Discussion in 'HTML' started by msaladin, Aug 29, 2007.

  1. msaladin

    msaladin Guest

    Hi all,

    I'd like to create a very small menu (when collapsed), but when you
    click on it, the OPTION entries should have a wide enough size to show
    everything. Actually, it should look like this:

    --------- ------- --------------------------
    Textbox - - ... - - Another textbox -
    --------- ------- --------------------------
    - Option 1 Should be longer than -
    - Option 2 Should be longer .... -

    I can do this in firefox when I set the CSS width-attribute for the
    SELECT tag, but not for the OPTION tag. Firefox correctly creates a
    small SELECT-BOX, and when you click on it, you see the long OPTION
    entries in the expanded field. IEXPLORER does recognize the width-
    attribute for the SELECT box, but then inherits the width to all the
    OPTION tags below, therefore the OPTIONS are truncated. The above
    SELECT box should just help the users to enter something in the
    textfield (e.g. when the user selects an item from the SELECT box, the
    value is inserted in the textfield on the left of the SELECT box).

    Is there any way to do this, without hacking with Javascript on
    onMouseDown and onMouseUp etc... I don't want to try to reprogram the
    whole SELECT mechanism in Javascript, but it would be great if this
    was possible.

    Thanks for your help
    msaladin, Aug 29, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  2. Scripsit msaladin:
    It's a much better idea to make all the alternatives visible immediately.
    That does not explain much. Why don't you post the URL of the current page,
    for a starter? Surely you have created a working, tested page before
    considering optional presentational nuances, haven't you?
    That does not explain much.
    You're playing with scripting, aren't you? But you are not explaining what
    you are really doing.
    Jukka K. Korpela, Aug 29, 2007
    1. Advertisements

  3. msaladin

    msaladin Guest

    msaladin, Aug 29, 2007
  4. Scripsit msaladin:
    and you're now not quoting or paraphrasing what you are commenting on.
    Please read my previous reply. Then, if problems remain, post a _real_ URL
    showing the context, not just an enigmatic, cryptic piece with no apparent
    purpose and context. The form hasn't even got a submit button or any
    explanation of what it does.

    And explain what the *** you are trying to achieve.
    Jukka K. Korpela, Aug 29, 2007
  5. I have to know, what is the 3 letter word that is so bad that you
    could not just type it? Are there really any 3 letter swear words?
    Travis Newbury, Aug 29, 2007
  6. Those are wildcards and can expand to any number of characters.

    Chris F.A. Johnson, Aug 30, 2007
  7. msaladin

    msaladin Guest

    I cannot provide you with the real page, because the page works only
    in the context of a web-application (which is not available on the
    internet). That's the reason I tried to create a HTML page as simple
    as possible to provide you guys not with the actual JSP/HTML/
    Javascript mess, but with a HTML page where the important facts remain
    valid: IExplorer truncates the OPTION-tag to the same width as the

    The web-application where I'm using this can initiate some tasks on
    servers where an agent is installed. The agent can be installed on 10
    servers, or on 1'000 servers, depening on the company that is using
    the software. What I want to do is to provide the user with two
    different ways to specify on which server he wants to execute a task:

    The user knows the servername, he can enter it in the textbox. If the
    servername does not match exactly a known servername, the servlet can
    try to guess it.

    The user does not know the servername, he will use the SELECT-box.
    Once the user has selected an OPTION, the OPTION-value is inserted in
    the textbox (via Javascript). This select box just shows the user all
    valid servers.

    So the only reason I need the SELECT-field in this case is to provide
    a list with all possible entries for the textbox. If this seems to be
    a problem, I could always solve the problem by providing an icon just
    after the textbox, and open a new HTML page with a list of all
    servers. But just to select a server, this seems to be too cumbersome.

    msaladin, Aug 30, 2007
  8. Scripsit msaladin:
    Or anything really resembling it. But can you learn how to post to Usenet?
    Hint: not quoting or paraphrasing _anything_ is not the right way.
    Not really. It just ignores your CSS setting for an option element. But if
    this is an important fact, why do you insist on creating that problem?
    Fine, you have a textbox then. For clarity, it is best to keep it on a
    separate line in the form, preceded by its label. Don't forget to make it
    reasonably wide, since server names can be fairly long, especially if they
    are fully qualified domain names.
    That may or may not work. If there are 1,000 options, it won't. But by
    trying to truncate the width of the select element (at least initially) to
    something that cannot possibly contain a typical name, you almost guarantee
    that it won't work for 10 options either.
    Why?? You don't need anything like that. Just pass the choice as a form
    field and make the form handler use it. You have the issue of deciding what
    to do if a choice has been made (to detect this, the select element should
    contain an initially selected option indicating that no choice has yet been
    made) _and_ the text input field is not empty. But that's manageable, and
    you could even use client-side JavaScript to detect - when possible - this
    as soon as the user makes a wrong move.
    Jukka K. Korpela, Aug 30, 2007
  9. msaladin

    David Segall Guest

    Could you please rephrase your hint to make it comprehensible to those
    of us who have not completed a University course in boolean algebra?
    David Segall, Aug 30, 2007
  10. Okay let's try it in a positive statement:

    In Usenet either quote the relevant bits of the message to which you are
    replying to or paraphrase it.
    Jonathan N. Little, Aug 30, 2007
  11. msaladin

    David Segall Guest

    David Segall, Aug 30, 2007
  12. msaladin

    David Segall Guest

    Thank you Jonathan. You have probably correctly interpreted Mr
    Korpela's sentence and you have generously ignored the subtext of
    David Segall, Aug 30, 2007
    1. Advertisements

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 (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.