By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
435,269 Members | 1,561 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 435,269 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

CSS text and image rollovers: two issues

P: n/a
I've got a couple of errors on my site that I'm not sure how to fix. I'm
using simple CSS for both text rollovers and my horizontal navbar, and
here's what happens. First, the site:

www.sunbadgeco.com/sunmetal/index.htm

#1 {
In IE6, rolling over an image in the navbar makes it "light" up. Clicking on
the image takes you to another page (which is not finished). Then clicking
the Back button keeps the image you just clicked on "lit" up, and that's the
problem. If you then click on the screen, the image behavior returns to
normal.

It's the same with the text rollover at the bottom. Clicking on a link
brings you correctly to the page, but clicking the Back button keeps the
underline on the link.

This does not happen in Mozilla FireFox 0.8! It appears to work fine...
}

#2 {
In Mozilla Firefox 0.8 (latest), the navbar images fail to appear
completely - except for a small transparent bar at the bottom of the image,
where I can see that the rollover does indeed work. But nearly all of it is
black.

Yet, the above problem with the links remaining in "active" state after
hitting the Back button are gone with this browser.
}

The NavBar CSS (I have a transparent 1x1px .gif the same size as the image
so that the _inactive state image appears on the site until you hover over
it):

a#artists:link, a#artists:visited {
background: #000 url(../images/artists_inactive.jpg) no-repeat;
}
a#artists:hover, a#artists:active {
background: #000 url(../images/artists_active.jpg) no-repeat;
}

etc. with contact and about images.
Jul 20 '05 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
15 Replies


P: n/a
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
I've got a couple of errors on my site that I'm not sure how to fix. I'm
using simple CSS for both text rollovers and my horizontal navbar, and
here's what happens. First, the site:

www.sunbadgeco.com/sunmetal/index.htm

#1 {
In IE6, rolling over an image in the navbar makes it "light" up. Clicking on
the image takes you to another page (which is not finished). Then clicking
the Back button keeps the image you just clicked on "lit" up, and that's the
problem. If you then click on the screen, the image behavior returns to
normal.

It's the same with the text rollover at the bottom. Clicking on a link
brings you correctly to the page, but clicking the Back button keeps the
underline on the link.

This does not happen in Mozilla FireFox 0.8! It appears to work fine...
}
This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back
the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
other browsers do not.
#2 {
In Mozilla Firefox 0.8 (latest), the navbar images fail to appear
completely - except for a small transparent bar at the bottom of the image,
where I can see that the rollover does indeed work. But nearly all of it is
black.

Yet, the above problem with the links remaining in "active" state after
hitting the Back button are gone with this browser.
}

The NavBar CSS (I have a transparent 1x1px .gif the same size as the image
so that the _inactive state image appears on the site until you hover over
it):

a#artists:link, a#artists:visited {
background: #000 url(../images/artists_inactive.jpg) no-repeat;
}
a#artists:hover, a#artists:active {
background: #000 url(../images/artists_active.jpg) no-repeat;
}


You've set the line-height for the parent element to 1px. So there
links are only 1px tall. The spacer gifs you've included spill outside
of the line box but the background image is only applied to the <a>
element itself which is constrained to the line box.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
Jul 20 '05 #2

P: n/a

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:e2********************************@4ax.com...
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
I've got a couple of errors on my site that I'm not sure how to fix. I'm
using simple CSS for both text rollovers and my horizontal navbar, and
here's what happens. First, the site:

www.sunbadgeco.com/sunmetal/index.htm

#1 {
In IE6, rolling over an image in the navbar makes it "light" up. Clicking onthe image takes you to another page (which is not finished). Then clickingthe Back button keeps the image you just clicked on "lit" up, and that's theproblem. If you then click on the screen, the image behavior returns to
normal.

It's the same with the text rollover at the bottom. Clicking on a link
brings you correctly to the page, but clicking the Back button keeps the
underline on the link.

This does not happen in Mozilla FireFox 0.8! It appears to work fine...
}
This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back
the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
other browsers do not.


Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.
#2 {
In Mozilla Firefox 0.8 (latest), the navbar images fail to appear
completely - except for a small transparent bar at the bottom of the image,where I can see that the rollover does indeed work. But nearly all of it isblack.

Yet, the above problem with the links remaining in "active" state after
hitting the Back button are gone with this browser.
}

The NavBar CSS (I have a transparent 1x1px .gif the same size as the imageso that the _inactive state image appears on the site until you hover overit):

a#artists:link, a#artists:visited {
background: #000 url(../images/artists_inactive.jpg) no-repeat;
}
a#artists:hover, a#artists:active {
background: #000 url(../images/artists_active.jpg) no-repeat;
}


You've set the line-height for the parent element to 1px. So there
links are only 1px tall. The spacer gifs you've included spill outside
of the line box but the background image is only applied to the <a>
element itself which is constrained to the line box.


Thanks, I'm sure that explains it, but how do I fix it in FireFox and why
does it work in IE?
Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

Jul 20 '05 #3

P: n/a
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote:

This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back
the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
other browsers do not.


Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.


No. It is working as intended by the browser manufacturer. The only
way around is to not use IE or Opera as your browser. Users of those
browsers are presumably used to it working this way and don't have any
problem with it.
You've set the line-height for the parent element to 1px. So there
links are only 1px tall. The spacer gifs you've included spill outside
of the line box but the background image is only applied to the <a>
element itself which is constrained to the line box.


Thanks, I'm sure that explains it, but how do I fix it in FireFox and why
does it work in IE?


Not just Gecko, Opera also displays only part of the image (though
more than 1px, possibly due to my minimum font-size setting).

Take out the line-height: 1px; and set the height of the <a> elements
to the height of the background image. You may need to tweak a few
other things as well.

IE gets it wrong. IE does that. A lot.
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>


Did you like my signature so much you had to quote it back to
everyone?

Steve

--
"Grab reality by the balls and squeeze." - Tempus Thales

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
Jul 20 '05 #4

P: n/a

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:id********************************@4ax.com...
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote:

This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back
the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
other browsers do not.
Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.


No. It is working as intended by the browser manufacturer. The only
way around is to not use IE or Opera as your browser. Users of those
browsers are presumably used to it working this way and don't have any
problem with it.


You are implying that because it was intended there cannot be a workaround.
Are you saying they intended it that way merely because it's worked that way
for a long time? There are often, I dare say usually, workarounds or hacks,
whether the manufacturer intends a behavior or not. I'm a long-time user of
IE and a) have not noticed this before (- perhaps as a user I did not think
of it, and as a designer I do), and b) I do have a problem with it on my
website, so you presume incorrectly.
You've set the line-height for the parent element to 1px. So there
links are only 1px tall. The spacer gifs you've included spill outside
of the line box but the background image is only applied to the <a>
element itself which is constrained to the line box.


Thanks, I'm sure that explains it, but how do I fix it in FireFox and why
does it work in IE?


Not just Gecko, Opera also displays only part of the image (though
more than 1px, possibly due to my minimum font-size setting).

Take out the line-height: 1px; and set the height of the <a> elements
to the height of the background image. You may need to tweak a few
other things as well.


Thanks. Line-height wasn't the culprit though. I had to add "font-size:
35px" to all the links and it worked.
Jul 20 '05 #5

P: n/a

"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote in
message news:aQEvc.655697$oR5.158008@pd7tw3no...

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:e2********************************@4ax.com...
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
I've got a couple of errors on my site that I'm not sure how to fix. I'musing simple CSS for both text rollovers and my horizontal navbar, and
here's what happens. First, the site:

www.sunbadgeco.com/sunmetal/index.htm

#1 {
In IE6, rolling over an image in the navbar makes it "light" up. Clicking
on
the image takes you to another page (which is not finished). Then clickingthe Back button keeps the image you just clicked on "lit" up, and
that's
theproblem. If you then click on the screen, the image behavior returns to
normal.

It's the same with the text rollover at the bottom. Clicking on a link
brings you correctly to the page, but clicking the Back button keeps

theunderline on the link.

This does not happen in Mozilla FireFox 0.8! It appears to work fine...
}


This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back
the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
other browsers do not.


Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.


It does work as intended--by the Microsoft developers. Has the W3C expressed
any intention about whether the active link on a page should still be active
when you return to the page via the Back button? Personally, I think IE's
behavior is preferable. "Back" is "back"--you're returning to a page you
were already looking at, and it's in the state it was in when you left it.
You don't have to wonder, "Wait, what link did I click the last time I was
here?" because you can see for yourself. If you're tabbing your way through
the page (if you can't use a pointing device, for example), you can continue
where you left off, instead of having to start at the top of the page all
over again.
Jul 20 '05 #6

P: n/a

"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote in
message news:BIFvc.659598$Ig.445890@pd7tw2no...

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:id********************************@4ax.com...
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote:
>
> This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back> the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
> apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
> other browsers do not.

Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.
No. It is working as intended by the browser manufacturer. The only
way around is to not use IE or Opera as your browser. Users of those
browsers are presumably used to it working this way and don't have any
problem with it.


You are implying that because it was intended there cannot be a

workaround. Are you saying they intended it that way merely because it's worked that way for a long time? There are often, I dare say usually, workarounds or hacks, whether the manufacturer intends a behavior or not. I'm a long-time user of IE and a) have not noticed this before (- perhaps as a user I did not think of it, and as a designer I do), and b) I do have a problem with it on my
website, so you presume incorrectly.


A regular IE user doesn't expect links and controls on your web site to
operate *differently* from those on any other web site. Even if they think
that the regular behavior is "wrong"--for the small percentage that even
think about it at all--they still know at least what to *expect*, so the
risk of confusion greatly outweighs the marginal bit of extra sunshine you
might bring to their lives if they actually care about this and are
overjoyed to the point of tears to see five pages out of a hundred billion
work the way that they think they should.

Jul 20 '05 #7

P: n/a
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:id********************************@4ax.com.. .
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
>"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote:
>>
>> This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back
>> the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
>> apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
>> other browsers do not.
>
>Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.
No. It is working as intended by the browser manufacturer. The only
way around is to not use IE or Opera as your browser. Users of those
browsers are presumably used to it working this way and don't have any
problem with it.


You are implying that because it was intended there cannot be a workaround.


It is such a basic part of how the browser works, and completely
outside of the scope of CSS, that there will be no CSS workaround. You
may be able to do something with JavaScript (i.e. when the page loads,
put the focus on another element) but you need to be careful of making
the situation worse (i.e. substituting a real usability problem for a
trivial visual effect).
Are you saying they intended it that way merely because it's worked that way
for a long time?
No. I'm saying that it was intended to work that way. Certainly in the
case of Opera this is true. Opera works on a 'fast' back functionality
which returns users to the page in exactly the same state it was in
when they left it. I wouldn't want to guess whether Microsoft's
reasoning is the same.
There are often, I dare say usually, workarounds or hacks,
whether the manufacturer intends a behavior or not.
Set :active to be the same as :link. It is much more important to
ensure that :link and :visited are different (which you fail to do).

Or add onfocus="blur()" to the links. That way the :active style will
never be used and the dotted focus rectangle will never be seen. But
keyboard users will have a hard time using your site. Again you've
swapped a minor visual difference for a real problem. (The
non-standard hidefocus attribute is more accessible but only gets rid
of the focus rectangle, not the styles).
I'm a long-time user of
IE and a) have not noticed this before (- perhaps as a user I did not think
of it,
Exacty my point. Why do you think any of the visitors to your site
will notice it?
and as a designer I do), and b) I do have a problem with it on my
website, so you presume incorrectly.


You can use Mozilla, then you no longer need be bothered by it.
Problem solved.
>> You've set the line-height for the parent element to 1px. So there
>> links are only 1px tall. The spacer gifs you've included spill outside
>> of the line box but the background image is only applied to the <a>
>> element itself which is constrained to the line box.
>
>Thanks, I'm sure that explains it, but how do I fix it in FireFox and why
>does it work in IE?


Not just Gecko, Opera also displays only part of the image (though
more than 1px, possibly due to my minimum font-size setting).

Take out the line-height: 1px; and set the height of the <a> elements
to the height of the background image. You may need to tweak a few
other things as well.


Thanks. Line-height wasn't the culprit though.
I had to add "font-size: 35px" to all the links and it worked.


As line-height and font-size are both used in determining the height
of a line box (and in a rather complex fashion) it's not a simple case
of either/or.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <st***@pugh.net> <http://steve.pugh.net/>
Jul 20 '05 #8

P: n/a
On Thu, 03 Jun 2004 13:29:05 GMT, Applebrown
<ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
as a designer I do), and b) I do have a problem with it on my
website


However, as a web author, you do need to get over this. It is not harming
the usability of the site - in fact, for many users any successful attempt
to circumvent this browser behavior will reduce usability.

Let it go. There are bigger battles to fight.
Jul 20 '05 #9

P: n/a

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:h1********************************@4ax.com...
No. It is working as intended by the browser manufacturer. The only
way around is to not use IE or Opera as your browser. Users of those
browsers are presumably used to it working this way and don't have any
problem with it.
You are implying that because it was intended there cannot be a workaround.
It is such a basic part of how the browser works, and completely
outside of the scope of CSS, that there will be no CSS workaround. You
may be able to do something with JavaScript (i.e. when the page loads,
put the focus on another element) but you need to be careful of making
the situation worse (i.e. substituting a real usability problem for a
trivial visual effect).


I completely agree. I'd hate to introduce Java with a clean page if it
doesn't need to be there.

Are you saying they intended it that way merely because it's worked that wayfor a long time?


No. I'm saying that it was intended to work that way. Certainly in the
case of Opera this is true. Opera works on a 'fast' back functionality
which returns users to the page in exactly the same state it was in
when they left it. I wouldn't want to guess whether Microsoft's
reasoning is the same.
There are often, I dare say usually, workarounds or hacks,
whether the manufacturer intends a behavior or not.


Set :active to be the same as :link. It is much more important to
ensure that :link and :visited are different (which you fail to do).


For most sites I would agree. While having a separate visited link may be
more important on a site with more than just four pages including its main
page, for a site with mainly a front page and an artists page, and
especially with binary graphical links rather than text, the functionality
would become more confusing than helpful. For instance, how would I
represent a previously visited page without introducing a new graphic and
increase the load? Would it be an "in between" light, or simply turned
off -- either of which do not make good sense? More importantly, with only
three links on the navbar, introducing a new graphic would represent more
confusion than help in my opinion. Let's not forget that _nearly_ everyone
can remember one or two pages without needing the visual "I've already been
there" cue.

and as a designer I do), and b) I do have a problem with it on my
website, so you presume incorrectly.


You can use Mozilla, then you no longer need be bothered by it.
Problem solved.


It doesn't matter what I use. It matters what customers use and what
constitutes good design. Though I suspect I'll have to live with it if I
want the graphics.
Jul 20 '05 #10

P: n/a

"Harlan Messinger" <h.*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2i************@uni-berlin.de...

"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote in
message news:aQEvc.655697$oR5.158008@pd7tw3no...

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:e2********************************@4ax.com...
"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:

>I've got a couple of errors on my site that I'm not sure how to fix. I'm >using simple CSS for both text rollovers and my horizontal navbar, and >here's what happens. First, the site:
>
>www.sunbadgeco.com/sunmetal/index.htm
>
>#1 {
>In IE6, rolling over an image in the navbar makes it "light" up. Clicking
on
>the image takes you to another page (which is not finished). Then clicking
>the Back button keeps the image you just clicked on "lit" up, and

that's
the
>problem. If you then click on the screen, the image behavior returns to >normal.
>
>It's the same with the text rollover at the bottom. Clicking on a link >brings you correctly to the page, but clicking the Back button keeps

the >underline on the link.
>
>This does not happen in Mozilla FireFox 0.8! It appears to work fine... >}

This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go back
the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and
other browsers do not.


Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.


It does work as intended--by the Microsoft developers. Has the W3C

expressed any intention about whether the active link on a page should still be active when you return to the page via the Back button?
You could ask the same of Microsoft. Did they intend it or is it merely a
side-effect of how their browser works, or perhaps a "bug"? How would you
(not you personally, the royal you) know? There's really no way unless
you've looked at the source and can interpret. I merely hoped that it may
have been a common enough workaround issue/bug that other web designers may
have dealt with, so I suppose I was wrong on that. I'm a perfectionist so
sometimes it's hard to not wish to mold something solid or in place to how
you envisioned it.
If you're tabbing your way through
the page (if you can't use a pointing device, for example), you can continue where you left off, instead of having to start at the top of the page all
over again. You don't have to wonder, "Wait, what link did I click the last time I was here?" because you can see for yourself.


That's something I didn't consider, and you're right. I just tried out and
makes sense enough to leave it in.
Jul 20 '05 #11

P: n/a

"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote in
message news:g4Hvc.659999$Ig.629235@pd7tw2no...

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:h1********************************@4ax.com...
> No. It is working as intended by the browser manufacturer. The only
> way around is to not use IE or Opera as your browser. Users of those
> browsers are presumably used to it working this way and don't have any> problem with it.

You are implying that because it was intended there cannot be a
workaround.

It is such a basic part of how the browser works, and completely
outside of the scope of CSS, that there will be no CSS workaround. You
may be able to do something with JavaScript (i.e. when the page loads,
put the focus on another element) but you need to be careful of making
the situation worse (i.e. substituting a real usability problem for a
trivial visual effect).


I completely agree. I'd hate to introduce Java with a clean page if it
doesn't need to be there.


FYI, Java != Javascript.

[snip]
It doesn't matter what I use. It matters what customers use and what
constitutes good design. Though I suspect I'll have to live with it if I
want the graphics.


The mechanics of their browsers is not a function of your pages' design.

Jul 20 '05 #12

P: n/a
Applebrown wrote:
"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote...
You may be able to do something with JavaScript
but you need to be careful of making the situation worse


I completely agree. I'd hate to introduce Java with a clean page if
it doesn't need to be there.


java != javascript
for a site with mainly a front page and an artists page, and
especially with binary graphical links rather than text, the
functionality would become more confusing than helpful. For
instance, how would I represent a previously visited page without
introducing a new graphic and increase the load?


Seems like a good argument for text links instead of images, with css
to style the text links in a visually attractive way.
as a designer I do), and b) I do have a problem with it on
my website, so you presume incorrectly.


You can use Mozilla, then you no longer need be bothered by it.


It doesn't matter what I use. It matters what customers use and
what constitutes good design.


Right. And good design is so much more than what pleases the eye.

--
Brian (remove ".invalid" to email me)

Jul 20 '05 #13

P: n/a

"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote in
message news:ReHvc.621485$Pk3.102682@pd7tw1no...

"Harlan Messinger" <h.*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2i************@uni-berlin.de...

"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote in
message news:aQEvc.655697$oR5.158008@pd7tw3no...

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:e2********************************@4ax.com...
> "Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote:
>
> >I've got a couple of errors on my site that I'm not sure how to fix.
I'm
> >using simple CSS for both text rollovers and my horizontal navbar, and > >here's what happens. First, the site:
> >
> >www.sunbadgeco.com/sunmetal/index.htm
> >
> >#1 {
> >In IE6, rolling over an image in the navbar makes it "light" up. Clicking
on
> >the image takes you to another page (which is not finished). Then
clicking
> >the Back button keeps the image you just clicked on "lit" up, and

that's
the
> >problem. If you then click on the screen, the image behavior
returns to > >normal.
> >
> >It's the same with the text rollover at the bottom. Clicking on a link > >brings you correctly to the page, but clicking the Back button
keeps
the
> >underline on the link.
> >
> >This does not happen in Mozilla FireFox 0.8! It appears to work fine... > >}
>
> This is normal behaviour in IE. If you click on a link and the go
back > the link is still in the active state (hence any :active styles will
> apply). At least some version of Opera behave the same way, Gecko and > other browsers do not.

Is there a workaround for it? I'd rather that it works as intended.


It does work as intended--by the Microsoft developers. Has the W3C

expressed
any intention about whether the active link on a page should still be

active
when you return to the page via the Back button?


You could ask the same of Microsoft. Did they intend it or is it merely a
side-effect of how their browser works, or perhaps a "bug"? How would you
(not you personally, the royal you) know? There's really no way unless
you've looked at the source and can interpret. I merely hoped that it may
have been a common enough workaround issue/bug that other web designers

may have dealt with, so I suppose I was wrong on that. I'm a perfectionist so
sometimes it's hard to not wish to mold something solid or in place to how
you envisioned it.
If you're tabbing your way through
the page (if you can't use a pointing device, for example), you can

continue
where you left off, instead of having to start at the top of the page

all over again. You don't have to wonder, "Wait, what link did I click the

last time I was
here?" because you can see for yourself.


That's something I didn't consider, and you're right. I just tried out and
makes sense enough to leave it in.


Jul 20 '05 #14

P: n/a

"Harlan Messinger" <h.*********@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:2i************@uni-berlin.de...

"Applebrown" <ap********@gamebanshee.takethis.andthisout.com> wrote in
message news:g4Hvc.659999$Ig.629235@pd7tw2no...

"Steve Pugh" <st***@pugh.net> wrote in message
news:h1********************************@4ax.com...
>> No. It is working as intended by the browser manufacturer. The only
>> way around is to not use IE or Opera as your browser. Users of those >> browsers are presumably used to it working this way and don't have any >> problem with it.
>
>You are implying that because it was intended there cannot be a

workaround.

It is such a basic part of how the browser works, and completely
outside of the scope of CSS, that there will be no CSS workaround. You
may be able to do something with JavaScript (i.e. when the page loads,
put the focus on another element) but you need to be careful of making
the situation worse (i.e. substituting a real usability problem for a
trivial visual effect).


I completely agree. I'd hate to introduce Java with a clean page if it
doesn't need to be there.


FYI, Java != Javascript.

[snip]
It doesn't matter what I use. It matters what customers use and what
constitutes good design. Though I suspect I'll have to live with it if I
want the graphics.


The mechanics of their browsers is not a function of your pages' design.


Nor would I argue that, nor did I. But thanks for sharing.

Jul 20 '05 #15

P: n/a

"Brian" <us*****@julietremblay.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:UhHvc.40036$eY2.3106@attbi_s02...
It doesn't matter what I use. It matters what customers use and
what constitutes good design.


Right. And good design is so much more than what pleases the eye.


Yes.
Jul 20 '05 #16

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.