Re: dt dd inline but dt clear left?

dorayme wrote:

(btw I was delighted to see your lovely shapes in the URLs above, a
pleasure to see. It is very hard to use such shapes and have them grow
with text size.)

Not at all. Just a bit of divitus and an extension of the standard sliding
door stuff that's been around for ages to produce those nice rounded tab
thingies in the menu bar.

http://barefile.com.au/test/backgrounds/

Carefully adjust your font size. Carefully adjust your canvas width.

amygdala, this works in all versions of IE, back to 5.5 (except the
centering bit in IE5.5).

In article <62a5c$49992e7c$cef88ba3$20468 (AT) TEKSAVVY (DOT) COM>,
"Chris F.A. Johnson" <cfajohnson (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

On 2009-02-16, dorayme wrote:
In article <49978fb0$0$7933$9a622dc7 (AT) news (DOT) kpnplanet.nl>,
amygdala <example (AT) example (DOT) com> wrote:

dorayme schreef:
amygdala <example (AT) example (DOT) com> wrote:
...
Or something like this.

http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/alt/dt_Inline.html
...
(btw I was delighted to see your lovely shapes in the URLs above, a
pleasure to see. It is very hard to use such shapes and have them grow
with text size.)

You must be using page zoom; they don't grow with text zoom. At my
default viewing size, the text is not contained within the shape:
http://cfaj.freeshell.org/testing/amygdala.jpg>.

No zoom. On this occasion I meant what I said literally. I liked the
shapes. They would be hard to make grow with text.

Reminds me of a joke or puzzling saying (not writing) from school:

Charles_I_walked_and_talked_after_he_had_his_head_ chopped_off. <g>

--
dorayme

In article <heaml.21144$cu.11378 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf@z.invalid> wrote:

dorayme wrote:

(btw I was delighted to see your lovely shapes in the URLs above, a
pleasure to see. It is very hard to use such shapes and have them grow
with text size.)

Not at all. Just a bit of divitus and an extension of the standard sliding
door stuff that's been around for ages to produce those nice rounded tab
thingies in the menu bar.

http://barefile.com.au/test/backgrounds/

Well, there you go! It is adaptable to more complex shapes. Good point
rf!

--
dorayme

dorayme wrote:

In article <heaml.21144$cu.11378 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf@z.invalid> wrote:

dorayme wrote:

(btw I was delighted to see your lovely shapes in the URLs above, a
pleasure to see. It is very hard to use such shapes and have them
grow with text size.)

Not at all. Just a bit of divitus and an extension of the standard
sliding door stuff that's been around for ages to produce those nice
rounded tab thingies in the menu bar.

http://barefile.com.au/test/backgrounds/

Well, there you go! It is adaptable to more complex shapes. Good point
rf!

You should know by now that such terms as "very hard" or even better
"impossible" are akin to a slap in the face with a duelling glove :-)

Who is this Charlie bloke and who chopped his head off and more importantly
did he deserve it?. Was it in duel? And why talk about it? I'd keep mum on
the matter myself. Second best and all of that.

As for walking, nothing to do with heads. In my formative years out on the
farm I'd help Dad behead the Sunday roast. Sometimes we had to chase the
blighters for bloody miles. There *is* one thing dumber than a chook - one
that has misplaced its top two inches.

On 2009-02-16, rf <rf@z.invalid> wrote:

dorayme wrote:
In article <heaml.21144$cu.11378 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf@z.invalid> wrote:

dorayme wrote:

(btw I was delighted to see your lovely shapes in the URLs above, a
pleasure to see. It is very hard to use such shapes and have them
grow with text size.)

Not at all. Just a bit of divitus and an extension of the standard
sliding door stuff that's been around for ages to produce those nice
rounded tab thingies in the menu bar.

http://barefile.com.au/test/backgrounds/

Well, there you go! It is adaptable to more complex shapes. Good point
rf!

You should know by now that such terms as "very hard" or even better
"impossible" are akin to a slap in the face with a duelling glove :-)

Who is this Charlie bloke and who chopped his head off and more importantly
did he deserve it?. Was it in duel? And why talk about it? I'd keep mum on
the matter myself. Second best and all of that.

He was a King of England, who was found guilty of treason by a court set
up by Parliament who then sentenced him and cut his head off.

He refused to take the trial seriously, very much in the manner of
Saddam Hussein, because he still thought of himself as the legitimate
tyrant.

It set an important precedent for the idea that nobody is above the law,
not even the King.

Ben C wrote:

On 2009-02-16, rf <rf@z.invalid> wrote:
dorayme wrote:
In article <heaml.21144$cu.11378 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf@z.invalid> wrote:

Who is this Charlie bloke and who chopped his head off and more
importantly did he deserve it?. Was it in duel? And why talk about
it? I'd keep mum on the matter myself. Second best and all of that.

He was a King of England, who was found guilty of treason by a court
set up by Parliament who then sentenced him and cut his head off.

He refused to take the trial seriously, very much in the manner of
Saddam Hussein, because he still thought of himself as the legitimate
tyrant.

It set an important precedent for the idea that nobody is above the
law, not even the King.

Ah, I see. dorayme, and your good self are more up than I on olde english
histery. However for my part I am descendant (in part) from one of the poor
bloody buggers shipped out here for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his
starving family and as such I have a slight mistrust of the "commonwealth"
:-(


No idea how this is relevant though :-)

On 2009-02-16, Ben C wrote:

On 2009-02-16, rf <rf@z.invalid> wrote:
dorayme wrote:
In article <heaml.21144$cu.11378 (AT) news-server (DOT) bigpond.net.au>,
"rf" <rf@z.invalid> wrote:

dorayme wrote:

(btw I was delighted to see your lovely shapes in the URLs above, a
pleasure to see. It is very hard to use such shapes and have them
grow with text size.)

Not at all. Just a bit of divitus and an extension of the standard
sliding door stuff that's been around for ages to produce those nice
rounded tab thingies in the menu bar.

http://barefile.com.au/test/backgrounds/

Well, there you go! It is adaptable to more complex shapes. Good point
rf!

You should know by now that such terms as "very hard" or even better
"impossible" are akin to a slap in the face with a duelling glove :-)

Who is this Charlie bloke and who chopped his head off and more importantly
did he deserve it?. Was it in duel? And why talk about it? I'd keep mum on
the matter myself. Second best and all of that.

He was a King of England, who was found guilty of treason by a court set
up by Parliament who then sentenced him and cut his head off.

He refused to take the trial seriously, very much in the manner of
Saddam Hussein, because he still thought of himself as the legitimate
tyrant.

It set an important precedent for the idea that nobody is above the law,
not even the King.

No, that precedent was set in 1205, with the signing of the Magna
Carta. Charles I was beheaded in 1649.

--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
================================================== =================
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

On 2009-02-16, Chris F.A. Johnson <cfajohnson (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

On 2009-02-16, Ben C wrote:
On 2009-02-16, rf <rf@z.invalid> wrote:
[...]
Who is this Charlie bloke and who chopped his head off and more importantly
did he deserve it?. Was it in duel? And why talk about it? I'd keep mum on
the matter myself. Second best and all of that.

He was a King of England, who was found guilty of treason by a court set
up by Parliament who then sentenced him and cut his head off.

He refused to take the trial seriously, very much in the manner of
Saddam Hussein, because he still thought of himself as the legitimate
tyrant.

It set an important precedent for the idea that nobody is above the law,
not even the King.

No, that precedent was set in 1205, with the signing of the Magna
Carta. Charles I was beheaded in 1649.

The Magna Carta was an important precedent for other things, but I
didn't think for the idea of the King not being above the law.

On 2009-02-16, Ben C wrote:

On 2009-02-16, Chris F.A. Johnson <cfajohnson (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
On 2009-02-16, Ben C wrote:
On 2009-02-16, rf <rf@z.invalid> wrote:
[...]
Who is this Charlie bloke and who chopped his head off and more importantly
did he deserve it?. Was it in duel? And why talk about it? I'd keep mum on
the matter myself. Second best and all of that.

He was a King of England, who was found guilty of treason by a court set
up by Parliament who then sentenced him and cut his head off.

He refused to take the trial seriously, very much in the manner of
Saddam Hussein, because he still thought of himself as the legitimate
tyrant.

It set an important precedent for the idea that nobody is above the law,
not even the King.

No, that precedent was set in 1205, with the signing of the Magna

Oops; 1215, not 1205.

Carta. Charles I was beheaded in 1649.

The Magna Carta was an important precedent for other things, but I
didn't think for the idea of the King not being above the law.

That is *exactly* what it did:

"With Magna Carta, King John placed himself and England's future
sovereigns and magistrates within the rule of law."

<http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/magna_carta/>

--
Chris F.A. Johnson <http://cfaj.freeshell.org>
================================================== =================
Author:
Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

On 2009-02-16, Chris F.A. Johnson <cfajohnson (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:

On 2009-02-16, Ben C wrote:
On 2009-02-16, Chris F.A. Johnson <cfajohnson (AT) gmail (DOT) com> wrote:
On 2009-02-16, Ben C wrote:
On 2009-02-16, rf <rf@z.invalid> wrote:
[...]
Who is this Charlie bloke and who chopped his head off and more importantly
did he deserve it?. Was it in duel? And why talk about it? I'd keep mum on
the matter myself. Second best and all of that.

He was a King of England, who was found guilty of treason by a court set
up by Parliament who then sentenced him and cut his head off.

He refused to take the trial seriously, very much in the manner of
Saddam Hussein, because he still thought of himself as the legitimate
tyrant.

It set an important precedent for the idea that nobody is above the law,
not even the King.

No, that precedent was set in 1205, with the signing of the Magna

Oops; 1215, not 1205.

Carta. Charles I was beheaded in 1649.

The Magna Carta was an important precedent for other things, but I
didn't think for the idea of the King not being above the law.

That is *exactly* what it did:

"With Magna Carta, King John placed himself and England's future
sovereigns and magistrates within the rule of law."

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/featured_documents/magna_carta/

Well I'm not an expert on the history, but although the Magna Carta
might have placed the King under the law in principle, that's not quite
the same as actually trying and executing him.

I'm also not sure exactly what "the law" consisted of in 1215.

Interesting comment in Wikipedia: "In practice, Magna Carta in the
Medieval period mostly did not limit the power of Kings; but by the time
of the English Civil War it had become an important symbol for those who
wished to show that the King was bound by the law."

The trial of Charles I was during that War. History is written by the
victors so I suppose the King must have been under the law since at
least 1215