Beginners woes with cross-browser CSS

[Spartanicus]

Re: Beginners woes with cross-browser CSS

Els <els.aNOSPAM@ti scali.nl> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>It's just that Mac users don't have a
>>>version 7 yet :-(
>>>
>>>(correct me if I'm wrong, anyone)[/color]
>>
>> There's one coming (7.5), currently available as a beta.[/color]
>
>Can it be used on older Mac OS's too? (I have no idea about
>compatibilit y of browsers on Macs)[/color]

Neither do I, but I've no reason to assume that it doesn't.

--
Spartanicus

[Marian Aldenhövel]

Re: Beginners woes with cross-browser CSS

Hi,
[color=blue]
> CSS is best for flexible design, don't use absolute pixel-positioning.[/color]

I guess this is where I was misled.

I was under the impression that CSS would be - among other good
things - a replacement for the table-based layout. Leaving tables
for tabular data while still allowing for pixelwise positioning.

But it's not so much the pixel-accuracy that I am after, I do
not really care wether an element is 25, 30 or 60 pixels in any
dimension. What makes me unhappy is the fact that my design
obviously cannot reliably be implemented at all although it
does not at all feel unreasonable to me.

What makes me even more unhappy is that it seemed to work out
OK in two of the three browsers I tried. _And_ it was easy and
fun composing it. _And_ the code looked good to me. But then
it failed miserably on the third browser of the lot. Unfortunately
the most important one.

Right now I feel I will have to go tables and use CSS "only" to
concentrate things like fonts and colors in a single place. That's
an improvement over the old ways, no doubt. But not what I had
hoped for.

Ciao, MM
--
Marian Aldenhövel, Rosenhain 23, 53123 Bonn.
Fon +49 228 624013, Fax +49 228 624031.

http://www.marian-aldenhoevel.de

"specializa tion is for insects" Lazarus Long

[Els]

Re: Beginners woes with cross-browser CSS

Marian Aldenhövel wrote:
[color=blue]
> Hi,
>[color=green]
>> CSS is best for flexible design, don't use absolute pixel-positioning.[/color]
>
> I guess this is where I was misled.
>
> I was under the impression that CSS would be - among other good
> things - a replacement for the table-based layout. Leaving tables
> for tabular data while still allowing for pixelwise positioning.
>
> But it's not so much the pixel-accuracy that I am after, I do
> not really care wether an element is 25, 30 or 60 pixels in any
> dimension. What makes me unhappy is the fact that my design
> obviously cannot reliably be implemented at all although it
> does not at all feel unreasonable to me.[/color]

Only unreasonable part imho is the footer not going below
the bottom of the window. The rest looked clearly possible
to me.
[color=blue]
> What makes me even more unhappy is that it seemed to work out
> OK in two of the three browsers I tried. _And_ it was easy and
> fun composing it. _And_ the code looked good to me. But then
> it failed miserably on the third browser of the lot. Unfortunately
> the most important one.[/color]

Yep :-(
[color=blue]
> Right now I feel I will have to go tables and use CSS "only" to
> concentrate things like fonts and colors in a single place. That's
> an improvement over the old ways, no doubt. But not what I had
> hoped for.[/color]

An improvement, maybe, but I'd say you can get much more out
of this, if you _only_ accept the bottom of the page being
below the viewport and accessible by scrolling the entire page.

Is that really a bad option for you? Given the fact that
even with table-based layout you might not be able to
achieve cross-browser what you want (scrollable middle part)?

--
Els

http://locusmeus.com/

Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -

[Rijk van Geijtenbeek]

Re: Beginners woes with cross-browser CSS

On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 09:37:40 +0100, Spartanicus <me@privacy.net > wrote:
[color=blue]
> Els <els.aNOSPAM@ti scali.nl> wrote:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
>>>> It's just that Mac users don't have a
>>>> version 7 yet :-(
>>>>
>>>> (correct me if I'm wrong, anyone)
>>>
>>> There's one coming (7.5), currently available as a beta.[/color]
>>
>> Can it be used on older Mac OS's too? (I have no idea about
>> compatibility of browsers on Macs)[/color]
>
> Neither do I, but I've no reason to assume that it doesn't.[/color]

Opera 7.5 for Mac requires OS X 10.1 or later. There are currently no
plans to port to MacOS 9.

--
Rijk van Geijtenbeek

The Web is a procrastination apparatus:
It can absorb as much time as is required to ensure that you
won't get any real work done. - J.Nielsen

[Marian Aldenhövel]

Re: Beginners woes with cross-browser CSS

Hi,
[color=blue]
> An improvement, maybe, but I'd say you can get much more out of this, if
> you _only_ accept the bottom of the page being below the viewport and
> accessible by scrolling the entire page.
>
> Is that really a bad option for you?[/color]

Absolutely not. I will try to make that work, even if it's just to
convince myself that I can do it.

Whether I will be using it in my application I am not yet sure.

Ciao, MM
--
Marian Aldenhövel, Rosenhain 23, 53123 Bonn.
Fon +49 228 624013, Fax +49 228 624031.

http://www.marian-aldenhoevel.de

"specializa tion is for insects" Lazarus Long