Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-26 Thread Chris Ovenden
On 3/23/07, david [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Barney Carroll wrote: david wrote: Or avoid a bunch of hacks and just use conditional comments to feed IE7 what it needs. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet! Quite refreshing, innit? I think it's because conditional comments aren't

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-26 Thread Michael Geary
From: david CSS is a powerful thing, but it is intended to work with valid HTML (as the W3C CSS validator reports). Clean, basic HTML avoids problems. And conditional comments don't interfere with that at all. From: Chris Ovenden I think it's disingenuous to call conditional comments

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-23 Thread Chris Ovenden
TO filter the other way you can use something like .clearing { display:none } /* IE 6 7 */ *|html .clearing { display:block } /* everything else */ Chris On 3/22/07, Mark Story [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The selector I've been using with quite a bit of success is *:first-child+html so in your

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-23 Thread Alex Robinson
At 11:34 + 23/3/07, Barney Carroll wrote: Wow! I've been under the false supposition that IE7 did not 'believe' in the nameless super-html object. How is it, then, that this works while the simple '* html' selector does not? Because while Microsoft fixed * html they introduced another

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-23 Thread Philippe Wittenbergh
Alex Robinson wrote: Because while Microsoft fixed * html they introduced another parsing bug :) Actually you don't need the :first-child since *+html shouldn't select anything and doesn't in other modern browsers. It's just IE7 that does it. The only drawback is that if you want to

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-23 Thread Barney Carroll
Alex Robinson wrote: ... but the W3 vaildator claims that it's not which looks like a bug in the validator to me. Of course, trying to explain that to some clients may be tricky. Pity the one who finds themselves having to justify lack of css validity and can't... More so if it's actually

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-23 Thread david
Chris Ovenden wrote: TO filter the other way you can use something like .clearing { display:none } /* IE 6 7 */ *|html .clearing { display:block } /* everything else */ Chris On 3/22/07, Mark Story [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The selector I've been using with quite a bit of success is

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-23 Thread Barney Carroll
david wrote: Or avoid a bunch of hacks and just use conditional comments to feed IE7 what it needs. I'm surprised no one has mentioned this yet! Quite refreshing, innit? I think it's because conditional comments aren't CSS. Increasingly I find more people find it more important to maintain

[css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-20 Thread Pelle
Hi all. I have this in my CSS * html .clearing {display:none;} i NEED this to imp+lement in IE7 too, but NOT in Ffx or so. What is the bug code for this? In pure .css file cause it is external, no javascript or [if lte IE 7] works in this case :( Regards Pelle

Re: [css-d] IE7 special code

2007-03-20 Thread francky
Pelle wrote: Hi all. I have this in my CSS * html .clearing {display:none;} i NEED this to imp+lement in IE7 too, but NOT in Ffx or so. What is the bug code for this? In pure .css file cause it is external, no javascript or [if lte IE 7] works in this case :( Regards Pelle Hi