background-color: #777777 not working in CSS

Kevin Yu · Aug 3, 2004

When I declare on HTML page

<LINK href="mycss.css" type="text/css" rel=stylesheet />
....
<BODY class=myclass>

in mycss.css

BODY { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Geneva; background-image: url(images/back.jpg); }

BODY.myclass { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 15px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Geneva; background-color: #777777; }
....

the background-color in the second declaration is NOT taken but the "normal" background image back.jpg is used for the background.

How do I get #777777 as background-color ?

Kevin

Els · Aug 4, 2004

Kevin Yu wrote:

[snip]

To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP had a
follow-up set to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets.
That's where everybody's answers went.

rf · Aug 4, 2004

Els

Kevin Yu wrote:

[snip]

To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP had a
follow-up set to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets.
That's where everybody's answers went.

Dickhead :-(
<adds OP to killfile>

The OP, not you Els

Els · Aug 4, 2004

rf said:
Els

Kevin Yu wrote:

[snip]

To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP
had a follow-up set to
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets. That's where
everybody's answers went.

Click to expand...

Dickhead :-(
<adds OP to killfile>

The OP, not you Els

I know that

Btw, I think maybe the FAQ (sorry, don't know which ones) aren't
too clear when they state that in case of crossposting it's a
good idea to set a follow-up to one of the groups. Maybe there
should be a clear(er) wording of "mention the follow-up in the
body of the message!"

rf · Aug 4, 2004

Els

I know that

Btw, I think maybe the FAQ (sorry, don't know which ones) aren't
too clear when they state that in case of crossposting it's a
good idea to set a follow-up to one of the groups. Maybe there
should be a clear(er) wording of "mention the follow-up in the
body of the message!"

I was (oddly enough) reading an FAQ somewhere today wherein it was stated in
big black writing that thou shall include, in the body of the post, the fact
that follow-ups have been set. I'm not sure I agree with followup's anyway.
If the post was important enough to cross post then surely both groups
should recieve all the messages, otherwise why crosspost in the first place,
but that is another story.

I had my time wasted because I don't audit ciwas and didn't see *any*
messages and I suspect it was only your good grace in posting a message
direct to ah that stopped even more people wasting their time.

Bloody trivial question anyway, don't know why I bothered

Els · Aug 4, 2004

rf said:
Els

I was (oddly enough) reading an FAQ somewhere today wherein
it was stated in big black writing that thou shall include,
in the body of the post, the fact that follow-ups have been
set. I'm not sure I agree with followup's anyway. If the
post was important enough to cross post then surely both
groups should recieve all the messages, otherwise why
crosspost in the first place, but that is another story.

True. Let's change the "FAQ somewhere"

I had my time wasted because I don't audit ciwas

I do, and I first answered the question, as alt.html is
alfabetically listed above ciwas, and then saw 19 people had
done the same. (Well, only 13 answered, and 6 responded to
those answers). So I had my time wasted *plus* was feeling
like a fool 2 minutes later ;-)

and didn't
see *any* messages and I suspect it was only your good
grace in posting a message direct to ah that stopped even
more people wasting their time.

That's why I posted that message

Bloody trivial question anyway, don't know why I bothered

It's automatic, a reflex. You see a question, you know the
answer, you respond. Nothing you can do about it

Dylan Parry · Aug 4, 2004

Els said:
I do, and I first answered the question, as alt.html is
alfabetically listed above ciwas, and then saw 19 people had
done the same. (Well, only 13 answered, and 6 responded to
those answers). So I had my time wasted *plus* was feeling
like a fool 2 minutes later ;-)

I was only the second person to reply... not knowing someone else had
given a perfectly fine answer before mine. Incidentally, I gave the same
solution as you, Els, not the rest of the peeps.

Even being the first person to waste my time, I felt dirty and used <g>

Els · Aug 4, 2004

Dylan said:
I was only the second person to reply... not knowing
someone else had given a perfectly fine answer before mine.
Incidentally, I gave the same solution as you, Els, not the
rest of the peeps.

You're saying you actually read and paid attention to all the
answers? Now that's wasting your time! ;-)

Even being the first person to waste my time, I felt dirty
and used <g>

You suppose we could sue the OP for abuse then?

lime · Aug 4, 2004

Kevin said:
[snip]

To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP had a
follow-up set to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets.
That's where everybody's answers went.

Aww, I wondered where my reply went....

Slideshow not working properly	2	Jan 7, 2023
Working on mobile css menu with plenty of frustration!	2	Dec 29, 2022
Positioning CSS components	1	Nov 16, 2023
How to position the tooltip comment on these buttons?	9	Nov 4, 2023
Justify-content not working	1	Mar 29, 2021
Background image not showing up on html page	3	Sep 23, 2023
Why is the e.target not working here?	1	Dec 29, 2022
Help with my responsive home page	2	Dec 14, 2022

background-color: #777777 not working in CSS

Kevin Yu

Els

rf

Els

rf

Els

Dylan Parry

Els

lime

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Latest Threads