Another question if someone doesn't mind answering this for me

K

Kate

I have a couple of questions if someone could shed some glorious light on
them for me I would be very grateful.

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/wwsfamilies/

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/wwsfamilies/main2.css

I have uploaded to my dump site above a page that I would like to use as the
basis for my layout on another site.

First question is that on the menu div I have height:100% set, but this
only shows in IE and Opera, Netscape and Firefox don't seem to support this.
I would preferably like to have the blue menu bar run the full length of the
page where there is page content past the immediate frame of view.

The second question is I have a horizontal scroll bar in again Netscape and
Firefox, but not in IE and Opera, any idea on how to get rid of it? I'm
sure I've missed something in the css, but for the life of me I can see the
tree for the wood. :-(

Many thanks in advance,
Kate
 
B

Barbara de Zoete

Please start using more appropriate subject lines. 'Another question'
doesn't mean a thing. 'Two column layout' and 'Scrollbar just in
Gecko-based browser' tell the world what your post is about.

I have a couple of questions if someone could shed some glorious light on
them for me I would be very grateful.

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/wwsfamilies/

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/wwsfamilies/main2.css

I have uploaded to my dump site above a page that I would like to use as
the
basis for my layout on another site.

First question is that on the menu div I have height:100% set, but this
only shows in IE and Opera, Netscape and Firefox don't seem to support
this.
I would preferably like to have the blue menu bar run the full length of
the page where there is page content past the immediate frame of view.

Ofcourse you do. So do many others. This question gets asked about fifty
times a year. So you wouldn't have to google any further back than
probably a week for an answer.
The second question is I have a horizontal scroll bar in again Netscape
and Firefox, but not in IE and Opera, any idea on how to get rid of it?
I'm
sure I've missed something in the css, but for the life of me I can see
the tree for the wood. :-(

This to is a very comon problem and question. Again, go to google for an
answer
<http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=nl&lr=&q=horizontal+scrollbar+firefox>

Please try to remember that this is not a helpdesk. Try put some effort in
finding an anwer yourself.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
 
U

Uncle Pirate

Kate said:
I have a couple of questions if someone could shed some glorious light on
them for me I would be very grateful.

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/wwsfamilies/

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/wwsfamilies/main2.css

I have uploaded to my dump site above a page that I would like to use as the
basis for my layout on another site.

First question is that on the menu div I have height:100% set, but this
only shows in IE and Opera, Netscape and Firefox don't seem to support this.
I would preferably like to have the blue menu bar run the full length of the
page where there is page content past the immediate frame of view.

You might try max-height and min-height to see if they'll give you what
you want. I've pretty much given up on using height as it never seems
to work the way I'd like.
The second question is I have a horizontal scroll bar in again Netscape and
Firefox, but not in IE and Opera, any idea on how to get rid of it? I'm
sure I've missed something in the css, but for the life of me I can see the
tree for the wood. :-(

Try setting your width to just under 100% or don't set width at all.
100% width + 1pt border + 1pt border = >100%, thus your horizontal
scroll bar. I doubt pt is what you want there, maybe px or 98%+1%+1% so
you can add it up?

--
Stan McCann "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/pirate.html
Webmaster/Computer Center Manager, NMSU at Alamogordo
Coordinator, Tularosa Basin Chapter, ABATE of NM; AMA#758681; COBB
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) :( http://motorcyclefun.org/Dcp_2068c.jpg
A zest for living must include a willingness to die. - R.A. Heinlein
 
K

Kate

Uncle Pirate said:
Kate wrote:

You might try max-height and min-height to see if they'll give you what
you want. I've pretty much given up on using height as it never seems
to work the way I'd like.


Try setting your width to just under 100% or don't set width at all.
100% width + 1pt border + 1pt border = >100%, thus your horizontal
scroll bar. I doubt pt is what you want there, maybe px or 98%+1%+1% so
you can add it up?

Many thanks Uncle Pirate, I'll give it a try. I have spent the last 24hrs
or so removing all padding, borders etc, just leaving three div of menu
(left column) content (middle) side column (right) set to 15%, 70%, 15% but
I still seem to have this horizontal scroll in the fore mentioned browsers.

And I have searched through google and other sites for answers, and have
done much reading to the point of pulling my hair out. In a two column
layout with div there doesn't seem to be any problem, everything works fine.
It's just when I use the three column layout. I thought it may be my css or
html that was causing the prob, but when I checked both with W3C they passed
fine. I do take your point though Barbara about the Subject title, my
apologise. You are right, it would be more helpful if I had used something
relating to my problem.

Have a good evening,
Kate
 
R

rf

Kate said:
First question is that on the menu div I have height:100% set, but this
only shows in IE and Opera, Netscape and Firefox don't seem to support
this.

The lack of a URL in your doctype is putting the former browsers into quirks
mode, where they incorrectly use your height as a percentage of the
viewport.

Supply a correct doctype (look at http://www.W3C.org for one) and all
browsers will treat height as a percentage of the containing box. Since that
menu div is floated it effectively has no containing box so the height is
not applicable and is ignored.
I would preferably like to have the blue menu bar run the full length of the
page where there is page content past the immediate frame of view.

This is not going to happen. There are various ways to simulate this, such
as using background colours.
<tinkers/>
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/menu.html

I have purposely turned on borders for all elements so you can see where
they go. You would of course turn them off in production.

Be sure to change your font size so you can see the "navbar" changing in
width.
The second question is I have a horizontal scroll bar in again Netscape and
Firefox, but not in IE and Opera,

It's the header thats causing the problem. Look up width in the CSS
reccomendations:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visudet.html#propdef-width

You have specified 100%, that is 100% of the headers containing box (which
is effectively the viewport). The 100% is that of the content. That is, the
bits inside the borders. Then you have added a border which makes the div
wider than the viewport by two pixels.

Once again you are running IE in quirks mode where is uses it's Very Broken
box model (as against the just Normally Broken one), which includes the size
of the borders in the width calculation, the borders are (incorrectly)
inside the width.

If you do not specify any width at all for that div then it will naturally
expand to fill the viewport. The browser knows how to handle this.

This is also why (in quirks mode) you have a permanent vertical scroll bar.
The height of your page is 100% plus the height of that header. This is
always larger than the viewport. It makes me want to scroll down there to
see what you are concealing under the fold :)

You have a few more issues.

Do not use the transitional DTD unless you have a Very Good Reason for doing
so. Use the strict one. This will prevent you from making a mistake and
using deprecated HTML.

Do not specify font size in pixels. This prevents IE users from changing the
font size to their liking, unless they use the accessibility options to
ignore your fonts entirely.

Don't style a div to be a header. Use a <h1> element. It is suspected that
search engines pay more attention to headings than other text on the page.

Don't position things absolutely (the top menu). When I change my font size
the rest of the graphics and sometimes the text overlaps that absolutely
positioned stuff. Simply put the menu inside the content div and let it flow
normally. At the moment the position of those menu items also depends on the
viewport width. A wide viewport causes the menu "bar" to seperate and look
odd. A narrow viewport causes the menu items ot overlap and look unreadable.

I would not float: left the centre column. I would specify left and right
margins as big as the left and right columns. That way you can use up all
the canvas instead of having an inch or so of vacant space at the rigth of
that middle column.

You have not specified a with for the left column. This is in fact an error.
The recommendations state that floated elements should have a width (unless
there is an intrinsic width). The way it is you are defaulting to the width
of the content, which you don't know.

When you do specify a width make it in ems. That way the width of that
column adjusts to the font size, not some arbitrary percentage of the
viewport. Same for the right column. Specify width in ems. In addition this
allows you to know exactly where those columns end and allows you to specify
a correct margin for the centre column.

Don't specify padding etc in points. Points are for print media. Use pixels
where you can be sure you actually do have for example 10 pixels. 10 points
results in some variable number of pixels depending on the DPI setting in
the operating system (hint this is different for a Mac (76 IIRC) than for
Windows (96)).

Don't specify padding in %. Use ems. Padding really relates to the size of
the font, not the width or height of the viewport.

Don't justify text. This is OK on paper but on a screen becomes hard to
read. There are simply not enough pixels to do it properly.

Lastly, simplify your CSS. You don't need to specify default things (float:
none;). Use the shorcuts. border-top: solid 1px black; is easier to read and
easier to maintain than all those border properties you are using. Padding:
1em; rather than padding-left: ...

Remember KISS. If you don't have a Really Good Reason for something being
there then remove it.

HTH
 
K

Kate

rf said:
this.

The lack of a URL in your doctype is putting the former browsers into quirks
mode, where they incorrectly use your height as a percentage of the
viewport.

Supply a correct doctype (look at http://www.W3C.org for one) and all
browsers will treat height as a percentage of the containing box. Since that
menu div is floated it effectively has no containing box so the height is
not applicable and is ignored.


This is not going to happen. There are various ways to simulate this, such
as using background colours.
<tinkers/>
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/menu.html

I have purposely turned on borders for all elements so you can see where
they go. You would of course turn them off in production.

Be sure to change your font size so you can see the "navbar" changing in
width.


It's the header thats causing the problem. Look up width in the CSS
reccomendations:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visudet.html#propdef-width

You have specified 100%, that is 100% of the headers containing box (which
is effectively the viewport). The 100% is that of the content. That is, the
bits inside the borders. Then you have added a border which makes the div
wider than the viewport by two pixels.

Once again you are running IE in quirks mode where is uses it's Very Broken
box model (as against the just Normally Broken one), which includes the size
of the borders in the width calculation, the borders are (incorrectly)
inside the width.

If you do not specify any width at all for that div then it will naturally
expand to fill the viewport. The browser knows how to handle this.

This is also why (in quirks mode) you have a permanent vertical scroll bar.
The height of your page is 100% plus the height of that header. This is
always larger than the viewport. It makes me want to scroll down there to
see what you are concealing under the fold :)

You have a few more issues.

Do not use the transitional DTD unless you have a Very Good Reason for doing
so. Use the strict one. This will prevent you from making a mistake and
using deprecated HTML.

Do not specify font size in pixels. This prevents IE users from changing the
font size to their liking, unless they use the accessibility options to
ignore your fonts entirely.

Don't style a div to be a header. Use a <h1> element. It is suspected that
search engines pay more attention to headings than other text on the page.

Don't position things absolutely (the top menu). When I change my font size
the rest of the graphics and sometimes the text overlaps that absolutely
positioned stuff. Simply put the menu inside the content div and let it flow
normally. At the moment the position of those menu items also depends on the
viewport width. A wide viewport causes the menu "bar" to seperate and look
odd. A narrow viewport causes the menu items ot overlap and look unreadable.

I would not float: left the centre column. I would specify left and right
margins as big as the left and right columns. That way you can use up all
the canvas instead of having an inch or so of vacant space at the rigth of
that middle column.

You have not specified a with for the left column. This is in fact an error.
The recommendations state that floated elements should have a width (unless
there is an intrinsic width). The way it is you are defaulting to the width
of the content, which you don't know.

When you do specify a width make it in ems. That way the width of that
column adjusts to the font size, not some arbitrary percentage of the
viewport. Same for the right column. Specify width in ems. In addition this
allows you to know exactly where those columns end and allows you to specify
a correct margin for the centre column.

Don't specify padding etc in points. Points are for print media. Use pixels
where you can be sure you actually do have for example 10 pixels. 10 points
results in some variable number of pixels depending on the DPI setting in
the operating system (hint this is different for a Mac (76 IIRC) than for
Windows (96)).

Don't specify padding in %. Use ems. Padding really relates to the size of
the font, not the width or height of the viewport.

Don't justify text. This is OK on paper but on a screen becomes hard to
read. There are simply not enough pixels to do it properly.

Lastly, simplify your CSS. You don't need to specify default things (float:
none;). Use the shorcuts. border-top: solid 1px black; is easier to read and
easier to maintain than all those border properties you are using. Padding:
1em; rather than padding-left: ...

Remember KISS. If you don't have a Really Good Reason for something being
there then remove it.

HTH

Richard, thank you for your frankness and valued information. I intend to
spend the next hour going through what you have said, and hopefully
understanding it. The DTD was place auto by Stones Webwriter, truthfully I
don't have a clue as to what it means, I am still pretty much a learner on
all of the aspects of web design.

I have been using a table to for layout up until now. But I have wanted to
get rid of it for a long time, and have been told by many people that div
and css was the way to go about it. It is turning into a real learning
curb. Can't say truly either way whether I'm enjoying it or not, lol...
"but" as they say "he who dares" and all that, I am determined to win,
hopefully! I have up until now used css for mainly visual purposes, so
learning how to use it for page design has not been as easy as I thought it
would be. Funny really, I kind of thought I was at least an intermediate
with css, I now realise I'm still very much a beginner. :-(

Any way once again thank you for your valued help and opinions, have a good
day.
All the best,
Kate
 
B

Barbara de Zoete

I have been using a table to for layout up until now. But I have wanted
to get rid of it for a long time, and have been told by many people that
div
and css was the way to go about it. It is turning into a real learning
curb. Can't say truly either way whether I'm enjoying it or not, lol...
"but" as they say "he who dares" and all that, I am determined to win,
hopefully! I have up until now used css for mainly visual purposes, so
learning how to use it for page design has not been as easy as I thought
it would be. Funny really, I kind of thought I was at least an
intermediate
with css, I now realise I'm still very much a beginner. :-(

Have you ever seen this post?
<http://groups.google.com/[email protected]>

It is a valuable guidance, contributed already over a year ago by Toby,
but still very much worth your while reading.


--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
 
K

Kate

Richard would you mind later today or tomorrow, when I have had a chance to
read, re-read and read through it again, if I came back with a few questions
on your comments and advice? Only I tend to like to digest info, try to
figure things out then if I can't ask questions.

Best regards
Kate
 
R

rf

Kate said:
Richard would you mind later today or tomorrow, when I have had a chance to
read, re-read and read through it again, if I came back with a few questions
on your comments and advice? Only I tend to like to digest info, try to
figure things out then if I can't ask questions.

Please return and ask any further questions you need to. This is one of the
reasons I lurk here.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/tricks/why.htm

Bear in mind that I am UTC +10 hours. So... it is now almost my bedtime :)

When you post again please include your latest effort on the template you
are building. We can, together, critisise it and make it better.
 
B

Barbara de Zoete

Kermit the Frog stuck a mic in Barbara's face, who said:



I like it. Except maybe the bits about 20pounds...
lol

if I read it
correctly, the better work I do, the poorer I get!

;-) It's a minor investment to do, and it allows you to implement years of
experience in your own ways. I can see only winners.

--
,-- --<--@ -- PretLetters: 'woest wyf', met vele interesses: ----------.
| weblog | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/_private/weblog.html |
| webontwerp | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/webontwerp.html |
|zweefvliegen | http://home.wanadoo.nl/b.de.zoete/html/vliegen.html |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'
 
U

Uncle Pirate

rf said:
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=pan.2003.10.19.16.05.38.354002@goddamn
.co.uk>

Toby is a very smart man. Worth paying attention to ;-)

Agreed. I also went and read that article. Full of good points. I'll
not send the 20 though. :)

--
Stan McCann "Uncle Pirate" http://stanmccann.us/pirate.html
Webmaster/Computer Center Manager, NMSU at Alamogordo
Coordinator, Tularosa Basin Chapter, ABATE of NM; AMA#758681; COBB
'94 1500 Vulcan (now wrecked) :( http://motorcyclefun.org/Dcp_2068c.jpg
A zest for living must include a willingness to die. - R.A. Heinlein
 
K

Kate

rf said:
Please return and ask any further questions you need to. This is one of the
reasons I lurk here.

http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/tricks/why.htm

Bear in mind that I am UTC +10 hours. So... it is now almost my bedtime :)

When you post again please include your latest effort on the template you
are building. We can, together, critisise it and make it better.

Good evening/morning firstly, ;) don't know how late it is over there now.
Ok I've made a few changes and now have some questions if you don't mind
enlightening me.
Supply a correct doctype (look at http://www.W3C.org for one) and all
browsers will treat height as a percentage of the containing box.

I have changed the DTD to strict as suggested, and have done a bit of
reading in last 24hrs on this subject, as you may remember I stated that
Stones Webwriter placed this in auto, and I didn't bother changing it as I
knew little about it.

This is not going to happen. There are various ways to simulate this, such
as using background colours.
<tinkers/>
http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/menu.html
Be sure to change your font size so you can see the "navbar" changing in
width.


I have now dropped this idea, and will look into it again at a later date
when I have gained more knowledge in css. I did take a look at the page and
printed off copies of the css and the page itself for future reference. I'm
not to confident with em so I ended up using % in both width and font. It
seems to do the same trick, font changing size along with div size.

This also works well when I make the browser window small, everything in
it's place so to speak.
It's the header thats causing the problem. Look up width in the CSS
reccomendations:
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visudet.html#propdef-width
You have specified 100%, that is 100% of the headers containing box (which
is effectively the viewport). The 100% is that of the content. That is, the
bits inside the borders. Then you have added a border which makes the div
wider than the viewport by two pixels.

Lol... yep I figured this out about ten minutes before your post.
You have a few more issues.
Do not specify font size in pixels. This prevents IE users from changing the
font size to their liking, unless they use the accessibility options to
ignore your fonts entirely.

Noted and change as stated above.
Don't style a div to be a header. Use a <h1> element. It is suspected that
search engines pay more attention to headings than other text on the page.

Yes I knew when I was doing it, that I should really have used a <h1>
element. Tell me why do different browser display the element in different
sizes? Fire Fox and IE display it the same, text tall and slim, where as
Opera and Netscape the text is slightly shorter and looks as if it's in
bold.
Don't position things absolutely (the top menu). When I change my font size
the rest of the graphics and sometimes the text overlaps that absolutely
positioned stuff. Simply put the menu inside the content div and let it flow
normally. At the moment the position of those menu items also depends on the
viewport width. A wide viewport causes the menu "bar" to seperate and look
odd. A narrow viewport causes the menu items ot overlap and look
unreadable.

This top menu has given me a headache, I would like it there but no amount
of placing it in a containing div, moving it around has got it the way I
want it, so for now I am going to omit it from the page design. I may come
back to this one in a few weeks, when I feel in the mood for tackling it
again.
I would not float: left the centre column. I would specify left and right
margins as big as the left and right columns. That way you can use up all
the canvas instead of having an inch or so of vacant space at the right of
that middle column.

As I was using the three column layout below the header div, if I didn't
float left the content div it meant the right column ended up beneath the
left column. I did try your suggestion, not once but a few times. The
first time thinking there was something missing when it did the above. But
alas I couldn't get all three columns to fall side by side. And due to the
vacant space that you mentioned above, (that was annoying, it didn't look
good I will agree) I have now change it to a two column. Placing the menu
and the right content boxes in a left column containing div which I floated
left and had just the content on the right side. Not quite what I wanted
but it looks ok for now.
You have not specified a with for the left column. This is in fact an error.
The recommendations state that floated elements should have a width (unless
there is an intrinsic width). The way it is you are defaulting to the width
of the content, which you don't know.

I did not actually realise that, thank you for this info. I have rectified
this.
When you do specify a width make it in ems. That way the width of that
column adjusts to the font size, not some arbitrary percentage of the
viewport.

I have already mentioned this above. I do have a question on this though, I
don't really understand em, what is it in relation to px and percentage? I
noticed that 1em seemed to look around 4 or 5 px. I think I need to do a
little more research into this before I feel confident in using it.
Don't specify padding etc in points. Points are for print media. Use pixels
where you can be sure you actually do have for example 10 pixels.

I have also rectified this. I actually thought I had changed them all, but
that was a stray one. I did ask a week or so about pt px etc, and Barbara
kindly told me that it was better to use px.
Lastly, simplify your CSS. You don't need to specify default things (float:
none;). Use the shorcuts. border-top: solid 1px black; is easier to read and
easier to maintain than all those border properties you are using. Padding:
1em; rather than padding-left: ...

I hope the updated version is cleaner, though I'm sure to be told if not,
lol... when you do get a sec would you mind taking a look and throwing some
criticisms (good or bad ) my way.

Many thanks in advance,
Kate
 
L

Lauri Raittila

There is padding, but it is behind those floated menues.
and Opera
I found it has something to do with the <h1>, why doesn't Opera like it? As
soon as I remove it, every thing falls in to place.

Opera supports margin collapsing better than others, maybe that was the
reason. Hard to say as you seem to have changed the site.
 

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,767
Messages
2,569,572
Members
45,046
Latest member
Gavizuho

Latest Threads

Top