| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Comments:
<0> margin also comes in addition to height, doesn't it?
<1> yes
<1> basically, EVERYTHING comes on top of your dimensions :p
<0> so i can't use margin to counter the border with a negative margin...
<1> no
<0> so well inner-block ftw
<0> i mean am i making space for content, or am i making space for the block itself
<1> some people use a see-through (invisible) border and then just changes the color of it. I'm guessing your'e making a hover effect and your layout is distorted. :p
<0> no i'm just trying to use height: 100%;
<1> Another option is outline instead of border. It's not added to the total width. It's also not supported by IE. :p
<0> right
<0> so FF sees the problem and adds a new css property instead of going to the source of the problem
<0> outline works like border except what you pointed out? can specify style and width?
<1> I actually think outline is kosher css3
<1> yes
<0> cool
<1> it's added inside of the padding if I recall correctly
<0> too bad one of the browsers always doesn't support what's needed to make my quirks designs into strict
<0> inside padding??
<0> that's kind of useless
<0> then you'd have to wrap the content in a new div with padding
<1> no wait, I might be mistaken
<0> anyway back to work for me.. done with my daily burst out
<1> o
<1> http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-ui/#outline1 :)
<1> it was from border and in, it seems
<0> cool
<1> css3 solves a lot of problems :) Too bad it will take ages before IE manages to support it. They've used 6 years on CSS2 so far.... :p
<1> Does anyone have any theories why NO browsers implement image scaling using resampling instead of the butt-ugly closest neighbour scaling?
<2> I wouldn't count on IE ever supporting css 3 :P
<3> yeah, with Microsoft's "close enough" mentality, they figure 2 is almost 3.
<3> it's closer than 1, anyway.
<4> since when did IE support 2.1 fully? :P
<3> "close enough"
<5> does anyone know if there is a WAI/WCAG validator thats any good to use?
<4> http://www.webdevout.net/browser_support_summary.php
<4> always a fun thing to peak at
<6> some body can speak Indonesia???
<1> The inhabitants there probably do.
<7> matt1982, I'd avoid them tbh. You need to use them as part of comprehensive human evaluation and testing anyhow.
<7> matt1982, there are lots of basic things they can't test like whether alt text is appropriate or not
<5> webben: yeah i was just wanting to make sure i hadn't missed any simple things out
<5> webben: human eye is best i always believe
<7> matt1982, Have you read the WCAG 1.0 spec and techniques? Because if you do, you'll probably have a better idea than from the validator. (***uming your markup is conformant)
<7> matt1982, (conformant to its document type that is)
<7> matt1982, Once you're satisfied, you could submit the URL to accessifyforum for comments.
<5> well yeah i have the css and the xhtml one, i was just trying to get all 3:) i have read it but it was a while ago i know the last one is well hard to get
<5> hehe
<8> Hi everyone, I was just talking with a friend, he was asking me how to modify their ASP/ActiveX app to move to a unix/php based solution. Sounds like the issue is that with activeX, they modify word documents directly on the user's machine... Any idea of a replacement/unix adaptation of activeX ?
<7> matt1982, if you do want to try and find a validator, have a look at http://www.w3.org/WAI/eval/Overview.html
<9> perlmonk: d-cop probably, but I doubt it will help with that problem
<7> perlmonk, probably a signed Mozilla XUL jar thingy ... giving access to the local file system
<9> perlmonk: There's no shortage of solutions for making modifications to word documents on UNIX - but having the server send data to the browser to cause it to edit files on the user's system? You need IE clients for that.
<9> hmm, that might work. I've never seen one though.
<8> That's IE clients
<7> What's IE clients?
<8> The clients are IE
<8> the server for now is a windows with asp
<8> They think about the eventuallity of moving to unix
<7> perlmonk, You'll need activex to edit files on the user's machine through IE.
<8> yes
<8> Is there an activex for unix ?
<7> I should imagine you can serve ActiveX plugins with a unix PHP solution though.
<8> hum... the unix version of php would do activex ?
<8> I know php can access COM on windows for example..
<9> perlmonk: ActiveX is a windows specific technology for communicating between applications.
<8> ok, so sounds like it's stuck
<8> unless they run a software client side
<9> perlmonk: Either you have an activex control which runs in the browser and can be served up like any other file from the server
<9> perlmonk: Or you have an activex control which the ASP accesses directly
<7> perlmonk, Well you can code an ActiveX plugin in anything, and it can communicate with the server via Ajax
<8> what about a java applet ?
<9> perlmonk: In the latter case, if it is to modify files on the user's machine, it would have to use something like Windows File and Print Sharing to access the word document.
<9> perlmonk: We don't know which of the two you're currently using
<8> Ok, thanks
<10> perlmonk: do you mean the clients are using activex to edit documents that AREN'T stored on their local machine?
<8> no
<10> hmm, never heard of anybody doing that the other way around
<8> the server modifies word documents on the client's machine
<10> that is very strange :P
<8> well, they do this on an intranet
<8> it's a web app
<8> not a site
<11> rather than using IIS_Rewrite, I placed my page in the 404 and 405 - is that unacceptably bad?
<9> MikeD_: Its ugly, but its only really bad if the server return a 404/405 status code for something that shouldn't be such.
<12> Whats it called when you need to forward requests coming to the WAN's router headed for one domain to a specific LAN IP and all other requests to another LAN IP?
<11> routing?
<11> NAT?
<12> Okay .. what's the routing term
<13> um, routing
<11> typically the router doesn't really care about domains, it only sees IP and Port
<12> regular port forwarding sends incoming requests to specified ports to internal IP's specified ports .... i need port forwarding that sends incoming requests to specific ports to specific domains to specific ports on an internal IP
<11> you have port forwarding and network address translation
<12> so this is going to be hard
<12> sigh....
<11> not really
<11> port address translation does what i think you want
<11> we do it for vnc to the router into internal machines
<11> there is only one external ip, but 60 or so internal machines
<11> each one has a different port on that external IP
<12> i just installed a groupware server - but unfortunately its accessed on port 80 of a local IP - we can't send all port 80 requests to that machine because our webservers operate on another machine ... but if we just send port 80 requests headed for mail.mydomain.com to that machine we could permit it ... is port address translation what i need?
<9> iratik: I'd set up the main webserver to proxy requests for that hostname.
<12> so its an apache thing?
<12> rewrite ?
<9> iratik: That approach would be (if you used apache). No, I don't think rewriting would come into it. I'd have to RTFM, its not something I've done myself.
<14> mod_proxy is your friend.
<12> i hate tfm
<11> can you make the groupware use a different port?
<12> yeah .. but i don't want the end users to have to use a different port
<12> i'll tell them to use a colon and they'll draw a smiley in the url
<14> What you're looking for is ProxyP***Reverse
<12> reading tfm
<14> Well, that and ProxyP***. They tend to work in tandem.
<12> thanks for the pointers matmcc,Dorward,MikeD_, (enygma)
<11> speaking of rewrite - since IIS does not have a native rewrite capability, I used the 404 and 405 pages to accomplish post slugged (?) URL's
<11> is that going to come back to bite me?
<11> should i pay someone for a rewrite module for iis?
<12> IIS is the devil
<15> as long as you change the 404 405 status codes
<11> ... because we're not going to just switch to apache
<11> so the page should be specifically delivering status 200?
<15> yes
<11> thanks. I was/am a little wary of using IIS in such an unconventional way
<11> it has issues when used the way MS intended, when you deviate from their rules anything can happen :)
<12> btw... (#apache seems to still be asleep) - enabling mod_proxy won't turn my server into a proxy server right ? I'd have to include the appropriate directives (by testing this ProxyP***Reverse stuff i'm trying to not cause a security breach) ?
<14> Right, you're explicitly stating what you're proxying.
<14> And the client doesn't even know it's happening.
<12> alright - just didn't want to open up a hole just by enabling mod_proxy, a2enmod mod_proxy&&/etc/init.d/apache2 restart right?
<16> i checked my site on google using site: domain.name.com . and found many of the result in the supplemental result... should i be worried about it ?
<16> in term of optimazation i mean
<1> How bad is intentionally refering to a non-existant stylesheet? Like linking to a current directory stylesheet.css to allow overriding the looks for some directories, while directories that doesn't need it can just omit the file?
<17> can I make a image map with java .. and when I move the mouse over a part .. another image will float over it next to the mouse ?
<10> is there a problem with mozilla and margins in css?
<10> pages that look fine in IE are totally screwed in mozilla
<7> Fuzzy76, well, it will cause extra hits to the server
<7> e-horn, Not AFAIK. Perhaps you'd better post a validating example.
<1> I guess using a blank css files in directories without css overrides would be a better thing to do....
<7> e-horn, (sounds suspiciously like you've triggered quirks mode in IE)
<1> the blank file would be cached, and it wouldn't show up as 404's in the server log
<10> webben: sorry I left out some info, the elements that have fixed margins set are floating
<10> I google it and it does look like a known issue
<10> *googled
<7> e-horn, did you find a bugzilla entry for it?
<5> can anyone explain why my bullet points in ie7 are going mental? its on this page and for some reason they work in every browser but not ie:( http://www.e-titans.com/new/webdevelopment.html
<5> its the list of services that is getting messed up well crazy
<7> matt1982, just an aside in <div id="menu"> you could use text-transform to style those options uppercase
<7> matt1982, as for lists going mental in IE, i'm not sure but i tend to try getting rid of the space between <li/> items
<5> webben: yeah i totally forget that in CSS its possible to do that. Dont know why I do really i should do it like that
<5> although i would still have to type it out i guess
<7> probably won't work here but ... it's always worth a shot.
<7> matt1982, type what out?
Return to
#web
or
Go to some related
logs:
kororaa coldplug block udev
simplexmlrpc server in windows
#php
adept install gcc
how install openXpertya
postfix remote_header_rewrite_domain
#php
perl mcpan install without test
#physics
#mysql
|
|