Re: [WSG] Hover issue
Looks great on IE / Mac, Safari and Firefox / Mac. CSS doesn't yet validate though. :) Lucian On Feb 16, 2004, at 4:01 PM, LC 55 wrote: Hi all... Anyone care to check - http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html please. I have a problem in IE 6 re: background image. The image at bottom right moves slightly down the page when hovering over footer links. Does the same problem exist across other browsers? Or are you finding any other problems? Any help appreciated. Regards, JG _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Hover issue
Thanks Lucian for the feedback. I am puzzled re: you writing, The CSS doesn't validate. W3C validator was used and, the uri below validates it as CSS2. Hope the W3C were not just being kind to me! http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Flc55.co.uk%2Ftest%2Fd.csswarning=1profile=css2usermedium=all Strange one this. So could you tell me where you tried the validation, please? Appreciate you testing it for me. Regards, JG --- Lucian Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks great on IE / Mac, Safari and Firefox / Mac. CSS doesn't yet validate though. :) Lucian On Feb 16, 2004, at 4:01 PM, LC 55 wrote: Hi all... Anyone care to check - http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html please. I have a problem in IE 6 re: background image. The image at bottom right moves slightly down the page when hovering over footer links. Does the same problem exist across other browsers? Or are you finding any other problems? Any help appreciated. Regards, JG _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
RE: [WSG] Hover issue
Hi JG, If you validate the page using the HTML validator, there is a link to check the CSS as well and this parses the page to validate the CSS (easier than validating all the CSS files individually if you have more than one and more correct as it uses the parsing tree). So go to: http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html (perfect!) and there is a link that says: If you use CSS in your document, you should also check it for validity using the W3C CSS Validation Service. Click on check it for validity and you'll get: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http://lc55.co.uk/test/inde x.html Errors URI : http://lc55.co.uk/test/d.css Line: 0 Context : #container Invalid number : margin-bottomToo many values or values are not recognized : 0 auto Line: 0 Context : #container Invalid number : margin-bottomToo many values or values are not recognized : 0 auto _ Now.. Why is this so? Sorry, I can't help you there right now, but probably something to do with the parsing tree. So why the commented stuff in: style type=text/css media=all /*![CDATA[*/ @import d.css; /*]]*/ /style P -Original Message- From: LC 55 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 16, 2004 8:09 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Hover issue Thanks Lucian for the feedback. I am puzzled re: you writing, The CSS doesn't validate. W3C validator was used and, the uri below validates it as CSS2. Hope the W3C were not just being kind to me! http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2F lc55.co.uk%2Ftest%2Fd.csswarning=1profile=css2usermedium=all Strange one this. So could you tell me where you tried the validation, please? Appreciate you testing it for me. Regards, JG --- Lucian Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks great on IE / Mac, Safari and Firefox / Mac. CSS doesn't yet validate though. :) Lucian On Feb 16, 2004, at 4:01 PM, LC 55 wrote: Hi all... Anyone care to check - http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html please. I have a problem in IE 6 re: background image. The image at bottom right moves slightly down the page when hovering over footer links. Does the same problem exist across other browsers? Or are you finding any other problems? Any help appreciated. Regards, JG _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * _ Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Hover issue
Pardon my ignorance please.
I tried the CSS validator using http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html and got this
result...
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?uri=http%3A%2F%2Flc55.co.uk%2Ftest%2Findex.htmlwarning=1profile=css2usermedium=all
Thanks for pointing this out Michael. (a very red face at this end).
Regards, JG
--- LC 55 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael, Peter and Lucian appreciate the feedback.
I'm still on a steep learning curve.
Firstly Michael, I was under the illusion if you tried to use the W3C CSS validator
with a .html extension, you wouldn't have a hope of getting it to validate, as
surely it is a .css only validator? Therefore how can it validate .html? (jigsaw
validator, I mean).
You'll probably have a simple explanation for me, I hope so, as I'm getting a bit lost
with this one.
As i said, I'm still quite green to this myself.
Also I know the CSS is untidy re: double ids etc. (still working on it).
New draft version at http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html (where I have moved the
background image to top right).
and the uncondensed CSS draft is at http://lc55.co.uk/test/d.css
Help with condensing the CSS would be very appreciated if any of you guys can spare
the time.
Hope I'm not boring you guys to much, but I suppose we are all here to learn from each
other.
Thanks again, JG
--- Michael Donnermeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?
uri=http%3A%2F%2Flc55.co.uk%2Ftest%2Findex.html
Here's the issue in your #container:
margin-bottom: 0 auto;
You can't have two values here. Correct ones would be::
margin-bottom: 0ormargin-bottom: auto
Were you trying this maybe::margin: 0 auto(0 on top bottom,
auto for left and right)
The CSS could use some cleaning, looks like there's some doubles in
there (ids) and alot of double stating on things like background in
some ids.
I.E.:
#container {
width : 100%;
margin: 0 auto;
background : url(img/xr.gif) repeat 100% 50%;
background-repeat : no-repeat;
background-position : 100% 100%;
background-color : #d4dfd1;
font-family : Trebuchet MS, Lucida Grande, Verdana, Arial,
sans-serif;
font-size : 0.9em;
color : #333;
line-height : 115%;
}
Two questions arise there...in one you have it repeat, then you don't.
You have it position 100% 50% then 100% 100%. The later of the two
override the first ones. Be easier to condense everything into:
background: #d4dfd1 url(img/xr,gif) no-repeat bottom right;
MD
On Feb 16, 2004, at 04:08, LC 55 wrote:
Thanks Lucian for the feedback.
I am puzzled re: you writing, The CSS doesn't validate.
W3C validator was used and, the uri below validates it as CSS2.
Hope the W3C were not just being kind to me!
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?
uri=http%3A%2F%2Flc55.co.uk%2Ftest%2Fd.csswarning=1profile=css2userm
edium=all
Strange one this.
So could you tell me where you tried the validation, please?
Appreciate you testing it for me.
Regards, JG
--- Lucian Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks great on IE / Mac, Safari and Firefox / Mac.
CSS doesn't yet validate though. :)
Lucian
On Feb 16, 2004, at 4:01 PM, LC 55 wrote:
Hi all...
Anyone care to check - http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html please.
I have a problem in IE 6 re: background image.
The image at bottom right moves slightly down the page when hovering
over footer links.
Does the same problem exist across other browsers?
Or are you finding any other problems?
Any help appreciated.
Regards, JG
_
Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers
Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
_
Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers
Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
_
Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers Cool Domains @
Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
Re: [WSG] Hover issue
It's not validating the html, but the CSS file based off the link contained within the HTML file...just like a browser would see the file. The only problem in there per the validator was the margin-bottom issue. After that's fixed, and everything's cleaned, it shouldn't have a problem validating. MD On Feb 16, 2004, at 07:08, LC 55 wrote: Michael, Peter and Lucian appreciate the feedback. I'm still on a steep learning curve. Firstly Michael, I was under the illusion if you tried to use the W3C CSS validator with a .html extension, you wouldn't have a hope of getting it to validate, as surely it is a .css only validator? Therefore how can it validate .html? (jigsaw validator, I mean). You'll probably have a simple explanation for me, I hope so, as I'm getting a bit lost with this one. As i said, I'm still quite green to this myself. Also I know the CSS is untidy re: double ids etc. (still working on it). New draft version at http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html (where I have moved the background image to top right). and the uncondensed CSS draft is at http://lc55.co.uk/test/d.css Help with condensing the CSS would be very appreciated if any of you guys can spare the time. Hope I'm not boring you guys to much, but I suppose we are all here to learn from each other. Thanks again, JG * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ *
Re: [WSG] Hover issue
Should be commented to show anything major done:
attachment: d.css.zip
MD
On Feb 16, 2004, at 07:08, LC 55 wrote:
Michael, Peter and Lucian appreciate the feedback.
I'm still on a steep learning curve.
Firstly Michael, I was under the illusion if you tried to use the W3C
CSS validator with a .html extension, you wouldn't have a hope of
getting it to validate, as surely it is a .css only validator?
Therefore how can it validate .html? (jigsaw validator, I mean).
You'll probably have a simple explanation for me, I hope so, as I'm
getting a bit lost with this one.
As i said, I'm still quite green to this myself.
Also I know the CSS is untidy re: double ids etc. (still working on
it).
New draft version at http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html (where I have
moved the background image to top right).
and the uncondensed CSS draft is at http://lc55.co.uk/test/d.css
Help with condensing the CSS would be very appreciated if any of you
guys can spare the time.
Hope I'm not boring you guys to much, but I suppose we are all here to
learn from each other.
Thanks again, JG
--- Michael Donnermeyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?
uri=http%3A%2F%2Flc55.co.uk%2Ftest%2Findex.html
Here's the issue in your #container:
margin-bottom: 0 auto;
You can't have two values here. Correct ones would be::
margin-bottom: 0ormargin-bottom: auto
Were you trying this maybe::margin: 0 auto(0 on top bottom,
auto for left and right)
The CSS could use some cleaning, looks like there's some doubles in
there (ids) and alot of double stating on things like background in
some ids.
I.E.:
#container {
width : 100%;
margin: 0 auto;
background : url(img/xr.gif) repeat 100% 50%;
background-repeat : no-repeat;
background-position : 100% 100%;
background-color : #d4dfd1;
font-family : Trebuchet MS, Lucida Grande, Verdana, Arial,
sans-serif;
font-size : 0.9em;
color : #333;
line-height : 115%;
}
Two questions arise there...in one you have it repeat, then you don't.
You have it position 100% 50% then 100% 100%. The later of the two
override the first ones. Be easier to condense everything into:
background: #d4dfd1 url(img/xr,gif) no-repeat bottom right;
MD
On Feb 16, 2004, at 04:08, LC 55 wrote:
Thanks Lucian for the feedback.
I am puzzled re: you writing, The CSS doesn't validate.
W3C validator was used and, the uri below validates it as CSS2.
Hope the W3C were not just being kind to me!
http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/validator?
uri=http%3A%2F%2Flc55.co.uk%2Ftest%2Fd.csswarning=1profile=css2user
m
edium=all
Strange one this.
So could you tell me where you tried the validation, please?
Appreciate you testing it for me.
Regards, JG
--- Lucian Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Looks great on IE / Mac, Safari and Firefox / Mac.
CSS doesn't yet validate though. :)
Lucian
On Feb 16, 2004, at 4:01 PM, LC 55 wrote:
Hi all...
Anyone care to check - http://lc55.co.uk/test/index.html please.
I have a problem in IE 6 re: background image.
The image at bottom right moves slightly down the page when hovering
over footer links.
Does the same problem exist across other browsers?
Or are you finding any other problems?
Any help appreciated.
Regards, JG
_
Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers
Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go:
http://www.idotz.net
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
_
Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers
Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
_
Why Pay $35 for a .COM, .NET or .ORG Web Address? iDotz.Net offers
Cool Domains @ Great Prices! Starting @ $8.75 Go: http://www.idotz.net
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
*
