Im using xhtml 1.0 strict and both tml and css validates, but no
matter what i do, i can't get overflow:auto to work in IE and i would
really like to get rit of that scroll bar when it isn't needed.
html:
http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/index.htm
css:
http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/includes/css/style.css
Thanks
In article
<1191645233.191421.177860@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
zacariaz@gmail.com wrote:
> Im using xhtml 1.0 strict and both tml and css validates, but no
> matter what i do, i can't get overflow:auto to work in IE and i would
> really like to get rit of that scroll bar when it isn't needed.
>
> html:
> http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/index.htm
>
> css:
> http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/includes/css/style.css
>
>
> Thanks
What is this all about:
head {overflow: auto;}
?
Look at your html (or xhtml if you like), what is the explanation
of the divs and
. It does not seem to make a lot of sense?
Validity is one thing. Sense is another. Make the page a little
more realistic and let's see.
--
dorayme
On 6 Okt., 07:03, dorayme
> In article
> <1191645233.191421.177...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Im using xhtml 1.0 strict and both tml and css validates, but no
> > matter what i do, i can't get overflow:auto to work in IE and i would
> > really like to get rit of that scroll bar when it isn't needed.
>
> > html:
> >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/index.htm
>
> > css:
> >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/includes/css/style.css
>
> > Thanks
>
> What is this all about:
>
> head {overflow: auto;}
>
> ?
>
> Look at your html (or xhtml if you like), what is the explanation
> of the divs and
. It does not seem to make a lot of sense?
> Validity is one thing. Sense is another. Make the page a little
> more realistic and let's see.
>
> --
> dorayme
What do you want me to do? put some content on the site? That has
absolutely nothing to do with the problem.
I have a working site and whether or not it makes sence doesnt matter,
only the problem and the solution.
In article
<1191648148.650578.224860@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>,
zacariaz@gmail.com wrote:
> On 6 Okt., 07:03, dorayme
> > In article
> > <1191645233.191421.177...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Im using xhtml 1.0 strict and both tml and css validates, but no
> > > matter what i do, i can't get overflow:auto to work in IE and i would
> > > really like to get rit of that scroll bar when it isn't needed.
> >
> > > html:
> > >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/index.htm
> >
> > > css:
> > >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/includes/css/style.css
> >
> > > Thanks
> >
> > What is this all about:
> >
> > head {overflow: auto;}
> >
> > ?
> >
> > Look at your html (or xhtml if you like), what is the explanation
> > of the divs and
. It does not seem to make a lot of sense?
> > Validity is one thing. Sense is another. Make the page a little
> > more realistic and let's see.
> >
> > --
> > dorayme
>
> What do you want me to do? put some content on the site? That has
> absolutely nothing to do with the problem.
> I have a working site and whether or not it makes sence doesnt matter,
> only the problem and the solution.
You have not explained what your head {overflow: auto;} is doing.
I was puzzled by this? Anyway, I see no problem with scrollbars
when this is removed in IE 6 (I cannot now test in IE7 I am
afraid).
I removed various height: auto s too, these are defaults.
I worry about your code when you are putting px font sizes and px
heights for footers that can be too small for a user upped font
and other things. It is not always easy to know what is causing
problems until the simple things are all fixed right. You are
more confident than me. I guess you are not in a mood to hear
about other things... like you need some sort of reason to use
xhtml rather than html, have you got one? It is confusing to call
classes and ids after normal elements, it is bad practice to use
px for fonts, it always helps to make a problem a bit realistic
if you are not sure what is causing the problem...
--
dorayme
On 6 Okt., 08:51, dorayme
> In article
> <1191648148.650578.224...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On 6 Okt., 07:03, dorayme
> > > In article
> > > <1191645233.191421.177...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > Im using xhtml 1.0 strict and both tml and css validates, but no
> > > > matter what i do, i can't get overflow:auto to work in IE and i wou=
ld
> > > > really like to get rit of that scroll bar when it isn't needed.
>
> > > > html:
> > > >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/index.htm
>
> > > > css:
> > > >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/includes/css/style.css
>
> > > > Thanks
>
> > > What is this all about:
>
> > > head {overflow: auto;}
>
> > > ?
>
> > > Look at your html (or xhtml if you like), what is the explanation
> > > of the divs and
. It does not seem to make a lot of sense?
> > > Validity is one thing. Sense is another. Make the page a little
> > > more realistic and let's see.
>
> > > --
> > > dorayme
>
> > What do you want me to do? put some content on the site? That has
> > absolutely nothing to do with the problem.
> > I have a working site and whether or not it makes sence doesnt matter,
> > only the problem and the solution.
>
> You have not explained what your head {overflow: auto;} is doing.
> I was puzzled by this? Anyway, I see no problem with scrollbars
> when this is removed in IE 6 (I cannot now test in IE7 I am
> afraid).
>
> I removed various height: auto s too, these are defaults.
>
> I worry about your code when you are putting px font sizes and px
> heights for footers that can be too small for a user upped font
> and other things. It is not always easy to know what is causing
> problems until the simple things are all fixed right. You are
> more confident than me. I guess you are not in a mood to hear
> about other things... like you need some sort of reason to use
> xhtml rather than html, have you got one? It is confusing to call
> classes and ids after normal elements, it is bad practice to use
> px for fonts, it always helps to make a problem a bit realistic
> if you are not sure what is causing the problem...
>
> --
> dorayme- Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn -
>
> - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn -
On 6 Okt., 08:51, dorayme
> In article
> <1191648148.650578.224...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
>
>
>
> zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On 6 Okt., 07:03, dorayme
> > > In article
> > > <1191645233.191421.177...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > Im using xhtml 1.0 strict and both tml and css validates, but no
> > > > matter what i do, i can't get overflow:auto to work in IE and i wou=
ld
> > > > really like to get rit of that scroll bar when it isn't needed.
>
> > > > html:
> > > >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/index.htm
>
> > > > css:
> > > >http://www.g33kz-inn.org/test/includes/css/style.css
>
> > > > Thanks
>
> > > What is this all about:
>
> > > head {overflow: auto;}
>
> > > ?
>
> > > Look at your html (or xhtml if you like), what is the explanation
> > > of the divs and
. It does not seem to make a lot of sense?
> > > Validity is one thing. Sense is another. Make the page a little
> > > more realistic and let's see.
>
> > > --
> > > dorayme
>
> > What do you want me to do? put some content on the site? That has
> > absolutely nothing to do with the problem.
> > I have a working site and whether or not it makes sence doesnt matter,
> > only the problem and the solution.
>
> You have not explained what your head {overflow: auto;} is doing.
> I was puzzled by this? Anyway, I see no problem with scrollbars
> when this is removed in IE 6 (I cannot now test in IE7 I am
> afraid).
I you do not know what overflow auto does, you are definently not able
to help.
I IE 6, as i am using, you allways have a visible scrollbar in the
right of your browser, regardless of how much contents there is on the
site.
This can usually be fixed with overflow auto.
>
> I removed various height: auto s too, these are defaults.
Yes, but they are nice to have in the development fase.
>
> I worry about your code when you are putting px font sizes and px
> heights for footers that can be too small for a user upped font
> and other things. It is not always easy to know what is causing
> problems until the simple things are all fixed right. You are
> more confident than me. I guess you are not in a mood to hear
> about other things... like you need some sort of reason to use
> xhtml rather than html, have you got one? It is confusing to call
> classes and ids after normal elements, it is bad practice to use
> px for fonts, it always helps to make a problem a bit realistic
> if you are not sure what is causing the problem...
I am allways ready to listen to good advice, but your "advice" dont
help.
I need to make overflow:auto work.
Everything else is exactly as i want it for now.
btw, links has been updated.
>
> --
> dorayme- Skjul tekst i anf=F8rselstegn -
>
> - Vis tekst i anf=F8rselstegn -
In article
<1191655025.555054.198890@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
zacariaz@gmail.com wrote:
> > You have not explained what your head {overflow: auto;} is doing.
> > I was puzzled by this? Anyway, I see no problem with scrollbars
> > when this is removed in IE 6 (I cannot now test in IE7 I am
> > afraid).
>
> I you do not know what overflow auto does, you are definently not able
> to help.
It was more a question about the head bit rather than the
overflow. I have never seen this before, just asking you?
Anyway, I took another look at my WinIE and yes, there is a
vertical scrollbar field ready to be activated if need be.
Why don't you try html {overflow: auto;} rather than head...?
--
dorayme
dorayme
news:doraymeRidThis-5741AD.17583906102007@news-vip.optusnet. com.au:
[snip]
> It was more a question about the head bit rather than the
> overflow. I have never seen this before, just asking you?
[snip]
Think head swelling, without an auto overflow the eyes may pop out.
--
BootNic Saturday October 6, 2007 4:11 AM
One must learn by doing the thing, for though you think you know it,
you have no certainty until you try.
*Aristotle*
On 6 Okt., 09:58, dorayme
> In article
> <1191655025.555054.198...@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
>
> zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > You have not explained what your head {overflow: auto;} is doing.
> > > I was puzzled by this? Anyway, I see no problem with scrollbars
> > > when this is removed in IE 6 (I cannot now test in IE7 I am
> > > afraid).
>
> > I you do not know what overflow auto does, you are definently not able
> > to help.
>
> It was more a question about the head bit rather than the
> overflow. I have never seen this before, just asking you?
>
> Anyway, I took another look at my WinIE and yes, there is a
> vertical scrollbar field ready to be activated if need be.
>
> Why don't you try html {overflow: auto;} rather than head...?
>
> --
> dorayme
Thanks, that worked.
I dont know what its all about, sometimes it work in body, sometimes
in head, and now apperently in html.
Well problem solved
In article
<1191658798.018742.135940@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
zacariaz@gmail.com wrote:
> On 6 Okt., 09:58, dorayme
> > In article
> > <1191655025.555054.198...@19g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > zacar...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > You have not explained what your head {overflow: auto;} is doing.
> > > > I was puzzled by this? Anyway, I see no problem with scrollbars
> > > > when this is removed in IE 6 (I cannot now test in IE7 I am
> > > > afraid).
> >
> > > I you do not know what overflow auto does, you are definently not able
> > > to help.
> >
> > It was more a question about the head bit rather than the
> > overflow. I have never seen this before, just asking you?
> >
> > Anyway, I took another look at my WinIE and yes, there is a
> > vertical scrollbar field ready to be activated if need be.
> >
> > Why don't you try html {overflow: auto;} rather than head...?
> >
> > --
> > dorayme
>
> Thanks, that worked.
>
> I dont know what its all about, sometimes it work in body, sometimes
> in head, and now apperently in html.
>
> Well problem solved
I should have picked this up earlier. Truth is, I would never
dream of worrying about scroll bars and most things to do with
them goes in one ear and out the other and I was thrown by your
styling the head element, never seen this?
Plus I was quite distracted this avo, I dropped my toy helicopter
controller. I opened it up and re-soldered bits that had broken,
I have lost the nice led lights and two of the three channels,
but I can still fly it on one channel now that I have made what
repairs I could. So, not bad really, I can fly the helicopter and
you can have no scroll bars.
--
dorayme
In article
BootNic
> dorayme
> news:doraymeRidThis-5741AD.17583906102007@news-vip.optusnet. com.au:
>
> [snip]
> > It was more a question about the head bit rather than the
> > overflow. I have never seen this before, just asking you?
> [snip]
>
> Think head swelling, without an auto overflow the eyes may pop out.
Yes...
--
dorayme
C'mon, its just one of those things that annoys me. Admitet, im a
perfectionist and a minimalist, if it has not purpose it dont want it
there!
Anyway, you are saying some things about the design, i dont quite
understand what you mean.
Though i have just started designing it, i would like some advise.
zacariaz@gmail.com wrote:
> Thanks, that worked.
>
> I dont know what its all about, sometimes it work in body, sometimes
> in head, and now apperently in html.
Its should never work in the head, partly what dorayme was getting at,
the HEAD is not part of the displayed presentational part of a webpage.
Essentially always:
head { display: none; }
so overflow on an element *not* displayed is meaningless.
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
In article
<1191671242.589757.305620@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
zacariaz@gmail.com wrote:
> C'mon, its just one of those things that annoys me. Admitet, im a
> perfectionist and a minimalist, if it has not purpose it dont want it
> there!
>
> Anyway, you are saying some things about the design, i dont quite
> understand what you mean.
> Though i have just started designing it, i would like some advise.
Good morning from Sydney, zacariaz. Perhaps you are using Google
to post messages? Please quote what it is you are replying to
first. This is a newsgroup and many of us have newsreaders, some
of us have online readers which do not store the contexts. It
helps to quote the relevant bits, things like who and what you
are replying to, the example url you are referring to, whatever
is particularly relevant.
There were some important issues, if I recall, about your coding
that, being a perfectionist, you would appreciate to look into. I
recall making some remarks. Which ones did you not quite
understand? I remember the font-size remark I think? You were
happy to specify font-size in pxs. This is not a good idea
because users of Internet Explorer cannot then easily change the
font size to suit their eyes. It also not a good idea because it
then lulls you into the bad practice of thinking you can control
a design this way, you think maybe the font is fixed and you can
fit it into yet another px dimensioned box (I recall your footer
being so dimensioned). But this is not so for many very good
browsers: the font size can be easily changed, the box will stay
fixed and the text will break out of the box. Not much good for
something like a footer in many designs!
--
dorayme
zacariaz@gmail.com wrote:
> C'mon, its just one of those things that annoys me. Admitet, im a
> perfectionist and a minimalist, if it has not purpose it dont want it
> there!
>
> Anyway, you are saying some things about the design, i dont quite
> understand what you mean.
> Though i have just started designing it, i would like some advise.
If you're a minimalist, stop inserting pointless CSS in an attempt to
control whether or not the browser has a scrollbar. That's the browser's
business.