playing with an expanding tree

[richard]

http://sample.1littleworld.com/menu2.html


The actual script is one from 4thorder.us.

With script off, it just shows the entire tree expanded.

I"ve checked it in FF2, Safari 3.5, Opera 9.5 and IE 7.

All but that blasted IE shows the tree nearly as intended.
For some reason, IE refuses to work with overflow:auto on the width.
Instead of a scroll bar, IE just expands the cell.
While I won't have that many cells that will that big of a problem, I
can work around that if need be.

Click on A then the first name in the list.


The nice thing about using the ul li is that CSS can be set up much
more efficiently.

 

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

http://sample.1littleworld.com/menu2.html


The actual script is one from 4thorder.us.

With script off, it just shows the entire tree expanded.

With unnecessary scrollbars all over the place.

 

[richard]

With unnecessary scrollbars all over the place.

<http://cfaj.freeshell.org/testing/littleuse.jpg>

Wahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!

So why scroll through one extreme long list just to get the section
you want to see?

 

[Travis Newbury]

http://sample.1littleworld.com/menu2.html
All but that blasted IE shows the tree nearly as intended....

bla bla bla...

I must say Richard you have beereally at it trying to learn. good for
you. Reminds me of Luigi and some guy a while back with Refrigerator
Website questions.

You are doing exactly what you should be doing while learning. Test,
try, succeed, learn, test ,try, fail, learn.

Good job.

 

[richard]

bla bla bla...

I must say Richard you have beereally at it trying to learn. good for
you. Reminds me of Luigi and some guy a while back with Refrigerator
Website questions.

You are doing exactly what you should be doing while learning. Test,
try, succeed, learn, test ,try, fail, learn.

Good job.

Thank you.

I learned a long time ago that even masters of their trade wind up
referring to manuals because they can't keep it all stored in their
head.
I put in a couple of hundred of hours writing the BASIC program that
let me develop this site without doing it by hand entirely. One of my
early versions took several hours to complete. Now, the time has come
down to less than an hour. As I continously experimented with various
ways to cut down the wasted time.

I didn't just slap this thing together in a couple of hours either. I
work on a small section, see what works and what doesn't.

My father used to say, "If I haven't learned something today, my day
is shot.".

I would like to learn flash and php. But where do you start? So called
tutorial sites give extremely basic lessons. What good is that? Show
me some real working examples I can use to play with and I'll learn by
doing.

That's basically how I learned the basics of html.
I've found that many, even here in this group, don't bother to at
least try and validate their code. I do. It helps me find errors I
missed. As well as learn.

 

[Travis Newbury]

I would like to learn flash and php. But where do you start? So called
tutorial sites give extremely basic lessons. What good is that? Show
me some real working examples I can use to play with and I'll learn by
doing.

There was a series of book about 10 years ago when I was doing
software development using Visual C++ called "How do I" The books
consisted of nothing more than questions like "How do I add items to a
listBox?", Then they would show you a working code example. Now there
is google.

 

[Allodoxaphobia]

There was a series of book about 10 years ago when I was doing
software development using Visual C++ called "How do I" The books
consisted of nothing more than questions like "How do I add items to a
listBox?", Then they would show you a working code example.

Now there is google.

However, authors and their books go through at least some semblance of
vetting before any ink is spilt.

'Information' found on web sites undergoes no such vetting. Sure,
there's post-publishing Reputation Development. But, there's a lot of
'bad stuff' (and 'good stuff') out there on obscure web sites.

Be careful out there.

Jonesy

 

[Travis Newbury]

'Information' found on web sites undergoes no such vetting. Sure,
there's post-publishing Reputation Development. But, there's a lot of
'bad stuff' (and 'good stuff') out there on obscure web sites.

Be careful out there.
Absolutely.

*** Killfiling google posts: <http://jonz.net/ng.htm>

Interesting you promote killfiling all Google posts, yet you replied
directly to me. I only post from google.

 

[Allodoxaphobia]

Interesting you promote killfiling all Google posts, yet you replied
directly to me. I only post from google.

I kill original Google posts -- not Google followups.

Doesn't eliminate ALL the crap coming from the Google 'interface' -- I
often see Google spammers doing followups to their own or other's posts.
And, sigh, far too many non-Google idjuts feel compelled to reply in a
hissy fit to the effluent posted by Drive-By Google spammers -- usually
re-posting the entire original payload. I get to see that, too.

But, the way I'm doing it _does_ improve the signal-to-noise ratio here!

Jonesy