Absolute positioning between browsers

#11

Sorry, this is the address to the page

http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html

--Original Message-----------------------------------------------

Right, have redesigned the page from the ground up, and all shows as
valid XHTML/1.0 Transitional

I haven't added any of the javascript to the page yet as I just want
to get the page working properly!!!

One thing I am not happy with is that two of the Div's are absolute
positioned, which I do not like....
Both boxKeyPersonel and boxMoreInfo are absolute positioned, but I
cannot figure a way of getting them to sit next to boxAbout properly,
if I use inherit, the box drops down below boxAbout.

Paul

#12

On 28 Apr, 10:15, mehstg1319 <meh... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html

Why use tick.png when there's a perfectly good character for doing
this? Try ✔, or ✔ if you can't get the encodings straight and
prefer to use a numeric entity.

✓ ☑ are worth a look too.

#13

On Apr 28, 12:51 pm, Andy Dingley <ding... (AT) codesmiths (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

On 28 Apr, 10:15, mehstg1319 <meh... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html

Why use tick.png when there's a perfectly good character for doing
this? Try ✔, or ✔ if you can't get the encodings straight and
prefer to use a numeric entity.

✓ ☑ are worth a look too.

I used the tick character before rebuilding and was criticised for
using it as it appeared as squares on some systems.

#14

On 28 Apr, 13:01, mehstg1319 <meh... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

✓ ☑ are worth a look too.

I used the tick character before rebuilding and was criticised for
using it as it appeared as squares on some systems.

Which ones? If you do this competently (i.e. use the entity, or set
the encoding correctly) then it will work for anything within living
memory. I'd venture to suggest that support for this would actually be
wider than support for .png formats.

Tutors telling you to use absolute positioning for this simple task
are in no position to comment on coding standards.

#15

mehstg1319 wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 28, 12:51 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On 28 Apr, 10:15, mehstg1319 wrote:

http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html

Why use tick.png when there's a perfectly good character for doing
this? Try ✔, or ✔ if you can't get the encodings straight and
prefer to use a numeric entity.

✓ ☑ are worth a look too.

I used the tick character before rebuilding and was criticised for
using it as it appeared as squares on some systems.

For the record*, in case you mean me, I didn't *criticise* you for using
whatever you were using; I just couldn't tell what they were supposed to
be. As I recall, even View Source showed question marks.

Added to that is the fact that I'm not so familiar with "ticks" as
nomenclature for, um, those things. I call them "check marks". (Or
"checks", which some of my fellow Yanks would be keen to cash at a bank.)

"Ticks" are nasty little blood-sucking parasitic arachnids. Keep 'em off
my browser, please. ;-)

*And &Diety; knows the Internet record has to be correct.
--
John
The UIP: http://improve-usenet.org/

#16

On 28 Apr, 14:53, Andy Dingley <ding... (AT) codesmiths (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:

On 28 Apr, 13:01, mehstg1319 <meh... (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

✓ ☑ are worth a look too.

I used the tick character before rebuilding and was criticised for
using it as it appeared as squares on some systems.

Which ones? If you do this competently (i.e. use the entity, or set
the encoding correctly) then it will work for anything within living
memory. I'd venture to suggest that support for this would actually be
wider than support for .png formats.

Tutors telling you to use absolute positioning for this simple task
are in no position to comment on coding standards.

Tutors are not telling me to use absolute positioning. It is a side
project, nothing to do with my course! I put that in previous posts.

I was simply asking for advice on how to build the bottom section of
my page, as I have done it with absolute positioning but am not happy
with it as I do not like using absolute positioning.

I have done very little HTML or CSS before so am pretty new to it!

Paul

#17

On 28 Apr, 15:14, John Hosking <J... (AT) DELETE (DOT) Hosking.name.INVALID>
wrote:

Quote:

mehstg1319 wrote:
On Apr 28, 12:51 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On 28 Apr, 10:15, mehstg1319 wrote:

http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html
Why use tick.png when there's a perfectly good character for doing
this? Try ✔, or ✔ if you can't get the encodings straight and
prefer to use a numeric entity.

✓ ☑ are worth a look too.

I used the tick character before rebuilding and was criticised for
using it as it appeared as squares on some systems.

For the record*, in case you mean me, I didn't *criticise* you for using
whatever you were using; I just couldn't tell what they were supposed to
be. As I recall, even View Source showed question marks.

Added to that is the fact that I'm not so familiar with "ticks" as
nomenclature for, um, those things. I call them "check marks". (Or
"checks", which some of my fellow Yanks would be keen to cash at a bank.)

"Ticks" are nasty little blood-sucking parasitic arachnids. Keep 'em off
my browser, please. ;-)

*And &Diety; knows the Internet record has to be correct.
--
John
The UIP:http://improve-usenet.org/

Didn't mean it as an insult when i used the word criticise, "Brought
to my attention" would have probably been a better phrase to use!!

Have re-implemented the ticks/checks as characters again. Any chance
you could let me know John if that is what they show up as in your
browser.

Also, does anybody know how I can set up my boxes at the bottom not to
use absolute positioning. I can't seem to get things to sit side by
side using relative.

Paul

#18

mehstg1319 wrote:

Quote:

Sorry, this is the address to the page

http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html

--Original Message-----------------------------------------------

Right, have redesigned the page from the ground up, and all shows as
valid XHTML/1.0 Transitional

I haven't added any of the javascript to the page yet as I just want
to get the page working properly!!!

One thing I am not happy with is that two of the Div's are absolute
positioned, which I do not like....
Both boxKeyPersonel and boxMoreInfo are absolute positioned, but I
cannot figure a way of getting them to sit next to boxAbout properly,
if I use inherit, the box drops down below boxAbout.

..boxabout add: float:left;

..boxkeypersonnel remove: position:absolute;top:2px;
add: float:left;

..boxmoreinformation remove: position:absolute;top:2px;left:731px;
add: float:left;

I also would like to know:
"Why are you using XHTML instead of HTML?
Why transitional instead of strict?"
Do you have a very good reason for each?

--
Gus

#19

mehstg1319 wrote:

Quote:

On 28 Apr, 15:14, John Hosking wrote:
mehstg1319 wrote:
On Apr 28, 12:51 pm, Andy Dingley wrote:
On 28 Apr, 10:15, mehstg1319 wrote:
http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html

Why use tick.png when there's a perfectly good character for doing
this? Try ✔, or ✔ if you can't get the encodings straight and
prefer to use a numeric entity.
✓ ☑ are worth a look too.

I used the tick character before rebuilding and was criticised for
using it as it appeared as squares on some systems.

...I just couldn't tell what they were supposed to
be. As I recall, even View Source showed question marks.

Have re-implemented the ticks/checks as characters again. Any chance
you could let me know John if that is what they show up as in your
browser.

In FF2 (and, uh, Netscape 7.1), question marks. In IE6, empty squares.
Tested on a basic Dell PC with Windows XP Professional. No other box
available here to test with.

View Source shows you are using ✓ which would be ✓ in
decimal. With content="text/html; charset=utf-8", you ask for UTF-8
encoding. Everything ought to work, ISTM.

Except that the code point you've specified doesn't seem to be available
in any of the fonts being used.

Your CSS asks (albeit not for this content) for Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif; I don't have Helvetica on my PC, and Arial doesn't seem to
have your checkmark. I believe my default sans-serif font is Arial, too.

Since you don't specify, my browser looks to its defauls, which in this
case is @serif@ for these links (gridNavStyle a). For me, that's Times
New Roman, which (surprise!) lacks a check mark at #x2713.

FWIW, The DB info at http://www.eki.ee/letter/chardata.cgi?ucode=2713
includes an empty entry for "found in charsets:"

In any case, I think I'm never going to see the CHECK MARK unless your
CSS can point to a font-family that (1) contains a glyph for that code
point and (2) is available on my PC. (There's a check mark thingy in my
"Wingdings 2" character set, at the same position as most other fonts
have the letter "P", but that info won't help you much on the WWW.)

Maybe some other better-informed person can help you further.

--
John
Please trim the sigs from posts you reply to, even in GoogleGroups.
Or *especially* in GoogleGroups.

#20

On 28 Apr, 17:48, Gus Richter <gusrich... (AT) netscape (DOT) net> wrote:

Quote:

mehstg1319 wrote:
Sorry, this is the address to the page

http://homepages.feis.herts.ac.uk/~b...ix/matrix.html

--Original Message-----------------------------------------------

Right, have redesigned the page from the ground up, and all shows as
valid XHTML/1.0 Transitional

I haven't added any of the javascript to the page yet as I just want
to get the page working properly!!!

One thing I am not happy with is that two of the Div's are absolute
positioned, which I do not like....
Both boxKeyPersonel and boxMoreInfo are absolute positioned, but I
cannot figure a way of getting them to sit next to boxAbout properly,
if I use inherit, the box drops down below boxAbout.

.boxabout * * * * * *add: * * float:left;

.boxkeypersonnel * * remove: *position:absolute;top:2px;
* * * * * * * * * * * add: * * float:left;

.boxmoreinformation *remove: *position:absolute;top:2px;left:731px;
* * * * * * * * * * * add: * * float:left;

I also would like to know:
* * "Why are you using XHTML instead of HTML?
* * *Why transitional instead of strict?"
Do you have a very good reason for each?

--
Gus

Gus

I am using XHTML as it was what I believed to be correct. If it would
be better to set it a HTML I will

Paul