Background image 100% of browser screen default.

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Dave Kelly, Aug 11, 2007.

  1. Dave Kelly

    Dave Kelly Guest

    I want the background image to be the width of the default screen no
    matter what the browser has set.

    What does the code look like?

    BODY { background-image: url(picture.gif); background-width: 100%;}
    or is it background-width: auto ?

    I read around in W3C and did not find anything that looked correct.

    TIA
    Dave

    --
    A little rum in the morning coffee. Just to clear the cobwebs, ya know.
     
    Dave Kelly, Aug 11, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. On 2007-08-11, Dave Kelly wrote:
    > I want the background image to be the width of the default screen no
    > matter what the browser has set.


    There is no way to do that.

    You could try using z-index with <img....

    > What does the code look like?
    >
    > BODY { background-image: url(picture.gif); background-width: 100%;}
    > or is it background-width: auto ?
    >
    > I read around in W3C and did not find anything that looked correct.


    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Aug 12, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Dave Kelly

    Dave Kelly Guest

    Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > On 2007-08-11, Dave Kelly wrote:
    >> I want the background image to be the width of the default screen no
    >> matter what the browser has set.

    >
    > There is no way to do that.
    >
    > You could try using z-index with <img....

    Chris...
    Thanks for your feedback. I will let the issue die.
    --
    A little rum in the morning coffee. Just to clear the cobwebs, ya know.
     
    Dave Kelly, Aug 12, 2007
    #3
  4. Dave Kelly

    Dave Kelly Guest

    Hi all.........
    Its me again.
    I was guilty of humanities most cumbersome character defect. Making a
    mountain out of a mole hill.

    Here is what I finally wound up with and it turns out to be exactly what
    I wanted to achieve. And it was so simple to do.

    Please realize that this is an early part of a work in progress. I know
    there is errors in the code. I'll fix that later, its time for me to go
    to bed.

    http://www.texasflyfishers.org/guide.htm

    --
    A little rum in the morning coffee. Just to clear the cobwebs, ya know.
     
    Dave Kelly, Aug 12, 2007
    #4
  5. Scripsit Dave Kelly:

    > Hi all.........
    > Its me again.


    You're supposed to quote or paraphrase what you are commenting on when you
    send a comment.

    > Here is what I finally wound up with and it turns out to be exactly
    > what I wanted to achieve. And it was so simple to do.


    And quite different from what you asked. You have now set a fixed centered
    background image. Your main mistake was that you didn't explain what you
    wanted to achieve in terms of visual impression, just an assumed technical
    approach (as in the Subject line).

    > http://www.texasflyfishers.org/guide.htm


    Well, it might be what you really wanted, but it _looks_ like a baby or an
    ape has been given your page and a pen to draw with, and it happened to mess
    up your content and not the available empty space (of which the page mainly
    consists, so it was really bad luck).

    Why make the text less readable with a background image like that?

    Or to take another perspective: If the image is useful or pretty, why make
    it less useful and less pretty by spilling some text over it?

    Positioning the image (as background) into the upper left corner so that you
    carefully _avoid_ making it cover the text might be a much better idea.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Aug 12, 2007
    #5
  6. Dave Kelly

    El Kabong Guest

    "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote in message
    news:Siyvi.205860$...
    > You're supposed to quote or paraphrase what you are commenting on when you
    > send a comment.


    Get a life, Yucky.

    > Well, it might be what you really wanted, but it _looks_ like a baby or an
    > ape has been given your page and a pen to draw with, and it happened to
    > mess up your content and not the available empty space (of which the page
    > mainly consists, so it was really bad luck).


    Actually, I kind of like it. It's kind of a neat way to show our beloved
    Texas coastline from Sabine
    Pass to the Rio Grande.

    > Positioning the image (as background) into the upper left corner so that
    > you carefully _avoid_ making it cover the text might be a much better
    > idea.
    >


    Maybe, maybe not. It's your baby, Dave. Do it the way _you_ like it.


    Bravo, Dave. I'll be checking your site often.

    El
     
    El Kabong, Aug 12, 2007
    #6
  7. El Kabong wrote:
    > "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote in message
    > news:Siyvi.205860$...
    >> You're supposed to quote or paraphrase what you are commenting on when you
    >> send a comment.

    >
    > Get a life, Yucky.
    >
    >> Well, it might be what you really wanted, but it _looks_ like a baby or an
    >> ape has been given your page and a pen to draw with, and it happened to
    >> mess up your content and not the available empty space (of which the page
    >> mainly consists, so it was really bad luck).

    >
    > Actually, I kind of like it. It's kind of a neat way to show our beloved
    > Texas coastline from Sabine
    > Pass to the Rio Grande.
    >


    Wow, didn't see that at first! As an artist I can say there are some
    problems in design. I would not be so brutality blunt as Jukka but his
    point is valid.

    To OP if you want to do such as a "watermark" with text overlaid you
    have to make special considerations with the image. If the recognition
    of the image is important and not just an abstract design then your
    image should be clearer in its design. Maybe a touch of green fill to
    the land-side and blue to the gulf-side to improve recognition that we
    are looking at a coastline and not a doodle. The fill could quickly fade
    if your wish to emphasize the coastline. Next because this image is
    deployed as a watermark you need to modify it so it does not obscure the
    text. Desaturate the color and|or lower the contrast and|or blur and
    soften the image.


    >> Positioning the image (as background) into the upper left corner so that
    >> you carefully _avoid_ making it cover the text might be a much better
    >> idea.
    >>


    Another possibility, but I still say if this is supposed to be the Texas
    coastline it should clear as to what we are looking at.


    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Aug 12, 2007
    #7
  8. Why do you say that?


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups.
    Except in Thunderbird, which can't filter that well.
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
     
    Blinky the Shark, Aug 12, 2007
    #8
  9. Dave Kelly

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sun, 12 Aug 2007 14:14:19
    GMT El Kabong scribed:

    >> Well, it might be what you really wanted, but it _looks_ like a baby
    >> or an ape has been given your page and a pen to draw with, and it
    >> happened to mess up your content and not the available empty space
    >> (of which the page mainly consists, so it was really bad luck).

    >
    > Actually, I kind of like it. It's kind of a neat way to show our
    > beloved Texas coastline from Sabine
    > Pass to the Rio Grande.


    The Texas coastline? Well that's a relief. I thought I had a noodle on my
    screen that just wouldn't wash off.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
     
    Neredbojias, Aug 12, 2007
    #9
  10. Dave Kelly

    dorayme Guest

    In article <7521a$46bf291c$40cba7be$>,
    "Jonathan N. Little" <> wrote:

    > El Kabong wrote:
    > > "Jukka K. Korpela" <> wrote in message
    > > news:Siyvi.205860$...


    > >> Well, it might be what you really wanted, but it _looks_ like a baby or an
    > >> ape has been given your page and a pen to draw with, and it happened to
    > >> mess up your content and not the available empty space (of which the page
    > >> mainly consists, so it was really bad luck).

    > >
    > > Actually, I kind of like it. It's kind of a neat way to show our beloved
    > > Texas coastline from Sabine
    > > Pass to the Rio Grande.
    > >

    >
    > Wow, didn't see that at first! As an artist I can say there are some
    > problems in design. I would not be so brutality blunt as Jukka but his
    > point is valid.


    Never mind the peccadillo about the coastline background, in
    Safari, the empty spaces taking up valuable browser height seem
    to have no function at all. OP might care to look into that
    issue. See the page under different font size conditions in
    different browsers.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Aug 12, 2007
    #10
  11. Dave Kelly

    El Kabong Guest

    "Neredbojias" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns998A6C437671Ananopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161...

    >
    > The Texas coastline? Well that's a relief. I thought I had a noodle on
    > my
    > screen that just wouldn't wash off.


    Were you checking to see if the pasta was done?

    El
     
    El Kabong, Aug 12, 2007
    #11
  12. Dave Kelly

    dorayme Guest

    In article <5eKvi.12032$SV4.9442@trnddc08>,
    "El Kabong" <> wrote:

    >
    > "Neredbojias" <> wrote in message
    > news:Xns998A6C437671Ananopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161...
    >
    > >
    > > The Texas coastline? Well that's a relief. I thought I had a noodle on
    > > my
    > > screen that just wouldn't wash off.

    >
    > Were you checking to see if the pasta was done?


    Boji, now that Luigi is no longer with us (sob...) to explain to
    you what this is about, I feel obliged to do it myself. Throwing
    pasta at a flat vertical and seeing if it sticks or not is
    claimed by some to be a measure of a satisfactory level of
    cooking. But it is not reliable unless you use the very same
    surface and observe finer details like the rate of slippage if
    any, also the bit fished out of the pot should truly
    representative of the rest and so on. Too many things to go into
    at this point. I might have to knock up a page on it for Aunty
    Dorayme's kitchen when I have time.

    You can conduct a little experiment of your own if you doubt any
    of this to confirm at least part of the story. The part easily
    confirmed is that uncooked dry pasta will bounce off if thrown
    with any force at all.

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Aug 12, 2007
    #12
  13. Dave Kelly

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sun, 12 Aug 2007 20:39:29
    GMT El Kabong scribed:

    >
    > "Neredbojias" <> wrote in message
    > news:Xns998A6C437671Ananopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161...
    >
    >>
    >> The Texas coastline? Well that's a relief. I thought I had a noodle
    >> on my
    >> screen that just wouldn't wash off.

    >
    > Were you checking to see if the pasta was done?


    Well, since it was green, I was checking to see if the pasta was moldy or
    alive.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
     
    Neredbojias, Aug 13, 2007
    #13
  14. Dave Kelly

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Sun, 12 Aug 2007 21:17:02
    GMT dorayme scribed:

    >> Were you checking to see if the pasta was done?

    >
    > Boji, now that Luigi is no longer with us (sob...) to explain to
    > you what this is about, I feel obliged to do it myself. Throwing
    > pasta at a flat vertical and seeing if it sticks or not is
    > claimed by some to be a measure of a satisfactory level of
    > cooking. But it is not reliable unless you use the very same
    > surface and observe finer details like the rate of slippage if
    > any, also the bit fished out of the pot should truly
    > representative of the rest and so on. Too many things to go into
    > at this point. I might have to knock up a page on it for Aunty
    > Dorayme's kitchen when I have time.


    Yep, you're right, that about sums up my expertise in the art of cooking.
    I could burn a can of soup even if I peel the label off first.

    > You can conduct a little experiment of your own if you doubt any
    > of this to confirm at least part of the story. The part easily
    > confirmed is that uncooked dry pasta will bounce off if thrown
    > with any force at all.


    Actually, I have tried this with bougars, but they just don't seem to
    bounce worth a snot! Perhaps I have one of those recoilless flatscreens
    which simply aren't much help in the pursuit of culinary or probiscal
    pastimes.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
     
    Neredbojias, Aug 13, 2007
    #14
  15. Dave Kelly

    Dave Kelly Guest

    This is my thread so I am going to hijack it for another question.

    Is the right click function for the use of the browser only or can I
    intercept the signal and use it for my own desires?

    I would like to left click to go to the URL and right click to go to
    another folder where I can read/write a report on that person.

    Is that possible?

    TIA
    Dave

    --
    A little rum in the morning coffee. Just to clear the cobwebs, ya know.
     
    Dave Kelly, Aug 13, 2007
    #15
  16. Dave Kelly

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Mon, 13 Aug 2007 01:31:40 GMT
    Dave Kelly scribed:

    > This is my thread so I am going to hijack it for another question.
    >
    > Is the right click function for the use of the browser only or can I
    > intercept the signal and use it for my own desires?
    >
    > I would like to left click to go to the URL and right click to go to
    > another folder where I can read/write a report on that person.
    >
    > Is that possible?


    Only in the most basic of browsers. Most of them have checkbox options to
    ignore that sort of code in order to prevent right-click lockout.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
     
    Neredbojias, Aug 13, 2007
    #16
  17. Scripsit Dave Kelly:

    > This is my thread so I am going to hijack it for another question.


    That's so idiotic an idea that it's almost amusing. Of course, you now
    hijack your own second question to protect it from all those readers of this
    group who are experts on its topic - after all, busy experts will skip
    threads that have uninteresting (to them) Subject lines.

    > Is the right click function for the use of the browser only


    No, many other programs have click functions too.

    > or can I
    > intercept the signal and use it for my own desires?


    You can, but you should not, especially since you had to ask.

    > I would like to left click to go to the URL and right click to go to
    > another folder where I can read/write a report on that person.


    Stop wanting that. Use different links for different purposes. That way, you
    will let all people access the information, even if (for example) it is
    physically impossible to them to click on anything.

    In an ideal world, we might have multi-destination links defined as part of
    HTML and implemented in brilliant ways. In this real world, we have to stop
    dreaming, since attempts at implementing such ideas in a per-site way will
    just become a nightmare. Your site is not an island, and your visitors spend
    most of their time on other sites, and they just don't want to learn (or
    just won't learn) a new paradigm of linking and link use when they drop in.

    > Is that possible?


    With severe limitations, it is, but you should not even try.

    Since this is alt.html in all its vagueness and charterlessness, someone may
    well pop up an throw some JavaScript code at you and tell you to put it into
    an onrightclick="..." attribute or something like that. If that happens,
    just duck.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
     
    Jukka K. Korpela, Aug 13, 2007
    #17
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Andreas Klemt
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    452
    Marina
    Jul 28, 2003
  2. Not4u
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    1,093
    Not4u
    Feb 27, 2004
  3. John
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    715
  4. fred
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    337
    Zifud
    Mar 17, 2005
  5. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    978
Loading...

Share This Page