unusual tag (blog) -- can't style for FF....

I have a blog..
http://francesblog.com/home/

pls look @ date for the posts (in IE and FF) in FF it's underlined with
a dotted line, but that's not specifed in css.. now this is a blog
created with Word Press.. they have a weird tag here I have never seen..

<abbr class="pDate-inner" title="2007-10-15T10:20:54-0600">

I added class="pDate-inner" myself, and did following in css:

.pDate-inner {text-decoration:none; }

but to no avail.. in IE it's ok, but in FF it appears underlined..
I searched for "dotted" in css, there are no instances of it..

(this tag is wrapped in a div, also did "text-decoration:none;" for that
div..)

and what is this <abbr...> tag?? I had never seen it before..

thank you...

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:19:15 +0200, maya <maya778899 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

I have a blog..
http://francesblog.com/home/

pls look @ date for the posts (in IE and FF) in FF it's underlined with
a dotted line, but that's not specifed in css.. now this is a blog
created with Word Press.. they have a weird tag here I have never seen...

abbr class="pDate-inner" title="2007-10-15T10:20:54-0600"

I added class="pDate-inner" myself, and did following in css:

.pDate-inner {text-decoration:none; }

border-bottom:none? (just check the styling on it using Firebug in Firefox
and you know what does it.

but to no avail.. in IE it's ok, but in FF it appears underlined..
and what is this <abbr...> tag?? I had never seen it before..

yfgi, it's terribly misused here though.
--
Rik Wasmus

Rik Wasmus wrote:

On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:19:15 +0200, maya <maya778899 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

I have a blog..
http://francesblog.com/home/

pls look @ date for the posts (in IE and FF) in FF it's underlined
with a dotted line, but that's not specifed in css.. now this is a
blog created with Word Press.. they have a weird tag here I have never
seen..

abbr class="pDate-inner" title="2007-10-15T10:20:54-0600"

I added class="pDate-inner" myself, and did following in css:

.pDate-inner {text-decoration:none; }


border-bottom:none? (just check the styling on it using Firebug in
Firefox and you know what does it.

but to no avail.. in IE it's ok, but in FF it appears underlined..
and what is this <abbr...> tag?? I had never seen it before..

yfgi, it's terribly misused here though.

ah yes.. thank you so much...

On 10/17/07 01:19 pm, maya wrote:

and what is this <abbr...> tag?? I had never seen it before.

It's a tag for an abbreviation.

It's rarely used because IE does not support it.

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Jim Moe wrote:

It's a tag for an abbreviation.
It's rarely used because IE does not support it.

IE6 ignores it. IE7 honours the title="Explanation" attribute, without
highlighting the text to let you know that it is worth investigating.
Other browsers underline the abbreviation with a dotted line. I'd never
seen this before, as I'd never used the tag myself.

See http://swiftys.org.uk/abbr.html

Can anyone suggest a way to get IE6 to underline some text with a dotted
line, for compatibility? :-)

--
Steve Swift
http://www.swiftys.org.uk/swifty.html
http://www.ringers.org.uk

On 10/18/07 04:55 am, Steve Swift wrote:

See http://swiftys.org.uk/abbr.html

Can anyone suggest a way to get IE6 to underline some text with a dotted
line, for compatibility? :-)

There is no way. As fas as IE6 is concerned, <abbr> is the same as

<blorch>, and is utterly ignored. You must change the generating source to
use something else, for instance, <acronym> the closest semantic
equivalent to <abbr>.
Or create a rule set for a new class, .abbr, replace <abbr> with <span
class="abbr">, and suffer the semantic loss.

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Jim Moe wrote:

On 10/18/07 04:55 am, Steve Swift wrote:

See http://swiftys.org.uk/abbr.html

Can anyone suggest a way to get IE6 to underline some text with a dotted
line, for compatibility? :-)

There is no way. As fas as IE6 is concerned, <abbr> is the same as
blorch>, and is utterly ignored. You must change the generating source to

So I should remove all my blorch elements? Rats!


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

On 10/18/07 01:43 pm, Blinky the Shark wrote:

There is no way. As fas as IE6 is concerned, <abbr> is the same as
blorch>, and is utterly ignored.

So I should remove all my blorch elements? Rats!

Rename them to <blurgh> and you should be okay.

--
jmm (hyphen) list (at) sohnen-moe (dot) com
(Remove .AXSPAMGN for email)

Jim Moe wrote:

On 10/18/07 01:43 pm, Blinky the Shark wrote:

There is no way. As fas as IE6 is concerned, <abbr> is the same as
blorch>, and is utterly ignored.

So I should remove all my blorch elements? Rats!

Rename them to <blurgh> and you should be okay.

Just a moment ago I found that at W3C. But thanks! I might have missed
it there.

I used to use <splash>, but that's been defecated.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Jim Moe wrote:

There is no way. As fas as IE6 is concerned, <abbr> is the same as
blorch>, and is utterly ignored.

Ah, but I almost never write static HTML; 99.9% of my pages are generate
by CGI scripts.

So I could use a SPAN with a TITLE to get the effect of the ABBR tags
(in my sample page) when I detect that the browser says it is MSIE. Note
that I'm not claiming I can detect Internet Explorer, just browsers that
are *saying* that they are MSIE.

My question was: Is there a way in IE to get a "word" underlined with a
dotted line? So my CGI can make IE look as though it does support ABBR?

I suppose I could put a border along just the bottom edge of the SPAN,
and specify a style of dotted, with the various dimensions set to place
the border close to the baseline of the text, but I'd anticipate some
odd effects from gyrations such as this. Even if I limited this
approach to browsers which said they were MSIE, I'd still come across
ones which weren't IE, but were saying that they were.

--
Steve Swift
http://www.swiftys.org.uk/swifty.html
http://www.ringers.org.uk