Thanks to Mustafa and Philippe, my problem is now solved. I added the
overflow:hidden
to the li and it worked like a charm.
I guess there is no way to get rid of the red/blue focussing rings
altogether. I thought that no-decoration would do it, but that didn't
work. Not a really big deal, but a
yeah, it works.
This is the second bug I encountered whose root cause is the hasLayout
problem. What a stupid bug.
Thanks.
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 3:43 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ray wrote:
Look at this page http://www.soundbowl.com/test.html in IE7. The outer
div has a
Hello all,
I am not sure if this is a HTTP question or a CSS question.
The situation :
1) a static HTML page at domain1.com references a CSS stylesheet at
domain2.com
2) the user agent has previously received a cookie for the domain2.com
domain
Questions : will the user agent send the cookie
This is a meta-css question: :)
Any of you are using this mailing list with Outlook and a rule to filter
mails from this mailing list ?
If so, can you please give me the configurations that work with you.
I have tried to make a lot of rules but, the message does not goes out from
my main
On Nov 5, 2008, at 20:01 wlb wrote:
Thanks to Mustafa and Philippe, my problem is now solved. I added the
overflow:hidden
to the li and it worked like a charm.
I guess there is no way to get rid of the red/blue focussing rings
altogether. I thought that no-decoration would do it, but that
Hi, all
What is the best way of forcing a container box enclose its floats?
clear:both is not good, because it would make the cleared element below all
previous floats. It's inappropriate on a column setup layout.
I also tested overflow:auto, but in many times an annoying scroll bar
appears.
How
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
discuss.org] On Behalf Of ray
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:01 AM
To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Subject: [css-d] Is overflow:hidden the best?
Hi, all
What is the best way of forcing a container box
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 3:12 PM, Doug Jolley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I just noticed that apparently the full spectrum of list-style-types
apply equally to both ordered lists and unordered lists. So, ordered
lists can have a list-style-type of disc and unordered lists can
have a list-style-type
Rod Castello
11812 A Moorpark Street
Studio City, CA 91604
(818) 437-7880
http://rodcastello.com
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Also, going back to its HTML history, screen readers (for the handicapped)
recognize the inherent 'orderliness' of a ol, over an ul.
IMHO, listing the ingredients needed in a recipe need not have the same
precedence as the recipe instructions.
Two cents poorer,
Keith D.
In IE7 the pop up window image is shifted to the right so only half the image
shows. I am unable to fix as I don't have IE7 installed and can't check my
fixes. I can't view in browsershots.org either, since it has to be popped up
to see the problem.
Here's the link to the page it's popped
Drew Trusz wrote:
No an ordered list can't have a disc and an unordered list can't be
numbered.
Of course they can. Whether you should style them that way is debatable, but
surely you can, by the specs and in practice.
When in doubt read the specs:
HTML specs only specify a suggested
the distinction clearer by specifiying the available type
attributes for both ol and ul.
And I think that if you do it with the type attribute, you are
indeed limited. Including a 'type=disc' attribute in an ol element
is undoubtedly going to cause the document to fail validation.
However, I
Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC
machines? Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to
adjust all text for the PC to better match the MAC. Can this be done?
I have used the underscore _hack to target IE, but I really need to
target all PC/Windows
Doug Jolley wrote:
Including a 'type=disc' attribute in an ol element
is undoubtedly going to cause the document to fail validation.
No it isn't. Check it. (It passes validation, because the type attribute in
ol is declared as CDATA, which pretty much means anything goes as far as
validation
Brett wrote:
Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC
machines? Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to
adjust all text for the PC to better match the MAC. Can this be done?
I have used the underscore _hack to target IE, but I really need to
Blake wrote:
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 8:54 AM, Ingo Chao [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This will slow down
new inventions a bit - which is good
Actually, I said: ... which is good since the conforming browsers are
not as free of bugs as some may believe.
What? Restricting innovation is never ever
For example, Win2000 in IE6 and FF2.0, both browsers display the text
much larger.
David Laakso wrote:
Brett wrote:
Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC
machines? Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to
adjust all text for the PC to better
Brett wrote:
Is there a way to set text attributes separately for Windows/PC
machines? Windows displays text larger than on a Mac so I'd like to
adjust all text for the PC to better match the MAC. Can this be
done? I have used the underscore _hack to target IE, but I really
need to
I'm using one of the footerstick methods (I forget which one I finally
decided to use - this one is closest to the effect I want) and I'm
having a problem in FF, IE7, Safari and Opera. This hasn't been checked
in IE6 yet.
http://www.redkitecreative.com/projects/hixon/
The footer's in the
Brett wrote:
For example, Win2000 in IE6 and FF2.0, both browsers display the text
much larger.
In what PC operating system and in what PC browsers and browser
versions is the text larger than on a Mac?
Is IE/6 set at default (text--size medium) and Firefox/2.0 set at
Hi,
I am new to this dicussion board and this is my first question. I'm following a
tutorial in a book about creating horizontal navigation. Because IE 6 and
earlier does not support the first-child element, the books recommends to apply
a class to the list item to remove the background image
Georg,
Thanks. Of course you are right, there are way too many variables to
make every OS and every browser look exactly the same, and it's a fools
dream to attempt it. I really just want to have the text size a bit
closer between the two platforms. I design on a MAC and I try to set
text
David,
Yes, both of the browsers are set to display the normal text size.
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies --
These days with the ability of most modern browsers to zoom in on an
entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or
percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are
the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance -- would it
be best
adamq wrote:
...
Because IE 6 and earlier does not support the first-child element,
the books recommends to apply a class to the list item to remove the
background image in these browsers. Using conditional comments to
apply this workaround seems best, but I cannot figure out why the
Brett wrote:
David,
Yes, both of the browsers are set to display the normal text size.
Then I suppose the good news is it is highly unlikely any user will be
running around with a pixel ruler comparing the page's font sizes among
operating systems or even among browsers on the same
Ce Ce wrote:
These days with the ability of most modern browsers to zoom in on an
entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems
or percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing?
This is a design decision rather than practical CSS authoring (which we try
Ce Ce wrote:
These days with the ability of most modern browsers to zoom in on an
entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or
percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are
the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance --
A general question: is it a really bad idea to use default HTML
selectors as ID names in CSS. For instance I'm evaluating a site
where they've designated an ID as body and I've seen similar
examples elsewhere. I always advise against this simply for clarity
sake but wondered if there were more
What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed our web
pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so that when
someone chose a larger font size the page would expand accordingly. Now that
browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Ce Ce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that
browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the
importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point?
http://bryanrieger.com/issues/mobile-screens-and-pixel-sizes/
Desktop browsers
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
discuss.org] On Behalf Of Tim Offenstein
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 2:30 PM
To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Subject: [css-d] Naming conventions
A general question: is it a really bad idea to use default
Thanks Blake. An interesting link.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Ce Ce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now that
browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is
the
importance of horizontal and vertical
Brett wrote:
Georg,
Thanks. Of course you are right, there are way too many variables to
make every OS and every browser look exactly the same, and it's a
fools dream to attempt it. I really just want to have the text size
a bit closer between the two platforms.
Make sure your PC and
Ce Ce wrote:
What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed
our web pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so
that when someone chose a larger font size the page would expand
accordingly. Now that browsers have the ability to page zoom
(rather than
Thanks Georg for such a thoughtful answer.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ce Ce wrote:
What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed our web
pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so that when
someone chose a
On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:13:35 -0700, Debbie Campbell wrote:
I'm using one of the footerstick methods (I forget which one I finally
decided to use -
this one is closest to the effect I want) and I'm having a problem in FF,
IE7, Safari
and Opera. This hasn't been checked in IE6 yet.
I know this way. But it is not appropriate for the columns layout(one or all
are float columns), because the cleared element would stay below ALL
previous floats. This problem is mentioned at the bottom of that page(easy
clearing).
Thanks for your reply.
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Serge
On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 11:12 PM, Serge Krul [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Hi,
What is the best way of forcing a container box enclose its floats?
From my experience the best way is to use the easy
clearinghttp://www.positioniseverything.net/easyclearing.html
technique. It's far more
Hi all.
http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780980455229/?CMP=EMC-E2H238907668#top points to a
book Everything You Know About CSS is Wrong!
Has anyone seen this? Is this a ruse by Microsoft to get everyone to switch to
IE8? Comments appreciated before I commit $30. :-)
Regards,
Alan.
Alan K Baker wrote:
http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780980455229/?CMP=EMC-E2H238907668#top
points to a book Everything You Know About CSS is Wrong!
Has anyone seen this? Is this a ruse by Microsoft to get everyone to
switch to IE8? Comments appreciated before I commit $30. :-)
Those who are
Yeah, I can see the problem. But in most cases we would set a left margin on
the content div to reserve space for the left column, so this issue may not
that important.
I think the big problem of this clearing way is that the cleared element
would stay below *All* previous floats, see this demo:
In IE7 the pop up window image is shifted to the right so only half the image
shows. I am unable to fix it as I don't have IE7 installed and can't check my
fixes. I can't view in browsershots.org either, since it has to be popped up
to see the problem.
Here's the link to the page it's popped
It's a SitePoint book. I have bought it and had a quick read of the PDF
version, and like the rest of their books, it looks great. It explores the
new CSS table solutions, how to cope with old browsers while doing so, CSs
layout, Mulit-column layout, grid positioning and template layout. (I'm
It seems it was my stand alone IE that I was testing with afterall, which
did not work with conditional comments. I downloaded an installer from
elsewhere cited in the book that enables me to install multiple stand alone
versions of IE 6, and earlier, all in one installer package, and test
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
discuss.org] On Behalf Of ray
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:51 PM
To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Subject: Re: [css-d] Is overflow:hidden the best?
Yeah, I can see the problem. But in most cases we would
ray wrote:
Yeah, I can see the problem. But in most cases we would set a left
margin on the content div to reserve space for the left column, so
this issue may not that important.
We would..?
I would hardly ever do that...
Sorry, but I see no point in looking for the best overall method,
No, I overwritten it, just the same name. :)
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 12:38 PM, Thierry Koblentz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
discuss.org] On Behalf Of ray
Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 7:51 PM
To:
49 matches
Mail list logo