Re: [css-d] Firefox the new pixel density ??
On 09/07/2013 02:20, Janet Lynn Ford wrote: 1. Is there a way to target this with media queries (I read that now one can target dpi, but I am curious if any one is doing so, what the problems and/or negative effects of doing so will be. I think this is part of the response to the issue that media queries for physical widths didn't really mean much, because all browsers previously pretended that the display was always 96DPI. This made it difficult/impossible for media queries to distinguish between a 1280x720px 20 monitor and a 1280x720px 4.5 mobile phone. For some background: http://css-tricks.com/high-dpi-monitors-resolution-independance-the-web-and-you/ http://www.quirksmode.org/blog/archives/2010/04/a_pixel_is_not.html 2. Does this seem strange to others? I feel like I am back in 1996 and facing the IE/Netscape browser wars once again. There is a quite a lot of discussion about this on the Mozilla bug: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=844604 3. Is this just the wave of the future and will all browsers be doing this as well? The relevant Chromium defect is here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=844604 From reading through the Mozilla and Chromium defects it seems that IE10 has already implemented a similar behaviour to Firefox. Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] on html and css versions
On 02/08/2012 10:31, Hakan Kirkan wrote: Using !DOCTYPE HTML breaks Canvas in IE8 IE8 doesn't support canvas. Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] on html and css versions
On 02/08/2012 04:39, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: First is that while browsers may not actually use the referenced DTD (the http... clause), they do parse the HTML based on the DOCTYPE html PUBLIC... clause and treat the HTML differently based on what you declare. No, they don't. It is used purely as a switch between standards, almost standards and quirks mode. This impacts CSS more than HTML in most cases. Second is that just because the Validator approves of the supplied HTML5 HTML, that does not mean that a browser will not choke on it or display the code properly. This is not the case with pre-HTML5 DOCTYPES where if the Validator approves of the code, the browser will correctly parse, interpret, and display it. Browsers have never used DOCTYPES, therefore the validation of whether or not a document conforms (or not) to a DOCTYPE has no impact on whether or not a browser will correctly parse, interpret or display it. IOW: At the current time, !DOCTYPE html throws the browser into tag soup mode where it tries to figure out what it is being supplied with as opposed to knowing how to parse and handle it. It should throw the browser into HTML5 parsing mode, which is the first version of the standard which specifies what to do with invalid as well as valid markup. It also specifies validity in terms of what the resulting parse tree should look like rather than in terms of the format of the input document. Whether it's in tag soup mode or not depends on the content-type header, not the DOCTYPE. If you serve with an XML content type then you'll get stricter XML parsing. See [1]. Rob [1] http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/HTML_vs._XHTML#Differences_Between_HTML_and_XHTML __ css-discuss [css-d@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] on html and css versions
On 02/08/2012 17:02, Philip TAYLOR wrote: I think that is an over-simplification, and one that is misleading if it gets into the wrong hands. Not really, otherwise tricks like having a DOCTYPE without a DTD wouldn't work. The problem is that different browsers (or even different versions of the same browser) will make different guesses about the same illegal construct; If they're HTML5 conforming then they'll make the same guesses, this was one of the whole points of HTML5. Ex. http://validator.w3.org/docs/help.html#what-is-it That page only refers to The (X)HTML languages, for all versions up to XHTML 1.1. Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] on html and css versions
On 02/08/12 18:49, Philip TAYLOR wrote: that if a page validates against the DTD given in the DOCTYPE directive, then it is more likely to be parsed and rendered correctly than if it does not. OK, then define parsed and rendered correctly. Or, put another way: where is the parsing process for a text file conforming to HTML4's DTD defined so that we can judge the correctness of a given browser's parsing behaviour? I prefer not to offer any observations on the probable behaviour of pages written to conform to the current draft recommendation since that recommendation could change at any time. Since the spec is based on what browser actually do, the only way it will change 'at any time' is if all the major browsers suddenly changed their behaviour. If the spec didn't change at that time, because it was a Recommendation or whatever, would you write your documents to conform to the spec or to conform to what browsers actually did? Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] on html and css versions
On 02/08/12 19:40, Philip TAYLOR wrote: Exactly as you meant it in your earlier message : I meant it as defined in the HTML5 specification. You're apparently disallowing that, so I wanted to know what your definition was. The specification for the parsing process for HTML 4.01 is directly derivable for the specification for the parsing process for SGML, taking into account any notes in the DTD where the exact behaviour could not be specified in SGML or differed therefrom. And since, as we've already discussed, browsers aren't using the DTDs, then we know they're all parsing everything pre-HTML5 incorrectly. To base a specification on what a particular subset of browsers do at some arbitrary point in time is to completely fail to understand the reason for a specification in the first place. A specification that no-one ever implements is no use to anyone either. I am unaware of any facility for augmenting the HTML 5 non-DTD in a similar way to get around future failures to conform. Use the XML serialisation of HTML5 and define your own schema. I know someone did this for HTML5 + RDFa, there may be some other examples but I've not followed that sort of thing in detail. Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] on html and css versions
On 02/08/12 20:50, Philip TAYLOR wrote: How things are defined the HTML 5 Draft specification is relevant only to HTML 5; since we are discussing documents that specify a DTD in their DOCTYPE directive, that clearly rules out documents coded to the HTML 5 Draft specification. No, it defines how browsers with an HTML5 parser[1] will parse *all* HTML documents, no matter what DOCTYPE you put on them. Rob, you and I clearly have different views on this : may I respectfully suggest that out of respect for the other members of the list, we cease this debate (at least on this forum) ? Yes of course, feel free to respond to the last word above I couldn't help myself but write, I will reply no further. Rob [1] Which is basically all of them, see: http://caniuse.com/svg-html5 __ css-discuss [css-d@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] android blackberry emulators
On 04/07/2012 03:25, David Laakso wrote: I've no idea about that site, but the official Android SDK includes an If accuracy is your bag in the end you'll want to break down and purchase a mobile device and save the receipt for your business accountant. I think in the end you'll want several devices, aside from the different OS versions, the different UI layers from different manufacturers and different form factors can have a significant effect when actually using a device. On 04/07/2012 04:21, Philippe Wittenbergh wrote: probably better Safari release builds, as Chrome has a much faster release cycle, esp compared to the default browser included with Android Staring with 4.1 tablets, Chrome will become the default browser on Android devices. Where Simulators of all kind fail completely is testing interaction design. You could always install the emulator on a Windows 7 tablet... Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] android blackberry emulators
On 03/07/12 13:20, Sandy wrote: http://android-emulator.org/ is this a reasonably accurate emulator? I've no idea about that site, but the official Android SDK includes an emulator: http://developer.android.com/tools/help/emulator.html Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] Will on-page css override same selector in external style sheet?
On 20/03/11 20:29, Keith Purtell wrote: Or do I need to instead have my conditional comment be an if or that calls up the main style sheet for the majority of visitors and a variant of the main style sheet with the alternate paragraph style? If the selectors are the same, the last rule wins: 4. Finally, sort by order specified: if two declarations have the same weight, origin and specificity, the latter specified wins. Declarations in imported style sheets are considered to be before any declarations in the style sheet itself. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/cascade.html#cascade Rob __ css-discuss [css-d@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] @fontface
Chetan Crasta wrote: On my computer (ubuntu), there was absolutely no styling of any element on the page. I get the same thing, no styles: Windows XP + Firefox 4. Rob __ 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] @fontface
On 06/01/11 14:44, David Laakso wrote Drag the page to a 400px window and the styles will kick-in. ~d What happens if you take the @font-face rule out of the media query? I wonder if Gecko doesn't like that being nested? Rob __ 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] Vendor prefixes and validation
Alan Gresley wrote: I should add that the CSS WG current work page is out of date often. The current work with the latest drafts are found here. http://dev.w3.org/csswg/ It's not the release of a new editor's draft that's significant, it's the spec moving to Candidate Recommendation which should be the trigger for browsers removing the vendor prefixes. Though I note in the case of backgrounds borders the spec did go to CR at one point and then got moved back. Rob __ 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] Vendor prefixes and validation
Alan Gresley wrote: On 21/12/2010 1:10 AM, G.Sørtun wrote: Currently IE9 beta supports most of CSS3 without any vender prefixes. No it doesn't and, since only two of the CSS3 specs are currently even at PR state, let alone CR, it would be foolish of them to do so. Rob __ 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] Vendor prefixes and validation
G.Sørtun wrote: So if no vendor is foolish enough to implement them we won't get those W3C CSS standards anywhere. I'm not suggesting they'd be foolish to implement them at all, I'm saying they'd be foolish to implement them without vendor prefixes. Rob __ 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] Vendor prefixes and validation
On 21/12/10 00:07, Alan Gresley wrote: Alan Gresley wrote: Currently IE9 beta supports most of CSS3 without any vender prefixes. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/ie/ff468705.aspx#_CSS3_BG_Borders All of which do no need a -ms- prefix. That's 16 properties, all in one spec. Even if you mean the entire page rather than just the fragment you linked to, it only mentions 8 specs. CSS level 3 comprises over 30 separate specs: http://www.w3.org/Style/CSS/current-work.en.html How do you get from 16 properties to 'most of CSS3'? And, I reiterate, since most of the specs they do mention are not yet at PR, they shouldn't implement them in the finished browser without prefixes in most cases. Rob __ 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 method for larger lead-in text?
On 24/11/10 17:05, Rory Bernstein wrote: Is there a way to use CSS to make the first X words of a paragraph be larger? Not really, the closest thing to it is the :first-line pseudo element, but that selects everything to the end of the line, not a particular number of words. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#first-line Rob __ 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] Border radius for nested image: works in chrome but not firefox
On 10/10/10 12:36, Karl Bedingfield wrote: I am creating a logo to work with chrome and firefox browsers but am running into a little problem with firefox. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=459144 Fixed in Firefox 4. If you can make the image a background instead of inline then it should work in Firefox 3.5/6. Rob __ 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] Overlay you can click through
On 08/10/10 18:08, Chris Hardie wrote: Can anyone think about how to get the result I want? You could try this: http://www.vinylfox.com/forwarding-mouse-events-through-layers/ If you don't have to support IE then you can also achieve the same thing with a CSS property: https://developer.mozilla.org/en/CSS/pointer-events This is originally derived from the SVG spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG11/interact.html#PointerEventsProperty Rob __ 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] -moz-box-shadow
Tim Climis wrote: I've got a question about box-shadow. If you have a shadow on an element with 100% width (an unfloated div, say), and give it a box-shadow, in firefox (with -moz-box-shadow) you get horizontal scroll, If you offset the x shadow against the blur then you get rid of the scrollbar, but you are then left with a gap at the right for however far you offset: -moz-box-shadow: rgba(0,0,0,0.5) -2px 2px 2px; Or: -moz-box-shadow: rgba(0,0,0,0.5) -3px 2px 3px; Rob __ 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] rounded image corners
Daniel Gerep wrote: My client will upload images and I'd like to put rounded corners on it...is there a way to do so? Using CSS you would use the border-radius property, currently implemented as -moz-border-radius and -webkit-border-radius in Firefox and Safari/Chrome respectively but it's currently not supported in IE. If your client is uploading the images to a server anyway it might be less hassle to do it on the backend: http://www.assemblysys.com/dataServices/php_roundedCorners.php Rob __ 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] RFC: printing backgrounds by default
Jason Crosse wrote: What I have done in the past is to have a print stylesheet to make printed text darker than its on-screen equivalent. This relies on the backgrounds not printing. I've also done this in the past - assumed the background wouldn't print, but since it's an option in the browser that can be easily toggled it strikes me that it's perhaps an assumption that we usually get away with rather than the correct way to approach things. Sort of like assuming your page background will be white by default. Rob __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] printing background images
Paul Seale wrote: Ive ran into a slight problem regarding printing content (text) with the background showing up. Is it possible to do so, It's a browser configuration - in Firefox: File - Page Setup... I'm sure there used to be a similar option in IE6 but I can't find it in IE7. or do I need to outright stack layers on each other with the image laying in one and the text in the other? Why not have a print stylesheet that makes the text readable without the background image? Rob __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] IE Print Defect
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Has anyone noticed IE not printing out all the text from a web page before? It is doing that to me now. Most of the words are there but a few that should be at the end of a line before it wraps to the next line have disappeared. I've seen it when the text was in a fixed width container, IE (and Firefox AFAIK) doesn't automatically shrink the box to fit on paper but keeps it at the equivalent on-screen width. Rob __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Layout help needed
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Problems:
Firefox:
1. The content (beginning with the item_title Saturday Long Run)
is not at the top of its div. It should be even with the top of the
Coach's Tip box.
As jeffrey said, you have a white h2 element on a white background
forcing everything down.
2. The Coach's Tip heading (tip) is not at the top of its div.
I found I could fix this by explicitly setting the padding:
h3 { margin-top: 0;}
IE6:
1. The content (beginning with the item_title Saturday Long Run)
is way down, not starting until after the material in the left column
has finished.
I think it's the 100% width in the #content rule, one I commented this
out it looked fine in IE(7) and Firefox, didn't test in anything else.
2. Once it moves up, I'm sure the content item_title will still be
low.
Same problem as with Firefox, your invisible h2 content.
Rob
PS. Sorry if this turns up twice, slight Thunderbird issue...
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
[css-d] Weird IE7 Problem
Hi I'm working on the following page (sorry for long URL): http://www.serviceworksglobal.com/demo/pages/case_studies_testimonials/computacenter.html I've encountered a weird problem with IE7. If I right click on one of the images and select 'Properties' then the content gets cut off just below the main heading. The page retains it's initial length but the content disappears. Re-sizing the browser window brings the content back. I've tried this on an IE7 on XP and an IE7 on Vista. I assumed this was some relation to the peek-a-boo bug, but causing hasLayout on the main page elements didn't seem to have any effect (and besides, it doesn't happen in IE6). I tried to recreate the problem in a simple version of the basic layout but couldn't, so I assume one of the more complex bits of the layout is causing the problem, I just have no idea which bit. I know it doesn't currently validate, because of the onresize attribute, but IE7 reports it's rendering in CSS1Compat mode. Anyone seen a similar issue before? I'm not even sure what to search for in Google, any mention of IE and disappearing content brings up a load of stuff about the peek-a-boo bug. Rob __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Weird IE7 Problem
Ingo Chao wrote: Again, a rule of thumb is: whenever a relatively positioned block has to contain a layout-block, be sure that the relatively positioned block has layout, or funny things like disappearance will happen. It's strange that it's triggered by an event in the browser chrome rather than something occurring in the page itself though. Move the zoom to #outer (applying layout via zoom and height in #wrapper is tautologous.) Thanks - that seems to have worked, I was banging my head on the desk this afternoon. Rob __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
