Question: Why does there appear to be two menu bars, one stacked on top of the other, so part of the other menu is concealed? So you can't get to those links?
[EDIT: OK, take back that question. I see now. Your start page is designed for 1024x768, whereas my monitor is running at 1280x1024, rendering the absolutely positioned menu above the other. If you're curious, this is what I'm seeing:
But since this is your start page (assuming no one else will ever see it), I see no problem in it being resolution-specific (or browser-specific, or platform-specific, for that matter )
And...
code:
<!--undoctyped until i can get a custom dtd for styles =P -->
Me no understand. Custom DTD for styles? What's that all about?
[This message has been edited by ozphactor (edited 08-19-2003).]
As for the firs list, its for my parents accesibility. They get confused with blocks and anything it explicitelly tells it is a link.
EDIT: I re-read your first comment. I think i aint sure what you talk about. Screenie please? ;P
EDIT2: Oh man! Well, i guess thats yet another challenge. To make it portable for larger resolutions. Speaking of which, can you really see anything over that large res?! ;P
__________________________________
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Frameset//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/frameset.dtd">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN">
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//IETF//DTD HTML//EN">
If none of them suits your needs (lie currently me, probably will have to fix a lot the positioning), you can write one.
quote:And if things don't work the way you would expect, figure out *why* and then correct them
Well, i already have been doin that (i am not done yet), else, this page would oook much worse (you dont want to see previous versions )
Personally, I would recommend using the XHTML 1.0 strict doctype, and coding accordingly.
Things not working right under a standard doctype is not a matter of the doctype "not suiting your needs" - it is a matter of proper coding usually.
It seems rather counter productive to write your own DTD simply because your page doesn't look right.
I also am still at a loss as to what you mean by 'for styles'...from what I understand, altering a doctype would allow you to specify various different elements, or different attributes for them, but it won't really effect your use of positioning...
As it is now, you've got some rather bizarre coding going on, and it would seem you are making things more complicated than they need to be. (one small example - you have a <span class="h1">. Just appply the styles you want to the H1 element, and use that - as it should be). You've also got tables where they're not needed, and lists that aren't in lists, etc..)
It also seem that there is some Javascript trying to happen that doesn't work in mozilla.
There is also an unhealthy mix of CSS and old stlye inline HTML formatting - that's never a good thing, and confuses browsers that do read a doctype...
So, pick a doctype (make it strict, and your CSS will be better interpreted...), and focus on cleaning up the code so it works properly rather than trying to work around it.
[This message has been edited by DL-44 (edited 08-19-2003).]
quote:Personally, I would recommend using the XHTML 1.0 strict doctype, and coding accordingly.
Things not working right under a standard doctype is not a matter of the doctype "not suiting your needs" - it is a matter of proper coding usually.
It seems rather counter productive to write your own DTD simply because your page doesn't look right.
True. I am working on it now.
quote:As it is now, you've got some rather bizarre coding going on, and it would seem you are making things more complicated than they need to be. (one small example - you have a <span class="h1">. Just appply the styles you want to the H1 element, and use that - as it should be). You've also got tables where they're not needed, and lists that aren't in lists, etc..)
I did not use H1 because everything after it is forced to be in a new line. And i like to see the changing dots the way they are right now whenever i am bored (watching those dots is entertaing ;P)
EDIT: doh, i can put the image between h1 tags!
quote:It also seem that there is some Javascript trying to happen that doesn't work in mozilla.
Care to elaborate?
quote:There is also an unhealthy mix of CSS and old stlye inline HTML formatting - that's never a good thing, and confuses browsers that do read a doctype...
:P
EDIT: the table was there to simplify some stuff (which did not happened). Dont rememeber what exactly was, proabbly for some older version.
quote:So, pick a doctype (make it strict, and your CSS will be better interpreted...), and focus on cleaning up the code so it works properly rather than trying to work around it.
Javascript - the "SC/W3C modding sites" and the others below it with the cyan-ish background don't do anything for me - I assume they are supposed to. I also noticed a few instances of javascript in the code, but don't see on the page what is meant to do...
As far as H1's and new lines - you can set them to "display:inline;" and they will not cause a line break =)
And of course - keep in mind that the entire purpose of CSS is the seperation of style and content. The power of CSS is that it can control *any* element on your page. So, use it to set your page colors, fonts, and margins; use it to set your cellpadding and cellspaing, borders, etc.
Make sure, any time you are going to add an attribute to an HTML tag that it is not something that should be specified in your style sheet instead!
.
Now, to get critical again - please don't tell people they need a specific resolution unless there's a *really* compelling reason that it can't be made more flexible.
I hate having to click on an alert just so I can get into a site....
Well, i kinda made some big changes. Same url. Is any better?
quote:Javascript - the "SC/W3C modding sites" and the others below it with the cyan-ish background don't do anything for me - I assume they are supposed to. I also noticed a few instances of javascript in the code, but don't see on the page what is meant to do...
Well, the JS dirt on the page is meant to display series of links right next the blocks bright purplish blocks. My method was to change the inner HTML of the "test"div tag. In the result it looks clean, but the code is rather clunky. I have not found another way of doing it, and seeing it does not seem to work over mozilla...
quote:As far as H1's and new lines - you can set them to "display:inline;" and they will not cause a line break =)
Thanks, but I already put the image inside the h1 tag, and works for me. I will be considering using that method later
quote:And of course - keep in mind that the entire purpose of CSS is the seperation of style and content. The power of CSS is that it can control *any* element on your page. So, use it to set your page colors, fonts, and margins; use it to set your cellpadding and cellspaing, borders, etc.
Make sure, any time you are going to add an attribute to an HTML tag that it is not something that should be specified in your style sheet instead!
I think this revamp will show some of this
quote:Now, to get critical again - please don't tell people they need a specific resolution unless there's a *really* compelling reason that it can't be made more flexible.
I hate having to click on an alert just so I can get into a site....
=)
Having now checked in IE, and seeing the functionality that the 'categories' are supposed to do, It is definately not working in mozilla. Nothing happens when the links are clicked.
You may want to drop into the JS/DHTML forum with that bit of code and see what they can do for it...
Code looks *much* cleaner - very nice to see =)
The only gripe I have on that end is that the list of links should really be coded in a list. If you don't want a bullet, yo can specify that -
quote:Having now checked in IE, and seeing the functionality that the 'categories' are supposed to do, It is definately not working in mozilla. Nothing happens when the links are clicked.
You may want to drop into the JS/DHTML forum with that bit of code and see what they can do for it...
EDIT: (how could i forgot to even comment! ) I will try by my own first. If it still does not work, i will surely ask then.
quote:Code looks *much* cleaner - very nice to see =)
Thanks. Btw, is the div tag any useufl without CSS? =
Hmm, the overlapping link problem is gone, but it's sad to see that you had to sacrifice the liquid layout to get it to work.
There still seems to be some text hidden behind the black box, though. I think it's that "best viewed in..." text.
And the <div> element stands for a "document division" but it has no visual significance, by itself. So it's pretty much redundant without any CSS to manipulate it.
The <div> creates a block level box around whatever element(s) it contains.
You won't *see* the box, but it is there. Since it is block-level, it will cause a line break on the page at its end.
Of course, as with anything else, you should always ask "do I need a <div> here?" before using one. I find the more I question wether I need a particular element, the more often the answer is "no".
I have found another thing of the divs. Every element between it seemss to have inherited stuff (you may have noticed that my main div's class is "mother" ;P). In my start page, you may have noticed that the absolute position of the blocks and stuff is actually based onto "mother" divs position (i.e. 'block' div has an abs pos of 50px from left, but seeing that it is inside 'mother' it will be 50 px apart from mother's left edge, isntad of 50 apart from window left edge).
Oz - Well, dont know about you, but to me, it renders very similar (probably in al larger res its noit aligned on the middle, but it did not really bothers me). As for the "best seen" text...well, i think i can now get rid of it, as it proably will not look buggy (i guess).
...is there a reason you have two encodings specified? It's certainly not valid (and actually, I can't even run your page through the validator because of it.)
[This message has been edited by ozphactor (edited 08-21-2003).]
Where i got the encoding list of laguages, it came that way. I thought it had to be all together (it was not obvious to me that i could pick either one or the other )
Btw, i got both Opera and Mozilla installed.
Mozilla is so....NS, and i dont like that. Still, many people use it. And yes, none of my scripts work at all there.
Opera, on the other side, is rather nice, except for the fact mouse wheel does not seem to work to scroll thru the page, that horrible ad that i dont feel like paying for removing it and some lil problems with css apparently (check the faq footer with it to see what i mean). The script works, but i need to fix the css, seeing how the space between lines over the lists is rather large.
I will still try to fix it by myself. If i really cant get it to work, i'll definitely post on the dhtml forum.
I think most sites should stick with iso-8859-1 or possibly utf-8 (which, by the way, is now the "official" encoding endorsed by the w3c).
And yes, Mozilla is almost identical to Netscape, both internally and externally. The only difference is Mozilla is an open-source project, and Netscape is, well... dead.
And as for the scroll wheel, I'm almost certain that there's a plugin for that somewhere out there. Try doing a google search on opera plugins.
I use Firebird (a stripped down version of Mozilla) as my default browser, and I'm overwhelmed by how many plugins I've found for it. My browser now has many features that I never knew existed, but now find incredibly useful
Actually, for elements that traditionally haven't required an end tag (<br>, <hr>, <img>, etc), you should just leave a space and insert a forward slash at the end of the tag, like so:
<br> = <br />
<hr> = <hr />
<img> = <img />
And so on.
<br></br> may work in certain browsers, but I wouldn't count on it.
quote:I just ran the page through the validator. My, i felt like i was bitchslapped in the face in the middle of a party. Ouch!
Hehehe
Yeah, that sounds about like my first couple of times using the validator.
But, the good news is - after a couple of episodes like that, you get to the point where you tend to write valid code right from the start, and there are little to no corrections to be made after the fact.
That's a good ting =)
Thanks for the link. Its been very useful. And yeah, it teach me to code properly. Reminds me of my first time messing with html. I was just surprised too see so many errors
I did some fixes and ran the page thru the validator again. Most of my current problems is the fact that there are tags inside the js tag (the ones in the array), that there does not seem to accept meta tags, and there is no Onclick/mouseOver elements (which sucks). I corrected the problem with the list height problem over opera, but definitely, no way to make the page work properly over Mozilla. I will be asking for help over the forum after all. http://www.freewebs.com/alevice/LinkList.html
posted 08-19-2003 06:44
)
