[WSG] RE: CSS Validator problem:= SOLVED
Thanx to Sigurd Magnusson, Peter J. Farrell, who take time to answer the question. Special Thanx to: Juergen Auer, Ben Curtis and Jalenack (for info about Mac IE5 and Safary) Juergen and Ben was absolutely right - the trouble was in first line (empty), which was generated becouse newlines immediately after closing PHP compilation markers in my include files. Thank you Sirs. Andrey Stefaneneko ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
Hi Bert, I do not exact know, if you know Xml/Xsl: But using them could help a lot. I am using this to create the inner window without the navigation. Look at http://www.sql-und-xml.de/xml/index.xml - there is no navigation defined. Matching all these Xml-Files with the associated Xsl produces pure Html - http://www.sql-und-xml.de/ is the Output for most of the browsers and spiders and has now a navigation. Using external Entities could also separate content, navigation and formatting elements. When I create a new page, the result is 'naturally XHtml1.1 - valide'. The Html-Version can be produced with a VBScript or a NET-Tool. Best Regards, Juergen Auer On 21 Mar 2005 at 11:22, Bert Doorn wrote: I design sites to be standards compliant (usually XHTML1.0 Strict). This is ~supposed~ to make maintenance easier, and it is for me since I know what I'm doing (or at least, I think I do) ... What other options are there, apart from complex, expensive CMS setups (or forgetting about standards)? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] IE trouble with CSS calendar
Hello, good people. :) I'm working on a css-based calendar, and have it almost as I'd like it, but I noticed it doesn't work in IE. I admit that the code may be sloppy, because I've pieced it together from a few sources. Can I please get some help on this? It'll be obvious what doesn't work in IE, but even in Firefox, I can't seem to get the unanchored numbers to center properly. Thanks. http://www.drzeus.net/clients/stevierays/music.html -- ~john _ Dr. Zeus Web Design http://www.DrZeus.net content without clutter ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Draggable Items
Does anyone know the best way to create draggable container elements? Dean Edwards (him of IE7 fame) has put something together that works in IE and FF: http://dean.edwards.name/my/examples/moz-behaviors/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Website Review
It is from Google. My host requires me to put it there in exchange for the free hosting :) On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 17:13:09 +1100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can I get some opinions on the practice of hiding link targets? When I hover near the sponsored links in http://www.uniformserver.com/ the target of the link doesn't appear in the status bar. I'm not really complaining about this particular site, but I tried something similar a while ago, with a bit of Javascript, and then realised it might be construed as concealing something from the surfer. I found it irritating that a link could take me to somewhere I don't want to go. Is it a good practice? -- John. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** -- Best Regards, Olajide Olaolorun @ www.olajideolaolorun.com ...ain't nothing impossible unless you make it... ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bert Doorn Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2005 10:22 PM To: Web Standards Group Subject: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves I design sites to be standards compliant (usually XHTML1.0 Strict). This is ~supposed~ to make maintenance easier, and it is for me since I know what I'm doing (or at least, I think I do) However, I get many prospects who want to update sites themselves. In many cases, these are very small businesses with just one or two people, none of which have any idea about (x)HTML. Most of them have very small budgets, so they can't afford a complete CMS type setup (and it's not the kind of thing I can supply) and they tend to only want a small site (a few pages) for next to nothing. Is it just me, or is this a common dilemma? Apart from abandoning standards compliance (not an option as far as I'm concerned), setting the site up in HTML4.01 Transitional and letting amateurs wreak havoc with Micro$oft FONTPlague, what options are there to design standards compliant sites, letting clients maintain them and still stay within web standards? ** Why not just offer to do it either on a contractual basis (x dollars for y time per month) or a per item basis? The work is generally trivial. drew ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Horizontal scrollbar issue
Bert is spot on. The horiz scrollbar disappears at 837 - 838 px wide,
inc chrome.
800px + 32px + 8px = 840px (assuming that 1em = 16px). QED.
What does 'full on' mean?
N
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
On 21 Mar 2005, at 1:19 PM, Chris Kennon wrote:
Hi,
My issue was with safari 1.0.3 on MAC OS 10.2.8. even full on it has a
horizontal scroll. Pardon the vagary.
On Sunday, March 20, 2005, at 04:50 PM, Bert Doorn wrote:
G'day
The page at the following url is giving me a horizontal scrollbar,
I've no clue why, would someone assist?
(http://working.ckimedia.com/spring_2005/index.php)
At what resolution in which browser on which platform?
I had a look at it with Firefox 1.01 on Windows 2000 Pro. It has a
horizontal scrollbar at 800x600 but not at 1024x768 and higher. The
reason for horizontal scrollbars at 800x600:
div#wrapper{
margin: 0 0 0 2em;
padding: 1em 0 0 .5em;
width: 800px;
}
Total width: 2em + .5em + 800px. That's is more than any browser can
fit at 800x600. Bear in mind that the 2.5em is ADDED to the 800px so
if 1em is 16px (it will vary), you have a total width of 840 pixels
PLUS browser chrome (vertical scrollbar, window borders, sidebars).
Try 700px instead of 800px. You could also use max-width:95% (or
less) and specify your left margin and padding as 4% and 1%, but MSIE
PC does not recognise max-width.
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
The true measure of ignorance
is thinking intelligence is the
solution to everything.
-ck
Chris Kennon
Principal
ckimedia (www.ckimedia.com)
e-mail: ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
blog: (http://thebardwire.blogspot.com/)
ph: (619)429-3258
fax: (619)429-3258
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Horizontal scrollbar issue
Hi,
When the browser is at 1024 X 768, Safari 1.0.3 still renders a
horizontal scroll bar. Thanks for looking.
C
On Monday, March 21, 2005, at 05:00 AM, Nick Gleitzman wrote:
Bert is spot on. The horiz scrollbar disappears at 837 - 838 px
wide, inc chrome.
800px + 32px + 8px = 840px (assuming that 1em = 16px). QED.
What does 'full on' mean?
N
___
Omnivision. Websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
On 21 Mar 2005, at 1:19 PM, Chris Kennon wrote:
Hi,
My issue was with safari 1.0.3 on MAC OS 10.2.8. even full on it has
a horizontal scroll. Pardon the vagary.
On Sunday, March 20, 2005, at 04:50 PM, Bert Doorn wrote:
G'day
The page at the following url is giving me a horizontal scrollbar,
I've no clue why, would someone assist?
(http://working.ckimedia.com/spring_2005/index.php)
At what resolution in which browser on which platform?
I had a look at it with Firefox 1.01 on Windows 2000 Pro. It has a
horizontal scrollbar at 800x600 but not at 1024x768 and higher. The
reason for horizontal scrollbars at 800x600:
div#wrapper{
margin: 0 0 0 2em;
padding: 1em 0 0 .5em;
width: 800px;
}
Total width: 2em + .5em + 800px. That's is more than any browser
can fit at 800x600. Bear in mind that the 2.5em is ADDED to the
800px so if 1em is 16px (it will vary), you have a total width of
840 pixels PLUS browser chrome (vertical scrollbar, window
borders, sidebars).
Try 700px instead of 800px. You could also use max-width:95% (or
less) and specify your left margin and padding as 4% and 1%, but
MSIE PC does not recognise max-width.
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
The true measure of ignorance
is thinking intelligence is the
solution to everything.
-ck
Chris Kennon
Principal
ckimedia (www.ckimedia.com)
e-mail: ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
blog: (http://thebardwire.blogspot.com/)
ph: (619)429-3258
fax: (619)429-3258
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
CK
__
Knowing is not enough, you must apply;
willing is not enough, you must do.
---Bruce Lee
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:22:29 +0800, Bert Doorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What other options are there, apart from complex, expensive CMS setups (or forgetting about standards)? Why not use a simple, free CMS like Wordpress or Textpattern? Both are free (as in speech and as in beer), fairly simple to configure and work with, and built to support standards. I think TXP (Textpattern) will give you and your clients an easy way to update their site and also, to avoid that your client destroys all the site design and estructure, by messing up with XHTML or CSS and screwing up all your work. Textpattern has the posibility to assing different permissions to the users, so you can be a Publisher (you have access to all administration options), and your client can be just an Author (and have access to modify just the contents, articles, links, etc). BTW, TXP is a CMS, but this doesnt mean that you need to create a blog-like site. I use it to manage an static site with few dinamic content. http://www.textpattern.com Excuse my poor english. Regards, Julián Le Mannequin ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
Another enthusiastic endorsement of Textpattern. I've used it a number of times in scenarios where the client wants to update the site themselves (see www.fluidwav.com as an example). I've also used it to manage more complex sites, where static pages would just be way too difficult to maintain (www.digroup.ca). I am very limited when it comes to php, but textpattern allows me to exploit many of the server-side benefits of scripting without having to write a single line of code. The txp paradigm take a bit of getting used to (for example, the word form is used to refer to a reusable bit of html, aka a php include), but once you've got it down, you'll have a hard time imagining working without it. Peter Flaschner www.peterflaschner.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Julián Landerreche Sent: Monday, March 21, 2005 9:54 AM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 11:22:29 +0800, Bert Doorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What other options are there, apart from complex, expensive CMS setups (or forgetting about standards)? Why not use a simple, free CMS like Wordpress or Textpattern? Both are free (as in speech and as in beer), fairly simple to configure and work with, and built to support standards. I think TXP (Textpattern) will give you and your clients an easy way to update their site and also, to avoid that your client destroys all the site design and estructure, by messing up with XHTML or CSS and screwing up all your work. Textpattern has the posibility to assing different permissions to the users, so you can be a Publisher (you have access to all administration options), and your client can be just an Author (and have access to modify just the contents, articles, links, etc). BTW, TXP is a CMS, but this doesnt mean that you need to create a blog-like site. I use it to manage an static site with few dinamic content. http://www.textpattern.com Excuse my poor english. Regards, Julián Le Mannequin ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
I've run into this problem quite a bit (in one way or another). I've found in the end is that the simple most effective way to fix it is to simply put instructions in the code with comments and do your best to instruct them on the details. If you don't work for a company and it's a private client you're dealing with who are desperate to make the updates themselves (and, understably, not pay you for your expertise) then they will either have to develop their own expertise (point them in the direction of a short course or you can teach them), or they can make mistakes. Updating a website without a CMS is a task for anyone. If they want to benefit from having a webpage, then they can either learn to do it or send the work to someone who knows how. In the end, it's like owning a car, either you get it repaired by a mechanic or you try to fix it, break it more and then get it repaired by a mechanic anyway, but at least with the later, maybe you've learnt something. In the end I gave up trying to teach every client and became a CMS developer. :P ~Dave Bert Doorn wrote: I design sites to be standards compliant (usually XHTML1.0 Strict). This is ~supposed~ to make maintenance easier, and it is for me since I know what I'm doing (or at least, I think I do) However, I get many prospects who want to update sites themselves. In many cases, these are very small businesses with just one or two people, none of which have any idea about (x)HTML. Most of them have very small budgets, so they can't afford a complete CMS type setup (and it's not the kind of thing I can supply) and they tend to only want a small site (a few pages) for next to nothing. Is it just me, or is this a common dilemma? Apart from abandoning standards compliance (not an option as far as I'm concerned), setting the site up in HTML4.01 Transitional and letting amateurs wreak havoc with Micro$oft FONTPlague, what options are there to design standards compliant sites, letting clients maintain them and still stay within web standards? Yes, I know there's things like XStandard, and the confusingly named FCKEditor. However, these (as far as I know) require server side scripting and the client would have to have write-access to the files on the server (or a database driven site), all of which increases the cost. What other options are there, apart from complex, expensive CMS setups (or forgetting about standards)? Regards -- *~Dave Elkan *munch munch*e:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *w:* http://www.zigzig.net *w:* http://www.edave.net ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
So... I'll stick with I will update for you as and when needed and charge for it. If you want CMS, I can't help you. The best advice in the thread seemed to be using comments in the markup. Unless they intend extreme updates, the ability to quickly locate and change their business profile - - or drop in seasonal specials and discounts - - is what will make the biggest impact for a small player. And a well-commented and cleanly coded page should be able to show them where it is while keeping them away from the part they can muck up. And yes, one of my clients is doing just that. Sure, I get a call every few months to add in a bit of something, or fix something he broke ... but the good will generated by helping him do a bit himself, I think, helped develop the client relationship. And as he grows, the time between calls is shorter and shorter. Flies and honey and all that. one man's opinion. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] nesting in list
Does anyone know what is allowed to be nested under a list (ul,ol,dl) in XHTML? I read one resource, but all it said is that ul and ol require 1 li, and dl requires at least one dt, and one dl. Alan Trick
Re: [WSG] nesting in list
at the very least, I believe any inline element can be nested. Some block-level elements may be as well I think. ~j On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:32:33 -0500, Alan Trick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know what is allowed to be nested under a list (ul,ol,dl) in XHTML? I read one resource, but all it said is that ul and ol require 1 li, and dl requires at least one dt, and one dl. Alan Trick -- Jonathan T. Sage Theatrical Lighting / Set Designer Professional Web Design [HTTP://www.JTSage.com] [HTTP://design.JTSage.com] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
So... I'll stick with I will update for you as and when needed and charge for it. If you want CMS, I can't help you. Or more like this?: I will update for you as and when needed and charge for it or you can try it yourself and I'll charge you to fix it later which may cost more than if I did it myself in the first place. If you want CMS, I can't help you. :-P -- - Tom Livingston Senior Multimedia Artist Media Logic mlinc.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] nesting in list
Looking at the W3C for XHTML 1.1; http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-modularization/abstract_modules.html#s_listmodule It says that LI and DDs both are part of the Flow content model, which is the same as DIV, so this looks to confirm what my feeling was... they can contain any nested element, including further DLs, ULs and OLs. DTs are like H1s; and can only contain inline elements. Siggy - Original Message - From: Jonathan T. Sage [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 5:52 AM Subject: Re: [WSG] nesting in list at the very least, I believe any inline element can be nested. Some block-level elements may be as well I think. ~j On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:32:33 -0500, Alan Trick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know what is allowed to be nested under a list (ul,ol,dl) in XHTML? I read one resource, but all it said is that ul and ol require 1 li, and dl requires at least one dt, and one dl. Alan Trick -- Jonathan T. Sage Theatrical Lighting / Set Designer Professional Web Design [HTTP://www.JTSage.com] [HTTP://design.JTSage.com] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Transparent gif renders wrong colours in Netscape7.0
For some reason Netscape has rendered a few div backgrounds in the wrong colour. This only occurs on some of the divs and only if it's a gif with transparency. A gif with no transparency or a jpg renders fine. When I scroll image off the screen and back on again it is rendered correctly, but hit refresh and it returns. Anyone got any advice or good links on this? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
Hi Bert The people I am trying to help want simple buttons to format text on static pages, not learn a new language (otherwise I'd teach them HTML). I haven't used this, but looked into it a while back, but it might provide a solution for some of your clients. Visit http://www.flyspeck.net/. It doesn't use a database, has password protection and allows for multiple edit chunks per page. HTH Sarah :) -- XERT Communications email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: +61 2 4782 3104 mobile: 0438 017 416 http://www.xert.com.au/ web development : digital imaging : dvd production ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
Hi Peter I am really interested in Textpattern, but like many others want to retain XHTML/CSS validation when clients make changes. Another enthusiastic endorsement of Textpattern. I've used it a number of times in scenarios where the client wants to update the site themselves (see www.fluidwav.com as an example). I've also used it to manage more complex sites, where static pages would just be way too difficult to maintain (www.digroup.ca). I am very limited when it comes to php, but textpattern allows me to exploit many of the server-side benefits of scripting without having to write a single line of code. I have just looked at both your sites (they're very impressive BTW), but there were some validation problems on the pages I looked at. Can you tell me whether the sites were XHTML/CSS valid when they went live? And if so, has the client's use of Textpattern thrown them out since? Thanks Sarah :) -- XERT Communications email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] office: +61 2 4782 3104 mobile: 0438 017 416 http://www.xert.com.au/ web development : digital imaging : dvd production ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
Bert Doorn wrote: What other options are there, apart from complex, expensive CMS setups (or forgetting about standards)? Check out liveSTORYBOARD CMS (http://www.livestoryboard.com/): * standards based CMS and standards compliant output * completely separates look and feel, business logic and content * content is edited in a friendly wysiwyg (suitable for non technically savvy content contributors, but an XML tree view is also available) * content is schema validated * provides staging environments * no install or maintenance for your clients - the CMS is hosted * affordable best, Iva. begin:vcard fn:Iva Koberg n:Koberg;Iva org:liveSTORYBOARD Inc. adr:#5;;2 Clarence Place;San Francisco;CA;94107;USA email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tel;work:415-615-9079 tel;fax:415-615-9036 tel;cell:415-823-5746 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.livestoryboard.com version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: [WSG] Standards compliant site, clients wants to make updates themselves
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005 00:28:47 +0800, Bert Doorn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Contribute sounds like a good idea, but it means I have to learn to use Dreamweaver and its template system. Plus the customer needs to learn how to use Contribute. Too hard. You don't have to use DW templates - that's just one suggestion for limiting the areas they can update. Also, learning the product takes about ten minutes for anyone - I haven't had a client yet who hasn't been amazed at how easy it actually is. I guess if you're happy to say to the client if you want a CMS I can't help you that's fine. Personally, I wouldn't dream of turning a client away, but that's just me! -- Kay Smoljak http://kay.smoljak.com/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] A HREF around a Flash Object?
Hi Everyone, hope you are well. I am currently developing a website for a customer who requires certain animated tiles which link through to other pages - they have decided to use Flash for these. I know in Flash hyperlinking to other pages is handled in the flash file itself. However, I wondered if there is a standards compliant way that I can wrap an A HREF around the flash object, so that the hyperlinking is controlled by the web page, not the flash file? That way users without Flash can still link through to the target page. Any Ideas? Cheers, Matt ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] A HREF around a Flash Object?
Use JavaScript to communicate to flash's command and arguments. Look up how to do this in Google. :o) Richard - Original Message - From: Matt [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2005 10:14 AM Subject: [WSG] A HREF around a Flash Object? Hi Everyone, hope you are well. I am currently developing a website for a customer who requires certain animated tiles which link through to other pages - they have decided to use Flash for these. I know in Flash hyperlinking to other pages is handled in the flash file itself. However, I wondered if there is a standards compliant way that I can wrap an A HREF around the flash object, so that the hyperlinking is controlled by the web page, not the flash file? That way users without Flash can still link through to the target page. Any Ideas? Cheers, Matt ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Horizontal scrollbar issue
On 22 Mar 2005, at 1:38 AM, Chris Kennon wrote: When the browser is at 1024 X 768, Safari 1.0.3 still renders a horizontal scroll bar. Thanks for looking. Ah. Then I'd say it's a bug in 1.0.3. I was checking in 1.2.4 / OS X 10.3.8. N ___ Omnivision. Websight. http://www.omnivision.com.au/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Re: [css-d] columns of equal height - a different problem?
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 18:55:47 -0800, Don Hinshaw
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[..]
The left column needs to have the light blue color continue to the
bottom of the page if the main column is longer than the left.
[...]
Make a gif the appropriate color and width, and use something like this in
your CSS:
#wrapper { background: #FFF url(light-blue-color.gif) top left repeat-y;
width: 650px;}
Best,
David
--
de gustibus non est disputandum
http://www.dlaakso.com/
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
RE: [WSG] Css Floating Image
Thank you that solved the problem in IE. Matt From: Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: RE: [WSG] Css Floating Image Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 19:12:31 +1100 -Original Message- From: M M [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, 16 March 2005 2:54 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] Css Floating Image Right now the problem is a gap under the image. Ooops, didn't read your mail carefully enough. It's the little space under the image you want to get rid of? That's caused by your formatting of HTML, I think. If you wrote your whole code on one line, it gets rid of the space: div id=wrapperdiv id=boximg src=images/test.jpg width=200 height=100/divdiv id=textthis text should float to the right of the image/div/div ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** _ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
