But that's what you missed. You can specify table layout for any
elements, but since IE doesn't support these properties it doesn't make
It looked like you could make any element act like TR or TD, but it
didn't look like you could describe the table in the CSS.
* Aaron Crane hate...@aaroncrane.co.uk [2006-07-13 12:40]:
No, only people who didn't understand the point of
non-presentational markup did that. The rest of us went from
bHello there!/b
to
strongHello there!/strong
Don’t miss http://hsivonen.iki.fi/wannabe/ though.
FWIW, I use
CSS 3, Multi-Column Layout, currently a Working Draft. Doesn't
(currently) include a way to specify min and max column widths and let
the browser auto-size the columns, but this is where to speak up if you
want to see this in an actual standard.
db# INSERT INTO hates_software (tag,hate)
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 18:51:21 -0400, Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com
wrote:
I'm not talking about multi-column layout, I'm talking about general
grid layout. You should be able to define a complex page layout, at the
top level, completely in CSS, just as easily as you can define a complex
Like I said, you _can_ do this, but it won't work in IE. The spec is
eight years old, so blame Microsoft, not the W3, though they should be
shot for other reasons (XSLT, for instance). Just read the damned link:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/tables.html#anonymous-boxes
I *did* read the
It was thus said that the Great Peter da Silva once stated:
Like I said, you _can_ do this, but it won't work in IE. The spec is
eight years old, so blame Microsoft, not the W3, though they should be
shot for other reasons (XSLT, for instance). Just read the damned link:
You'll then notice that the Obligatory Picture is now below the Amazon ads
(which themselves have shifted down) on the right hand side. I did not use
floats for either style, nor did I play with layers. Granted, it took some
playing around with but since I don't really *care* for IE
And it still sounds like you'll be using a ton of DIVs to replace TRs
and TDs.
Well, except that it wouldn't be a ton, and the layout of the divs would
be specified entirely in the CSS file. Like the stuff Aaron linked to.
And if I understand you right, you want something like:
DIV
Peter da Silva writes:
I'm not talking about multi-column layout, I'm talking about general
grid layout. You should be able to define a complex page layout, at the
top level, completely in CSS, just as easily as you can define a complex
table.
So something more like the possible approaches in
So something more like the possible approaches in this, then?
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-css3-layout-20051215/
...
Oh, thank you!
That looks like it allows just about everything I can think of, except
for non-contiguous and interleaved flow.
Non-contiguous flow:
@x
aa
* Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com [2006-07-12 16:55]:
(insert hate about CSS taking the whole no tables things too
seriously and refusing to have grid layout as an option, just
to turn it up to 11)
`display: table-cell`, anyone?
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pagaltzis // http://plasmasturm.org/
On Wed, Jul 12, 2006 at 02:25:44PM +0100, Yoz Grahame wrote:
On 7/12/06, Hakim Cassimally hakim.cassima...@gmail.com wrote:
So, I had to reboot it every 1-2 days or it would run like treacle,
Same with mine. And the problem - oh how I laughed - appears to be
Firefox leaking like a wounded
On 7/13/06, Guy Thornley g...@esphion.com wrote:
Im sure there is plenty of other things. Oh there definately is: theres no
option for treat as plain text when opening an unsupported mime type. The
server is always right, is it?
Yes. Yes it is.
If
and only if the media type is not given
If and only if the media type is not given by a Content-Type field, the
recipient MAY attempt to guess the media type via inspection of its
content and/or the name extension(s) of the URI used to identify the
resource. (RFC 2616)
Software that ignores this, and decides to sniff
Guy Thornley writes:
Oh now we get to one my pet [Firefox] hates; the one that I find most
endearing: the handling of the multi-line text input dialoges. In many
unix text editors, Ctrl-A is beginning-of-line; so you press Ctrl-A,
and then press a key to insert whatever character you want:
On Thu, Jul 13, 2006 at 12:41:08PM +1200, Guy Thornley wrote:
Im sure there is plenty of other things. Oh there definately is: theres no
option for treat as plain text when opening an unsupported mime type.
Over five and a half years old and counting.
On 2006-07-12 at 15:33 +0200, David Landgren wrote:
Give the .cmd extension a whirl in lieu of .bat, that may work. Either
works for me so perhaps your PC's ext associations are fupped uck.
Just to double-check before I spend time fighting Windows -- this is
using the App Paths section of the
Peter da Silva writes:
JSC: Okay. Press Alt + Esc.
Oh yes, it's *control-escape*. Bleeding obvious, no? No?
Alt was the universal command key up to then, but Windows 95 is when
Microsoft really jumped the shark...
I think that Ctrl+Esc did do something on Windows 3.1, perhaps
On 11/07/06, Jan Martin Mathiassen hates_softw...@mindriot.as wrote:
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 10:42:07AM +0930, Bill Page said:
windows+e brings up windows explorer
Windows-m minimises and unminimises everything which is hella useful
windows-l brings up the logout/change user box in XP
On 2006-07-12 at 11:00 +0200, Hakim Cassimally wrote:
windows-r brings up a mini command line. When I used windows I used
that for pretty much all of my application launching. Sure it mean
you had to remember excel but winword and powerpnt, but with
command-line completion that wasn't too
On 2006-07-12 at 11:12 +0200, Phil Pennock wrote:
I've since added a few others. The main limitation is that you're
limited to .exe, from what I recall, so no .bat. The other is that
whilst you can specify that a program takes dragdrop, you can't
otherwise massage the parameters. That, in
On 12/07/06, Phil Pennock phil.penn...@globnix.org wrote:
On 2006-07-12 at 11:12 +0200, Phil Pennock wrote:
Something has to go wrong soon, because this OS install is almost
becoming tolerable and every time I think that, I become frustrated at
something new and the hates builds to an even
On 7/12/06, Hakim Cassimally hakim.cassima...@gmail.com wrote:
So, I had to reboot it every 1-2 days or it would run like treacle,
Same with mine. And the problem - oh how I laughed - appears to be
Firefox leaking like a wounded oil tanker. Sure, I'm frequently
running in excess of 30 tabs,
On 7/12/06, Yoz Grahame y...@yoz.com wrote:
On 7/12/06, Hakim Cassimally hakim.cassima...@gmail.com wrote:
So, I had to reboot it every 1-2 days or it would run like treacle,
Same with mine. And the problem - oh how I laughed - appears to be
Firefox leaking like a wounded oil tanker.
Let me
On 7/12/06, Hakim Cassimally hakim.cassima...@gmail.com wrote:
Just to keep the hate nice and focused on topic, Safari, on gf's,
dad's, and brother's iBooks beachballs to a half when I try to run it
with more than 2 or 3 tabs. That and failing to work on pretty much
for any credit-card
Yoz Grahame writes:
Safari appeared to consistently take twice as much RAM as Firefox despite
the latter running three times as many tabs.
It seems not uncommon for my Safari to take 3 *gigabytes* of memory
after several days of usage. This is on a laptop with 768 MB of RAM;
unsurprisingly, I
Ohgodyes. I suspect Safari was partially responsible for my
experiences of OS 10.4 on a Mini being less stable than XP on the
laptop sitting next to it. Safari appeared to consistently take twice
as much RAM as Firefox despite the latter running three times as many
tabs. That, along with
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 10:54:04 -0400, Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com
wrote:
(insert hate about CSS taking the whole no tables things too seriously
and refusing to have grid layout as an option, just to turn it up to 11)
Actually it does, it's just not supported in IE so nobody bothers with
On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 14:50:34 -0400, Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com
wrote:
tables for layout in inappropriate ways, and CSS doesn't seem to have a
way to specify grid layout in the CSS file...
But that's what you missed. You can specify table layout for any
elements, but since IE
You can have the target be a .lnk file (pointing directly to the .exe),
You can put command line arguments and things in a shortcut, and may be
able to run a batch file from there. If not, make it a shortcut to cmd.exe
and put the batch file in the arguments.
Or do what I do and keep a command
Phil Pennock wrote:
On 2006-07-12 at 11:00 +0200, Hakim Cassimally wrote:
[...]
I could never quite work out where these names were registered
(they're not in PATH, but are the short names which respond to start
progname in command line, I rifled through the registry a couple of
times to try
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 06:24:26PM +, Zach White wrote:
Can anyone think of a more asinine proceedure for logging out? Not only is
it completely unintuitive, but the very way it operates is hateful.
Shuttle crew members share your hate.
From THE WEEKLY UNIX NEWSPAPER, London, 16-20 Feb
JSC: Okay. Press Alt + Esc.
Crew: And what does that do?
JSC: It should help.
Crew: Negative.
Oh yes, it's *control-escape*. Bleeding obvious, no? No?
Alt was the universal command key up to then, but Windows 95 is when
Microsoft really jumped the shark...
Granted, WinXP and 2003 get this better, and admittedly I could use the
logout option in the start menu itself that can be enabled, but that action
isn't burned into muscle memory from years of hitting Win, u, enter every
time I wanted to log out.
I never hit the win key in Windows, except
* Peter da Silva pe...@taronga.com [2006-07-11 01:55]:
can't even be usefully applied as hotkeys in other apps?
I like them, a set of extra meta keys is always nice to have...
But of course I don't use Windows.
There are a couple hates to be had around the subject (binding
keys in X11; trying
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 10:42:07AM +0930, Bill Page said:
the only useful thing i can think of about the windows key is
windows+e brings up windows explorer
though i assume there's another way of doing that anyway?
Windows-m minimises and unminimises everything which is hella useful
On 7/11/06, Simon Wistow si...@thegestalt.org wrote:
Windows-m minimises and unminimises everything which is hella useful
sometimes.
Hiding your porn one handed, for example.
--
Adam Auden - UNIX Metal Geek
whois bimble.net
On Tue, Jul 11, 2006 at 10:42:07AM +0930, Bill Page said:
the only useful thing i can think of about the windows key is
windows+e brings up windows explorer
though i assume there's another way of doing that anyway?
Windows-m minimises and unminimises everything which is hella useful
On Mon, 10 Jul 2006, Peter da Silva wrote:
I never hit the win key in Windows, except when I've been using a
Mac recently and I'm going for Command. Can anyone come up with as big
a waste of keyboard space as the two Windows keys and the menu key...
all of which simply duplicate other
On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Ricardo SIGNES wrote:
* Chris Devers cdev...@pobox.com [2006-07-11T00:34:30]
As for the menu key, show me any other way to bring up a context menu
for the current focus (highlighted) item without using the mouse.
I thought this nearly always was Shift-F10..?
[Regarding the win key.
On Jul 10, 2006, at 11:34 PM, Chris Devers wrote:
Au contraire, I used to feel this way, but once I got used to them I
realized that they made it possible to use Windows nearly sans mouse.
That's another reason for my hatred of the Win key.
You see, prior to the
Peter da Silva wrote:
Which brings me to my hate of Microsoft using CONTROL for application
commands AS WELL AS for command line OS level controls.
See also: everyone else with both GUIs and terminals.
Well, except IBM. (Anyone else still shut Windows apps
with Alt-F4?)
--
On 7/11/06, John Handelaar j...@userfrenzy.com wrote:
(Anyone else still shut Windows apps with Alt-F4?)
I use it to shut extra Firefox windows. Which is still the same app. Ick.
And Opera 9, which interfered with my Ctrl+N = new tab muscle memory.
And Ctrl+Q closes down the whole program, so
Can anyone think of a more asinine proceedure for logging out? Not only is
it completely unintuitive, but the very way it operates is hateful.
I have this particular Win2k box I log into once a week or so via RDC. About
a month ago I had to reboot the box, after it had been up for months. So of
44 matches
Mail list logo
