469,267 Members | 1,031 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 469,267 developers. It's quick & easy.

layer transparent Please HELP!!

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
87 9085
FIREFOX 1.0.7 AND IE6 viewed through DATATIME: a summary REPORT
================================================== =============
by Pamela
Datatime Team
-----------------

Ok guys. I am back.

I have been working hard to implement all your suggestions and to
incorporate all the advice you kindly provided concerning Datatime web
export. And in particular to extract the different styles and to make
preliminary classes, in order to avoid repetitions of the same
descriptors.

- acknowledgements ----------------------------------------------------

In particular I am very grateful to the contributors:

PretLetters
Spartanicus
Bill
kchayka
Beauregard
Antoine
Robi
Arne
Niek
Rincewind
Blinky the Shark
Matt
Udo
....
(hope didn't miss anyone. Althought someone should be listed in a black
list :-))

Here is my latest result. These are 2 pages. The first one contains a
SCREENSHOT to show the original as it is in DATATIME.
And the other is the corresponding WEB OUTPUT.
Compare Firefox and IE to see differences.

The layout shown it is not intended to not make any sense.
It is just a TEST where several formatting effects are used.

ORIGINAL SCREENSHOT (bitmap):
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...screenshot.htm

WEB OUTPUT (rendered with CSS2):
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm

Just for the record when your css is
validated http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=htt...tatimedemo.htmyou 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.


I have lost my previous record. But I still deserve a prize according
what
Matt Silberstein says... :-)

There are some strange warning about colors and font. Please let me
know the code changes
to eliminate them.

Your suggestions are very important for my work.
Of course, all of you are invited, if you wish, to join the board of
supporting experts of Datatime
----------------------------------------------------------------------

This time I have been working using in parallel FIREFOX end IE
to double check the rendering of the report.
In the process of reprogramming the web ouput I have made some
discoveries (i use the word subjectively), which I wish to share.
Some are just hypotheses. So, please, correct me if am wrong.

IE has the well-known issue it does not support natively the PNG
transparency. To modify this behavior it is necessary to use
a script. For the webmaster, it is matter of inserting 1 line, such as
img {behavior:url("pngbehavior.htc");}
within the <style> section. This work fine and is the official
solution suggested by IE Team. (IE7 beta corrects this behavior).

WARNING! I noticed it is very important *where* you place this line.
In fact while IE doensn't care. If you place it before
the class definitions, FIREFOX is no more able to render
the page correctly.
To be safe, place it past the class definitions.

About doctypes, I noticed that if you
use <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN">
instead of <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01
Transitional//EN">
there are sensible differences in the computation of the blocks.
Infact the algorithm I used to draw the boxes with HTML 4.01
Transitional does NOT
work with HTML 4.01, and a slightly different algorithm is needed.
This would suggest the box model is different.

In general, it seems FIREFOX is more strict that IE. An example was the
behavior
it has with the call to "pngbehavior.htc". Here are other 2 examples.
1.
HTML 4.01 Transitional seems to be rendered differently by
IE6 and Firefox. I have the impression that when this doctype
is used, Firefox uses a newer box model with respect to IE6,
while just some of the latest properties are not rendered.
Hence, there seems to be no way to get the same result with IE6 and
the last version of Firefox using the Transitional doctype, as the box
model
used is different.
Using DTD HTML 4.01 you can get almost exactly the same
rendering, apart some small details explained below.

2.
About encoding. If your web page is actually encoded UTF-8 and you
by chance specify another encoding, such as charset=iso-8859-1
IE seems anyway able to understand that the encoding is UTF-8,
FIREFOX instead uses what is specified. This might
cause the appearance of some strange chars at the very beginning
of the page.

In general, the impression I have got so far is that Firefox is
candidate to
be more lovable by users, especially those open source oriented, due to
some
nice features and the tabbed interface. FIREFOX is somehow more
confortable
to use for the final user. (IE is perhaps sligtly better good looking).

Firefox is unforgiven and strict as to css.
There is something strange with Firefox rendering of INSET/OUTSET.
In fact if the border size is 1 it uses for the borders the forecolor.
This is strange as it does not happen with border width > 1. IE6 does
not
have this problem.

To center I used the VALIGN, because I could not find a way with css.
(HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!)
This is very uncomfortable to maintain and requires some attention as
the cell generated by TD
automatically is shifted 2 pixels below and to the righ respect to its
container.
So to correct this behavior the absolute location of container must be
shifted
2 pixels top left. The size of the cell is different in the browsers.
Here
IE seems to be a little more consistent.

<table><td bgcolor=blue width=127px height=139px valign=middle>Austria
</td></table>
this instruction generates the following phisical box:
129x141 pixels in IE6
129x139 pixels in Firefox

Further Firefox anf IE have slightly different behavior if the TD box
il larger than
the container, IE enlarges the container also. Firefox no. But this
will not
affect us, except when the cell il smaller than its content.
------------------------------------------------------------------

So thanks to your help the Datatime web EXPORT has so far improved
sensibly.
In particular those big pages have been reduced sensibly by a
preliminary
extraction of style classes.

I still need help with vertical alignent since I feel the solution I
have use
is unelegant and ackward (althought it works).

After all, it also turns out Datatime can also be used as an effective
tool to test and
overstress browsers!! :-)

-Pamela

Oct 3 '05 #51
On 3 Oct 2005 04:04:44 -0700, ex********@libero.it wrote:
About doctypes, I noticed that if you
use <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN">
that is not a complete DTD there are three for HTML 4.01:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Frameset//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/frameset.dtd">

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

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
I have lost my previous record. But I still deserve a prize according
what
Matt Silberstein says... :-)


Only a consolation prize now you've managed to reduce the error count to a
mere 783!!!!
http://validator.w3.org/check?verbos...tatimedemo.htm


Oct 3 '05 #52
Actually the prize was for producing the largest number of errors
and at the same time having something which works.

Actually I had validated only CSS. It's good to validate
also html. The number of errors is not a big problem
since it essentially due to repetition of a few different ones (the
number of cells is high).

And actually they are not that big issue. I am going to correct them
anyway. THANKS!

PS
you wanted to be put in the white list, right?

Oct 3 '05 #53
ex********@libero.it wrote:

Here is my latest result.
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm


FYI, this is tabular data. I can't fathom why you don't put the data in
a table instead of all those absolutely positioned divs, unless you're
under the misconception that all tables are bad. They aren't.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Oct 3 '05 #54
As already said, tables were first choice. But
then we realized they didn't allow for all the flexibility
and precision of formatting we need. That why the control is at cell
level.
Try to replicate exacly (I mean at pixel level)
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm
or
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
with a table and you will understand what i mean.

For the rest I agree tables are powerful. In fact so far it's the only
practical way I found for vertical alignment of text !!

-Pamela

Oct 4 '05 #55
good to know!

Oct 4 '05 #56
Lost this record as well!

-Pamela

Oct 4 '05 #57
On 3 Oct 2005 10:02:25 -0700, ex********@libero.it wrote:
Actually the prize was for producing the largest number of errors
and at the same time having something which works.
Well work is a relative term, the page doesn't work particularly well, it
takes an age to load and doesn't look good in FF.
Actually I had validated only CSS. It's good to validate
also html. It's good to validate both, but neither will validate well if you don't use
a complete DTD
The number of errors is not a big problem
since it essentially due to repetition of a few different ones (the
number of cells is high).
Then it should be easy to sort those problems out,
And actually they are not that big issue. I am going to correct them
anyway. THANKS!
You might not think they are a big issue but with the number of errors you
have in both CSS and HTML, any page that renders is going to be a guess by
the browser, especially IE, and until you start from a good base you can't
really evaluate how your page works.
PS
you wanted to be put in the white list, right?


I don't know if I want to be on any list maintained by a self professed
"bad character" ;-))
Oct 4 '05 #58
If you insist on using that abominable google groups for posting to
usenet, learn how to use it and start following the accepted posting
conventions of this group!
<URL:http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>

If you won't do this much, it shows your inability to learn or adapt,
hence you'll just end up being ignored by those people who are most
likely to give you sound advice.

ex********@libero.it wrote:
As already said, tables were first choice. But
then we realized they didn't allow for all the flexibility
and precision of formatting we need. That why the control is at cell
level.
Try to replicate exacly (I mean at pixel level)
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...tatimedemo.htm
or
http://cam70.sta.uniroma1.it/Technic...ansparency.htm
with a table and you will understand what i mean.


One thing you apparently don't realize is that there is no need for
pixel precision here at all. So what if the overlaying graphic covers 3
pixels of the word "Argentina" or not? Nobody cares.

You apparently also haven't considered using multiple tables. That first
page should have 2 tables, one 6-column table for all the data on the
left side of the page and one 2-column table for the data on the right.
Position those 2 tables if you must, but not the individual cells. The
second page should have one 5-column table for each country. No
positioning required at all, except for the overlaying graphic(s).

As is, you have just created an accessibility problem with all that
positioning, as well as a layout that does not adapt well to different
browsing environments and has a huge amount of bloat, which negatively
affects download time. This is what happens when people don't understand
the technology they are trying to use and just hack away rather than
take the time to actually learn it. You just create a problem where none
should exist. :(

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Oct 4 '05 #59
Rincewind wrote:
On 3 Oct 2005 04:04:44 -0700, ex********@libero.it wrote:

About doctypes, I noticed that if you
use <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN">

that is not a complete DTD


It is a _complete_ _document type declaration_. It is not a DTD
(document type definition).
--
Johannes Koch
In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum.
(Te Deum, 4th cent.)
Oct 4 '05 #60
kchayka ha scritto:
If you insist on using that abominable google groups for posting to
usenet, learn how to use it and start following the accepted posting
conventions of this group!
<URL:http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/>
It's really abominable.
I had written a long reply. Then I don't know
what happened, I must have pressed some key I should have not:
all I wrote has suddenly disappeared (ahhrgh).

Incredible! After all there seems to be something worst
than the code I write, around...

What do you use for news reading?
--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.


Oct 4 '05 #61
ex********@libero.it wrote:
What do you use for news reading?


Headers tell all ...

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Oct 4 '05 #62
On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 16:34:14 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
ex********@libero.it wrote:
What do you use for news reading?


Headers tell all ...


eyes for me not headers ;-0
Oct 4 '05 #63

Rincewind ha scritto:

eyes for me not headers ;-0
sorry I don't get the meaning of all your expressions.
What you mean?

I also didn't get this one from Niek:
That's a 100% legit example of geek-talk! :-)


what is "legit" and "geek" ?

You guys talking too difficult!!

Pamela

Oct 5 '05 #64
ex********@libero.it schreef:
Rincewind ha scritto:

eyes for me not headers ;-0

sorry I don't get the meaning of all your expressions.
What you mean?

I also didn't get this one from Niek:

That's a 100% legit example of geek-talk! :-)

what is "legit" and "geek" ?


It means something like:
"Quello č un esempio 100% del legit di geek-comunica!"
translated by http://babelfish.altavista.com/

A geek is someone who says he/she spends his.her life with a compiler?
Legit means something like 'legittimo'in Italian.


You guys talking too difficult!!


Spice up your English, this is a good way to do that, and learning the correct way to build website alongside
(using tables for tabular dat for instance).
BTW I posted an answer (well.. not quite an entire answer) to one of your questions in the other, more recent,
thread.
--
Niek
Oct 5 '05 #65
>
It means something like:
"Quello č un esempio 100% del legit di geek-comunica!"
translated by http://babelfish.altavista.com/
it's just missing to translate those 2 words.
Perhaps it is considered slang if the dictionary does not have the
words
A geek is someone who says he/she spends his.her life with a compiler? you mean out of real world? Sound like gig robot (cartoon)
Legit means something like 'legittimo'in Italian.
You guys talking too difficult!!
Spice up your English, this is a good way to do that, and learning the correct way to build website alongside
(using tables for tabular dat for instance).


Well there are good reason for me to maintais this approach.
While I understand your reasons (you are kind of artists programming by
hand)
I have other reason which are not easy to explain to nonprogrammers.
All these reason can be summarized in one word: code maintainability.

However... if one of you is capable to do the following make a page
which
- Obtain exacly the same results as in datatimedemo with tables only
- Has less bytes in the file
I shall be happy to reconsider recoding the export routine
BTW I posted an answer (well.. not quite an entire answer) to one of yourquestions in the other, more recent,
thread. Yes I read it I was waiting to see a complete solution I could
implement.
I wanto do add quotes: so
height=200px should be changed in height="200px" or height="200"px or
height="200" or what?
last time I remove px the whole table disappeared.

Notice I have nothing against tables actually they have been an easy
and maintainable way
to center vertically the foreground text

pamela the gig r steel heart ... (I compensate with other virtues)

PS
A question I noticed that my code almost passed the 4.01 except
the validator was complaining with the "WIDTH" tag in tables.
Why the validator complains and how do I replace WIDTH.

Another one. Why that stupid validator complains about transparent
background
color. What is the change to remove that annoying warning?

--
Niek


Oct 5 '05 #66

Beauregard T. Shagnasty ha scritto:
--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck


Do you have so many pig trucks where you live?

P. the g.

Oct 5 '05 #67
ex********@libero.it schreef:
It means something like:
"Quello č un esempio 100% del legit di geek-comunica!"
translated by http://babelfish.altavista.com/

it's just missing to translate those 2 words.
Perhaps it is considered slang if the dictionary does not have the
words

A geek is someone who says he/she spends his.her life with a compiler?


you mean out of real world? Sound like gig robot (cartoon)


Oh boy, this is going to be difficult...
What does Google say:
Geek č un termine di origine anglosassone di etimo oscuro (forse storpiatura del termine inglese - in italiano
geco - come antonomasia per la particolare abilitą dell'animale di incollarsi agli oggetti).Indica una persona
solitaria che č affascinata dalla tecnologia e dalla fantasia. Il significato di geek non coincide con quello
di nerd.
it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geek

~snip~
Spice up your English, this is a good way to do that, and learning the correct way to build website alongside
(using tables for tabular dat for instance).

Well there are good reason for me to maintais this approach.
While I understand your reasons (you are kind of artists programming by
hand)
I have other reason which are not easy to explain to nonprogrammers.
All these reason can be summarized in one word: code maintainability.


I understand, lets just say you have multiple blocks which are based on one 'source-block'.

However... if one of you is capable to do the following make a page
which
- Obtain exacly the same results as in datatimedemo with tables only
- Has less bytes in the file
I shall be happy to reconsider recoding the export routine
You can export one 'source-block' to something like this: <td style="some style-elements here">Argentian</td>
If you know which block starts in a row of five blocks, you can put a <tr> in front of it an if you kwnw where
which block is the last one of the row, you can put a </tr> after it.
Same goes with the start and end of the table.

~snip~
I wanto do add quotes: so
height=200px should be changed in height="200px" or height="200"px or
height="200" or what?
last time I remove px the whole table disappeared.
It must be: height="200"

pamela the gig r steel heart ... (I compensate with other virtues)
I hope you do ;-)

PS
A question I noticed that my code almost passed the 4.01 except
the validator was complaining with the "WIDTH" tag in tables.
Why the validator complains and how do I replace WIDTH.


Basicly putting width in a tble-cell or div using html is depricated, it is better to use CSS to define
style-elements (and so you seperate the design from the content).

--
Niek
Oct 5 '05 #68
ex********@libero.it wrote:
Beauregard T. Shagnasty ha scritto:
--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck


Do you have so many pig trucks where you live?

P. the g.


One pig truck is enough!

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Oct 5 '05 #69

'sNiek ha scritto:
ex********@libero.it schreef:
It means something like:
"Quello č un esempio 100% del legit di geek-comunica!"
translated by http://babelfish.altavista.com/

it's just missing to translate those 2 words.
Perhaps it is considered slang if the dictionary does not have the
words

A geek is someone who says he/she spends his.her life with a compiler?


you mean out of real world? Sound like gig robot (cartoon)


Oh boy, this is going to be difficult...
What does Google say:
Geek č un termine di origine anglosassone di etimo oscuro (forse storpiatura del termine inglese - in italiano
geco - come antonomasia per la particolare abilitą dell'animale di incollarsi agli oggetti).Indica una persona
solitaria che č affascinata dalla tecnologia e dalla fantasia. Il significato di geek non coincide con quello
di nerd.
it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geek

~snip~
Spice up your English, this is a good way to do that, and learning the correct way to build website alongside
(using tables for tabular dat for instance).

Well there are good reason for me to maintais this approach.
While I understand your reasons (you are kind of artists programming by
hand)
I have other reason which are not easy to explain to nonprogrammers.
All these reason can be summarized in one word: code maintainability.


I understand, lets just say you have multiple blocks which are based on one 'source-block'.


good intuition

However... if one of you is capable to do the following make a page
which
- Obtain exacly the same results as in datatimedemo with tables only
- Has less bytes in the file
I shall be happy to reconsider recoding the export routine
You can export one 'source-block' to something like this: <td style="some style-elements here">Argentian</td>
If you know which block starts in a row of five blocks, you can put a <tr> in front of it an if you kwnw where
which block is the last one of the row, you can put a </tr> after it.
Same goes with the start and end of the table.


note that cells in a row can have different styoe with different
borders, cellpadding, alignments and so on... I don't see it as easy to
do
or maintainable
height="200" or what?
last time I remove px the whole table disappeared.


It must be: height="200"


Ok will try. If report disappears I come to beat you.
>
> PS
> A question I noticed that my code almost passed the 4.01 except
> the validator was complaining with the "WIDTH" tag in tables.
> Why the validator complains and how do I replace WIDTH.


Basicly putting width in a tble-cell or div using html is depricated, it is better to use CSS to define
style-elements (and so you seperate the design from the content).

Yes but here the width is necessary for the td to align correctly. It
cannot align based on
the container DIV block

--
Niek


Oct 5 '05 #70
So are you suggesting to surpass it?

And how about a manure truck?

P.

Oct 5 '05 #71
ex********@libero.it schreef:
note that cells in a row can have different styoe with different
borders, cellpadding, alignments and so on... I don't see it as easy to
do
or maintainable


that will be no problem it is completely legite to do something like:
<td style="width:95px;height:47px;border: 2px solid #ff9900; vertical-align:top">Argentian</td>
It just makes your file big.
Note that you should only use inline-style (such as the example above) when the style in that <td>-tag must be
different from the default-style.

height="200" or what?
last time I remove px the whole table disappeared.


It must be: height="200"

Ok will try. If report disappears I come to beat you.


I'm not so into the beating-game to be honoust...
Basicly putting width in a tble-cell or div using html is depricated, it is better to use CSS to define
style-elements (and so you seperate the design from the content).


Yes but here the width is necessary for the td to align correctly. It
cannot align based on
the container DIV block


That's why you have to use the DTD mentioned earlier, it tells the browser it is "Transitional".
--
Niek
Oct 5 '05 #72
'sNiek wrote:

it is completely legite to do something like:
<td style="width:95px;height:47px;border: 2px solid #ff9900; vertical-align:top">Argentian</td>
Much better would be to assign a class selector and put all the style
rules in an external stylesheet, using class names that identify the
content rather than the styling. For example
<td class="country">Argentina</td>
It just makes your file big.


Indeed.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Oct 5 '05 #73
ex********@libero.it wrote:

Well there are good reason for me to maintais this approach.
I have other reason which are not easy to explain to nonprogrammers.
Don't be condescending. Read through a database, do a little data
manipulation and print out the results. It isn't anything new.
All these reason can be summarized in one word: code maintainability.
Considering that you don't seem to understand either proper HTML or CSS,
I think you only imagine that using all those absolutely positioned divs
is somehow easier to maintain. It isn't. More like you just haven't had
enough experience to know a better, more efficient way to do it.
However... if one of you is capable to do the following make a page
which
- Obtain exacly the same results as in datatimedemo with tables only
Why does it have to be either all tables or none?
- Use proper multi-column, multi-row tables for the tabular data.
- Use divs (or whatever is most appropriate) for the other elements.
- Position (or float) the tables and divs as you see fit.

Contrary to popular belief, a pixel-perfect layout is not required.
- Has less bytes in the file
I shall be happy to reconsider recoding the export routine
It's not that hard to do, you just seem to have some preconceived
notions that are getting in the way.
Another one. Why that stupid validator complains about transparent
background
color. What is the change to remove that annoying warning?


Remove that annoying non-standard CSS. ;)
"behavior" is proprietary to IE and is not recognized by the validator.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Oct 5 '05 #74

kchayka ha scritto:

Don't be condescending. Read through a database, do a little data
manipulation and print out the results. It isn't anything new.
God forgive them because they don't know what are ... saying
2.5 years work, almost 2 millions line code, over 1500 classes
I have to hear that. Ok let's be patient.

Next I will probably hear that we have used too much code because
we don't know how to program. It's not that hard to do, you just seem to have some preconceived
notions that are getting in the way.
Then do it and, then, you can talk with reason ...
Another one. Why that stupid validator complains about transparent
background
color. What is the change to remove that annoying warning?


Remove that annoying non-standard CSS. ;)
"behavior" is proprietary to IE and is not recognized by the validator.


I was talking about the color warning
A consideration.
People in this group, different from what I am used too, tend to speak
a lot without offering concrete support (code) what they say, which
is exactly the contrary a programmer is used to do.

I think one should first prove something and then speak. Otherwise
anyone can say anything and everyone is right.

That's why lately I was showing interest for Beauregard's
pig truck.

No offense for anyone. Anyone is the way he/she is and I respect
and appreciate everyone opinion and advice.

Pamela

Oct 5 '05 #75
ex********@libero.it wrote:
Next I will probably hear that we have used too much code
Well ... perhaps.
because we don't know how to program.


No, it's not that.

It's that you don't yet know how to output proper and efficient HTML and
CSS... :-)

--
-bts
-When motorcycling, never follow a pig truck
Oct 5 '05 #76
kchayka schreef:
'sNiek wrote:
it is completely legite to do something like:
<td style="width:95px;height:47px;border: 2px solid #ff9900; vertical-align:top">Argentian</td>

Much better would be to assign a class selector and put all the style
rules in an external stylesheet, using class names that identify the
content rather than the styling. For example
<td class="country">Argentina</td>


I told the OP that, but she wants to be able to chenge the style of any
cell on the page, so I mentioned that she dhould do it the way you said
and then overrule the style if necessary by using inline style.
It just makes your file big.

Indeed.


very big!

--
Niek
Oct 5 '05 #77
ex********@libero.it schreef:
I think one should first prove something and then speak. Otherwise
anyone can say anything and everyone is right.


We allready told you to use tables for tabular data, your project is a
schoolaxample for tabular data. Proof enough I would say.

I do hope you take this advice at heart: study it, implement it and come
back with a new demo.
We certainly are curious: this is about the longest thred I've seen lately.
Ciao

--
Niek
Oct 5 '05 #78
In <11*********************@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups. com>, on
10/05/2005
at 01:48 AM, ex********@libero.it said:
what is "legit"
It's geek-talk for legitimate. ;-)
and "geek" ?


The word "geek" is a pejorative used for anybody who shows signs of
education, of working in a specialized occupation or of having a hobby
with a specialized vocabulary. The latter is quite ironic because
people who routinely sling around cryptic sports acronyms like "RBI"
often accuse others of being geeks because they use acronyms.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to sp******@library.lspace.org

Oct 6 '05 #79
On 5 Oct 2005 09:39:31 -0700, ex********@libero.it wrote:
I was talking about the color warning


apparently the CSS validator has just been updated and during the process
some

This warning is now being generated because of an update to the validator
fixing a bug.

In order to stop it you need to specify a color as well as a
background-color within the element.
Oct 6 '05 #80

Rincewind ha scritto:
On 5 Oct 2005 09:39:31 -0700, ex********@libero.it wrote:
I was talking about the color warning


apparently the CSS validator has just been updated and during the process
some

This warning is now being generated because of an update to the validator
fixing a bug.

Let's write a validator of the validator!

-Pamela

Oct 7 '05 #81
The word "geek" is a pejorative
so someone insulting me here ;-) --
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail.
I am really tempted :-)

Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to sp******@library.lspace.org


Oct 7 '05 #82

'sNiek ha scritto:

We allready told you to use tables for tabular data, your project is a
schoolaxample for tabular data. Proof enough I would say.
My believe is that is not possible to achieve exactly the same result.
Just think about the 3d effect. On the same row we can have inset and
ouset. Also border and padding top bottom can be all of different sized
for cells in a given row. But I may be wrong.

You have proven nothing so far. I have not seen any CODE, Just talk.

There are 3 criteria I see so far:

1- Code must attain exact rendering of layout report
2- code must validate according current specs
3- code must take less to load (smaller size)
[and from my point of view:
4- generating code must be maintenable ]

1. I do not think it is possible
2 this is possible
3 I think you would anyway get bigger size
4 (cell approach is more maintenable due to modularity)

You show WITH CODE you can fith the above criteria, and I will
certainly
implement gratefully your solution. All the rest is just bla bla...

So far what I can see is that, while I have rendered a complex layout,
you guys have still not been able to center vertically a single cell,
as proposed by Niek.

So: molte chiacchiere e pochi risultati!

-pamela
I do hope you take this advice at heart: study it, implement it and come
back with a new demo.
We certainly are curious: this is about the longest thred I've seen lately.
Ciao

--
Niek


Oct 7 '05 #83
In <11*********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>, on
10/05/2005
at 09:39 AM, ex********@libero.it said:
People in this group, different from what I am used too, tend to
speak a lot without offering concrete support (code) what they say,
which is exactly the contrary a programmer is used to do.
Some programmers do an extensive amount of analysis, design,
documentation and review before writing a line of code. They generally
turn out better code as a result.
I think one should first prove something and then speak.
That would cut out 90% of the useful advice. It's *your* job to try
things and see what works for you.
Otherwise anyone can say anything and everyone is right.


This is Usenet; everybody *does* say anything, and it's up to you to
decide what to trust. Keep in mind that nobody here is paid to help
you; people give advice as and when they have the time and
inclination. If you insist that they do your job before giving advice,
then they just won't bother and you'll be the loser.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to sp******@library.lspace.org

Oct 7 '05 #84
> turn out better code as a result.
I think one should first prove something and then speak.
That would cut out 90% of the useful advice. It's *your* job to try
things and see what works for you.


I might partially agree with you.
But a technical group is supposed to talk about technical
stuff. Although occasionally we might like talking about pig trucks.

Here it as been claimed that something could be done better in
another way. My opinion is contrary and I have provided specific
reasons. If one says that something could be done in a way which is
clearly impossible (in general), should at least provide evidence.
Otherwise it remains just a claim, not helpful but just
confusing.
Otherwise anyone can say anything and everyone is right.


This is Usenet; everybody *does* say anything, and it's up to you to


not true in general. Try to go in some other tech group and try to
say anything... :-)

Oct 7 '05 #85
In <11*********************@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups. com>, on
10/07/2005
at 09:22 AM, ex********@libero.it said:
Here it as been claimed that something could be done better in
another way. My opinion is contrary and I have provided specific
reasons. If one says that something could be done in a way which is
clearly impossible (in general), should at least provide evidence.
Why? He's not being paid to solve your problem. He gave you advise,
pro bono publico. You are free to either accept or ignore his advice.
If you ignore it, he may not bother giving you advice in the future.
He has no obligation to convince you that his advice is good; he's
already done more than he was obligated to.
Otherwise it remains just a claim, not helpful but just confusing.
It is helpful if it is correct; if you refuse to pay attention, that's
your problem, not his.
not true in general. Try to go in some other tech group and try to
say anything... :-)


Google is your friend. This group is quite sedate compared to some
technical groups.

They don't really have flames on Usenet. They think they do, but
that's only because they've never seen the real thing. Back in the old
days, before FIDO, when men were men and sheep were scared, there were
some real flames.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to sp******@library.lspace.org

Oct 7 '05 #86
ex********@libero.it wrote:

My believe is that is not possible to achieve exactly the same result.
Just think about the 3d effect. On the same row we can have inset and
ouset. Also border and padding top bottom can be all of different sized
for cells in a given row. But I may be wrong.
This is where you are going wrong, methinks. It sounds like classic
"form over function". That sample page you put up looks just awful from
a usability standpoint. I can't imagine why you would want to do such a
thing in the first place. The whim of some marketing guy?
There are 3 criteria I see so far:

1- Code must attain exact rendering of layout report
HTML was never meant to acheive exactness. You already discovered that
CSS might do it, but in your case, it looks like a case of abuse.
2- code must validate according current specs
Validation only checks for syntax errors. Your sample page was loaded
with logic errors, insofar as using correct markup for the specific
content. As a programmer, you should understand the difference.
Validating according to specs should also include conforming to some
level of published accessibility guidelines. Your sample page was a
total disaster in that regard.
You show WITH CODE you can fith the above criteria, and I will
certainly
implement gratefully your solution. All the rest is just bla bla...
A couple people have already shown you the path to better code. You
don't seem interested in using correct markup.
So far what I can see is that, while I have rendered a complex layout,


Seems to me it is unnecessarily complex, which is where much of the
trouble lies. If acheiving a particular pixel-perfect layout is so
bloody important, forget HTML altogether. Try PDF.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Oct 8 '05 #87
ex********@libero.it wrote:
kchayka ha scritto:
It's not that hard to do, you just seem to have some preconceived
notions that are getting in the way.


Then do it and, then, you can talk with reason ...


Let go of this crazy notion that you must maintain some pixel-perfect
layout. If you can't do that, then there is little hope.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.
Oct 8 '05 #88

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.