CSS: Problems with doubly defined colors (according to validator)

[Sebastian Schack]

Hey everyone.

Hope I'm in the right spot here... if not, please correct me.

My .css starts with the definition of the body-part which looks as follows:

body {
background: #FFFFFF url(images/banner_spacer.png) repeat-x;
font: normal small Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
}

The validator complains about two other parts in my .css file, telling me
that I'm using the same color for the fore- and the background in the two
contexts body and .boxed .title and in the two contexts body and #topmenu
a.

Here's my .boxed .title part:
..boxed .title {
height: 29px;
padding: 11px 0 0 27px;
text-transform: uppercase;
font-size: 1.2em;
color: #FFFFFF;
}

And here the #topmenu a part:
#topmenu a {
display: block;
float: left;
margin: 0 0 0 20px;
padding: 0 0 0 15px;
text-transform: uppercase;
text-decoration: none;
font-size: x-small;
font-weight: bold;
color: #ffffff;
}

Well, most likely I'm just blind in this case... but I can't see what I am
doing wrong or how I could do this in a better way.

Anybody?

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Sebastian

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Sebastian Schack wrote:

Hey everyone.

Hey.

Hope I'm in the right spot here... if not, please correct me.
My .css starts with the

How about a URL to a working example of your problem?

#topmenu a {

...

font-size: x-small;

I can't read that.

font-weight: bold;

...and will be even worse when bold. I will probably have to increase the
text size in my browser by about 30% or so - and then the text will no
doubt escape from your explicitly-pixel-sized boxes.

--
-bts
-Motorcycles defy gravity; cars just suck

[Jonathan N. Little]

Sebastian Schack wrote:

Hey everyone.

Hope I'm in the right spot here... if not, please correct me.

My .css starts with the definition of the body-part which looks as follows:

A url would be better, you may not have included the part with the error
but...

>
body {
background: #FFFFFF url(images/banner_spacer.png) repeat-x;

^^^^^^
This states that your *base* background color is white.

font: normal small Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
}

The validator complains about two other parts in my .css file, telling me
that I'm using the same color for the fore- and the background in the two
contexts body and .boxed .title and in the two contexts body and #topmenu
a.

Here's my .boxed .title part:
.boxed .title {
height: 29px;
padding: 11px 0 0 27px;
text-transform: uppercase;
font-size: 1.2em;
color: #FFFFFF;

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now you have set the foreground color to white but what is the
background? You don't say so since your base color is white and and any
elements with class "boxed" or "title" will inherent the background
color of the parent your default will be white on white and hence the
warning. Yes I know you have a background image, but if it unavailable
for some reason the background color will preside. If this PNG is dark
you should set the background color dark as well for us folks on dialup
can read your page as your PNG takes it's merry time loading.

}

And here the #topmenu a part:
#topmenu a {
display: block;
float: left;
margin: 0 0 0 20px;
padding: 0 0 0 15px;
text-transform: uppercase;
text-decoration: none;
font-size: x-small;
font-weight: bold;
color: #ffffff;

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
DITTO

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Scripsit Sebastian Schack:

Hope I'm in the right spot here... if not, please correct me.

You aren't. This group is about HTML, not CSS. The c.i.w.a.stylesheets group
is just around the corner. But before posting the question there, read the
responses here, re-read the warning message(s) you got, and - should you
need to post - don't forget the URL.

--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/

[Sebastian Schack]

Jonathan N. Little wrote:

A url would be better, you may not have included the part with the error
but...

Yeah, sorry.
The website's still in the alpha phase and looked that shabby, I didn't dare
to upload it last night. ;)
However, here it is (with no content and no function):
http://www.schacknetz.de
http://www.schacknetz.de/default.css

>>
body {
background: #FFFFFF url(images/banner_spacer.png) repeat-x;

^^^^^^
This states that your *base* background color is white.

Right. As intended.

>Here's my .boxed .title part:
.boxed .title {
height: 29px;
padding: 11px 0 0 27px;
text-transform: uppercase;
font-size: 1.2em;
color: #FFFFFF;

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Now you have set the foreground color to white but what is the
background? [...] Yes I know you have a background image, but if it
unavailable for some reason the background color will preside. If this PNG
is dark you should set the background color[...]

Well, your right, I have a background image. But it doesn't cover the whole
page.
So when I change the background color to, let's say, black, half of the
page's background will be black.

Please take a look at the page and the css as well.
Feel free to comment/ correct me wherever I am|might be wrong. :)

Thanks in advance!

[Sebastian Schack]

Strange things are happening!

I felt free so free to already include the links to both, the (X)HTMl and
the CSS validator.
Now I'm really surprised: I didn't change a thing in the CSS file since
posting to the newsgroup in search for help. When you click on one of the
links (right at the bottom) both, the page itself and the css file are
being validated.

However, if I upload my local default.css to the validator of www.w3.org, it
shows me the same "mistakes" as before.
The files are exactly the same (I just used diff to verify).

Who's wrong now?
Is my CSS okay and the validator is somewhat confused?

Regards,
Sebastian

[Ben Bacarisse]

Sebastian Schack <se**************@gmail.comwrites:

Strange things are happening!

I felt free so free to already include the links to both, the (X)HTMl and
the CSS validator.
Now I'm really surprised: I didn't change a thing in the CSS file since
posting to the newsgroup in search for help. When you click on one of the
links (right at the bottom) both, the page itself and the css file are
being validated.

However, if I upload my local default.css to the validator of www.w3.org, it
shows me the same "mistakes" as before.
The files are exactly the same (I just used diff to verify).

Who's wrong now?
Is my CSS okay and the validator is somewhat confused?

The "direct link" does a check without warnings. The two colour
warnings you get when you go to the w3c validator page can be turned
off (by setting the validators's options) and then you will get the same
output from both methods.

--
Ben.