New Site Design - Problems printing web pages (only background image appears)

Discussion in 'HTML' started by bidarsan@hotmail.com, Sep 5, 2006.

  1. Guest

    I've been working on redesigning my site, and came to an "example"
    page. I have been trying to print a representative page (see
    www.orangefrogproductions.com/ofp2o_home.shtml from my test site) to
    PDF, and only get the background image. I have been designing sites for
    a number of years, and seem to remember having this problem some time
    in the past, but, for the life of me, cannot remember how to fix it.
    (Besides, back then, it probably had more to do with frames.) The page
    looks great in IE6 (and is generic enough, I believe will look pretty
    much the same elsewhere), but I have a positioning problem in Firefox
    (page-bottom div overlays near the top of the page, which I think can
    be fixed by adding a "position: relative", or the like to the div). The
    problem seems to be in printing the page "as is". The problem also
    shows in Print Preview. (only the background appears).

    I have a lot of stuff in my CSSs, and am using most, if not all of
    them. Most classes are named "generically", and work for me. Don't get
    on me about that, huh? ;-) I am also using server-side includes (SSIs)
    for my sidebar, page top (banner) and page bottom (linkbar/copyright
    info), and don't believe that is the problem. My index page at
    http://www.orangefrogproductions.com/ofp2/ prints, but doesn't use the
    SSIs, maybe they ARE part of the problem...(?)

    My CSSs are at www.orangefrogproductions.com/ofp2/css/ofp2.css (main
    CSS) and www.orangefrogproductions.com/ofp2/css/ofp2p.css (print css).
    I have a print CSS because I am going to drop the background, sidebar,
    breadcrumbs and linkbar from the print, and attempt to add the links in
    one of a couple of ways (see
    http://www.alistapart.com/articles/improvingprint). I also plan to
    change the colors to black or gray, and a few other odds and ends.

    For the print CSS, I have commented out most, if not all, of the
    relavent "floats", and have played around with positions. I have also
    tried commenting out bits and pieces, and cannot find what is causing
    the problem. (BTW: My original site pages -
    www.orangefrogproductions.com - print fine, and when I change the
    absolute position of the full-page div to static, it appears I will
    only get one page of printout, where when it's left alone, I will get
    11 pages. But again, only the background prints.) I have removed (and
    replaced) the image, the color. I'm at my wit's end! (Showing my age,
    huh?)

    Does ANYONE have any idea what the problem is and how to fix it without
    going through 150+ pages?

    I thank you in advance for any help and insight you can give me.

    Bill S.
     
    , Sep 5, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. bigdaddybs Guest

    bigdaddybs, Sep 7, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Arne Guest

    Re: New Site Design - Problems printing web pages (only backgroundimage appears)

    Once upon a time *bigdaddybs* wrote:
    > Sorry... Must have manually typed the link in and forgot the ofp2
    > directory... try
    > http://www.orangefrogproductions.com/ofp2/ofp2o_home.shtml


    If I'd know what you are talking about?

    * How to quote: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html#toc2
    * From Google: http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/

    --
    /Arne

    Proud User of SeaMonkey. Get your free copy:
    http://www.mozilla.org/projects/seamonkey/
     
    Arne, Sep 7, 2006
    #3
  4. bigdaddybs Guest

    Arne wrote:
    > If I'd know what you are talking about?
    >
    > /Arne


    Thank you. I appreciate your help *sarcasm here*.

    I would have thought it obvious to anyone who had actually read (and
    tried to click the link) on my first post. And, that since no one had
    said anything that they would simply read through the first, notice the
    2nd was from ME, and realize what I was talking about.

    In case you missed it, I entered the url incorrectly (manually) in the
    first post. The second post corrected that error, and I didn't think
    anyone would want to see the whole (or even part) of the first post,
    again. I apologize for confusing the issue.

    Thanks for the links, anyway. *genuine thanks*.

    BS
     
    bigdaddybs, Sep 10, 2006
    #4
  5. On 2006-09-10, bigdaddybs wrote:
    > Arne wrote:
    >> If I'd know what you are talking about?
    >>
    >> /Arne

    >
    > Thank you. I appreciate your help *sarcasm here*.
    >
    > I would have thought it obvious to anyone who had actually read (and
    > tried to click the link) on my first post.


    What post was that? You do not know whether anyone has seen it, read
    it, or forgotten it.


    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
     
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Sep 10, 2006
    #5
  6. Re: New Site Design - Problems printing web pages (only backgroundimage appears)

    bigdaddybs wrote:
    > Arne wrote:
    >> If I'd know what you are talking about?
    >>
    >> /Arne

    >
    > Thank you. I appreciate your help *sarcasm here*.
    >
    > I would have thought it obvious to anyone who had actually read (and
    > tried to click the link) on my first post. And, that since no one had
    > said anything that they would simply read through the first, notice the
    > 2nd was from ME, and realize what I was talking about.
    >
    > In case you missed it, I entered the url incorrectly (manually) in the
    > first post. The second post corrected that error, and I didn't think
    > anyone would want to see the whole (or even part) of the first post,
    > again. I apologize for confusing the issue.
    >
    > Thanks for the links, anyway. *genuine thanks*.


    Since you genuinely appear not to understand I will try to explain why
    your are not getting the help that you believe that you are entitled to.

    This is Usenet not Google Groups. What does that mean? Well, it means
    in Usenet when accessed with a real newsreader all the posts of a
    threaded are *NOT* displayed as a single column of posts on a web page.
    Google Groups 'interprets and reformats' Usenet to appear that way. So
    users with newsreader may not *see* your previous post *unless* your
    reprint (i.e., quote) the previous bits to which your are referring to.
    As such your comments appear out of context and are meaningless.

    "Why is a duck?"

    So what you should have done was read the links that Arne posted:


    > Arne wrote:
    >> If I'd know what you are talking about?
    >>
    >> * How to quote: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html#toc2
    >> * From Google: http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/



    And then you would have realized you should have preceded your URL
    correction with a quote of what your where correcting!

    Lastly, and you may pickup on this if you read about Usenet a bit. It
    can be a very useful resource for discussion. And "discussion" is a key
    word here because what happens here are "conversations" and must be
    approached as such. You can learn quite a bit, but it is not a help
    desk. Many are willing to help be they are not obligated to do so. No
    one is paying us.

    Now taking a cursory look at your site:

    If this is a redesign I think you should design with "strict" and not
    "transitional" doctype, Keeping IE out of quirks mode can alleviate a
    lot of headaches. It is great that you are using stylesheets and not
    deprecated markup, but I would say two things about what I see--your CSS
    appears *way too* complicated and over managed, you may have more
    predicable behavior and better artistic results by simplifying it.
    Secondly your CSS seems to employ too many IE hacks (which also can be
    related to over management) If in your base design you allow for some
    flexibility as to how your page will display in different browsers your
    results may be better. I noticed that regardless of how wide my browser
    is (even a 2048 pixels wide!) your page is *always* wider with a
    horizontal scrollbar! That is a fundamental design error. You have made
    your basic layout blocks of your page add up to more that 100%

    Note: Don't use IE for your standard here. Use a real web browser for
    design (then tweak if you have to to get IE to cooperate).

    Problem may be that you have DIV "main-page" set to 100% width and your
    BODY has default margins and padding (>0) AND you have a floated navbar
    that makes your total width >100%. but with 3000+ lines of CSS I do not
    have the time to debug for you.


    --
    Take care,

    Jonathan
    -------------------
    LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    Jonathan N. Little, Sep 10, 2006
    #6
  7. bigdaddybs Guest

    Ok... I give... I apologize to all concerned. I have used usenet
    before, but you're right in that I am accessing it thought google
    groups. Again, I apologize. (And no... I don't believe I'm ENTITLED to
    anything. It's just that Arne's comment hit me the wrong way. Yes, I
    understand the "Many are willing to help be they are not obligated to
    do so.", and never said anything about "obligation". I do understand
    about quoting, but am more used to threaded message boards and forums,
    so DID misunderstand.) I apologize to you, too, Arne.

    Attempting to CSS everything may be the problem, but again, I'm
    dropping depreciated language, and doing what I have read and learned
    about. I'm self-taught, so am learning as I go. So far, throughout the
    site, I've used almost all of the ids and classes I have listed.

    One thing... while there may be a lot of lines in the CSS, I also
    commented it profusely, so I (and anyone else who actually reads it)
    knows what I did, and hopefully WHY. (A carryover from my programming
    days, when documentation was important!) And, many of the attributes
    are listed VERTICALLY, rather than horizontally. I used abbreviations
    for classes, so I can use them in numerous places, even if they were
    designed originally for a specific one (fcr = font color red, hbbqrly =
    heavy border/blockquote replacement/light yellow, etc). Many of the
    "lines" of the CSS have to do with cascading the attributes for various
    pieces and parts. Maybe there's a better way, but it works for me, at
    least this time.

    To the original problem -- I managed to get my page to print well
    enough for my example. I did reconfigure the divs in the CSS, removing
    the negative margins, removing the Column class float and position
    attributes (left the class for the "make the columns the same length"
    thing), positioning the main-page div (static) to left: 0, top: 0 with
    a 130px left margin, and floating the sidebar left with margin 0. I
    also removed (commented out) a full-page > full-sidebar setup. I played
    around a little with the other divs (the odd-named ones) and got
    everything to print correctly. A lot apparently had to do with
    positioning and floating. (I'd heard that before, but...)

    To be sure, it still doesn't print correctly (ok... in IE6... still ...
    with the sidebar on the top page, and it leaves a large bottom margin
    on each page), but it was enough to create my example images using
    cropping, cut-and-paste. (Ok... I cheated... For this, it works... ;-)
    )

    Since the sidebar will NOT be part of the normal print, when all is
    said and done, I'm not too worried about it. (Plan on making it and
    linkbar divs display:none.) I'm also not too sure why the column class
    didn't handle the relative positioning, but at least it's to this
    point.

    I appreciate your comments. Next redo, (took three years to get to the
    point I wanted to, last time!) I'll try to "simplify" or name things
    better (especially IDs... the classes are too generic, far as I'm
    concerned, and the abbreviations make sense, again, at least to me ;-),
    and no one else "messes" with my personal webpage).

    I do appreciate constructive criticism (as opposed to complaining to
    complain or name-calling or not explaining what the problem is.)

    Thanks for your help.
    Bill

    PS: The page in question is at
    www.orangefrogproductions.com/ofp2/ofp2o_home.shtml, and I'm getting my
    information through
    http://groups.google.com/group/alt.html/browse_thread/thread/ccdfaaae63e1c448,
    which threads my first message at the top. Again, I apologize for the
    confusion. BS (my initials... Not saying... you know.)

    Jonathan N. Little wrote:
    > bigdaddybs wrote:
    > > Arne wrote:
    > >> If I'd know what you are talking about?
    > >>
    > >> /Arne

    > >
    > > Thank you. I appreciate your help *sarcasm here*.
    > >
    > > I would have thought it obvious to anyone who had actually read (and
    > > tried to click the link) on my first post. And, that since no one had
    > > said anything that they would simply read through the first, notice the
    > > 2nd was from ME, and realize what I was talking about.
    > >
    > > In case you missed it, I entered the url incorrectly (manually) in the
    > > first post. The second post corrected that error, and I didn't think
    > > anyone would want to see the whole (or even part) of the first post,
    > > again. I apologize for confusing the issue.
    > >
    > > Thanks for the links, anyway. *genuine thanks*.

    >
    > Since you genuinely appear not to understand I will try to explain why
    > your are not getting the help that you believe that you are entitled to.
    >
    > This is Usenet not Google Groups. What does that mean? Well, it means
    > in Usenet when accessed with a real newsreader all the posts of a
    > threaded are *NOT* displayed as a single column of posts on a web page.
    > Google Groups 'interprets and reformats' Usenet to appear that way. So
    > users with newsreader may not *see* your previous post *unless* your
    > reprint (i.e., quote) the previous bits to which your are referring to.
    > As such your comments appear out of context and are meaningless.
    >
    > "Why is a duck?"
    >
    > So what you should have done was read the links that Arne posted:
    >
    >
    > > Arne wrote:
    > >> If I'd know what you are talking about?
    > >>
    > >> * How to quote: http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html#toc2
    > >> * From Google: http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/

    >
    >
    > And then you would have realized you should have preceded your URL
    > correction with a quote of what your where correcting!
    >
    > Lastly, and you may pickup on this if you read about Usenet a bit. It
    > can be a very useful resource for discussion. And "discussion" is a key
    > word here because what happens here are "conversations" and must be
    > approached as such. You can learn quite a bit, but it is not a help
    > desk. Many are willing to help be they are not obligated to do so. No
    > one is paying us.
    >
    > Now taking a cursory look at your site:
    >
    > If this is a redesign I think you should design with "strict" and not
    > "transitional" doctype, Keeping IE out of quirks mode can alleviate a
    > lot of headaches. It is great that you are using stylesheets and not
    > deprecated markup, but I would say two things about what I see--your CSS
    > appears *way too* complicated and over managed, you may have more
    > predicable behavior and better artistic results by simplifying it.
    > Secondly your CSS seems to employ too many IE hacks (which also can be
    > related to over management) If in your base design you allow for some
    > flexibility as to how your page will display in different browsers your
    > results may be better. I noticed that regardless of how wide my browser
    > is (even a 2048 pixels wide!) your page is *always* wider with a
    > horizontal scrollbar! That is a fundamental design error. You have made
    > your basic layout blocks of your page add up to more that 100%
    >
    > Note: Don't use IE for your standard here. Use a real web browser for
    > design (then tweak if you have to to get IE to cooperate).
    >
    > Problem may be that you have DIV "main-page" set to 100% width and your
    > BODY has default margins and padding (>0) AND you have a floated navbar
    > that makes your total width >100%. but with 3000+ lines of CSS I do not
    > have the time to debug for you.
    >
    >
    > --
    > Take care,
    >
    > Jonathan
    > -------------------
    > LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
    > http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
     
    bigdaddybs, Sep 11, 2006
    #7
  8. dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    "bigdaddybs" <> wrote:

    > Ok... I give... I apologize to all concerned. I have used usenet
    > before, but you're right in that I am accessing it thought google
    > groups. Again, I apologize. (And no... I don't believe I'm ENTITLED to
    > anything. It's just that Arne's comment hit me the wrong way. Yes, I
    > understand the "Many are willing to help be they are not obligated to
    > do so.", and never said anything about "obligation". I do understand
    > about quoting, but am more used to threaded message boards and forums,
    > so DID misunderstand.) I apologize to you, too, Arne.


    What might induce you to stop top posting?

    --
    dorayme
     
    dorayme, Sep 11, 2006
    #8
    1. Advertising

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. Paul Sellis

    background image appears first

    Paul Sellis, Oct 22, 2003, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    569
    Sid Ismail
    Oct 22, 2003
  2. ross
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    3,633
    Mark Parnell
    Nov 5, 2003
  3. news.sbcglobal.net
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    15,207
    Mark Rae
    May 24, 2006
  4. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    461
  5. anothermark

    Mysterious code appears in web pages.

    anothermark, Dec 16, 2003, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    98
    McKirahan
    Dec 16, 2003
Loading...

Share This Page