Forum Home
Press F1
 
Thread ID: 44510 2004-04-21 06:20:00 Argh! Need some webdesign help! mejobloggs (264) Press F1
Post ID Timestamp Content User
230944 2004-04-21 06:20:00 Arrrrrrrrghhh! Sorry, some frustration . Spent ages trying to nut this out .

. orcon . net . nz/test/kane/index03 . html" target="_blank">bloggsworld . orcon . net . nz

Look at it in IE, then Mozilla/firefox

That spectwhatsit logo with the round corners . How do I fix that?

And yes, I want it fixed . No I am not happy for just all the 95% of people to be able to see it good, the ones with IE .

Probably some stupid little obvious ANNOYING thing i have overlooked .

Narf, gnargh heee bleargh . Insane?

Help would be welcome .

There is a CSS file, I can not be bothered finding a link for, but if you do not know how to find that, then you probably can not help . Ehh, finding a link would have been quicker than typing that, ah what the heck . . orcon . net . nz/test/kane/spectakasm . css" target="_blank">bloggsworld . orcon . net . nz
mejobloggs (264)
230945 2004-04-21 06:33:00 Oh, and sorry about the mess, it might be a bit hard to follow, I got frustrated and started plonking anything in. mejobloggs (264)
230946 2004-04-21 07:19:00 Hey mejobloggs,

I don't mind helping you out, although would you like me saying that you haven't kept to XHTML 1.0 Strict standards?

Now, if anything, make sure you keep standards and not use enhancements that the other browsers make. If you have the page written to standard and the browser displays a problem then obviously the browser hasn't met the w3c standards.

I've displayed in it IE and looks fine, I've looked in Mozilla and notice that the corners aren't inline.

Try and get the code to standard, if you need help I can help there. I'll try and find a way to fix the page, although it may be easier writing browser specific pages, but I prefer a page that is standard for all browsers.


Noel Nosivad
Noel Nosivad (389)
230947 2004-04-21 09:21:00 Yeah, I kept to the standards. I just missed a few alt tags in images when I was trying different things for that table. Also, one td height when I got really angry, and reverted to html 4.

None of that had any effect on the problem though, thats why I didnt bother.

Its a draft anyway.

Thanks
mejobloggs (264)
230948 2004-04-21 11:02:00 I dunno what is wrong with it. It is just table there, how can that go wrong?

I notice on mozilla, I can not get the table cells below 20px or something. If I change my body font to smaller, then it works fine. Yet, I tried for those cells, to put font size of 0, line height as 0, and cell height as 10. It still will not work, unless I put the body height below a certain size, and then it is too small for my liking.

I guess I will just have to flag the body text, and put it into two sections. 1 font size for the menu, and then when I get up to the writing/content/page section, just give it a class name, with the font size, and go that way.

I still do not see why it does not work. If I declare the body as 12px, and the in that table, make the font 0px it should work, as the table one would override the body one. Maybe it wont do 0px? Or maybe I should set the font sizes in the table, not the cells.

I dunno, I will have a look when I can get to a computer with mozilla.
mejobloggs (264)
230949 2004-04-21 11:51:00 Ah, fixed it. Just set the font size for the table, and not the cells. Thanks mejobloggs (264)
230950 2004-04-21 13:16:00 > Ah, fixed it .

Ya sure? Still looks out in Firefox
whiskeytangofoxtrot (438)
230951 2004-04-21 23:57:00 Had not uploaded it. mejobloggs (264)
230952 2004-04-22 10:43:00 bloggsworld.orcon.net.nz

Mozilla problem again.
mejobloggs (264)
230953 2004-04-24 03:59:00 > Yeah, I kept to the standards . I just missed a few
> alt tags in images when I was trying different things
> for that table . Also, one td height when I got really
> angry, and reverted to html 4 .
>
> None of that had any effect on the problem though,
> thats why I didnt bother .
>
> Its a draft anyway .
>
> Thanks

Hey mejobloggs,

I'm not talking about the validator, which has limited functionality in checking XHTML properly, it's the DTD Strict standard that you defined . Basically this is default for any web programmer, and Strict is hard to conform to, that's why I said your code was not correct because of some elements .

HTML tags were originally to defined the contents of a document . e . g . This is a paragraph

, this is a table <table > , etc . But with this they included attributes that would define what is more presentational/style .

It's these presentational elements that are not present in DTD Strict standard e . g . width, height, color, etc, this is to keep the document clean looking . That was the only thing I picked up just from seeing your DOCTYPE and noticing presentational elements .

Apart from that your code is fine and is considered DTD Transitional which has less restrictions than Strict and allows presentational elements . If you wanted to make it Strict standards then presentational elements should reside in the CSS file, which was created for the purpose of adding all style information .

I'm not bagging you or anyone else, I believe if there's standards involved then we should push more towards them, even if they seem out of place and not relevent, but they are set as guidelines we should all follow . The strict standards are to show clean HTML, the presentational elements however made HTML messy and took away HTML's purpose, which was not web designing but presenting well-formed documents .


Noel Nosivad
Noel Nosivad (389)
1 2