Line above text field in IE
Clayburn
designed by a previous company. Eventually I'll redesign the entire
site, but for now I need to get this to work. However, in IE, there
is a line before the text field and as a result, the tables get messed
up, creating a bunch of extra space between tables. You can see the
difference in Firefox and IE. It works fine in Firefox.
Can someone tell me how best to fix this in IE?
Clayburn
Sorry, I forgot to put the URL. It's http://www.gelbcenter.com
richard
Why are you insisting on using tables for this?
Two simple divisions would be better.
Then I would suggest a navigation bar across the top instead of that
outdated, ignorant enter button.
Clayburn
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT), Clayburn
>
> >On Mar 20, 12:59 pm, Clayburn <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I have a form with a text field. I added it to a website already
> >> designed by a previous company. Eventually I'll redesign the entire
> >> site, but for now I need to get this to work. However, in IE, there
> >> is a line before the text field and as a result, the tables get messed
> >> up, creating a bunch of extra space between tables. You can see the
> >> difference in Firefox and IE. It works fine in Firefox.
>
> >> Can someone tell me how best to fix this in IE?
>
>
> Why are you insisting on using tables for this?
> Two simple divisions would be better.
> Then I would suggest a navigation bar across the top instead of that
> outdated, ignorant enter button.
I didn't design it. It was designed before I got here. I need to
tweak it some to add a few features and keyword optimization and
whatnot. The form on the front page is one feature I need to add.
But it disrupts the current design in IE. I'm going to be redesigning
it, but in the meantime I need to make some changes to the current
site, so I have to work with what's there. I don't want to redo it
entirely just to add the form since I'll be trashing the current
design once the new one is up and running anyway.
I just need a fix to keep it from screwing up in IE. It works fine in
Firefox.
richard
Sure it looks fine until you increase the text size.
Use divisions and set the CSS in em's.
Then the division will change height with the text size increase.
Clayburn
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:29:43 -0700 (PDT), Clayburn
>
>
>
What should I do about IE? How can I get rid of the extra space?
They sliced an image for the table background, so it's important that
they line up correctly.
richard
One thing you might want to try is this little trick.
In the css:
table {border-collapse:collapse;}
td {border-collapse:collapse;}
That should eliminate that nuisance line.
If not, it's in the image.
richard
I just realized that the line might be coming from the fact the "form"
is not inside the area it's supposed to be in. If you could move that
up a line or two, that should help.
Clayburn
> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT), Clayburn
>
> >On Mar 20, 12:59 pm, Clayburn <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I have a form with a text field. I added it to a website already
> >> designed by a previous company. Eventually I'll redesign the entire
> >> site, but for now I need to get this to work. However, in IE, there
> >> is a line before the text field and as a result, the tables get messed
> >> up, creating a bunch of extra space between tables. You can see the
> >> difference in Firefox and IE. It works fine in Firefox.
>
> >> Can someone tell me how best to fix this in IE?
>
>
> I just realized that the line might be coming from the fact the "form"
> is not inside the area it's supposed to be in. If you could move that
> up a line or two, that should help.
The problem is the <form method="post" action="../php/formmail2.php">
If I remove it, it's fine. But I need that for the form to work. So
where should I put it?
Clayburn
>
> >On Mar 20, 12:59 pm, Clayburn <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I have a form with a text field. I added it to a website already
> >> designed by a previous company. Eventually I'll redesign the entire
> >> site, but for now I need to get this to work. However, in IE, there
> >> is a line before the text field and as a result, the tables get messed
> >> up, creating a bunch of extra space between tables. You can see the
> >> difference in Firefox and IE. It works fine in Firefox.
>
> >> Can someone tell me how best to fix this in IE?
>
>
> I just realized that the line might be coming from the fact the "form"
> is not inside the area it's supposed to be in. If you could move that
> up a line or two, that should help.
Okay, I think I got it. The problem is for some reason the </form>
creates an extra line. So I put the <form> begin tag and hidden
inputs right after the body tag, and the closing form tag right before
the closing body tag. So, basically the form is the entire page, so
the extra line(s) created by it are above and blow the content.
How's it look?
Clayburn
Well, great. Now the form isn't working.
Clayburn
Okay, I think it's done. The form was working, there was just a delay
for some reason in the email for a while. I think the server was
having problems. But yeah, it seems to be working now and looks right
in IE and Firefox.
dorayme
richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> Use divisions and set the CSS in em's.
Are you practicing, for a part in a play maybe, some sort of listening
problem?
--
dorayme
dorayme
<fdf21b6a-4b94-47cd...@c11g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
Clayburn <clay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay, I think it's done.
You might be thinking that rewriting this site - as you said is your
intention - will take a while. Do not delay because of the difficulty of
making it look like this in every detail. You can make it look very
roughly similar quickly enough and add things later for the finer zing
that gives it that modern arty feel.
I assume you are aware of the screams it causes browsers that associate
with validators. Do you know that browsers like FF and iCab are mates
with their validators? They go to the pub together and take the piss out
of various sites that have come their way and their language gets pretty
rough the more they drink.
Only the other day I heard iCab saying to FF:
"Oh yeah? Well, mate, check this arty number that came my way, it was ok
for a while and I liked the nice sheila on it but f*#!* hell, maaaaate,
http://www.gelbcenter.com/pages/home.htm
HTML Error (11, 0): The tag <meta> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (12, 0): The tag <meta> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (13, 0): The tag <script> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (14, 0): The tag <script> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (28, 0): The tag <link> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (30, 7): The tag <head> is missing.
HTML Error (34, 0): The tag <body> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (40, 34): The attribute "alt" is missing.
HTML Error (90, 3): The tag <TABLE> is unknown.
HTML Error (92, 2): The tag <tr> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (104, 0): The tag <center> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (121, 10): The end tag </br> is missing.
HTML Error (123, 16): The end tag </TABLE> is unknown.
HTML Error (149, 17): The attribute "quality" is unknown.
HTML Error (149, 17): The attribute "wmode" is unknown.
HTML Error (149, 16): The tag <embed> is not allowed in the Doctype of
the document.
HTML Error (183, 54): The attribute "alt" is missing.
HTML Error (440, 29): The attribute "alt" is missing.
HTML Error (462, 24): The tag <div> is missing.
HTML Error (463, 42): The tag <td> is missing.
HTML Error (465, 19): The tag <tr> is missing.
HTML Error (467, 20): The tag <table> is missing.
HTML Error (467, 25): The tag <td> is missing.
HTML Error (469, 15): The tag <tr> is missing.
HTML Error (471, 10): The tag <tr> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (473, 55): The attribute "alt" is missing.
HTML Error (477, 4): The tag <tr> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (483, 16): The tag <table> is missing.
HTML Error (483, 21): The tag <td> is missing.
HTML Error (485, 11): The tag <tr> is missing.
HTML Error (487, 6): The tag <tr> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (489, 85): The attribute "alt" is missing.
HTML Error (493, 12): The tag <table> is missing.
HTML Error (493, 17): The tag <td> is missing.
HTML Error (495, 7): The tag <tr> is missing.
HTML Error (497, 2): The tag <tr> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (503, 8): The end tag </body> is missing.
HTML Error (503, 8): The end tag </meta> is missing.
HTML Error (503, 8): The end tag </meta> is missing.
HTML Error (503, 8): The end tag </meta> is missing.
HTML Error (503, 8): The end tag </head> is missing.
HTML Error (503, 8): The end tag </html> is missing.
HTML Error (523, 5): The tag <a> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (525, 5): The tag <a> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (527, 5): The tag <a> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (529, 5): The tag <a> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (531, 14): The tag <a> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (533, 14): The tag <a> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (535, 14): The tag <a> is not allowed in its parent tag.
HTML Error (535, 53): The end tag </br> is missing.
http://www.google.com/coop/cse/brand?form=cse-search-box&lang=en
HTML Error (1, 0): The tag <title> is missing.
http://adtrack.voicestar.com/euinc/number-changer.js
HTML Error (2, 0): The tag <title> is missing.
HTML Error (112, 26): The tag <SCR'> is unknown.
HTML Error (112, 26): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (112, 26): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (112, 26): The attribute "'IPT" is unknown.
HTML Error (112, 26): The value of the HTML attribute "'IPT" is missing.
HTML Error (112, 58): The end tag </SCR'> is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The tag <nr;> is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "i++){" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "i++){" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "if(" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "if(" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "pd[i].repl" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "num" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "num" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "||" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "||" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "!" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "!" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "pd[i].repl" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "pd[i].repl" is
missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "){" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "){" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "if(" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "if(" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "pd[i].dont" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "pd[i].dont" is
missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute ")" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute ")" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "break;" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "break;" is
missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "rw" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "if(" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "if(" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "rw" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "rw" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "){" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "){" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "na" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "nb" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "nc" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "rw" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "m[1]" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "m[1]" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "m[2]" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "m[2]" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "na" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "na" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "m[4]" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "m[4]" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "nb" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "nb" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "m[6]" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "m[6]" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "nc" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "nc" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "m[8];" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "m[8];" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "this.debug("rewriting:" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute
"this.debug("rewriting:" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute """ is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute """ is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "numfull" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "numfull" is
missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute "+" is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute "+" is missing.
HTML Error (133, 16): The attribute """ is unknown.
HTML Error (133, 16): The value of the HTML attribute """ is missing.
http://www.gelbcenter.com/gelb.css
CSS Error (163, 15): The property "filter" is unknown.
CSS Error (199, 1): The property "filter" is unknown.
CSS Warning (199, 26): The property "-moz-opacity" is unknown.
CSS Error (199, 43): The property "opacity" is unknown.
..."
--
dorayme
rf
> On Mar 20, 1:50 pm, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:29:43 -0700 (PDT), Clayburn
>>>>> Sorry, I forgot to put the URL. It'shttp://www.gelbcenter.com
> What should I do about IE? How can I get rid of the extra space?
> They sliced an image for the table background, so it's important that
> they line up correctly.
I thought I explained that this is never going to happen.
You have just proved how terribly fragile this design is.
rf
> On Mar 20, 2:42 pm, richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:08:44 -0700 (PDT), Clayburn
>>
>> <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Mar 20, 12:59 pm, Clayburn <clayb...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I have a form with a text field. I added it to a website already
>>>> designed by a previous company. Eventually I'll redesign the entire
>>>> site, but for now I need to get this to work. However, in IE, there
>>>> is a line before the text field and as a result, the tables get
>>>> messed up, creating a bunch of extra space between tables. You can
>>>> see the difference in Firefox and IE. It works fine in Firefox.
>>
>>>> Can someone tell me how best to fix this in IE?
>>
>>> Sorry, I forgot to put the URL. It'shttp://www.gelbcenter.com
>>
>> I just realized that the line might be coming from the fact the
>> "form" is not inside the area it's supposed to be in. If you could
>> move that up a line or two, that should help.
>
> Okay, I think I got it. The problem is for some reason the </form>
> creates an extra line.
No, the problem is not "for some reason the </form> creates an extra line".
The problem is that the form element has, by default and per the
specifications, top and bottom margins, which may or may not collapse
depending what is before or after the form. Many elements (hn, p, etc) have
top and bottom margins.
You could have removed these margins:
form {margin: 0}
richard
At least with IE now that line is gone.
still, all that table stuff has to go.
richard
bwaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha
<table> is unknown?
I wouldn't rely on that piece of shit for validating.
dorayme
richard <mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> >
> >HTML Error (34, 0): The tag <body> is not allowed in its parent tag.
> >
> >HTML Error (40, 34): The attribute "alt" is missing.
> >
> >HTML Error (90, 3): The tag <TABLE> is unknown.
>
>
> <table> is unknown?
>
> I wouldn't rely on that piece of shit for validating.
Driver, understand that the errors need interpreting, all good
validators flag things for good reasons, but you can't be drunk when
using them. Step out of that truck and don't continue until your blood
alcohol reading subsides.
--
dorayme
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> dorayme wrote:
>> HTML Error (90, 3): The tag <TABLE> is unknown.
>
> bwaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha
>
> <table> is unknown?
No, <table> is known, but <TABLE> is not.
element "TABLE" undefined.
<TABLE cellspacing=0 border=0>
This error is often caused by:
· by using upper-case tags in XHTML (in XHTML attributes and elements
must be all lower-case).
> I wouldn't rely on that piece of shit for validating.
It is an extremely good piece of shit. Unlike you, it knows that one
must use lower-case words in XHTML elements.
bwaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahaha
The page in question is a trainwreck.
--
-bts
-Friends don't let friends drive Windows
Neredbojias
> Clayburn wrote:
>> Okay, I think I got it. The problem is for some reason the </form>
>> creates an extra line.
>
> No, the problem is not "for some reason the </form> creates an extra
> line". The problem is that the form element has, by default and per
> the specifications, top and bottom margins, which may or may not
> collapse depending what is before or after the form. Many elements
> (hn, p, etc) have top and bottom margins.
>
> You could have removed these margins:
> form {margin: 0}
I'd have thought that would've been the first thing anybody suggested
to the OP.
--
Neredbojias
People who live in glass houses must feel funny peeing.
http://www.neredbojias.org/
http://www.neredbojias.net/
rf
> On 20 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Clayburn wrote:
>
>>> Okay, I think I got it. The problem is for some reason the </form>
>>> creates an extra line.
>>
>> No, the problem is not "for some reason the </form> creates an extra
>> line". The problem is that the form element has, by default and per
>> the specifications, top and bottom margins, which may or may not
>> collapse depending what is before or after the form. Many elements
>> (hn, p, etc) have top and bottom margins.
>>
>> You could have removed these margins:
>> form {margin: 0}
>
> I'd have thought that would've been the first thing anybody suggested
> to the OP.
Indeed. But, we had just got through the problem of whitespace between the
end of a particular element and a closing </td> tag (a totally known IE
issue) when the OP suddenly complicated matters by adding a form to the
already fragile layout.
The layout should be dumped IMHO. The possibility of a monitory refund from
the original perpetrators of this flawed design should be investigated.
Neredbojias
> Neredbojias wrote:
>> On 20 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Clayburn wrote:
>>
>>>> Okay, I think I got it. The problem is for some reason the
>>>> </form> creates an extra line.
>>>
>>> No, the problem is not "for some reason the </form> creates an
>>> extra line". The problem is that the form element has, by default
>>> and per the specifications, top and bottom margins, which may or
>>> may not collapse depending what is before or after the form. Many
>>> elements (hn, p, etc) have top and bottom margins.
>>>
>>> You could have removed these margins:
>>> form {margin: 0}
>>
>> I'd have thought that would've been the first thing anybody
>> suggested to the OP.
>
> Indeed. But, we had just got through the problem of whitespace
> between the end of a particular element and a closing </td> tag (a
> totally known IE issue) when the OP suddenly complicated matters by
> adding a form to the already fragile layout.
Right, and I saw your specific comment re. that which seem to go
ignored. When I cleaned the whitespace with developer, it wasn't what
was between the object and embed tags that mattered...
> The layout should be dumped IMHO. The possibility of a monitory
> refund from the original perpetrators of this flawed design should be
> investigated.
Absolutely. Thats a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur. I
looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash rendering)
and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional - attractive. Good
commercial effort.
rf
> On 21 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
You've been very quite recently. Sabbatical?
> Absolutely. That's a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur.
The really sad part is that these people really don't think they are
amateurs. They think they are professionals and they acuallly get away with
chargeing for this sort of stuff because nobody catches them out.
Until someone like the OP exposes one of their pages to, say, alt.html :-)
> I
> looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash rendering)
> and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional - attractive. Good
> commercial effort.
I missed that one. URL? I always enjoy looking at Adriennes pages. They give
me inspiration.
Adrienne Boswell
writing in news:Xns9BD5314A5A80...@news.albasani.net:
> Absolutely. Thats a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur. I
> looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash rendering)
> and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional - attractive. Good
> commercial effort.
>
>
Gee, thanks! That really makes my morning.
--
Adrienne Boswell at Home
Arbpen Web Site Design Services
http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
Please respond to the group so others can share
freemont
> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Neredbojias
> <nered...@gmail.com> writing in
> news:Xns9BD5314A5A80...@news.albasani.net:
>
>> Absolutely. Thats a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur. I
>> looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash rendering)
>> and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional - attractive. Good
>> commercial effort.
>>
>>
>>
> Gee, thanks! That really makes my morning.
Adrienne, You might want to look at your site in Opera. Here's what I see:
http://i42.tinypic.com/108d5wg.jpg
Some of the borders on your left column are missing! :-) I assume you
didn't intend this because the same thing doesn't happen in FF.
This is opera 9.64 on Mandriva 2009.0. HTH
--
"Because all you of Earth are idiots!"
¯`·.¸¸.·´¯`·-> freemont© <-·´¯`·.¸¸.·´¯
Ed Mullen
Looks fine here. Opera 9.64, Windows XP Pro.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
Always proofread carefully to see if you any words out.
BootNic
Ed Mullen <e...@edmullen.net> wrote in:
<2lvs5v....@news.alt.net>
> freemont wrote:
>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:40:51 +0000, Adrienne Boswell writ:
[snip]
>> Adrienne, You might want to look at your site in Opera. Here's
>> what I see:
>>
>> http://i42.tinypic.com/108d5wg.jpg
>>
>> Some of the borders on your left column are missing! :-) I
>> assume you didn't intend this because the same thing doesn't
>> happen in FF.
>>
>> This is opera 9.64 on Mandriva 2009.0. HTH
>>
> Looks fine here. Opera 9.64, Windows XP Pro.
I do not think the issue is dependent on the user agent.
The width of #navAlpha is set to 15%, while #content left margin is
set to 170px, with a wide enough view #navAlpha slides under
#content making it appear to be missing the right border.
--
BootNic Sat Mar 21, 2009 03:28 pm
Wife who put husband in doghouse soon find him in cat house.
*Ancient Chinese Proverbs*
Adrienne Boswell
<bootnic...@gmail.com> writing in news:20090321152854.6fef7bc1
@bootnic.motzarella.org:
> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:03:25 -0400
> Ed Mullen <e...@edmullen.net> wrote in:
><2lvs5v....@news.alt.net>
>
>> freemont wrote:
>>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:40:51 +0000, Adrienne Boswell writ:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> Adrienne, You might want to look at your site in Opera. Here's
>>> what I see:
>>>
>>> http://i42.tinypic.com/108d5wg.jpg
>>>
>>> Some of the borders on your left column are missing! :-) I
>>> assume you didn't intend this because the same thing doesn't
>>> happen in FF.
>>>
>>> This is opera 9.64 on Mandriva 2009.0. HTH
>>>
>> Looks fine here. Opera 9.64, Windows XP Pro.
>
> I do not think the issue is dependent on the user agent.
>
> The width of #navAlpha is set to 15%, while #content left margin is
> set to 170px, with a wide enough view #navAlpha slides under
> #content making it appear to be missing the right border.
>
This is one of those things that I keep saying I'm going to do - give my
own web-site a makeover. Maybe I should hire Ty Pennington 8-)
Ed Mullen
> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed BootNic
> <bootnic...@gmail.com> writing in news:20090321152854.6fef7bc1
> @bootnic.motzarella.org:
>
>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 13:03:25 -0400
>> Ed Mullen <e...@edmullen.net> wrote in:
>> <2lvs5v....@news.alt.net>
>>
>>> freemont wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:40:51 +0000, Adrienne Boswell writ:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>>>> Adrienne, You might want to look at your site in Opera. Here's
>>>> what I see:
>>>>
>>>> http://i42.tinypic.com/108d5wg.jpg
>>>>
>>>> Some of the borders on your left column are missing! :-) I
>>>> assume you didn't intend this because the same thing doesn't
>>>> happen in FF.
>>>>
>>>> This is opera 9.64 on Mandriva 2009.0. HTH
>>>>
>>> Looks fine here. Opera 9.64, Windows XP Pro.
>> I do not think the issue is dependent on the user agent.
>>
>> The width of #navAlpha is set to 15%, while #content left margin is
>> set to 170px, with a wide enough view #navAlpha slides under
>> #content making it appear to be missing the right border.
>>
>
> This is one of those things that I keep saying I'm going to do - give my
> own web-site a makeover. Maybe I should hire Ty Pennington 8-)
>
Only if he and Oprah agree to pay for it!
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
What hair color do they put on the driver's licenses of bald men?
Neredbojias
> Neredbojias wrote:
>> On 21 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
>
> You've been very quite recently. Sabbatical?
Well, thought I'd tone it down a notch or 2. Bit of a burn-out,
perhaps; my posts were getting off-topic a lot and just plain silly
sometimes. Anyway, I intend to be more frugal with the words and less
opinionated, or at least try.
>> Absolutely. That's a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur.
>
> The really sad part is that these people really don't think they are
> amateurs. They think they are professionals and they acuallly get
> away with chargeing for this sort of stuff because nobody catches
> them out.
>
> Until someone like the OP exposes one of their pages to, say,
> alt.html :-)
I can forgive a bad amateur much easier than I can a bad professional.
Of course the sausage grinder that is alt.html would hardly let one
slip by "untenderized".
>> I
>> looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash
>> rendering) and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional -
>> attractive. Good commercial effort.
>
> I missed that one. URL? I always enjoy looking at Adriennes pages.
> They give me inspiration.
URL -, ok let's see...
http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php
(It's in the 1st message a couple threads before this one.)
Neredbojias
> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Neredbojias
> <nered...@gmail.com> writing in
> news:Xns9BD5314A5A80...@news.albasani.net:
>
>> Absolutely. Thats a pretty poor bit of markup even for an amateur.
>> I looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash
>> rendering) and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional -
>> attractive. Good commercial effort.
>>
>>
>
> Gee, thanks! That really makes my morning.
It's a good piece of work so you deserve it.
rf
> On 21 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Neredbojias wrote:
>>> On 21 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
>>> looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash
>>> rendering) and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional -
>>> attractive. Good commercial effort.
>>
>> I missed that one. URL? I always enjoy looking at Adriennes pages.
>> They give me inspiration.
>
> URL -, ok let's see...
>
> http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php
Ah, yes, flash. I don't usually have flash enabled (that flashblock thing is
Wonderful). I'll just turn on the flash <clickety>.
Ah, yes, I remember why I installed flashblock in the first place. I have a
long history here of downcrying such continuously moving stuff. It IMHO
totally distracts from any other content that may be on the page. Just look
at [anything].cn for an example. If a client requests flash I refer said
client to somebody else. This is probably why I missed the post you mention,
the word "flash" in a subject line is an automatic filter to me. I didn't
even look at the post.
Remember me ranting a couple or five years ago about moving stuff and
tigers?
When we were all living in the jungle using brucies pointy stick to write
HTML anything moving in the surrounding area simply *had* to be be looked
at. It just might have been a tiger out lurking for its dinner. This inbuilt
propensity for looking at moving stuff still holds. Consider a bus, you
*always* look at one if it is moving near to you. Walk into a quiet
corporate office and pitch a tennis ball around the walls. Everybody that
has line of sight to that tennis ball *will* look at it, even if they are
currently listening carefully the profound advice being given out by the
CEO.
If you are looking at the moving stuff then you are not looking at the
content.
Unfortunately Adrienne's flash is so overpowering that I had to re-block the
flash just so I could type this post, even though the browsers window is two
screens that way ---> , our inbuilt reflex to look at stuff works even
better when said stuff is in the corner of ones eye. This is why I have the
TV currently replaying the Indian Wells semifinals *behind* me. I look at it
*if I wish*, not *when I must*.
Now, if the flash were to move just once and then say politely still...
Other than that, yes, the new page is quite a good one. Much cleaner that
what it looks like it is replacing.
Adrienne Boswell
news:dWnxl.30291$cu....@news-server.bigpond.net.au:
> Neredbojias wrote:
>> On 21 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Neredbojias wrote:
>>>> On 21 Mar 2009, "rf" <r...@z.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> looked at Adrienne B.'s latest page (...problems with Flash
>>>> rendering) and must say I was impressed. Simple - functional -
>>>> attractive. Good commercial effort.
>>>
>>> I missed that one. URL? I always enjoy looking at Adriennes pages.
>>> They give me inspiration.
>>
>> URL -, ok let's see...
>>
>> http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php
>
> Ah, yes, flash. I don't usually have flash enabled (that flashblock
> thing is Wonderful). I'll just turn on the flash <clickety>.
>
> Ah, yes, I remember why I installed flashblock in the first place. I
> have a long history here of downcrying such continuously moving stuff.
> It IMHO totally distracts from any other content that may be on the
> page. Just look at [anything].cn for an example. If a client requests
> flash I refer said client to somebody else. This is probably why I
> missed the post you mention, the word "flash" in a subject line is an
> automatic filter to me. I didn't even look at the post.
>
> Remember me ranting a couple or five years ago about moving stuff and
> tigers?
Yes, I do, and I agree with you.
>
> When we were all living in the jungle using brucies pointy stick to
> write HTML anything moving in the surrounding area simply *had* to be
> be looked at. It just might have been a tiger out lurking for its
> dinner. This inbuilt propensity for looking at moving stuff still
> holds. Consider a bus, you *always* look at one if it is moving near
> to you. Walk into a quiet corporate office and pitch a tennis ball
> around the walls. Everybody that has line of sight to that tennis ball
> *will* look at it, even if they are currently listening carefully the
> profound advice being given out by the CEO.
>
> If you are looking at the moving stuff then you are not looking at the
> content.
>
> Unfortunately Adrienne's flash is so overpowering that I had to
> re-block the flash just so I could type this post, even though the
> browsers window is two screens that way ---> , our inbuilt reflex to
> look at stuff works even better when said stuff is in the corner of
> ones eye. This is why I have the TV currently replaying the Indian
> Wells semifinals *behind* me. I look at it *if I wish*, not *when I
> must*.
I'm going to recommend the static image that replaces the Flash image
when Flash is unavailable. Here it is with the static image:
http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php
Better?
>
> Now, if the flash were to move just once and then say politely
> still...
>
>
I could do that. That's a good idea.
>
> Other than that, yes, the new page is quite a good one. Much cleaner
> that what it looks like it is replacing.
>
Yes, my main thing was to get the page "alive" and more presentable.
The original image was just too dark, and IMHO, did not make anyone want
to buy shoes.
Neredbojias
>>> I missed that one. URL? I always enjoy looking at Adriennes pages.
>>> They give me inspiration.
>>
>> URL -, ok let's see...
>>
>> http://adrienneboswell.com/tiptop/index.php
>
> Ah, yes, flash. I don't usually have flash enabled (that flashblock
> thing is Wonderful). I'll just turn on the flash <clickety>.
>
> Ah, yes, I remember why I installed flashblock in the first place. I
> have a long history here of downcrying such continuously moving
> stuff. It IMHO totally distracts from any other content that may be
> on the page. Just look at [anything].cn for an example. If a client
> requests flash I refer said client to somebody else. This is probably
> why I missed the post you mention, the word "flash" in a subject line
> is an automatic filter to me. I didn't even look at the post.
>
> Remember me ranting a couple or five years ago about moving stuff and
> tigers?
Sure. All of your rants are rather memorable...
> When we were all living in the jungle using brucies pointy stick to
> write HTML anything moving in the surrounding area simply *had* to be
> be looked at. It just might have been a tiger out lurking for its
> dinner. This inbuilt propensity for looking at moving stuff still
> holds. Consider a bus, you *always* look at one if it is moving near
> to you. Walk into a quiet corporate office and pitch a tennis ball
> around the walls. Everybody that has line of sight to that tennis
> ball *will* look at it, even if they are currently listening
> carefully the profound advice being given out by the CEO.
>
> If you are looking at the moving stuff then you are not looking at
> the content.
>
> Unfortunately Adrienne's flash is so overpowering that I had to
> re-block the flash just so I could type this post, even though the
> browsers window is two screens that way ---> , our inbuilt reflex to
> look at stuff works even better when said stuff is in the corner of
> ones eye. This is why I have the TV currently replaying the Indian
> Wells semifinals *behind* me. I look at it *if I wish*, not *when I
> must*.
Well, in general I agree with you but honestly didn't think the Flash
on Ade's page was so bad. However, it's probably true that animation
should be kept out of normal "serious" pages at least without a start
and stop button.
> Now, if the flash were to move just once and then say politely
> still...
Yeah, better than continuous fer sure.
> Other than that, yes, the new page is quite a good one. Much cleaner
> that what it looks like it is replacing.
I'm growing to like Flash for things like music vids and such (-it's
good ((and necessary)) on You Tube, etc.) Still, I doubt if I'll ever
support any form of _autostart_ no matter where it is.