hi All

Thanks for all the replies. I seem to have everything lining up properly 
now in Firefox and IE

Bryan
__
css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org]
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/