Odd CSS question

[Toby Inkster]

Toby- Any ideas on how to get it to work in IE 6?

<u class="weird"><span>Foo</span></u>

Yes. It's odd. But it works.

( is the Unicode zero-width non-breaking space.)

 

[Barbara de Zoete]

[you should properly attribute the quoted bits]

I don't know if you're in fact even interested in the spelling mistakes,

Like I said, not in here.



--
,-- --<--@ -- 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 |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

 

[Barbara de Zoete]

So you're prepared to miss a load of emails just cos you don't want to
receive a few bytes more than strictly necessary?

It's not 'a few bytes more'. Take the entire internet, all the e-mail
traffic and rethink those few bytes you mentioned.
Anyway, I hardly ever get to know what I missed out on, do I

(Note: I'm not trying to make you change your preferences, it doesn't
bother me . Just raising a point)

(so noted )


--
,-- --<--@ -- 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 |
`-------------------------------------------------- --<--@ ------------'

 

[Arne]

No, of course not! Just curiousity.


Interesting...

So you're prepared to miss a load of emails just cos you don't want to
receive a few bytes more than strictly necessary? Even though most
emails are sent with around a KB of header info anyway (not to mention
the TCP/IP overhead)?

(Note: I'm not trying to make you change your preferences, it doesn't
bother me . Just raising a point)

I have the basic principle that HTML is for websites, not mail (or
news) messages. What's the point to add a bunch of HTML-tags (badly
coded BTW) in a mail with only text content? If you do add background
color different font size and/or color, in what way did that make your
message better?

And if you also add some inline images, then you add a lot more kB to
it also. That slows down the download, mail server and the whole
Internet when millions of stupid people do it at the same time!

Unfortunately I can't filter out every HTML mail, but I have set
Mozilla to convert them to plain text so I see only that.

 

[Nico Schuyt]

I have the basic principle that HTML is for websites, not mail (or
news) messages. What's the point to add a bunch of HTML-tags (badly
coded BTW) in a mail with only text content? If you do add background
color different font size and/or color, in what way did that make your
message better?

Layout is important for all kinds of messages. No matter if it concerns a
magazine, a newspaper, a website or mail.

 

[Jukka K. Korpela]

The image is the OP's only way of demonstrating what s/he wants.

And it failed.

S/he wants to learn the CSS to change the amount of white space
between the underline and the text. Apparently so s/he can have
them touching as demonstrated in the image.

Maybe. We still don't know why, since no URL demonstrating the _context
and purpose_ was posted.

I might get interested in the problem if someone answered the "why"
part somewhat sensibly, or offered money for solving the problem.

Meanwhile, I'm happy with the solution to the "opposite" problem of
putting _more_ spacing between the text and the underline to avoid
making the text hard to read in some cases. (As opposite to an attempt
to make the text harder to read.) That would mean using a bottom border
instead of an underline.

 

[Arne]

Layout is important for all kinds of messages. No matter if it concerns a
magazine, a newspaper, a website or mail.

So, who do you hire to write your (snailmail) letters for you?
Just an ordinary mail with a few lines, can have the "layout" it needs
even without HTML. You don't need to write it as a printed letter,
with your company logo in the top and all contact info in the bottom
in the same way you have them preprinted on the letter papers.

 

[Oli Filth]

Once upon a time *Oli Filth* wrote:



I have the basic principle that HTML is for websites, not mail (or
news) messages. What's the point to add a bunch of HTML-tags (badly
coded BTW) in a mail with only text content? If you do add background
color different font size and/or color, in what way did that make your
message better?

So you always use Notepad to write letters, reports, newsletters rather
than Word? (Apologies if you're not a Windows user, but hopefully you
get the analogy).

Anyway, HTML is a HyperText Markup Language, it's not specified anywhere
that it's only meant for web browsing.

And if you also add some inline images, then you add a lot more kB to
it also. That slows down the download, mail server and the whole
Internet when millions of stupid people do it at the same time!

Yes, that's true. I also dislike inline images. However, even if you
filter these messages out, they're still sent to the server from the
sender, and they're still forwarded to your e-mail client, so you
haven't saved any internet bandwidth.

 

[Oli Filth]

Yes, that's true. I also dislike inline images. However, even if you
filter these messages out, they're still sent to the server from the
sender, and they're still forwarded to your e-mail client, so you
haven't saved any internet bandwidth.

Hmm, not true, I just realised. You're not requesting the images, so you
*have* saved bandwidth.

But the e-mail HTML content itself is still sent (twice) regardless of
whether you filter it or view it.

 

[Arne]

So you always use Notepad to write letters, reports, newsletters rather
than Word? (Apologies if you're not a Windows user, but hopefully you
get the analogy).

Of cause not. Printed matters is a whole different thing. Se my
comment to Nico.

Anyway, HTML is a HyperText Markup Language, it's not specified anywhere
that it's only meant for web browsing.

That was not my point. However, it's not either specified anywhere
that it's meant for email also.

Yes, that's true. I also dislike inline images. However, even if you
filter these messages out, they're still sent to the server from the
sender, and they're still forwarded to your e-mail client, so you
haven't saved any internet bandwidth.

Unfortunately it's so. But I do what I can to save some when I don't
write HTML mails. And some of them who write in HTML get the idea when
I reply in plain text. If they reply back, then it's in plain text.

 

[Arne]

Hmm, not true, I just realised. You're not requesting the images, so you
*have* saved bandwidth.

But the e-mail HTML content itself is still sent (twice) regardless of
whether you filter it or view it.

In some mail (bulkmail?) software (I don't remember them at the
moment) send the HTML in a way that nothing shows up in the body of
the mail I recive

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Barbara de Zoete wrote:

Why? That's rather a dramatic way to get rid of spam. That's one step

Spam is a dramatically large problem.

away from filtering out all e-mails with text in them...

Datapoint #2. I do that, too. But I have pass filters that act before
that one, that allow addresses from which I *desire* to get HTML mail
-- vendor newsletters and such (which are WAY WAY in the minority as
versus the spam that gets binned).

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Oli Filth wrote:

Hmm, not true, I just realised. You're not requesting the images, so you
*have* saved bandwidth.

And also not true if your filter deletes them on the server, based on
headers, and doesn't download the message at all.

 

[Andy Dingley]

Why? That's rather a dramatic way to get rid of spam.

It works though. I'm still waiting for a HTML-email message that was
worth reading.

 

[Andy Dingley]

Anyway, HTML is a HyperText Markup Language, it's not specified anywhere
that it's only meant for web browsing.

Of course it is - the name is wrong.

If HTML was _really_ for email use too, there would be a lot of
differences about it. If you look at some of the modularisation work
on XHTML, you can see where they go.

 

[Sentient Fluid]

But I do what I can to save some when I don't
write HTML mails. And some of them who write in HTML get the idea when
I reply in plain text. If they reply back, then it's in plain text.

I'm wondering if that's them "getting the idea" as much as it is they're
email client happens to be configured to reply in the same format as the
message they're replying to.

~Senti

 

[dorayme]

Organization: http://groups.google.com
Newsgroups: alt.html
Date: 8 Apr 2005 22:22:28 -0700
Subject: Odd CSS question

I have a question. I want to display a link, except when I display the
link, I don't want the underline the normal distance away from the
word. I want the underline right up on the word, to create a different
effect. The problem is, I know there's a way to do it, but I can't for
the life of me remember what it is. If you know how to do it, or you
at least know a site that does it, could you please post it here?
Thank you.

Buggered if I can do it easily, I tried bottom-border setting to 1px with
(paradoxically) text-decoration to none for the link but this allowed only
greater, not less distance. Looking at the way normal underlines go on
links, they seem pretty close to me, they always seem distinctly close in
fact. Maybe it is my browsers and system (Mac)? Anyway, this brings me to
the question of what makes you so sure you "know there's a way to do it"?
Maybe just a hunch eh? Having tried I want you to know - even though I can't
help

dorayme

 

[Arne]

I'm wondering if that's them "getting the idea" as much as it is they're
email client happens to be configured to reply in the same format as the
message they're replying to.

I know it's the settings in the client. But when they recive my reply
and see how it looks when they write back to me, it's a "nice" way to
tell them how to post. And within some time they will get the idea

--
/Arne

Top posters will be ignored. Quote the part you
are replying to, no more and no less! And don't
quote signatures, thank you.

 

[dorayme]

I might get interested in the problem if someone answered the "why"
part...

Well, suppose the context were something like this: an html/css teacher
wants to head off a plan by a group of unnaturally gifted students. The plan
is to make some links with weirdly close underlining. They have not yet
worked out how to achieve this and have been practicing (on gifs) to read
such links which others find difficult. It is a sort of postmodern, weirdo,
in, clubby thing that is going on. They don't want that the public should
find the links useful and easy, their purpose is "artistic jarring", a
concept they have been captured by from the writings of Agabasta Filibuster,
the great Postmodernist magician. The teacher wants to have an input into
this upstart plan to head it off in the name of everything good and
wholesome and churchlike. But he knows he won't be able to do it unless he
can win the respect of his students. To do this, he better know what he
suspects they will discover, how to achieve this weirdo result in html and
css. He posts a question on a newsgroup in all innocence and hope...

Excuse me, must go and take my pills now, have to start work...

dorayme

 

[kchayka]

html formatted e-mails are waaaaay too big. I hate
receiving three simple five words sentenses with a >5kB mail. Hate hate
hate it.

I once received an email message spewed forth by MS Word. It sent more
than 9kb to deliver a message that was less than 100 bytes. Unbelievable.