All sorted thanks to Roger Roelofs.
I must have replied to him directly.
Ta
Ian
-Original Message-
From: {tonyFelice} [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 02 January 2006 19:02
To: 'Ian Young'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED] Css-Discuss. Org'
Subject: RE: [css-d] class vs id issu
[tonyFelice] Ian, additional questions inline, please:
Template coming together but cannot seem to get "div class" to work.
[tonyFelice] does not work on what platform, please?
The border doesn't appear if I use the class version
[tonyFelice] which border, please?
See
http://www.iyesolutions.co.
Template coming together but cannot seem to get "div class" to work.
The border doesn't appear if I use the class version
If write as "div id" all works fine but as this is a dynamic page it will
return more than one div id and will not comply with mark-up.
See
http://www.iyesolutions.co.uk/templ
Brian wrote:
> >>> Similarly, refer to elements with an ID by the ID alone: #m_home,
> >>> not a#m_home. There should only be ONE, so there's no need to
> >>> specify the element.
> >
>If you have a rule for
>#container a {} and want new rules for #container #foo {} just give it
>the rules - anyth
> > However, as sexy as highlighting with CSS only is, it does not make
> > sense from a usability/accessibility point of view, as the current
> > page _should not be a link_. Personally I highlight the current page
> > with a strong - as this also makes sense without CSS and use the body
> > id co
Christian Heilmann wrote:
> However, as sexy as highlighting with CSS only is, it does not make
> sense from a usability/accessibility point of view, as the current
> page _should not be a link_. Personally I highlight the current page
> with a strong - as this also makes sense without CSS and use
I think the idea was that the wiki would stay "evergreen" while the past
discussion would not be
as available to new members (or existing members who don't feel like searching
archives) Wiki
pages are also more easily referred to in response to new questions than an
old discussion
thread.
>>> Now, most of us agreed that what the original poster was trying
>>> to do wasn't a Good Thing, and there otherwise wouldn't be much
>>> use to differentiate the links, but a better way would be to
>>> apply IDs instead
>
>
> Unless you have more than one navigation on the page and want to do
> And, if you *do* want to IDentify each link, an ID is what you want,
anyway.
> Conversely, when writing rules for a class, always specfy the element.
If only we all had the freedom to do so.
~ cj
[stuck with Microsoft hijacking ID tags for their own use and making it
impossible for me to sp
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> Now, most of us agreed that what the original poster was trying to do
> wasn't a Good Thing, and there otherwise wouldn't be much use to
> differentiate the links, but a better way would be to apply IDs instead
Unless you have more than one navigation on the page and want t
I keep seeing examples where people are using classes instead of IDs in
their markup. Take this example from the "rollover with no link content"
thread:
>
>
>
>
Now, most of us agreed that what the original poster was trying to do
wasn't a Good Thing, and there otherwise wouldn't be much u
11 matches
Mail list logo
