By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
435,536 Members | 2,165 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 435,536 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

layer transparent Please HELP!!

P: n/a
Dear friends,

My name is Pamela, I know little about CSS,
but I would like to ask a question
I have an image on a web page within a css layer:

<DIV ID=MyLayer
STYLE = "position: absolute;top:68px; left:563px;
width:640px;height:480px;">
<IMG src="ReportImageBox_12.54.52.png" width=640 height=480></IMG>
</DIV>

I need that the parts of this layer which have a certain color
(for instance "white") be rendered transparent, that is
what is under the image must be visible.

How can I do it (I am assuming my image is not transparent
or its transparency not supported by browser, like png in ie6)

If it is not possible with CSS does anybody know an other
way to solve it (scrips ...?)

Thank you very much

-Pamela
..NET Developer

Sep 27 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
87 Replies


P: n/a

ex********@libero.it schreef:
<DIV ID=MyLayer
STYLE = "position: absolute;top:68px; left:563px;
width:640px;height:480px;">
<IMG src="ReportImageBox_12.54.52.png" width=640 height=480></IMG>
</DIV>

I need that the parts of this layer which have a certain color
(for instance "white") be rendered transparent, that is
what is under the image must be visible.


I wouldn't worry too much about that at all, since you've chosen to
place the image so far off to the left, it is hardly shown in my
viewport with my preferred dimensions (about 580px wide and about 480
high). Whether or not the image is partly transparent is not something
I will notice, since I will probably leave as soon as the page is fully
loaded and I notice the wide horizontal scroll that is necessary to use
the page.

--

-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ---------
weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html
webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html
zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html

Sep 27 '05 #2

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
I have an image on a web page within a css layer:
There is no such thing as a CSS "layer", it's Macromedia marketing
speak, lose it.
<DIV ID=MyLayer
STYLE = "position: absolute;top:68px; left:563px;
I'm willing to bet that you are using absolute positioning
inappropriately. It's often used to position most if not all elements,
this is a big mistake that results in a very bad web site. Note also
that inline styles are rarely a good idea, styles should be moved to an
external stylesheet.
width:640px;height:480px;">
<IMG src="ReportImageBox_12.54.52.png" width=640 height=480></IMG>
</DIV>
You should also learn how to write proper HTML, the above is invalid
markup, a validator may help in showing the syntax errors.
I need that the parts of this layer which have a certain color
(for instance "white") be rendered transparent, that is
what is under the image must be visible.

How can I do it (I am assuming my image is not transparent
or its transparency not supported by browser, like png in ie6)


The div's size is equal to the image, I assume that your reference to
transparency therefore applies to the image. Image transparency cannot
be manipulated via CSS, use an image editor.

--
Spartanicus
Sep 27 '05 #3

P: n/a
The number I used are unimportant they are random.
The issue is transparency.

If you like lets say it is
<DIV ID=MyLayer
STYLE = "position: absolute;top:0px; left:0px;
width:200px;height:200px;">
<IMG src="MyImage.png" width=640 height=480></IMG>
</DIV>


The page is generated * programmatically * within a bulk task. So
anything must be
inside of it.

My issue is. Is there a way to tell that layer that a given color
(example "white")
must be considered a key for transparency?

Pamela

Sep 27 '05 #4

P: n/a
Hi Pamela,

IE does not render transparency with png images. Use gif instead.

Bill
Sep 27 '05 #5

P: n/a
Bill wrote:

IE does not render transparency with png images.
Not true. IE does not support *alpha* transparency. It supports indexed
(8-bit) transparency just fine. If your graphics editor can only do
alpha transparency, it is deficient.
Use gif instead.


There is no benefit in using transparent gif over indexed transparent png.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Sep 27 '05 #6

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
The number I used are unimportant they are random.
The issue is transparency.


Since you've ignored all that I wrote, I will return the favour.

--
Spartanicus
Sep 27 '05 #7

P: n/a
kchayka <us****@c-net.us> wrote:
IE does not render transparency with png images.


Not true. IE does not support *alpha* transparency.


Not directly, indirectly it does.

--
Spartanicus
Sep 27 '05 #8

P: n/a
About transparency everyone knows that
gif is ok and png is not still supported
by ie but it will in ie7.

By the way a very smart guy has forwarded me this
pointer http://webfx.eae.net/download/pngbehavior102.zip
very useful which fixes the problem with png in ie6

The point here was another, but everyone is talking
about what he likes.

Here seems people don't really want to get the point.
It is clear that css cannot make tell the browser
to make something transparent. Otherwise
someone have given the answer, instead of
saying anything passed in their mind...
Thanks anyway.

Pamela

Sep 27 '05 #9

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
About transparency everyone knows that
gif is ok and png is not still supported
by ie but it will in ie7.


...which won't mean anything for at least the next ten years.

In another group, I just answered a question about email clients for a
Windows 95 user. Do you think he will be upgrading to
Longhorn/Vista/Vesta .. whatever they're going to call it .. anytime
soon?

http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/
--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Sep 27 '05 #10

P: n/a
expertware at libero.it wrote:
Dear friends,

My name is Pamela, I know little about CSS,
but I would like to ask a question
I have an image on a web page within a css layer:

<DIV ID=MyLayer
STYLE = "position: absolute;top:68px; left:563px;
width:640px;height:480px;">
<IMG src="ReportImageBox_12.54.52.png" width=640 height=480></IMG>
</DIV>

I need that the parts of this layer which have a certain color
(for instance "white") be rendered transparent, that is
what is under the image must be visible.

[...]

lookup "opacity"

http://www.google.com/search?q=css+opacity

Sep 27 '05 #11

P: n/a
It seems my msg has disappeared (??)
Here again

Finally I found the solution to be used with css. Its the Chroma Filter

here is a demo of web output. Note the 3 pictures on the right, 2 of
which (pie and legenda) are using transparency
if the browser (IE6) warns you, you must allow execution, to see the
transparency effect
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm
Pamela
..NET Developer
Datatime Team
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/TechnicalPreview/

PS
this is the most extravagant group i have ever read...
css must have a strange effect on minds :-)

Sep 27 '05 #12

P: n/a
Actually I must correct myself.

There is a way to make a region transparent with css.

I have just been informed about the existence of the Chroma Filter and
was just
what needed. Already coded. This will do until ie7 ships.

Here is a demo of it.
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm

Note the 3 pictures on the right, 2 of which (pie and legenda) are
using transparency
if the browser (IE6) warns you, you must allow execution, to see the
transparency effect

Pamela
..NET Developer
Datatime Team
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/TechnicalPreview/

Sep 27 '05 #13

P: n/a
expertware at libero.it wrote in message news:11**********************@g14g2000cwa.googlegr oups.com...
It seems my msg has disappeared (??)
Here again

Finally I found the solution to be used with css. Its the Chroma Filter

here is a demo of web output. Note the 3 pictures on the right, 2 of
which (pie and legenda) are using transparency
if the browser (IE6) warns you, you must allow execution, to see the
transparency effect
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm
you might be impressed, but chroma seems to be a micro$oft thingy,
which doesn't work on my version of Firefox. I bet there are other
browsers who react the same way.

I'm sorry to tell you that thatpage looks pretty bad.
no, not bad as in good.
the chroma filter doesn't work, the shipcountry and shipcity "cells"
are horribly rendered, and whatever is behind the piechart is unknown.

If I was a customer using datatime, I would promptly
look for a different software company to do business with.

not everybody likes to use MS products....

Sorry.
PS
this is the most extravagant group i have ever read...
css must have a strange effect on minds :-)


Actually, if implemented right, CSS has a great effect on websites
and on minds, but only if implemented correctly...
that's what this newsgroup is here for. Ultimately it is the author
who is responsible for a website. If warnings don't blow any whistles
then there's one more strange mind walking.

Mi raccommando
Sep 27 '05 #14

P: n/a
Once upon a time *Robi* wrote:
expertware at libero.it wrote in message news:1127836511.937704.250570@g14g2000
It seems my msg has disappeared (??)
Here again

Finally I found the solution to be used with css. Its the Chroma Filter

here is a demo of web output. Note the 3 pictures on the right, 2 of
which (pie and legenda) are using transparency
if the browser (IE6) warns you, you must allow execution, to see the
transparency effect
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm


you might be impressed, but chroma seems to be a micro$oft thingy,
which doesn't work on my version of Firefox. I bet there are other
browsers who react the same way.


IE probably use ActiveX to display the effect and since ActiveX is a
very vulnerable component, I don't use that browser.

--
/Arne
Now killing all posts originating at GoogleGroups
Workaround: http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sep 27 '05 #15

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
Actually I must correct myself.

There is a way to make a region transparent with css.

I have just been informed about the existence of the Chroma Filter and
was just
what needed. Already coded. This will do until ie7 ships.

Here is a demo of it.
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm

Note the 3 pictures on the right, 2 of which (pie and legenda) are
using transparency
if the browser (IE6) warns you, you must allow execution, to see the
transparency effect


FireFox 1.5 doesn't warn me and I see no transparency effect.
Sep 27 '05 #16

P: n/a
Robi wrote:
and whatever is behind the piechart is unknown.


http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...x_19.19.48.png

...and it is a 707.38 KB (724359 bytes) image! Waaay bad!

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Sep 28 '05 #17

P: n/a
Robi wrote:

you might be impressed, but chroma seems to be a micro$oft thingy,
which doesn't work on my version of Firefox. I bet there are other
browsers who react the same way.
Yes, an M$ special:
filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Chroma(Co lor=White);
PS
this is the most extravagant group i have ever read...
css must have a strange effect on minds :-)

After seeing the same antiquated coding, code errors and abysmal
styling over and over, yes, we become testy. Lurk for a while.
Using CSS well requires a major shifts in mindset:
- learning the difference between presentation and semantic markup
- layout without tables
- recognizing that the user has a lot of influence on presentation
- discovering there are other (and better!) browsers than IE

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)
Sep 28 '05 #18

P: n/a
I have posted a simple question and got and incredible number of
replies.
None of which go to the point. That'is way I am talking about
extravagancy.
Is it possible than there is nobody able to answer simply in terms of
CODE ?

I will try again.

- Assume I am completely ignorant on css (its true) and I am here
among you experts
to be instructed. I am coding an a routine to export reports
produced by Datatime
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/TechnicalPreview/
to web and I want they look EXACTLY the same. It is not important if
css is not elegant.
Our product only work with Microsoft technology. It's a .NET program.

- I have a simple problem. I have some Images in a web page that are
mandatory in
PNG format. They have a transparent background. The key used for coding
transparency
is white.

-So far the best i could do is (it is probably completely wrong):

<DIV ID=Cell{X=40,Y=40}
STYLE = "position: absolute;
top:40px;
left:40px;
width:600px;
height:78px;
filter:progid:DXImageTransform.Microsoft.Chroma(Co lor=White);
z-index:2;
">
<IMG src="MyPNGTransparentImage.png" width=600 height=78 ></IMG>
</DIV>

- My simple question:
Could anyone provide the code which does what intended in a clean an
correct way
so that it works with most browser.

- Please speak to me only in terms of code. I am a .NET programmer.
Other discussions
are not useful. Or else they are only after you have provided the
right code.
If you don't' really know please just shut up and listen to what
experts have to say ...

- Be realistic, and use right priorities, 95% people is using ie. That
I know, none
of our target client has ever heard the word firefox. Our focus is on
reports.
People want to make them quickly. They don't give a damn about how we
reach the result.
They just want the result.

..NET Developer
-Pamela

Sep 28 '05 #19

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it:
- Be realistic, and use right priorities, 95% people is using ie.


On which planet?
--
Freundliche Gruesse,
Netzteil - Udo Marx
http://www.netzteil.com
Sep 28 '05 #20

P: n/a
Thanks Robi.
I have done some changes to the code which generates the page.

Could you tell me if now your browser can see transparency?

the chroma filter doesn't work, the shipcountry and shipcity "cells"
are horribly rendered, and whatever is behind the piechart is unknown


Here I dont' know why. Here I just use plain CSS. I have read the CSS2
spec.
Perhaps firefox is behind.
Here is the code. Can you see what bothers firefox?

<DIV ID=Cell0_3
STYLE = "position: absolute;
top:144px;
left:808px;
width:68px;
height:23px;
color: White;
background-color: Green;
font-family:Tahoma;
font-size:11px;
font-style:Bold;
font-weight:bold;
border-width:1px;
border-style:outset;
padding-left:3px;
padding-right:3px;
padding-top:3px;
padding-bottom:3px;
z-index:1;
text-align:left;
vertical-align:middle;
">
SHIPCITY
</DIV>
Perhaps it is not able to render properly OUTSET INSET

Another possibility is RIDGE and GROOVE . Do you think
that they will solve the problem of the 3D effect?

Thank you very much!

-Pamela

PS
I know you are purists but keep in mind I am makink an automatical
tool for translating from a very complex program.
So I will try to adhere as much as possible to your suggestions but you
take in mind the context.

Sep 28 '05 #21

P: n/a
Caro Spartanicus ,

the reason while I am not using external sheet is that I am generating
code to render cells which can be arbitrarily edited by the user.
This is an automatic generation from a reporting tool:
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ew/Default.htm

The user can even define programmatically Alarms to give the cells
a more evident appearance.

So I guess it would be complicate to deal with this kind of complexity
using stylesheet. Let me know if you have ideas on how to overcome
this.
You should also learn how to write proper HTML, the above is invalid
markup, a validator may help in showing the syntax errors.
this is not a big problem it takes me minute to change the code to
correct the names.
What the issue, the dots? or what or you mean I should replace it with
CONTENTS
please suggest the correction if you can...
The div's size is equal to the image, I assume that your reference to
transparency therefore applies to the image. Image transparency cannot
be manipulated via CSS, use an image editor.


Here I did't understand the correction you are suggesting.

In the meantime I have changed some code according to the suggestions
provided. Here is the new sample results:
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm
Other suggestions welcome

-Pamela
..NET Developer
Datatime Team

Sep 28 '05 #22

P: n/a
Dear Antoine

I have done changes. Let me know if now you can see transparency.

http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm

About the warning. I just realized that, as it is right, IE gives the
warning
only if the webpage is being loaded from the local machine.

So to explore the behavior of firefox you should download the page
locally
and see. If it behaves well it should warn you because you are
executing a script
(which potentially coluld be dangerous)

Thank you very much!!

-Pamela

Sep 28 '05 #23

P: n/a
Dear Beauregard
sorry, I didn't notice it. I was preoccupied with the transparency
issue...

here is a new trial:
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm
Thanks anyway

Sep 28 '05 #24

P: n/a
Dear Niek,

I have stated clearly I knew nothing about CSS.
I am a .NET coder who has to code an AUTOMATED export utility from a
very complex reporting tool (with alarms and a lot of other
complications which
do not allow for instance to have external sylesheets).

All I have implemented I have learn in less than a morning. I had to
read the entire
CSS2 spec.

I need to get result if I don't want to be kicked out be the Project
Head.
They pay me a lot and expect I do fast what I have to do.
So just give me the time to get all your points. I finally do the best
possible
job, given the context ...

Actually I have a bad character. As a matter of fact my average time
with a fiancee
is less than 3 months.

:-)

-Pamela
..NET Developer
Datatime Team
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ew/Default.htm

Sep 28 '05 #25

P: n/a
Dear Udo

Do you mean they are more than that?
http://www.ayukov.com/essays/browsers.html

Most people are lazy. They don't bother to change what they find
preinstalled in their
win OS. Also probably depends on countries. Here I don't know anybody
who has ever
hear even the very word firefox, for instance...

I am not particularly in love with Microsoft, but if you want to rise
some money with software products
there seem not to be much more choices ... In any case it is a reality
that cannot be ignored.

Sep 28 '05 #26

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
Dear Beauregard
sorry, I didn't notice it. I was preoccupied with the transparency
issue...

here is a new trial:
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm


On those two pages, I see a huge graphic that does nothing more than
obscure most of the data tables. What is the point of doing this?

If that is supposed to be a pie chart, display it after the tables.

What is the "" that is injected into the very beginning of the page?

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Sep 28 '05 #27

P: n/a

That is for testing. If you do not see the white
rectangle around the pie it mean that transparency is working fine.
In the other page there is an image with semitransparent faces.
What is the "" that is injected into the very beginning of the page?
I cannot finf it, which file and which code line are you referring to?

(Must be some redundant quotes (?)

Thanks,

Pamela

Beauregard T. Shagnasty ha scritto:
ex********@libero.it wrote:
Dear Beauregard
sorry, I didn't notice it. I was preoccupied with the transparency
issue...

here is a new trial:
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...nsparency..htm
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm


On those two pages, I see a huge graphic that does nothing more than
obscure most of the data tables. What is the point of doing this?

If that is supposed to be a pie chart, display it after the tables.

What is the "" that is injected into the very beginning of the page?

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck


Sep 28 '05 #28

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
That is for testing. If you do not see the white
rectangle around the pie it mean that transparency is working fine.
In the other page there is an image with semitransparent faces.


There was no rectangle. Firefox.
What is the "" that is injected into the very beginning of the page?


I cannot finf it, which file and which code line are you referring to?

(Must be some redundant quotes (?)


Look at the source of the two links you posted. Those strange characters
are the very first in the source, before the doctype (which is
incorrect).

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">

See: http://www.w3.org/QA/2002/04/valid-dtd-list.html
You should use this:

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Sep 28 '05 #29

P: n/a
Dear Beauregard,
thank you very much for your correction. I have modified the routine to
begin the page.
Here is the new version

Sub IniziaDocumentoWeb()

'"<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC ""-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01
Transitional//EN"">" & vbCrLf & _
'This one removed!!!

Dim InizioDocumento As String = _
"<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC ""-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"">" & vbCrLf
& _
"<html>" & vbCrLf & _
"<head>" & vbCrLf & _
"<meta http-equiv=""content-type""
content=""text/html;charset=iso-8859-1"">" & vbCrLf & _
"<meta name=""generator"" content=""Datatime Reporting Tool and
BI"">" & vbCrLf & _
"<title>Report</title>" & vbCrLf & _
"<style type=""text/css"" media=""screen"">" & vbCrLf & _
"img {behavior: url(""pngbehavior.htc"")};" & vbCrLf & _
"</style>" & vbCrLf & _
"</head>" & vbCrLf

Me.sbCodeWebDocument = New
System.Text.StringBuilder(InizioDocumento)

End Sub
As you see in the routine there are no strange characters. So I guess
I must change
the encoding of the text file.
If I open the source from IE, which invokes NOTEPAD here is what I
see:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1">
<meta name="generator" content="Datatime Reporting Tool and BI">
<title>Report</title>
<style type="text/css" media="screen">
img {behavior: url("pngbehavior.htc")};
</style>
</head>

so the strange chars <!DOCTYPE do not appear!!
To check for the encoding I need be able to see those chars to be sure
I remove them.
What text editor are you using?

-Pamela
PS
By the way any information about the best text encoding for web pages?

Sep 28 '05 #30

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
so the strange chars <!DOCTYPE do not appear!!
To check for the encoding I need be able to see those chars to be sure
I remove them.
What text editor are you using?


As I stated, I was viewing the page(s) in Firefox. Those characters
appear both on the page, and in the View Source.

I opened one of them in Opera, and ... no strange characters. So, it is
either Mozilla browsers, or my computer. Since they appear in both
Firefox 1.0.7 and Mozilla 1.7.4? I tend to think it is not my computer.

How does the page look to you with Firefox?

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Sep 28 '05 #31

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it:
Dear Udo

Do you mean they are more than that?
http://www.ayukov.com/essays/browsers.html


Outdated, it is from Sep 04

http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/stat.htm
or
http://www.webhits.de/deutsch/index..../webstats.html

for germany, approx, 11 Mio. people are using Firefox-
Don't bother, they're not using this internetcancer named MSIE.
--
Freundliche Gruesse,
Netzteil - Udo Marx
http://www.netzteil.com
Sep 28 '05 #32

P: n/a
I have browsed the 2 pages with FIREFOX 1.0.7

http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm

it shows strange characters at the beginning
These chars do not appear in IE

Also if you compare with IE ,you will see Firefox
does not understand some CSS such as INSET and OUTSET
destroying the 3D effect.

Also there are errors in the positionioning of some DIVs.
With IE everythings is ok.

Looks like Firefox has incomplete support for CSS. I don't see how come
these guys have
difficulties to render a simple 3d effect. Its only matter to draw a
box with 2 different colors ...

Tomorrow I will try with RIDGE and GROOVE to see if they got it right

Sep 28 '05 #33

P: n/a
AH I just found the reason
It's the char encoding (can be changed in the menu)

By default it uses ISO-8859-1

if you switch FIREFOX to Unicode (UTF-8) they disappear (there is an
item in a menu, I have it in italian).

So do you suggest I swithch to a different encoding or it is better to
leave unicode ??

Sep 28 '05 #34

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:

None of which go to the point. That'is way I am talking about
extravagancy.
Is it possible that there is nobody who can answer simply in terms of
CODE ?
No. It cannot be done in either HTML or CSS. Or Javascript. Or ...
If you want a transparent PNG, use an image editor to produce it. If
the browser still does not show the transparency, it is a limitation of
the browser. IE has such limitations with PNG.
I am coding an a routine to export reports produced by Datatime
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/TechnicalPreview/
to web and I want they should look EXACTLY the same.

The only way to do that is a screen capture like your sample, or create
a PDF from the original document. The WWW medium simply does not offer the
degree or type of layout control you require.

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)
Sep 28 '05 #35

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:

Could you tell me if now your browser can see transparency?

Yes, it does. Mozilla and Firefox.

--
jmm dash list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)
Sep 28 '05 #36

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it wrote:
With IE everythings is ok.

Looks like Firefox has incomplete support for CSS.


I'm pressed for time just now, so I will say .. what? .. how can we
convince you that IE uses proprietary stuff, including CSS, and if you
would use a CORRECT doctype, Firefox is by far the better browser.

Once again, use a correct, strict, doctype.

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Sep 28 '05 #37

P: n/a
On 28 Sep 2005 10:34:28 -0700, ex********@libero.it wrote:
Also if you compare with IE ,you will see Firefox
does not understand some CSS such as INSET and OUTSET
destroying the 3D effect.

Also there are errors in the positionioning of some DIVs.
With IE everythings is ok.

Looks like Firefox has incomplete support for CSS. I don't see how come
these guys have
difficulties to render a simple 3d effect. Its only matter to draw a
box with 2 different colors ...

Tomorrow I will try with RIDGE and GROOVE to see if they got it right


So you think that because you have made thousands of mistakes in your CSS
that somehow Firefox is to blame when it can't *guess* what you want.
Just for the record when your css is
validated(http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/v...tatimedemo.htm)
you get over 5000 errors, that's not a typo that's 5000 and over 10,000
warnings, It amazes me that any browser can render such a pitifully poor
piece of coding, especially as it has to cope with 3385 html coding errors.

So before you get all high and mighty blaming Mozilla for anything get your
own house in order
Sep 28 '05 #38

P: n/a
Rincewind wrote:
So you think that because you have made thousands of mistakes in your
CSS that somehow Firefox is to blame when it can't *guess* what you
want. Just for the record when your css is validated
(http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/v...tatimedemo.htm)
you get over 5000 errors, that's not a typo that's 5000 and over
10,000 warnings, It amazes me that any browser can render such a
pitifully poor piece of coding, especially as it has to cope with
3385 html coding errors.
Heh, I was reluctant to subject the validator to those huge pages. <g>
But I suspected the answer would be as you have stated.
So before you get all high and mighty blaming Mozilla for anything
get your own house in order


Exactly that.

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Sep 28 '05 #39

P: n/a
Rincewind wrote:
Just for the record when your css is
validated(http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/v...tatimedemo.htm)
you get over 5000 errors, that's not a typo that's 5000 and over 10,000
warnings, It amazes me that any browser can render such a pitifully poor
piece of coding, especially as it has to cope with 3385 html coding errors.


These have to be World Records!
--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
Killing All Posts from GG: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Sep 28 '05 #40

P: n/a
On 28 Sep 2005 22:55:29 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
Rincewind wrote:
Just for the record when your css is
validated(http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/v...tatimedemo.htm)
you get over 5000 errors, that's not a typo that's 5000 and over 10,000
warnings, It amazes me that any browser can render such a pitifully poor
piece of coding, especially as it has to cope with 3385 html coding errors.


These have to be World Records!


Yes and another record for the time it took for the css validation result
page to load: over 3mins for 30,000+ lines ;-) I thought it had been
broken!
Sep 28 '05 #41

P: n/a
Rincewind wrote:
On 28 Sep 2005 22:55:29 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
Rincewind wrote:
Just for the record when your css is
validated(http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/v...tatimedemo.htm)
you get over 5000 errors, that's not a typo that's 5000 and over 10,000
warnings, It amazes me that any browser can render such a pitifully poor
piece of coding, especially as it has to cope with 3385 html coding errors.


These have to be World Records!


Yes and another record for the time it took for the css validation result
page to load: over 3mins for 30,000+ lines ;-) I thought it had been
broken!


I'm glad you persevered. This is a record that needs to be known. :)
--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
Killing All Posts from GG: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Sep 29 '05 #42

P: n/a
Since I repeat always equal the code for 1 cell, it is clear
that if for instance I use something not correct in one cell
than the warning or error is counted as many times as the cells are.

So I can always beat ANY record. It just matter of incrementing
the number of cells!!

But let's go to the ESSENCE. Now I will go remove all the causes of
errors
and warning, but still I want you note that here I am talking of
box POSITION and of some effects such as INSET OUTSET RIDGE GROOVE.

This is just plain CSS, as I have learned from the official
specification
And it is an evidence that firefox has problem with these.

In fact the position of cell is just natter of mathematics, as you see
it is perfect both in the report composer and in IE, but in firefox,
some cell
is not well positioned.

Also some effect, NOT proprietary but PLAIN css, are not rendered.

I am just being objective. I am a coder I have nothing against firefox
which I discovered only yesterday and seems to have a NICE interface.
I am just saying that there are some LITTLE imperfections. They are not
so hard to correct. If I were the author of firefox it would probably
take me
less than 1 hour to fix these little imperfections.

So don't be agressive to me. I am not partial (as you seems) I am not
in love
with microsoft. I am just a coder who is trying to do a good work.

So intead of blaming me, if you wish to be nice and helpful just tell
me exacly
what I have to correct and I will gladly do.

Another thing. You have not been follwing well the all discussion.
The transparency effect you see in IE are not screen capture. That is
true
transparency. We have infact already solved that problem.

People here are so much sentitive and partial when talking about
browsers. But
please understand I am an independent coder. I have nothing against
anyone
I am not Bill Gates. I an not your enemy.

If the people at firefox needs help or testing I am even available to
help.

Thank for your help!!

-Pamela

Sep 29 '05 #43

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it schreef:
Thank for your help!!


Oke, let me give you a good hint: why don't you use a table for yur
tabular data?
When you use a table you can give the cells diffrent classes for yheir
switching backgroundcolours. Your code can then be reduced to - just
gueassing - 5%.

Example:

<table id="putTheTableNameHere">
<tr>
<th class="shipCountry">SHIPCOUNTRY</th>
<th>ORDERID</th>
<th class="headerLight">FREIGHT</th>
<th>EMPLOYEEID</th>
<th class="headerLight">SHIPVIA</th>
</tr>
<tr class="rowName1>
<th>Argentina</th>
<td>16</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>16</td>
<td>16</td>
</tr>
<tr class="rowName2>
<th>Austria</th>
<td>40</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>40</td>
</tr>
</table>

Then you use CSS to declare the styles for the different table's', tr's,
th's and td's.
Please try to figure that out yourself before asking help on that.
Good luck!

--
Niek
Sep 29 '05 #44

P: n/a
'sNiek schreef:
ex********@libero.it schreef:
Thank for your help!!

Oke, let me give you a good hint: why don't you use a table for yur
tabular data?
When you use a table you can give the cells diffrent classes for yheir
switching backgroundcolours. Your code can then be reduced to - just
gueassing - 5%.

Oops sorry for the typo's, I'm using a different keyboard now.

--
Niek
Sep 29 '05 #45

P: n/a
No problem. I am italian and make a lot of errors writing.

Tables have been my first choices. But we had to discard them because
the report layout can be so much complicated that a table is not
able to render it in general.

Report are objects much more complex than an html table.
So I had to rewrite, painfully, the whole routine which originally
generated the report, to
allow a finer control, with the possibility of positioning each single
cell.

Here you must understand the context. In reports a user can write a
program to
change dinamically the appearance of specific cell only when some
conditions
are verified (the so called alarms).

What I can do, with some extra programming effort, to reduce the
number of tag is to make a preliminary analysis of all cell,
extracting the different styles, and defining them separately.
However, still the positioning of cell is to be specified singularly.

This way a cell would have an ID (for the style used) plus information
about position and size.
Do you think this can be an improvement?

Pamela

Sep 29 '05 #46

P: n/a
ex********@libero.it schreef:
No problem. I am italian and make a lot of errors writing.
Italians make fantastic wines, so you're excused ;-)
What I can do, with some extra programming effort, to reduce the
number of tag is to make a preliminary analysis of all cell,
extracting the different styles, and defining them separately.
However, still the positioning of cell is to be specified singularly.
You can add classes to each div, the cells are in about 15 different
styles. So you make 15 standard classes, if a cell should have a
differently style because the user chosses to, you can add inline style.

Around each table-like thing on
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
you can put a 'mother'-div so you can decalre the allround style
(borders and such) for all div's in that 'mother'-div.

div#mother1{
border-lef: 1px solid black;
border-top: 1px solid black;
}

div#mother1 div{
border-right: 1px solid black;
border-bottom: 1px solid black;
}

This way a cell would have an ID (for the style used) plus information
about position and size.
Do you think this can be an improvement?


I don't quite get the positioning part, it looks like a table to me. but
then again I don't know anything about you're report-thing (I am a
sitebuilder, not a programmer).

Hope this can help you, please help us by quoting texts your replying to
(it's general netiquette).
Cheers
--
Niek
Sep 29 '05 #47

P: n/a


Hope this can help you, please help us by quoting texts your replying to
(it's general netiquette).
This change will require me to get back heavily to programming.
While working I will still read, so any suggestion is still welcome.

In the meantime I have changed the DOCTYPE string and color names to
hex
(actually I don't understand whay the validator get upset about them,
while
every browser can understand them very well. Also it gives some
warnings that should not be there such as the external component .htc I
used to correct the IE6 behavior ).

So far many people in this newsgroup have been so much helpful.
Please if you wish just go on our website and drop an email to confirm
to be listed in our supporting expert board:
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...articipate.htm

I will take care personally to entry your data ...

A presto,

Pamela
Cheers
--
Niek


Sep 29 '05 #48

P: n/a
On 29 Sep 2005 00:14:44 GMT, in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets , Blinky the Shark
<no*****@box.invalid> in
<sl********************@thurston.blinkynet.net> wrote:
Rincewind wrote:
On 28 Sep 2005 22:55:29 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:
Rincewind wrote:

Just for the record when your css is
validated(http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/v...tatimedemo.htm)
you get over 5000 errors, that's not a typo that's 5000 and over 10,000
warnings, It amazes me that any browser can render such a pitifully poor
piece of coding, especially as it has to cope with 3385 html coding errors.

These have to be World Records!


Yes and another record for the time it took for the css validation result
page to load: over 3mins for 30,000+ lines ;-) I thought it had been
broken!


I'm glad you persevered. This is a record that needs to be known. :)


I remember a computer course that had an assignment to try to produce
the largest number of compiler errors. A more difficult task than it
seems since the code needs to be good enough to keep the compiler
going.
--
Matt Silberstein

Do something today about the Darfur Genocide

Genocide is news | Be A Witness
http://www.beawitness.org

"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
www.darfurgenocide.org

Save Darfur.org :: Violence and Suffering in Sudan's Darfur Region
http://www.savedarfur.org/
Sep 29 '05 #49

P: n/a
Matt Silberstein wrote:
On 29 Sep 2005 00:14:44 GMT, in
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets , Blinky the Shark
<no*****@box.invalid> in
<sl********************@thurston.blinkynet.net> wrote:
Rincewind wrote:
On 28 Sep 2005 22:55:29 GMT, Blinky the Shark wrote:

Rincewind wrote:

> Just for the record when your css is
> validated(http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/v...tatimedemo.htm)
> you get over 5000 errors, that's not a typo that's 5000 and over 10,000
> warnings, It amazes me that any browser can render such a pitifully poor
> piece of coding, especially as it has to cope with 3385 html coding errors.

These have to be World Records!

Yes and another record for the time it took for the css validation result
page to load: over 3mins for 30,000+ lines ;-) I thought it had been
broken!


I'm glad you persevered. This is a record that needs to be known. :)


I remember a computer course that had an assignment to try to produce
the largest number of compiler errors. A more difficult task than it
seems since the code needs to be good enough to keep the compiler
going.


Heh. I wonder how close that site (above) comes to blowing a fuse at
the validator. :)
--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
Killing All Posts from GG: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Sep 30 '05 #50

87 Replies

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.