Re: [css-d] navigation link a different colour when page is active
Shortie Designs said: I'm trying to keep the current page navigation link a different colour to the rest of the navigation link - this way users will know what page they are on. Ie: if the user is on the 'ABOUT US' page - then the About US link in the navigation bar is a different colour. I don't want to use JavaScript. The best way if using a dynamic web page is to use an id on the current page link in the navigation. If it's a static web site you could use a combination of an id on the body tag and the links and target those with unique descendant selectors. For example these HTML snippets: body id=markets lia id=nav-markets href=markets.htmlmarkets/a/li lia id=nav-products href=products.htmlproducts/a/li could be targeted with these selectors: #markets #nav-markets, #products #nav-products I'd use id rather than class as a target inside the navigation should be unique on the page. Even if you have several pages with the same body id value, this doesn't matter as only one page is loaded at a time. This allows several pages to be current under a navigation link, like part 2 of an article and so on. I use this technique on quickly made mockups and similar. /MB __ 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] New to css [late response]
Ed Seedhouse said: Yes, it is wrong to use tables to create a layout, but not to use them when appropriate is equally mistaken. I would argue that a general wrong is a bit strong in this context. The wrong approach to reach your objectives in many cases or a more limited way of achieving web layouts in general. what HTML should be all about is the semantics of the content. That is what it is designed for, and was right from the start. This is both true and untrue. The semantic idea is in the heart I'd say, but it's far from a fulfilled property of HTML markup. The important part, perhaps, is that separating structure and contextual meaning (HTML) from presentation (CSS and graphics) when done right, gives many advantages. The disadvantage is that it takes another way of developing and that there are many pitfalls to watch out for. __ 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] Combinators: How to Address Multiple Successive br/Tags
Rick Gordon said: There's no way the user is going to deal with HTML for this, so CSS is the only hope. What about the server-side software? It can't be made to translate user- input paragraphs to, paragraphs? If so, that's quite lame. It do sound like a setting issue as it's very basic mechanism in server-side software. __ 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] doctype
Chris Blake said: What gives, I can't even pass 100% before writing anything! You are mixing the syntax of HTML and XHTML. I wouldn't be using XHTML unless I had specific reasons for that. From a pure CSS perspective the reasons for choosing HTML or XHTML are close to nil. However, if you're going to use CSS layout techniques the strict versions of either language gives less surprises and more consistent results. There are circumstances when it could be adviseable to choose the transitional, but I would argue that's rare. HTML 4.01 Strict is what I use: !DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC -//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN http://www.w3.org/TR/ html4/strict.dtd html head meta http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html; charset=UTF-8 /head and so on Note there is no trailing / in the meta element. __ 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] doctype
Chris Blake told: Sorry! This document can not be checked. When i try to validate anything that is UTF8. If you kept reading you would see that the validation page says further down: I am unable to validate this document because on line 35 it contained one or more bytes that I cannot interpret as utf-8 (in other words, the bytes found are not valid values in the specified Character Encoding) This means your file contains erroneus characters. What I usually do is to start a new utf-8 encoded HTML-file and start anew. If I have a more full source-file I copy the source and start a new utf-8 encoded HTML-file in my editor and paste the source code into that. Sometimes the erroneus characters may follow with the copy process. In that case you have to make sure you copy only valid parts. __ 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] New to css
Bill Braun said: Your interpretation is a bit on the literal side, but I am grateful for your kind words nevertheless. My apologies. I forgot the smiley. Digital communication can be difficult when writing on the run. __ 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] New to css
Bill Braun said: Setting aside the moral implications, having made a transition from a site built completely around tables to one based on div, the latter, in my experience and opinion, takes much better advantage of CSS. I have been able to do everything using div as I did using table, in a much more flexible manner, and, again in my opinion, with a slight edge in favor of design aesthetics. Based on divs? Hello? What about based on structural semantic markup and CSS-layout techniques? You guys - Bill, Claude - sound like you have contracted divitis* in your migration to CSS-layout techniques. Better find a cure. Wiktionary definition of divitis http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/divitis Jeffery Zeldman quote on divitis with code example http://adam.kahtava.com/journal/2009/07/15/cronic-divitis-and-classitis- what-is-it/ The cure is IMHO semantic markup methods. Robert Nyman has a nice brief introduction: Explaining Semantic Mark-Up http://robertnyman.com/2007/10/29/explaining-semantic-mark-up/ /MB Content precedes design. Design in the absence of content is not design, it's decoration. -- Jeffrey Zeldman http://twitter.com/zeldman/statuses/804159148 __ 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] sprites and dropdowns
Ido dekkers asked: one more - is there a way to make the dropdowns (regular ones) accessible without JS? Only with mouseover ie adding the pseudoclass :hover. Clicks means JS. __ 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] content in table won't align vertically
Philip TAYLOR said: In my experience, DW almost never grasps the full subtlety of CSS, and its rendering usually leaves a great deal to be desired. I thought DW used webkit for the Live view on Mac OS X at least. There are a lot of webkit-based browsers, no? Obviously, the Design view in DW is not about how it will look in a real web browser. Rather this view concerns itself with developing the web page and its content as a total. It would be nice if the Design view always showed CSS according to the spec at least, but DW have always been barely usable for CSS-oriented design and the interface even in the current version is full of easy GUI starting points for bad code. But even so, it is very possible to do compliant good web design in Dreamweaver. As always, it's about the knowledge and skill of the author/developer. __ 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] content in table won't align vertically
Chris Blake suggested: The best editor for Mac OSX is Coda by Panic. It uses the Safari render engine (webkit) from your mac to preview your pages. http://www.panic.com/coda/ I may take this route and use Coda, but I am still thinking about it. Perhaps I could use it for a small project during the demo period and see how I actually like working in it. I do most development time in Netbeans, but I do like to be able to see the effect my CSS code gets right away. I also like integrated file and link handling. The next step is to use the firebug extension in firefox which is just a godsend for testing things on the fly. I use this and Firebug too. The only real drawback is when you click on a link by mistake and lose your edit. __ 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] Transcendant web design and CSS3
Thierry Koblentz said: I'm not for serving pixel perfect designs - or even identical look - across browsers, but I'm not for punishing IE6 users either. I'm sorry, but this makes no sense to me... To quote Georg: It leaves older IE/win versions with a perfectly usable document, and doesn't in any way shut out users with obsolete browsers - they simply get a clean sheet. from the link Alan provided. http:// www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_50.html I donknow if you read Transcending CSS or not, but this is basically the same thing Andy was saying in his book. Perfectly usable is the same as punishing? I disagree with that conclusion. There's nothing in Andy Clarkes approach to transcending the situation with CSS-design (as it were in 2006) that prohibits the developer to support older versions of IE with usable pages, if he/she decides this is worth the effort. Exactly how usable is up to the developer. In this book, Andy leaves it to the developer to decide which browser is the development browser. That could be IE6 or some other browser if the project demands that. I feel Andys total web development approach makes more sense than the alternatives I've seen. Though some designs in the book brake needlessly so in IE6. But there are other sources for accomodating IE6, if that's important. Also, this is three years later. IE6 usage is dropping and the real challenge today among other things is making usable web for all those other browsers. You know 9-inch screens and phones and the like. How ever anyone sane could choose to NOT separate structure and presentation in this day and age is totally beyond me. Not that this old school approach have been promoted in this particular thread, but I see seemingly bewildered developers defend this old school approach too often on this list - like table layout designs, minimum widths and so on. But this paragraph is really out of the subject, so. __ 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] can't get my sprites to work.
Drazin Carrie said: My sprites are not working- any suggestions? I'll get back to you on this. Also, the orange badge that says upcoming events is supposed to be absolutely positioned, but when I resize the page - it moves? You have not set a positioning context to let your absolutely positioned element be positioned to, by setting a surrounding element to position:relative. Given that, the page - or the HTML element - is the context. So choose the element. __ 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] Transcendant web design and CSS3
Thierry Koblentz said: Stealing time from IE6 dev time to tune styles sheets for browsers that represent a very small fraction of your audience is no better than spending time on making rounded corner, drop shadow, etc. work in IE6. I think the key is to *balance* these two approaches. Yes, balance is always an objective. I feel that was what Andy Clarke was, and is, promoting while also saying don't be afraid, sooner or later you can transcend the current situation. BTW, IE6 is not the lowest common denominator in the logs I've looked at recently. But that varies from site to site of course. /MB Content precedes design. Design in the absence of content is not design, it's decoration. -- Jeffrey Zeldman http://twitter.com/zeldman/statuses/804159148 __ 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] FW: bemstrongi tags
Michael Stevens said: My point was that, stricly semantically speaking (real semantics not web semantics), most tags are used to change the way a browser presents text to the reader. That is PRESENTATTIONAL by definition. By you and in your head, yes, that's possible. But the joke is on you. Because many developers don't work like that. Your definition is incomplete and quite useless I think. In the end they almost always change the way the text is presented. So what? Personally, I markup my content semantically in the *structural* fashion that works for me and use CSS to present this content in the fashion I choose. For me HTML is primarily structure and meaning intermingled. Let me say that again: Structure. If browsers choose to present my HTML- structure in a certain way, by CSS defaults when my CSS instructions fail, then that's fine by me. I feel my markup work WITH the browsers way of conveying this structure, not against it. I don't think HTML is perfect in any way, but separating presentation and structure/meaning is way better than the old alternative IMHO. /MB __ 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] FW: bemstrongi tags
Alan Gresley blurted out: The built-in defaults ARE CSS. It's the CSS the browsermakers decided to have builtin. Technically, this is the case with Firefox anyway. No, you are both wrong in opposite ways. The user agent defaults are just style sheets and an important part in the cascade. That's just another way of saying what I said. What the difference in meaning between The 'built-in defaults' are CSS. and defaults are just style sheets. __ 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] css-sound joomla templates?
na...@thesmudge.com said: I'm currently using one based on a template from http://www.joomlart.com called ja_rochea. I moved around, eliminated, and added divs, and redid most of the css, so it's not much like the original. But at least it wasn't based on tables, if that's what you mean. Well, I prefer to not use tables for layout nor Divitis-suffering layouts. I'd like templates with lists, when the content is likely to be lists, like for instance lists of articles, navigation and similar, and tables only when the content is likely to be tabular. And so on. HTML may be incomplete, but so be it. On the other hand, a well made DIV-markup based layout may be very easy to change yourself to your type of markup, if it's not a tag soup. It turns out, however, I'm going to write my own publishing engine instead for this assignment, so no Joomla this time. Thanks for your response. /MB __ 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] css-sound joomla templates?
Thanks everyone for your suggestions. It turns out I'm going to write my own publishing engine instead for this assignment, so no Joomla this time. /MB __ 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] FW: bemstrongi tags
Michael Stevens said: I use use EM when I want italic and STRONG when I want bold, sometimes I'll change the font color as well, therefore I consider them presentational tags. Are your definitions the ideal we all should adhere to? I think not. Why a specific developer choose to misuse a certain element or a group thereof, doesn't make that element presentational per definition. You can say that you use specific elements for presentational reasons of course, but if you don't point that out clearly in the discussion to begin with, then it's quite hard to discuss the topic meaningfully. Because, if the developer uses some elements primarily for their browser default CSS, then any element can be considered presentational for that reason. Which is a quite pointless set of considerations to have to use in this discussion in this forum. But perhaps (hopefully) I'm missing your point. /MB __ 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] FW: bemstrongi tags
Bob Rosenberg said: CSS is a way of changing the built-in defaults for how to display text enclosed in the different tags. The built-in defaults ARE CSS. It's the CSS the browsermakers decided to have builtin. Technically, this is the case with Firefox anyway. __ 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] css-sound joomla templates?
Can anyone recommend some sound css-layoutoriented Joomla templates out there? I'd rather buy something sound than learn Joomla template editing. Being a Java guy myself I'd rather spend my time doing that, but it seems I might have to do this one. Naturally I want to be able to swiftly edit the layout via CSS. /MB __ 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] horizontal scrollbar
David Laakso sa såhär: Thanks to all who took time to view and write (saves a trip to the Department of Veterans Affairs Mental Health Outpatient Clinic). I wish when someone posts something, this someone either move the original problem files to a new URL and post that afterwards, or even better use that separate URL from the beginning. Because I see no scrollbars in either Safari 4.04 nor FF 3.6 on OS X 10.5.8 and assume you have fixed the problem. But it could also be that you hadn't and my report could have been useful. __ 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] horizontal scrollbar :: OS X 10.5 -- 10.5.8 + IE6 in XPsp3
David Laakso said: http://www.tradeloop.com/ I know the fix but it has not been implemented as of this writing. Your report would be useful. Anyone else not seeing a horizontal scrollbar in any Mac OS X10.5 through 10.5.8 browser ? Also in Opera 9.27 and Firefox 3.0.11 (All on OS X 10.5.8) I can't see any scrollbars. I tried resizing the window as well as the using the zoom. It looked too big at the maxed zoom, but no scrollbars. I have a fairly big display (1600 x 900). Perhaps this problem only kicks in at certain scren sizes? I wanted to see the problem so I fired up IE6 running under Windows XP sp3. I see no scrollbars there either, also text-size set at biggest. Unfortunately I don't have access to IE7 or 8 at this time. I'll see if i can confirm in Chrome later if you want. Coudl you post a picture too? Maybe I'm looking for the wrong thing. /MB __ 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] horizontal scrollbar :: OS X 10.5 -- 10.5.8 + IE6 in XPsp3
David Laakso said: Sure and thanks. Shot in OS X 10.4 Mac Book Pro 116.5 dpi native resolution 1680 Camino/ 2.0.1. I am referring to the horizontal scrollbar at the very bottom of the png. http://chelseacreekstudio.com/tl/t1_a.png Retested in FF 3.0.11, Safari 4.04 (both OS X), IE5 and now also Chrome 4.0 (both XPsp3). No scrollbars at the end or anywhere but the browser window itself. /MB __ 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] Moving css to external css changes results?!
David Dorward said: There is no difference in cascade order between embedded and external. Not so fast. If the link to the external stylesheet preceeds the style element - which is common - styles declared in the style element come before in the cascade because of source order, ie being redeclared later. Specificity being the same otherwise. While this doesn't conflict with your statement per se, it's worth noting. __ 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] Is there a simple way to center in an iframe?
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 2:21 PM, David Dorward dorw...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/11/11 Alan Gresley a...@css-class.com: Hello, Michael, since iframe is a deprecated inline element. Iframe is not deprecated (although is discouraged). If you are using the strict version of HTML 4.01, then iframes aren't even a part of HTML. i.e. iframes isn't defined as an element. There are valid alternative ways to update an image with a click. If one is using HTML 4.01 Transitional, then iframes are an option. A very buggy option depending what you want to do and what versions of IE must be supported. The one reason I can think of that could defend using iframes is if one has taken the step to use HTML 5, i its current state. Even then I don't think it's the best solution for updating an image with a click. iframes in HTML 5 are to be used when Where embedded content is expected. (Quote: http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/text-level- semantics.html. Is this really the context here? __ 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/
