On 25. 8. 2011 21:12, David Laakso wrote:
... i have come to a pretty stable css, when it comes to rendering it
with firefox or chrome. but the internet explorer gives me headache
and behaves absolutely idiotically :( can you please refresh the page
and hint me, what might be wrong, or ho
Tim Climis wrote:
I've been thinking that developing with IE6 in mind is in the past -
my
experience and data shows that people using IE/Windows have left
IE6.
Windows has been diligent in including browser upgrades as part of
its
"important" software updates.
Are people seeing data contrair
>My current employer - and the previous employer - use IE6 as their
>official corporate browser. The reason the current employer uses it?
>High end mission critical enterprise web apps that work only with IE6.
>Replacing the apps would cost millions of dollars or more, not worth it
>for the relativ
bruce.som...@web.de wrote:
>> My current employer - and the previous employer - use IE6 as their
>> official corporate browser. The reason the current employer uses it?
>> High end mission critical enterprise web apps that work only with IE6.
>> Replacing the apps would cost millions of dollars o
On 26/08/2011 7:39 PM, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
If, at the time of development, no more recent version
of IE than IE6 was available, then they may have had
little alternative, IMHO.
Philip Taylor
Very true and off-topic.
This debate will also apply to IE7, IE8 and IE9 and cou
On 26/08/2011 7:55 AM, Tim Climis wrote:
It depends on your audience. I work primarily with international
students, so the 30% of China, and the 17% of South Korea still
using IE6 is a major concern. It may not be for your purposes.
---Tim
There may be a very good reason for this. Please v
>If, at the time of development, no more recent version
>of IE than IE6 was available, then they may have had
>little alternative, IMHO.
>
>Philip Taylor
One can support IE without making use of proprietary features available only
with IE. That's never a good idea.
Bruce
On Friday, August 26, 2011, 12:15:48 PM, bruce.som...@web.de wrote:
> One can support IE without making use of proprietary features
> available only with IE. That's never a good idea.
While that's easy to say with hindsight, it wasn't so readily apparent
at the time and many of us produced applic
On 26/08/2011 10:02 PM, Geoff Lane wrote:
On Friday, August 26, 2011, 12:15:48 PM, bruce.som...@web.de wrote:
One can support IE without making use of proprietary features
available only with IE. That's never a good idea.
While that's easy to say with hindsight, it wasn't so readily
apparent
I've been looking all over websites -- a lot of good h1 replacement
suggestions. But which one is more practical, validated in all aspects i.e.
bobby approved, html5, etc?
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.cs
Scott Hamm wrote:
> I've been looking all over websites -- a lot of good h1 replacement
> suggestions. But which one is more practical, validated in all aspects i.e.
> bobby approved, html5, etc?
is HTML, not CSS, but that said, why might anyone want to replace it ?
Philip Taylor
___
Nice!
And thanks Tim for the clarification, I'll definitely be incorporating that
syntax in future projects.
Kevin
On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 6:06 PM, John wrote:
>
> On Aug 25, 2011, at 9:10 AM, Kevin A. Cameron wrote:
>
> +1 for the OOCSS mentality...Start with a base class that defines the m
I'm guessing this is referring to replacing text with a (background)
image..?
Kevin
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 9:20 AM, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) <
p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Scott Hamm wrote:
>
> > I've been looking all over websites -- a lot of good h1 replacement
> > suggestions.
I made the rounds of a few different techniques over the years for replacing
H1 text with an image until I realized that the most reliable, most
semantic, most indexable, most manageable solution was also the simplest:
Google loves alt text. No extra classes to identify which background should
I'll probably be throwing them up online for testing soon, and I know
I'll have issues/questions.
I'm going to flag your email to me so that I can alert you when
they're up, if that works.
J
On Aug 26, 2011, at 10:40 AM, Ted Rolle Jr. wrote:
John, would you be willing to post or e-mail
http://coffeeonmars.com/testing/Dev_index.html
http://coffeeonmars.com/testing/Dev_WPR_A.html
These two pages ^ are nearly identical, except that the second
one has an image placed into it with a div tag, and that seems to be
causing the second page to sprout a horizontal scroll bar!
On Aug 26, 2011, at 2:20 PM, John wrote:
http://coffeeonmars.com/testing/Dev_index.html
http://coffeeonmars.com/testing/Dev_WPR_A.html
These two pages ^ are nearly identical, except that the
second one has an image placed into it with a div tag, and that
seems to be causing the seco
On Aug 26, 2011, at 2:36 PM, Angela French wrote:
It's dependent on the size of my browser instance. If I spread it
out a smidge bigger than my 19" monitor, it goes away. I don't
believe you can control for that.
Right. so, if it's smaller than 1024, scrollbar no mystery.
But I'm gett
I stripped out all of the attributes of the image's div tag (which
included width and height!) and kept only:
{
display: block;
margin: 20px 0 0 160px;
}
and that seems to have fixed it..still testing and trying to break it
and shakier on my feeble coding chops.
any thoughts?
J
_
On Aug 26, 2011, at 2:55 PM, John wrote:
I stripped out all of the attributes of the image's div tag (which
included width and height!) and kept only:
{
display: block;
margin: 20px 0 0 160px;
}
and that seems to have fixed it..still testing and trying to break
it and shakier on m
On 8/26/11 5:55 PM, John wrote:
I stripped out all of the attributes of the image's div tag (which
included width and height!) and kept only:
{
display: block;
margin: 20px 0 0 160px;
}
and that seems to have fixed it..still testing and trying to break it
and shakier on my feeble coding c
Error Correction
#WPR_Image_A {
border: 1px solid red/*4 position only*/;
}
Best,
someyoungguy
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-
On Aug 26, 2011, at 3:27 PM, David Laakso wrote:
Try positioing all your stuff /without/ using position:absolute; or
position: relative;. Margins will do. Padding when needed. Float
left or right if margin left or right won't work. Stress test:
press and hold apple; keep banging the + key
On 8/26/11 7:37 PM, John wrote:
one of these days, I will know what I'm doing with this stuff...
working.
J
Keep it lean. Keep it mean; Keep it simple. Keep at it!
Best,
someyoungguy
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.cs
Hi John,
I think here's the problem:
#WPR_Image_A {
position: absolute;
top: 210px;
left: 160px;
z-index: 70;
height: 100px;
width: 1024px;
display: block;
margin: 0 0 0 0;
}
You're setting a 1024px width to that element, then, because of the
position:absolute adding the left 160px is using 10
On Aug 26, 2011, at 6:12 PM, Germán Martínez wrote:
You're setting a 1024px width to that element, then, because of the
position:absolute adding the left 160px is using 1024px +160px,
and since the container is set to a 1024px witdth you see the
scroll bar.
An easy fix will be to set th
- Original Message -
From: "John"
To:
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2011 7:37 PM
Subject: Re: [css-d] two similar pages; one scrolls. Why?
On Aug 26, 2011, at 3:27 PM, David Laakso wrote:
Try positioing all your stuff /without/ using position:absolute; or
position: relative;. Margins w
On 27.08.2011 01:37, John wrote:
[...] I am not sure where, but somebody said that position: was the
way to go...
"Position" is fine ... once you master the various variants and all
combinations.
one of these days, I will know what I'm doing with this stuff...
I am sure you will. Until th
28 matches
Mail list logo
