Thanks for all the replies about two column layouts. It certainly helps.
Alas, I see I need more. I am trying to change a current html page with
massive tables to the css layout. I inherited this page. There are some
things I don't know how to switch to the css style. For instance, just under
LOL! I forgot to put the page address in. DUH.
Here it is: www.norfolkwholesalefloral.com
The current css is very minimal with only font style, link colors, and
that's about it.
Thanks again! JoAn
- Original Message -
From: JoAn [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent:
This works as long as the side column is shorter than the main column.
View it here: http://www.manisheriar.com/wsg/twoColumn/
html:
div id=container
div id=header
h1This is the Head/h1
/div!-- end head --
div id=wrapper
Oops - always test in IE before posting, eh? ;~)
Changed the css code of sidebar to:
#sidebar {
position:absolute;
top:0;
left:0 !important;
left:-190px;
width:140px;
padding:10px;
font-size:90%;
}
To deal with IE.
Mani Sheriar
I was thinking this morning that we constantly tell people two things
about CSS, as in this wonderful presentation:
http://www.hotdesign.com/seybold/ (pages 9 and 10)
we tell them
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded once!
and then we tell them
b) you
That might be an issue if you're changing the stylesheet all the time
(although even then browsers should still update the cached file if
it's changed) but generally people are talking about updating it
infrequently and irregularly. In that case it might take a while to
filter down to everyone's
G'day
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded
once!
b) you can reformat your whole site just by changing the CSS file!
and what, we just hope nobody notices that they contradict each other?
To me it's only a contradiction if you read once to mean once in your
Browser DO go back out and update files (according to the policy set by either a network admin or the user - which may mean NEVER).
BUT - the biggest problem is all the Proxy Servers inbetween the user and the site.
You cannot always gaurantee that the policy on the proxy is set correctly (or if
I wrote:
Changing the css filename is not a good idea as you would then need to
edit every html file to point to the updated file?
Unless like you (John) mentioned, one uses an include (I missed that bit).
Regards
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/
Changing the css filename is not a good idea as you would then need
to edit every html file to point to the updated file?
Well, that's the point of my trick, unwieldy though it is.
Every html file would have a server-side include, which contained a
client-side include. Next, a rabbit out of a
Except that then that stylesheet gets cached (more likely cached on the
proxy) and you have the same problem all over again.
Jake
On 19/9/2005, Geoff Pack [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John,
There's no need for a server-side include to do this. Just use a linked
stylesheet to import the real
There is a simply option:
1. add a link to a generic css file:
link rel=stylesheet href=basic.css type=text/css media=screen,
print
2. inside this file, import any css file you need:
@import advanced.css;
The advantages are:
1. by using two media types in first link you will stop NN4 from
What about setting the content expiration in the HTTP headers, you can do
this from within the webserver.
Isn't that how it was intended to work?
Taco Fleur - Pacific Fox
an industry leader with commercial IT experience since 1994 .
http://www.pacificfox.com
-Original Message-
From:
But my point was that in this situation (proxies caching out of date
stylesheets) the proxy will hold an old version of the importing
stylesheet and so only link to the old sheets. This won't solve the
initial probelm, but I haven't seen it happen all that often and I
don't really think it's all
John,
There's no need for a server-side include to do this. Just use a
linked stylesheet
Intra-corporate controversy! Fair enough, but as Jake has pointed
out, this isn't absolutely guaranteed, because screen.css may still
get cached, leaving users with the old @import statements.
autocomplete=off
I have recently used this invalid attribute on a credit card field for
security in IE.
IE will try to complete the field and show
a small drop down box under text fields containing all entries
which have been entered previously. This autocomplete
feature means that credit
Sorry to be thick, I get it now.
I guess you have to use the SSI if you want to be absolutely sure.
Though if you are only changing the styles, does it matter? The content will
still be correct (unless the html is also cached...)
cheers,
Geoff.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Stuart Sherwood wrote:
autocomplete=off
Any suggestions for a valid alternative?
Injecting the attribute via javascript, or just weighing up what's more
important: a single validation error in the name of security, or having
a perfectly valid document that may cause serious issues?
--
Bert Doorn wrote:
G'day
a) it's more efficient because the style sheet only gets downloaded
once!
b) you can reformat your whole site just by changing the CSS file!
and what, we just hope nobody notices that they contradict each
other?
To me it's only a contradiction if you read once to
19 matches
Mail list logo
