|
|
Posted by tshad on 08/09/07 20:59
"John Hosking" <John@DELETE.Hosking.name.INVALID> wrote in message
news:46ba532a$1_2@news.bluewin.ch...
> tshad wrote:
>> "John Hosking" wrote in message news:46b923d6$1_5@news.bluewin.ch...
>>>
>>> Please get access to a public site and post your code there and a URL
>>> here. Nobody wants to see all this code out of context. There are free
>>> servers where you can put up a page for free, if your ISP doesn't
>>> provide one.
>>
>> Where would I find one of those?
>
> GIYF: search for "free hosting" or "free web server" or something. I
> really hate Yahoo's GeoCities, but if all else fails (getting _good_
> hosting), you could go there as a last resort.
>
>>
>> I actually have a couple of references, but from them references I
>> couldn't figure out the differences between:
>>
>> .bodybold a:link
>>
>> and
>>
>> a.bodybold:link
>
> Just CSS notation. The thing following the leading dot is a class name.
> The thing peceding the dot, if present, is the element with that class. A
> sequence of "things" separated by spaces show descendents, where each
> thing is a descendent of the things to its left. A colon starts a
> pseudo-selector. (And commas separate selectors in a list which use the
> same rules, but you know that now.)
>
> Selectutorial has some fine tutorials on CSS. Here's their page on
> grouping selectors:
> http://css.maxdesign.com.au/selectutorial/rules_group_sel.htm
>
>>
>> At least not directly. For example, I didn't see in my references (may
>> have missed it) that a:Link affects the other classes.
>>> BTW, if you have identical rules for :link, :hover, and :active, you can
>>> probably just specify a:link, a:visited and leave out the others, as
>>> they are affected by the a:link selector.
>>
>> Are you saying that a:hover and a:active is affected by a:link or a:hover
>> is affected by a:link and a:active is affected by visited? Just wanted
>> to make sure.
>
> Here's some more to read (and refer back to later). If you read this (and
> understand it) you ought to have no more problems in this area.
> http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/pseudocss.html is a page which talks
> primarily about bugs in IE regarding pseudo-selectors (so it's both more
> than we're discussing here and also restricted to just a couple of browser
> versions), but it contains a good explanation about the :link, :visited,
> et. al. mechanics. I suggest that you just skip to
> http://www.satzansatz.de/cssd/pseudocss.html#link-pseudo-classes and read
> from there.
>
> And from the horse's mouth (also linked to from above):
> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/selector.html#link-pseudo-classes
> http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/selector.html#dynamic-pseudo-classes
>
> And for dessert, here are a couple of fun facts from
> http://www.quirksmode.org/css/hover.html ;-)
>
I will be looking at these pretty closely.
I have been looking at: http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_pseudo_classes.asp
with is pretty basic but helps as a tickler to remember the format.
> .test:hover doesn't work in Mozilla/Firefox in CSS Quirks Mode.
>
> :hover on elements other than links doesn't work in Explorer 7 in CSS
> Quirks Mode.
>
>>
>> Also, since we are using the pseudo selectors, is a { }
>> not really useful? I can't figure out why I would use the "a" tag by
>> itself.
>
> Not all <a> elements are links. You don't see the non-link kind very often
> anymore, but they exist.
>
>>
>> So I assume that the following:
>>
>> .bodybold a:link
>> {
> [snippage of repeated identical rules]
>> }
>> .bodybold a:visited
>> {
> [snippage]
>> }
>> .bodybold a:hover
>> {
> [snippage]
>> }
>> .bodybold a:active
>> {
> [snippage]
>> }
>>
>> Can be changed to:
>>
>> .bodybold a:active, .bodybold a:visited, .bodybold a:hover, .bodybold
>> a:active
>
> If you correct the first a:active in what I presume is a typo here to
Yes, it was.
I meant it as you typed it.
>
> .bodybold a:link, .bodybold a:visited, .bodybold a:hover, .bodybold
> a:active
>
>> {
> [snippage]
>> }
>
> ...then yes, but
>
>>
>> or
>>
>> .bodybold a:active, .bodybold a:visited
>> {
> [snippage]
>> }
>
> No. Don't know how you jumped here. Ah! unless you have the same typo. If
> you mean .bodybold a:link, .bodybold a:visited, then yes.
>
>
>> The same with this:
>>
>> a.bodybold:link
>> {
>> }
>> a.bodybold:visited
>> {
>> }
>> a.bodybold:hover
>> {
>> }
>> a.bodybold:active
>> {
>> }
>>
>> can be changed to:
>>
>> a.bodybold:link, a.bodybold:visited, a.bodybold:hover, a.bodybold:active
>> {
>> }
>>
>> or
>>
>> a.bodybold:link, a.bodybold:visited
>> {
>> }
> Well, yes, but do note that these are two entirely different examples
> you've given. "a.bodybold:link" is different from ".bodybold a:link".
They are different examples - but just wanted to make sure there wasn't some
gotcha between the different types.
Thanks - this helps a lot,
Tom
>
>
> --
> John
> Pondering the value of the UIP: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|