On Sep 25, 2010, at 9:05 AM, K DeMott wrote:
> I'm cleaning up a small website an checking browser compatibility. Everything
> appears to line up correctly in IE 7 and 8, FF 3 and 4 and Opera 10.
>
> drbrentchiropractor.com
>
> In Chrome, the background image for the main content section (betw
I'm cleaning up a small website an checking browser compatibility. Everything
appears to line up correctly in IE 7 and 8, FF 3 and 4 and Opera 10.
drbrentchiropractor.com
In Chrome, the background image for the main content section (between the
header and footer) is offset by one pixel to the r
On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Richard Grevers
wrote:
> Other than railing against the fact that you can only apply a fixed
> background relative to the viewport rather than a container, what can
> I do to position the *left* edge of a background image at 50% with a
> fluid layout?
> "fudging" i
Multiple replies in one post:
On Friday, September 24, 2010, 6:42:54 PM, David Hucklesby wrote:
> That markup may be difficult for a screen reader to digest.
> I'd stick with a list if I were you (and clobber the list
> markers/numbers with list-style-type: none.)
Thanks. It's an internal docume
On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 3:36 AM, Geoff Lane wrote:
> BTW, switching my doctype declaration to 4.01 strict and then running
> the page through W3C's validator jogged my memory as to why I've
> stayed with the transitional standard: the target attribute of the
> anchor tag is deprecated and my page
On 9/24/10 1:53 AM, Geoff Lane wrote:
On Thursday, September 23, 2010, 8:10:48 PM, Eric A. Meyer wrote:
In theory you could do it with a combination of ::marker and CSS
counters. In practice, nobody ever implemented ::marker. And I
agree with the assertions made in the link from David H.
> Thanks for that. I had (mistakenly) assumed that it wasn't necessary
> to refer to the DTD explicitly and that each "flavour" of HTML was
> fully defined.
>
> BTW, switching my doctype declaration to 4.01 strict and then running
> the page through W3C's validator jogged my memory as to why I've
On Friday, September 24, 2010, 11:15:57 AM, Duncan Hill wrote:
> Even a fully qualified transitional Doctype should trigger Standards Mode
> in IE
> "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd";>
> and so give you the benefit of stability (predictability?) on your pages.
---
Thanks for that. I ha
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:05:40 +0100, Geoff Lane wrote:
On Friday, September 24, 2010, 9:52:45 AM, Alan Gresley asked whether
the markup was OK for HTML 4.01 Strict.
---
Unfortunately not. I have to confess to being a naughty boy and using
deprecated attributes in the HTML! One day I'll learn en
On Friday, September 24, 2010, 9:52:45 AM, Alan Gresley asked whether
the markup was OK for HTML 4.01 Strict.
---
Unfortunately not. I have to confess to being a naughty boy and using
deprecated attributes in the HTML! One day I'll learn enough about CSS
to be able to do away with them, but for no
On Thursday, September 23, 2010, 8:10:48 PM, Eric A. Meyer wrote:
> In theory you could do it with a combination of ::marker and CSS
> counters. In practice, nobody ever implemented ::marker. And I
> agree with the assertions made in the link from David H.'s post, that
> you want the numb
Geoff Lane wrote:
On Friday, September 24, 2010, 6:12:06 AM, Thierry Koblentz wrote:
The technique used on Wikipedia won't give you the wrapping you want.
What about using two spans and using this approach:
2.1.1.2It shall be construed
a crime against humanity to recover an ancient musical i
On Friday, September 24, 2010, 6:12:06 AM, Thierry Koblentz wrote:
> The technique used on Wikipedia won't give you the wrapping you want.
> What about using two spans and using this approach:
> 2.1.1.2It shall be construed
> a crime against humanity to recover an ancient musical instrument from
13 matches
Mail list logo
