[css-d] IE7 special code
Hi all.
I have this in my CSS
* html .clearing {display:none;}
i NEED this to imp+lement in IE7 too, but NOT in Ffx or so.
What is the bug code for this?
In pure .css file cause it is external, no javascript or [if lte IE 7]
works in this case :(
Regards Pelle
__
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] IE7 special code
Pelle wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I have this in my CSS
> * html .clearing {display:none;}
>
> i NEED this to imp+lement in IE7 too, but NOT in Ffx or so.
> What is the bug code for this?
> In pure .css file cause it is external, no javascript or [if lte IE 7]
> works in this case :(
>
> Regards Pelle
>
>
Hi Pelle,
Did you try:
.clearing {
display: block !important;
display: none;
}
Don't know what IE7 will play with that...
But: *why* the clearing has to be canceled for IE?
If you have a testpage to see, maybe somebody can suggest a workaround.
Greetings,
francky
__
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] IE7 special code
The selector I've been using with quite a bit of success is
*:first-child+html
so in your circumstance it would be
*:first-child+html .clearing {
This selector uses the invisible super parent object above html that
only IE has, it then uses CSS2 selectors to target the HTML object
something that IE6 cannot do. This selector is completely ignored by
other browsers as they don't have an element above html.
-Mark
Pelle wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I have this in my CSS
> * html .clearing {display:none;}
>
> i NEED this to imp+lement in IE7 too, but NOT in Ffx or so.
> What is the bug code for this?
> In pure .css file cause it is external, no javascript or [if lte IE 7]
> works in this case :(
>
> Regards Pelle
>
__
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] IE7 special code
TO filter the other way you can use something like
.clearing { display:none } /* IE 6 & 7 */
*|html .clearing { display:block } /* everything else */
Chris
On 3/22/07, Mark Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The selector I've been using with quite a bit of success is
>
> *:first-child+html
> so in your circumstance it would be
>
> *:first-child+html .clearing {
>
> This selector uses the invisible super parent object above html that
> only IE has, it then uses CSS2 selectors to target the HTML object
> something that IE6 cannot do. This selector is completely ignored by
> other browsers as they don't have an element above html.
>
> -Mark
>
> Pelle wrote:
> > Hi all.
> >
> > I have this in my CSS
> > * html .clearing {display:none;}
> >
> > i NEED this to imp+lement in IE7 too, but NOT in Ffx or so.
> > What is the bug code for this?
> > In pure .css file cause it is external, no javascript or [if lte IE 7]
> > works in this case :(
> >
> > Regards Pelle
> >
>
> __
> 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/
>
--
Chris Ovenden
http://thepeer.blogspot.com
"Imagine all the people / Sharing all the world"
__
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] IE7 special code
Wow! I've been under the false supposition that IE7 did not 'believe' in
the nameless super-html object.
How is it, then, that this works while the simple '* html' selector does
not?
Regards,
Barney
Mark Story wrote:
> The selector I've been using with quite a bit of success is
>
> *:first-child+html
> so in your circumstance it would be
>
> *:first-child+html .clearing {
>
> This selector uses the invisible super parent object above html that
> only IE has, it then uses CSS2 selectors to target the HTML object
> something that IE6 cannot do. This selector is completely ignored by
> other browsers as they don't have an element above html.
>
> -Mark
__
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] IE7 special code
At 11:34 + 23/3/07, Barney Carroll wrote:
>Wow! I've been under the false supposition that IE7 did not 'believe' in
>the nameless super-html object.
>
>How is it, then, that this works while the simple '* html' selector does
>not?
Because while Microsoft fixed * html they introduced another parsing bug :)
Actually you don't need the :first-child since *+html shouldn't
select anything and doesn't in other modern browsers. It's just IE7
that does it.
The only drawback is that if you want to target both IE7 and IE6 et
al, you need to have a double declaration
* html { ... }
*+html { ... }
At 10:50 + 23/3/07, Chris Ovenden wrote:
>.clearing { display:none } /* IE 6 & 7 */
>*|html .clearing { display:block } /* everything else */
I think this is the first sighting of this beast in the wild
http://frontend.blogsome.com/2007/01/23/the-flispide-of-star-html/
Of course that's invalid in CSS2.1
It is valid CSS3 as far as I can tell...
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-namespace/#css-qnames
... but the W3 vaildator claims that it's not which looks like a bug
in the validator to me. Of course, trying to explain that to some
clients may be tricky.
Moreover, you're also going to be targeting older browsers that don't
understand the namespace selector either which may or may not be the
result you're after.
And if we look at the list's very own wiki we find a page dedicated
to IE7 which details even more ways to hack around IE7 including
fuzzy specificity
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
So, the choice is yours. Obviously though the best solution is to try
and remove the need for the hacks in the first place.
For my own part I've been bumping into serious miscalculations of
both em and percentage sized widths that all other browsers including
IE6 and its oldr siblings handle just fine, but which IE7 gets
hilariously and mysteriously wrong. This is though in pretty complex
layouts and as yet I haven't had the time to roll up my sleeves and
create reduced test cases to see just what is causing these
miscalculations...
__
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] IE7 special code
Alex Robinson wrote:
> Because while Microsoft fixed * html they introduced another
> parsing bug :)
>
> Actually you don't need the :first-child since *+html shouldn't
> select anything and doesn't in other modern browsers. It's just IE7
> that does it.
>
> The only drawback is that if you want to target both IE7 and IE6 et
> al, you need to have a double declaration
>
> * html { ... }
> *+html { ... }
MS fixed the mysterious 'super-root' element. But their support for
those additional selectors in IE 7 reveals another bug, in that
comments (and the DTD stuff at the top of the page is a SGML comment
of sorts) are treated as elements, whereas they should be just
nothing, at parsing time.
(Probably because they have to support that barbarity that is a
Conditional Comment).
Deconstructed:
*+html selects an element that immediately follows another one (any
element), as in
(and IE 7 only support the adjacent sibling combinator in 'standards
mode')
> At 10:50 + 23/3/07, Chris Ovenden wrote:
>> .clearing { display:none } /* IE 6 & 7 */
>> *|html .clearing { display:block } /* everything else */
>
> I think this is the first sighting of this beast in the wild
>
> http://frontend.blogsome.com/2007/01/23/the-flispide-of-star-html/
>
> Of course that's invalid in CSS2.1
>
> It is valid CSS3 as far as I can tell...
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-namespace/#css-qnames
>
> ... but the W3 vaildator claims that it's not which looks like a bug
> in the validator to me.
The CSS validator doesn't support namespaces, as far as I know.
Try validating this:
@namespace a url(http://www.example.com/a);
a|b
foo
Moreover, I don't think browsers should support namespace selectors
in text/html documents. text/html is not namespace aware (browser do
support them in practice).
Philippe
---
Philippe Wittenbergh
__
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] IE7 special code
Alex Robinson wrote: > ... but the W3 vaildator claims that it's not which looks like a bug in > the validator to me. Of course, trying to explain that to some clients > may be tricky. Pity the one who finds themselves having to justify lack of css validity and can't... More so if it's actually significant in the client's eyes! Regards, Barney __ 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] IE7 special code
Chris Ovenden wrote:
> TO filter the other way you can use something like
> .clearing { display:none } /* IE 6 & 7 */
> *|html .clearing { display:block } /* everything else */
>
> Chris
>
> On 3/22/07, Mark Story <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The selector I've been using with quite a bit of success is
>>
>> *:first-child+html
>> so in your circumstance it would be
>>
>> *:first-child+html .clearing {
>>
>> This selector uses the invisible super parent object above html that
>> only IE has, it then uses CSS2 selectors to target the HTML object
>> something that IE6 cannot do. This selector is completely ignored by
>> other browsers as they don't have an element above html.
>>
>> -Mark
>>
>> Pelle wrote:
>>> Hi all.
>>>
>>> I have this in my CSS
>>> * html .clearing {display:none;}
>>>
>>> i NEED this to imp+lement in IE7 too, but NOT in Ffx or so.
>>> What is the bug code for this?
>>> In pure .css file cause it is external, no javascript or [if lte IE 7]
>>> works in this case :(
Or avoid a bunch of hacks and just use conditional comments to feed IE7
what it needs. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet!
--
David
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
authenticity, honesty, community
__
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] IE7 special code
david wrote: > Or avoid a bunch of hacks and just use conditional comments to feed IE7 > what it needs. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet! Quite refreshing, innit? I think it's because conditional comments aren't CSS. Increasingly I find more people find it more important to maintain honestly valid HTML than CSS - as long as the markup is sparkling, the horrors underneath can twist and turn to accommodate whatever will eat them. Regards, Barney __ 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] IE7 special code
Barney Carroll wrote: > david wrote: >> Or avoid a bunch of hacks and just use conditional comments to feed IE7 >> what it needs. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet! > > Quite refreshing, innit? I think it's because conditional comments > aren't CSS. > > Increasingly I find more people find it more important to maintain > honestly valid HTML than CSS - as long as the markup is sparkling, the > horrors underneath can twist and turn to accommodate whatever will eat them. CSS is a powerful thing, but it is intended to work with valid HTML (as the W3C CSS validator reports). Clean, basic HTML avoids problems. And conditional comments don't interfere with that at all. -- David [EMAIL PROTECTED] authenticity, honesty, community __ 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] IE7 special code
On 3/23/07, david <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Barney Carroll wrote: > > david wrote: > >> Or avoid a bunch of hacks and just use conditional comments to feed IE7 > >> what it needs. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet! > > > > Quite refreshing, innit? I think it's because conditional comments > > aren't CSS. > > > > Increasingly I find more people find it more important to maintain > > honestly valid HTML than CSS - as long as the markup is sparkling, the > > horrors underneath can twist and turn to accommodate whatever will eat them. > > CSS is a powerful thing, but it is intended to work with valid HTML (as > the W3C CSS validator reports). Clean, basic HTML avoids problems. And > conditional comments don't interfere with that at all. > I think it's disingenuous to call conditional comments "clean, basic HTML". We all want to do beautiful, cross-platform, futureproof page layouts using semantic, accessible markup; unfortunately user agents are currently not quite up to the job (and, much as I love it, I have to include Firefox in this). So we hack; or, less pejoratively, we work around known issues with the user agents we're given - counting our blessings that we live in 2007 and not 1997. Whether we hack the CSS, the HTML or a bit of both is a matter of personal choice (personally I'm with Barney on this) - but call it what it is and don't try to pretend to purity. Chris -- Chris Ovenden http://thepeer.blogspot.com "Imagine all the people / Sharing all the world" __ 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] IE7 special code
> > From: david > > CSS is a powerful thing, but it is intended to work with > > valid HTML (as the W3C CSS validator reports). Clean, > > basic HTML avoids problems. And conditional comments > > don't interfere with that at all. > From: Chris Ovenden > I think it's disingenuous to call conditional comments > "clean, basic HTML". We all want to do beautiful, > cross-platform, futureproof page layouts using semantic, > accessible markup; unfortunately user agents are currently > not quite up to the job (and, much as I love it, I have to > include Firefox in this). So we hack; or, less pejoratively, we > work around known issues with the user agents we're given > - counting our blessings that we live in 2007 and not 1997. > Whether we hack the CSS, the HTML or a bit of both is a > matter of personal choice (personally I'm with Barney on > this) - but call it what it is and don't try to pretend to purity. Very insightful! At first I was taken aback by the word "disingenuous", until I realized you probably didn't mean its usual connotation of cynical, calculating, and insincere. :-) It's not surprising that I'd be confused by a word where Dictionary.com complains: "The meaning of disingenuous has been shifting about lately, as if people were unsure of its proper meaning..." http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=disingenuous -Mike (not the language police, just want to make sure no one takes offense at something you didn't intend) __ 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] IE7 special code
Michael Geary wrote: > > From: Chris Ovenden > > I think it's disingenuous to call conditional comments > > "clean, basic HTML". We all want to do beautiful, > > cross-platform, futureproof page layouts using semantic, > > accessible markup; unfortunately user agents are currently > > not quite up to the job (and, much as I love it, I have to > > include Firefox in this). So we hack; or, less pejoratively, we > > work around known issues with the user agents we're given > > - counting our blessings that we live in 2007 and not 1997. > > Whether we hack the CSS, the HTML or a bit of both is a > > matter of personal choice (personally I'm with Barney on > > this) - but call it what it is and don't try to pretend to purity. > > Very insightful! > > At first I was taken aback by the word "disingenuous", until I realized you > probably didn't mean its usual connotation of cynical, calculating, and > insincere. :-) > > It's not surprising that I'd be confused by a word where Dictionary.com > complains: "The meaning of disingenuous has been shifting about lately, as > if people were unsure of its proper meaning..." > > http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=disingenuous > > -Mike (not the language police, just want to make sure no one takes offense > at something you didn't intend) > Very interesting! I stand corrected in my use of the word, as I didn't mean to imply that david's description of conditional comments was either calcuating, naive or lacking in candour. Lacking in depth or clarity, perhaps; overly-optimistic maybe. Can we just go with "inaccurate"? ;-) -- Chris Ovenden http://thepeer.blogspot.com "Imagine all the people / Sharing all the world" __ 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/
