I have a page with two html files. I have exactly the same code for the footer in them. They use exactly the same CSS file but they look different and I still cannot find out why :
The code is here for the footer :
<div class="container_12">
<div class="grid_12"><footer>
<div class="socials">
facebook |
twitter |
google+
</div>
<div class="copy">COSMOSET © 2013 | Privacy Policy <!--{%FOOTER_LINK} -->
</div></footer>
</div>
</div>
Also if you visit the page here: HERE you can see the text-box-areas do not have the same transparent white background. I assume this one is a server issue (plesk). Because when i open the file on my PC (saved on my PC) it looks perfect.
If you go to the second link from the left (of your navigator) you can see that you have the following DOM structure:
The problem is that, on the page your provided in your post, the footer is a sibling of the <header>, <div class="clear"> and <div class="bg1"> elements, as you can see it in the following screenshot:
Your problem will get solved if you move the "container_12" to be a sibling of the elements I mentioned above.
LATER EDIT:
To answer your second question, for the #form textarea CSS selector you've added an extra . after the png extenstion:
Related
I can see lots of answers for this but not quite the right solutions..
Essentially i'm displaying numerous emails in a thread (looks like iMessage a bit) on a page. The messages are looped within a repeated element, with the HTML email displayed inside it.
I have no control over the HTML in the email content as it could be from anywhere.. the problem is that the HTML in the email is inheriting CSS styling from the page style sheets.. this is making it all look weird..
I can't overrule the CSS with a more specific CSS, as there could be any classes or id's coming in the email that match those in the main style sheet..
I've tried adding all:initial to the wrapper div like this:
div.sentMsgBody *{
all: initial !important;
}
This however seems to override any styles that comes with the email and so looks really naff..
Anyone got any ideas how to display the email content with its own HTML without taking on the main styles?
Thanks!!
Addition:
I've been asked to show my code, though that's quite tricky...
there's loops of a certain div in the page like this:
<div id="page">
<div class="sentMsgBody"></div>
<div class="sentMsgBody"></div>
<div class="sentMsgBody"></div>
</div>
Of course each loop of this div could have any HTML at all as its showing emails...
eg:
<div id="page">
<div class="sentMsgBody">
<div class="Header">My Email</div>
<div class="Main">This is my email body</div>
<div class="Footer">Email Footer</div>
</div>
<div class="sentMsgBody"> ... ... </div>
<div class="sentMsgBody"> ... ... </div>
</div>
Here the Header and Footer etc may take css from the main page...
I thought about iFrames but they are messy, i don't know how big the content will be for each one, are a bugger with being responsive too, and there could be dozens that have to be created dynamically from the content of each div that is loaded by ajax from a handler.
I think my last question was misunderstood. I have pasted below, the HTML of the page I am having troubles with, but you can see it here: http://jsfiddle.net/wCZYU/6/
Basically I would like a fixed header (pageHeader) and a colored div that fills the browser window, NOT the entire page background. I then would like a div under this that the user will be required to scroll to see
<header class="pageHeader">
<div class="setWidth">
<div class="navMain">
Home
Work
Blog
Contact
</div>
</div>
</header>
<div class="secFill">i want to be below the navigation</div>
<div class="content">i want to be below secFill</div>
This is the image that I posted earlier that I want it to look like
http://i.stack.imgur.com/jZgMb.png
The navigation must be fixed and compatible in ie7/8.
Thanks alot (again)
If I'm understanding correctly, you just need to define .secFill as height:100%.
.secFill {
height:100%;
background-color:red;
}
http://jsfiddle.net/wCZYU/7/
one issue I don't quite understand.
I made an online sample, when I'm resizing the window, the SPANs response one by one.
Online sample http://jsfiddle.net/Pva7y/1/
Online Images
However, I copied the same code to my local html, the SPANs response just together.
Local Image.
why different? Thanks
HTML:
<div class="row ">
<div class="span7 blue">
1
</div>
<div class="span2 red">
2
</div>
<div class="span3 green">
3
</div>
</div>
CSS:
.blue{background-color:blue;}
.red{background-color:red;}
.green{background-color:green;}
First thing is that you forgot to use container div. Correct pattern is
<div class="container">
<div class="row">
<div class="span12">
1 2 3
</div>
</div>
</div>
See corrected jsfiddle (1).
Next, if you want your page to be responsive and fit the layout to the size of the viewport you have to also include bootstrap-responsive.css. See jsfiddle (2). In your local HTML you used either both bootstrap.css and bootstrap-responsive.css or prior files merged to one CSS for reducing client-server requests number.
Your <div>s are floated in your Fiddle, but they are not floated in your local html judging from your screenshot. And since bootstrap.css floats the <div> element with a class of span, I am guessing that bootstrap.css is not loaded properly in your local html file.
A way to troubleshoot your issue is to check the Inspector (if you're using Chrome), or Firebug (if you're using Firefox). Look at the computer style of the three <div>s in your fiddle AND your local html, and compare them. They must have been styled differently because they look different on the same browser, so that's the way to start troubleshooting.
I read about semantic HTML online...
Semantic HTML means using HTML tags for their implied meaning, rather than just using (meaningless) div and span tags for absolutely everything.
If you use <h1> instead of <div class="header">, and <h2> instead of , et cetera, Google and other search engines will interpret your headers as being important titles in your page. This way, when people search on the words in your headers and sub-headers, your page will be considered more relevant (and rank higher). Plus, it's much shorter and cleaner.
So, below is semantic,
<h1>My Website Name</h1>
<h2>My Website Tagline </h2>
What about this below?
<div id="header">
<h1><span class="hide">My Website Name</span></h1>
<h2><span class="hide">My Website Tagline</span></h2>
</div>
I tend to combine h tags with div and span tags like above - is this practised considered as the lack of semantic?
The reason why I have the span with the hide class is that I want to display the site logo instead of text. So use CSS to set the background of h1 as image and then hide the text. is this incorrect practise?
Then, if I don't use div, what can I use to make a box around the h1 and h2?
As far as I know, html 5 is not fully ready yet, we must not use <header> yet, must we??
Thanks.
I would do something like the following if I was going to use HTML5:
<header>
<hgroup>
<h1>My Website Name</h1>
<h2>My Website Tagline</h2>
</hgroup>
</header>
Remember to add display: block; to the HTML5 elements and createElement for IE in the CSS though. The header element shows the block is a header and the hgroup element is there to show that the second h* element is a sub heading, so shouldn't be taken into account when calculating the header levels in the document.
If you don't want to use HTML5 yet then you could use divs instead of the new elements, and use the HTML5 element names as the class value. This will make it easier to switch over when you feel comfortable using HMTL5 on a live site.
You don't really need to use the span elements. You can use tricks such as using a large negative text-indent in the CSS to hide the text off the screen.
If you want to display a logo instead of text, use an image. Google say so (even if they don't know the difference between a tag and an attribute). Taglines, BTW, are not subheadings (and the site name (and thus logo) is usually only a heading on the homepage).
<div id="header">
<h1><img src="foo.png" alt="My Website Name"></h1>
<p><img src="foo.png" alt="My Website Tagline"></p>
</div>
Unfortunately, Internet Explorer 8 does not recognize many HTML5 tags, and when I've tested it, I was unable to set CSS values for the <header> tag, for example. So for now I would recommend that you continue to use div tags to group your semantic meaning.
As a sidenote, Google does not like hidden text, and if you have a lot of it, it will consider it deceptive coding. One is probably fine, but you'd be better off using the alt attribute on the image tag.
Nobody suggested that you should not use DIVs at all... semantic HTML does not mean there cannot be div or span tags in your code. It just only means that whenever possible (there is a specific tag available for a specific semantic meaning) you should try to give semantic meaning.
h2 is not to be used for taglines, as somebody else already suggested.
Also, in my interpretation (some will argue), h1 is not for the name of your website. It is the title for the content on a specific page.
I agree with #David Dorward, the tag line should be in a p tag.
Your example (wrapping the header elements with a div) is perfectly acceptable, though I would like to raise a small caution: Be careful that you do not get in the habit of wrapping everything in div tags. For example:
<div class="content">
<div class="list">
<ul>
<li>something</li>
<li>something</li>
<li>something</li>
</ul>
</div>
</div>
Since a ul tag is already a block element, the above markup would be better off like this:
<div class="content">
<ul class="list">
<li>something</li>
<li>something</li>
<li>something</li>
</ul>
</div>
And then just style the ul to look like the div.
On the matter of displaying the logo as an image:
If your logo is text-based, or has text in it, you would be better off doing the following:
HTML
<div id="header">
<h1 class="logo">My Logo Text - My Website Tagline</h1>
</div>
CSS
.logo { text-indent:-9999px;background-image:url(thelogo.jpg) no-repeat;}
/* Also add height and width based on your logo height and width */
I'm a programmer trying to learn some css and I've already run into a stumbling block.
I have the following HTML:
<div class="container">
<div class="span-24 last">
Header
</div>
<div class="span-4">
Left sidebar
</div>
<div class="span-16">
<div class="span-8">
Box1
</div>
<div class="span-4">
Box2
</div>
<div class="span-4 last">
Box3
</div>
<div class="span-16 last">
Main content
</div>
</div>
<div class="span-4 last">
Right sidebar
</div>
<div class="span-24 last">
Footer
</div>
</div>
In my css I have the following:
body {
background-color:#FFFFFF;
}
div.container {
background:url(/images/bck.jpg);
}
I just want to display an image for the background area for the container div but nothing shows up. If I remove the background section from the css and add background-color:#000000; then I see a black background for the container div.
What am I overlooking?
Most likely you are not specifying the correct path to the image:
background:url(images/bck.jpg);
Make sure that:
You are specifying the correct path
File name of the image is correct
The image file is present in the images folder
Note: As I answered a question today, see how to specify the path with ../.
Most likely the image path is wrong. Remember that the image must be specified relative to the location of your CSS file. Let us say that you have a folder named styles with your CSS files and you have a folder named images with your images. Then you may need to specify:
../images/bck.jpg
in order to access that image.
I find that using Firebug for Firefox, the Web Inspector for Safari, or the Developer tools for MSIE 8 helps me diagnose issues like this. Inspect your div.container element and see what path shows up for your image.
Of course, if you have access to your server logs you could also check those to find what image was requested.
I recently had a problem just like this in where a jpeg image refused to show, but only in MSIE. I had to open up the image in photoshop and use the "Save for Web" again then reupload it. I'm not certain what the glich was, perhaps it was saved in an incompatible jpeg variation or was corrupt in some way, but that worked for me.