Well - I'm going to guess you resolved the issue... as in bith IE6 and MFF1+ (win), the sites seem good (not like the images).
Removed the defualt Margin/Padding from the Header?
Well - I'm going to guess you resolved the issue... as in bith IE6 and MFF1+ (win), the sites seem good (not like the images).
Removed the defualt Margin/Padding from the Header?
Glad that it's increasing from 800 to 1024....
why only 98% though?
I set the html/body to min-width: 100.2%... which invokes the scrollbar down the side (so almost all browsers are the same view width) and means the odd percetage seems to handle the odd calculations on certain browsers.
Those are "across the board" stats - and may not represent the "user base" for a website (think, how many 45+ users have 1200+ monitors, and how many -25 have 800???)
Still - damned good set of figures... and a good point of referene :)
So, do you know your user-base / target audience?
I suppose you could make 1 single design... then once you have the stats, alter it.
Not a problem - let me know if you want any extra help with it (Forms can be a sod sometimes (esp. if you don't do them that often!)
Well...
Use the <fieldset> tag to collect related parts of the form together (if a large form).
Apply <legend> to help indicate what the form pertains to.
Ensure all Inputs have a <label> tag.
Also ensure all Labels/Inputs have unique IDs.
The label should go first for most inputs, (text, text area etc.), and last for things like Checkbox lists, radio groups etc.
Use the font-size tag for the Label/Inputs, using % or EM units.
Apply styling for :focus for inputs so that users can see which form element that are currently in (such as changing the BG colour or altering the Border Colour etc.).
(NOTE: doesn't work on IE6.)
Consider applying a little JS to enhance usability (autofocus the first part of a form and enable IE6 to use the :focus).
-------
If it helps....
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" ><head>
<title>Center Block Element 2</title>
<style type="text/css">
html
{
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
font-size: 100%;
font-family: trebuchet, arial, sans-serif;
}
body
{
margin: 0;
padding: 10px;
font-size: 62.5%;
}
form
{
margin: 0;
padding: 0;
width: 500px;
}
fieldset
{
margin: 0;
padding: 10px;
border: 1px solid #d6d6d6;
display: block;
}
legend
{
margin: 0 0 15px 0;
padding: 4px 8px;
border: 0px solid #d6d6d6;
font-weight: bold;
font-size: 1.6em;
background-color: #000000;
color: #ffffff;
}
.formelementwrappersingle
{
margin: 2px;
padding: 0;
float: left;
clear: both;
width: …
Hmmmm
Well, when loaded and not used....
Top level H bar is Black links on Red.
Hovering over them makes them White.
When hovering over a Parent, Drop downs appear.
If the child link has no children, it shows White.
If it has its own children - it shows Black.
This repeats.
IE6 Win XP Pro SP2.
As a suggestion though - increase the font size.
Don't use Dark text on Dark BG's - it's hard to read.
Otherwise, well done :)
Hmm - dam good question.
I tought that they would automatically be "seperate"...
If you can, think of it as two seperate table cells... I always thought the bullet was in the left one, the text in the right...
Where as you are saying you see the bullet, you have a space, then the text... which wraps round and causes the text to continue on the line below, satarting from the bullet ?
Well - I cannot say I've ever encountered this... but try...
UL
{list-style-position: inside;}
The only thing I can think of is that you hae somehow applied different formatting else where and it is overiding.
If that doesn't help, come back and paste some of the code (or link to the page).
okay... are you using HTML + CSS?
If you are using Inline css styles...
<img src="picture1.jpg" alt="description1" style="float: left;">
<img src="picture2.jpg" alt="description2" style="float: left;">
If you are using Embedded (within the <style></style> tags)...
<style>
.imagefloatleft
{float:left;}
</style>
<img src="picture1.jpg" alt="description1" class="imagefloatleft">
<img src="picture2.jpg" alt="description2" class="imagefloatleft">
If you are using External CSS (in a seperate file and called within the <head> section)...
then it's the same as the above, but the Styling goes in the file :)
----
You may want to wrap the images within a "containing" element, such as a Span or a Div, as it may cause strange behaviours... such as protruding out of your main content sections.
If that happens, simply put a div/span around the images...
<div style="float: left; clear: both;">
<img src="picture1.jpg" alt="description1" class="imagefloatleft">
<img src="picture2.jpg" alt="description2" class="imagefloatleft">
</div>
1) Technically, the "best" is the one that most of your users will have.
2) I still use 800 as the minimum (776px).
3) Do you mean Flexible or Fluid? Flexible is equal to Elastic... it shifts from a Min to a Max... Fluid generally means it will keep on matching the browser.
4) Whether Fluid/Flex - it shouldn't make any difference to your control over layout.
If you are encoutnering issues, it may be that you have got something slight amiss with your markup/styling - not a major problem... should be simple to find it and fix it.
Okay - I think I get it (you had "custome"... and I read it 3 times as being "costume" ?)...
taking it as custom...
I hate to say this... but having something like DreamWeaver (arg-horrid taste in my mouth), would be of benefit to you in this case.
You can turn on an option that will show little indicators for tempaltes/includes being called up.
This will enable you to see what files do what, and easily alter the graphics/css being applied to these.
Thus, you can take the design, and then start inserting the changes.
Hope that helps.
hmmm
http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/struct/lists.html
... :) ...
http://www.somacon.com/p357.php
that should give you enough info and a "quick" method to get used to.
Don't foget, if you are using an external style sheet, cutting and pasting the Code will result in a different display.
Using Inline Styles will help... but I cannot gaurentee that any application will accept or result in a manner the same way a browser would.
If it is important to get a example of the page in a document, eithe take a screen shot and paste it in as an image.... or make it a PDF.
arg... go look it up :D
It should work i most modern browsers and the majority of text-readers.
go download some other browsers and test it ;)
It's not new, nor is it phenominal... it's the same as the "Back to top" stuff on a lot of sites...
Look it up, read the usage andresults, then decide if you want to use it.
In my opinion... if you link to a page, it should start at the top.
If you link to an item on the page, you should go to that item (the jump link)... possibly with an option to go to the main page without jumping to the item.
But it boils down to choice.
Erm... when you say "next to each other"... you mean "side by side" or "horizontally ???
Well, think about it.
MS Word is not receiving the styles!
If you remove your style sheet call, you'll probably see that the browsers do the same as the word processor.
Divs, by desfult, go full width.
This means that they will not appear side by side, but instead will stack beneath each other.
Additionally.... why do many divs?
You could get much the same result with a List and Spans :)
(Okay, not exactly much better... but more logical?).
Try looking up Anchor and Target :)
By using the ID attribute, you have basically made a "jump to link"....
usually, in the anchor, you'd have to have something like... href="blah.html/#thisonegere"... and in the page markup have an id for "thisonehere".
The link is jumping to that point!
... vesna ...
If you look around on the net, there are sites with little tools for this sort of thing... pop-up window makers etc.
The better ones will give you the choice of toolber y/n, scrollbar y/n, modal, display,movable etc... all the optiosn that you can use.
Simply look at the code they generate and the options are usually self explanatory.
So, try;
http://javascript.internet.com/generators/popup-window.html
:)
... farmaan ...
? What ahs the sitemap question got to do with JS window controls ?
The basic principal is that there is nothing wrong with using software... so long as you know what the software is doing - which means you needto know what the codes are, what they do etc... as trust me, most of those programs leave junk code in or do things in a few funy ways.
Unless you know what you should, you'll never see it!
Yeah for ... vishesh ..., glad to see others think starting with a "do it all" tool is a bad move.
HTMLDog
AListApart
Mezzoblue
All good sources.
Best thing to do is learn by building simple bits.
Learn the ie bugs off by heart - look for IE + Bug + hasLayout ... will solve half your problems!
Also, learn the basics, make sure you get those right every time... you'd be amazed the results from one stupid little error!
Refer to this thread...
http://www.daniweb.com/forums/thread88871.html
That covers some of the basics, and gives you a head start on the right path (or atleast, what I see as the right path!).
Do not fall for flashy, clever or exagerated stuff - stick to the basics.
With multiple basics you get clever results any way (It's like building blocks).
Find an approach to layouts that suits you (positioned, floated, inline etc.).
I myself break the site into chunks/sections... header, main, footer. Then I code within those blocks... not 1 purists view, nor 100% semanticly perfect, but fairly clean and saves a whole world of positioning issues.
Basics to figure and play with.
You can position a container relatively, then position child items within it absolutely.
Try to use EM's as a font measurement, and gfor heights (no 20px boxes!... try 2 em), as when you increase text size, things shift …
As far as I know, a Table "Shrink Wrap" - default to the smallest possible width.
This is groovey - until you have a fair bit of content.
Then it can get ugly, fast.
Thus...
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" ><head>
<title>Center Block Element 2</title>
<style type="text/css">
#divContainer
{text-align: center; width: 100%}
#tblMain
{margin: 0 auto 0 auto; text-align: left; border: solid 1px gray; border-collapse: collapse;}
td
{padding:5px;}
</style>
</head>
<body>
<div id="divContainer">
<table id="tblMain">
<tr>
<td>
<p>
Cell 1 sd fsdf sdf sdfs dfsd fsdfs dfsdf sdfs dfsdf sdfs dfsd fsdf sdfsfdsdfsd sdf sdf sdf sdfsdfs as dasd asd asda sda sda sda sda sd asd as dasd asd asd asd asd asd asd
</p>
</td>
<td>
<p>
Cell 2
</p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
</div>
</body>
</html>
Will result in the table being full-width.
You will have no real control over the dimensions unless you apply dimensions.
If that is the design you are after, fantasic - otherwise you will have problems!
Also, double check in both Moz and Opera, as they tend to render tables differently... you basically have to Style Everything to do with the table to make sure it looks the same.
So, to center anything, you can use margin:auto on the item, or margin % on the item, or padding % on the parent of the item.
You can also use Text-align center on certain items (block rather than inline …
If you look at your hosting account, you sould beable to find the php stuff... there are pre-built functions/classes for things such as stats etc.
You can use those for most tings such as referer tracking etc.
The other thing to consider is creating a sessionid and a table for tracking users...
You can then save the referer (where they come from), their browser, OS, the page they arrive on and the subsequent pages etc.).
This will give you what you need to know for individual Users, Page Impressions, Who goes where, the most popular sections etc.
Okay... thread links.
You refered to such items here, and have said you are not sure how they aare made.
You currently fetch data and build little forms.
Those forms hae a detination addres (in the action part of the Form, or in the Redirect part as input).
Thread links are not very much different.
Data can be passed to the url, and the php can hae a script/function/api that reads the extra data in the URL and takes relavant actions...
(In xaraya, you can have index.php?module=articles&type=user&func=dispaly&aid=11 - this means Articles Module using a User Template of type Display showing Article 11)....
This forum I assume does much the same... not the URL here is Forum / threadIDGOESHERE ... thus it knows what topic to pickup and display.
(In other cases, it can all be done "behind the scenes" - such as Short URLS / Caching etc.)
So, it depends on how you have built your code.
By the sounds of it, you have not built any code to handle such things, which is why you use forms.
Now when you go look at all you "go to here" forms... notice the similarities in the code etc.
You could probably cobble together a php function that handles those parts as variables.
Then you call that function and pass in the values everytime.
You can use the php redirect function to change the page when a link …
...MidiMAgic...
You made that rather difficult for people to help...
You said no fixed width, no defined width, then you apply 100% for the Table Width.
:)
For just about anything...
margin: 0 auto;
text-align: center;
This works for almost every browser, no matter the element. The reson being that though IE stuffs up, it will use the test-align, even though it shouldn't.
Push comes to shove, you can always apply a wrapper div and apply the styles to that.
The other alternative is to margin/pad with %... tihs means you do not define a width for the item, you control it's width relative to the browser width.
(800px browser, with 10% pad/margin L/R = 640 item with 80 on L/R ... 1024 with 10% p/m L/R = 999 item with 102/103 on L/R.
You will also find it easier to center things with a width applied, even if it is percentile/relational.
Where you have applied the auto-margin, it should only work with a defined width that is less than the browser. If your table is 100% in width, it shouldn't be centered... unlessyou have a wrapper/container with a defined width (fixed,%,relational).
Otherwise it would still be going 100% of the page width!
FAir enough.
Basically, Flat means all repsonses are to the Original item... where as threded/tiered etc. means you can respond to the original item or no response to the origianl item.
if you look at some sites, you can have replies to replies to replies...
Original Item
Response
Response
Response
-- Response
-- -- Response
-- Response
-- -- Response
-- -- Response
-- -- -- Response
Response
-- Response
Make sense? All far left "Response" are flat... thoe with the -- are leveled :)
Most Forusm are flat by default... but I have seen some tiered ones in use.
Groovey :)
Right, with that out of the way...
It all depends on how you built your "forums".
is it threaded? (probably)
Is it Flat/Linear, Tiered/Leveled?
How fast is it (if you have several threads of varying depths... whats the query structure like?
Regarding CMS... I use Xaraya... it has a Forum Module... it also has Coments.
But to be honoest, depending on how you wanted it... you could convert it with Dynamic Data... as this lets you create your own objects or use External tables.
It also enables you to use the inbuilt basic query stuff and a slection of APIS...
Which raises another point for you... if you are ok with code... no reason you can't look at CMS's and learn from the API and Class calls :)
Okay... just for the sake of you encoutnering the problems latter...
http://www.daniweb.com/forums/thread88871.html
Please read that and consider making the adjustments :)
I give up -sorry.
I've tried applying Psotion Abs/Rel - that makes the gframe itself move.
I've tried applying margin/marginTop etc. with negatives - nothing happens after the body shifts to the frame edge.
I've tried using Clip-rect/overflow etc... nothing!
I'm out of ideas :(
Nope - it will only draw the Body up to the very top, not beyond it....
Frustrating!
Well, I cannot get it to work (then again, I'm naff with scripts :) )
No idea...
I can see that it is applying the style of margin top -200px... but it seems to be applying it to the contents of the frame (the body of the pagethat loads).
AS I dsaid, no idea if it would work.... I don't sue frames...
that said, did you try the other methd of putting in a div within the frame and applying the style to that?
<frame>
<div id="frameddiv">
</div>
</frame>
#frameddiv{
margin-top: -200px;
}
???
The only tother things I can think of is to use JS - which is something else I avoid as much as possible.
in the markup (html), you have the <frame>
<html>
<body>
<frame id="thishereframe">
</frame>
</body>
</html>
in the CSS, you would have...
#thishereframe
{margin-top: -200px;}
Tahts basically the same as what I posted above... I'm sure you know what to do.
... I think he meant the opposite... he really does not want to become like or apart of America.
Hmmm...
Well, I'm not sure if it is possibly to apply a styli to the Fram itself...
If it is... something along the lines of
#myframe
{margin-top: -200px;}
The alternative is to code a Container with the frame... so you would have...
<frame>
<div id="framecontentwrap">
</div>
</frame>
And then apply the above CSS suggestion to #framecontentwrap.
Of course, this would mean that the top 200px would not be visible... at all - users would not beable to scroll-up to see, as the contents would basically be "dragged out of view".
If you jsut want it positioned 200px down (so the scrollbar doesn't start at the top), then I believe with a little JS you can apply focus and position the scroller).
Perfect.
So, If I understand correctly.... you want a page that loads the frame.
Inside the frame youw ill oad a second page.
It is the second page that you wish to be 200 from the top.
Now, I assume that when you say "200" you mean downwards (so the pagethat loads in the frame is pushed towards the bottom of the frame // moved downwards from the top).
So instead of it being...
______________________________________
HERE
|
|
200
|
|
v
It would be here
???
Also, by "dots", do you Pixels or Lines?
(Meaning, do you want it moved by 200px or by 200 lines of text?)
Alot of interesting posts... and I'm glad to see that this wasn't the ethno-riot I feared it would be when I clickedthe link.
Okay... England.
Land of Education, Civility, Manners, Honour and lets not forget Sarcasm (damn sure it's an English Invention! ;) )
The coutnry has been invaded fully or partially numerous times... probably a damn site mre than documented.
Plus the bordering countries have influenced the population unaccoutnably (why England and not Britain?).
In regards to Immigration, I cannot help but feel that a large number of the "ethnic minorities" such as certain Asian, Oriental and African persuasions have a born-right to come to this country - they belong or elonged to the British Common wealth - they have thesame rights as those born on English Soil! (Mainly due tot he fact that we Invaded, Stole or Bought theirs ;) )
Further, our culture has only ever expanded due to this sort of thing - alot of the language is actually "borrowed" or "imported" from other nationalities... most prominently German for obvious reasons, not to forget Indian, Spanish, Gaulic and French etc.
Ido feel that sometimes things are out of hand... certain cultures/ethnicities are known to move to an area, make it highly unpalletable, which reduces the housing prices... then there families and friends buy.... clean up the are and viola... the equivelent of a corporate take-over!
This doesn't annoy me for racial reasons - only that our …
Do you mean you want the "content of the frame" to be 200 from the top?
Sorry, it is obvious that it is important to you - but we are not quite sure what you mean.
Please forgive us, and if possible, supply a link or a quick iamge of what you have and what you would like... even if it's done in paint!
As soon as we understand what you need, I'm sure we can help you do it.
Okay - you have told us what the width should be... any reason you haven't told your css ?
:)
Tell you Nav Container the width you want!
Additionally, you may want to wrappers/contaiers for the nav... once with the full width, one that "shrinks" around the content... then center the shrunk one.
As it's parent has a defined width, it should beable to calcualte a position from there!
please think twice before applying a set height for the nav - as text-resizing will cause the text to break out!
Further, what happens if the text gets bigger in such a short widht.... it could result in the links dropping to two lines not one... in which case it will break your design due to fixed height!
Basically... set widths, not heights!!!
If you have a windows based server it is doable with a little effort (sort of the only advantage to a windows server!).
The other alternative is to attach the spread sheet to a database, and have the database attached to the webpage.
That means you can make changes to thespreadsheet, upload thechanges tot he DB... and the results would be updated onthe page.
thank you...
Lol @ at the Matrix
There are providers out there.
Esendex (or something) do it for the UK.
Have a look around, you will find that there are cheaper options available, and some host will have such features as well, as I said, 1and1 do (both the .com and .co.uk suppliers provide SMS features!).
... MattEvans ...
Hey, I did use the word "probably"... does that not count ?
;)
(then again, the "ands" may have been read as definitive breaks from the probably... :D)
Okay...
1) You have inserted contents and elements straight into a <table>, no <tr> or <td> !!!!
This is incorret.
If you Validated, you would have found tis error and fixed it.
(http://validator.w3.org)
2) Rather than making your page title a <p> with lots of <br>s... try using one of the <heading> tags... I'd recomend either <h2> or <h3>.
Then Style that.
3) You'll also find that the White is due to the image used not actually showing properly!
Try aligning the image to the bottom of the Table Cell.
Alternatively, get rid of the tables and use DIVS+CSS.
You will probably end up using 1/4th less code, and find it much much easier to see problems and make alterations.
Okay... make sure that any floated columns do not have a combined width of 100% (or more!).
Remove comments from inbetween flaoted elements.
See what results you get.
In most cases, that will solve the problem.
Additionally, beware of using display:none.
Basically, as with most of the IE Bugs, you need to read up on "hasLayout".
Once you are aware of what that entails, what the results are and how to avoid it / use it, your life agaisnt IE gets soooo much easier.
Best of luck.
Thank you, both for the response and the support.
Was worried I was doing it wrong... I'd hate to be tackling the problem badly and ot povide help...
Glad I'm not doing it wrog :)
erm... ot 100% sure on this....
each "Number" is only available once.
It is associated with a "Provider".
You may not need to know the Provider, as the number is already associated with it!
You do not pick up your mobile... enter in your friends number, then select a proider do you?
It is done enroute.
Does that make sense?
If not... think of it as a Postal Address.
You use a Zip Code - done! it can get where it needs to just by that - everything else is for us, not for the Sorting Machines or that.
So, you have the form, you enter in the number, it parses the number, sends it off to the exchange, along with your default message (in a hidden text area?) and you're done.
Of course, I could be wrong, but that seems to be what ... tlcoffee ... is getting at.
Maybe you are over complicating things? (I do it all the time).
Hi folks...
Awkward topic for me to discuss... but I'm seriously doubting myself onthis one...
Am I being overly critical?
I look through the "reviews" section and do my best to find problems, and list them, often with the possible cause or a solution.
I do this in several communities, in the hopes of rasing the genral standard and ensure even noobs get the right idea from the start.
Yet a current site under review seems to have hit a major problem - the developer seems to think I'me being a "nerd" and nit-picking.
http://www.daniweb.com/forums/newpostinthread88870.html
Please, those of you that care to comment;
Am I being overly critical in such things?
Do I fault find to readily?
Should I not bother with attepting to help correct such issues?
Or is it simply that some people willalways respond like that?
NOTE:
I am aware that my repsonse were not the best, nor particularly mature, grown up or ven fair - I'm just tired of this profession being flooded with those that shouldn't be allowed to charge for what they produce - at least not without warning the clients of the level of the workmanship.
So, if you can forgive my impatience, immaturity etc., it would be appreciated.
You would need some script to do that.
ADditionally, you would need some SMS provision.
1and1 hosting provides such things... alternatively, you cansign up to such providers who should giveyou some sample scripts and instructions.
Okay - just to clarify... and if others would confirm...
!!! Ignore the sodding green bar on the toolbar !!!
It has little to do with much else - it is often out of date, doesn't reflect everything is is basically misunderstood.
Concern yourself with "Search Engine Rank"... ot "page Rank".
I dunno, I took the approach of having tiered costs over time (capping) as some domains are registered, then some one goes and sets up a company and registers trademarks, names and designs.... then finds out they do not have sole privilege to a matching domain.
I can see, from the cold business view, that it is a potential avenua of good profits - I just do not think charging someone hundreds, (hell, some try for thousands!), for somethign that cost them at most 15!
It's disgusting - which is why I feel it ought to be regulated.
But you are corret, there are not enough suffixes/extensions... maybe making a "2" would do.... as most countries hae a 2 letter extension... maybe adding a number on to the end would suffice?
(e.g. www.whatever.uk, www.whatever.uk1, www.whatever.uk2 etc.).
Then again, the original busiess idea is to be unique and standout... and stop "name-hangars" cashing in on prfits by purchasing similar names - I advise all clietns to get .com and .co.uk if possible... as those are the most likely to be associated suffixes).
Hell, if you look at it, the entire structure is poor... you ought to get a reduction for bying the domain name with multile extensions... so by the .com, .co.uk and .net for a greatly reduced price :)