Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About babyboomer

  • Rank
  1. babyboomer

    What is the risk?

    When I decided I wanted to add a visitor counter to my website, I scoured the Internet for a ready-made solution. I don't yet have the expertise to write my own routine, so I was hoping to find something relatively simple to implement. I encountered numerous sites offering free counters. On most of them, the process was the same. They provided a mechanism for customizing the way the counter should look. After selecting the styling options and viewing a preview, you push a button to generate the corresponding HTML code. The code generated is an HTML <img> tag which is to be placed in your HTML document. Typically, the <img> tag is wrapped in an anchor (<a>) tag. From what I've been able to ascertain, behind the scenes there's some kind of CGI process. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but my best guess is that every time my site is loaded, the server increments the count and sends me a new picture. Anyway… From among the myriad choices I had, I elected to use a site called cutercounter.com. The landing page looks like this: After selecting a style that I liked, I entered the URL of my website into the "Your Website URL:" field and clicked on the "Get Your Counter HTML Code" button. Thereafter, the following screen was displayed: I placed the code into my HTML document, which yielded the following: I'm happy with the result, but I have a concern. I'm wondering whether there's a risk in placing that unsecured (http versus https) link in my document. I don't have sufficient expertise to make that determination. Do I have cause for concern?
  2. babyboomer

    "Hit counter" for my Website

    So, I found this site on the Internet. It's just one among many that offer the same service. I plugged the code into my HTML document, and it seemed to behave as advertised... However, I'm wondering about the wisdom of embedding a link to an unsecured URL.
  3. babyboomer

    "Hit counter" for my Website

    None of the above constitute my definition of a "hit." perhaps the word "visit" would be more appropriate. If I give someone a tour of every room in my home, that still constitutes a single visit. I guess that's what I'm looking for. Perhaps a simple solution would not be sufficient to meet my requirements.
  4. babyboomer

    "Hit counter" for my Website

    I'm looking for a simple hit counter that I can plug into and display on my website. Someone suggested a solution from Google, but that's really more than I'm looking for. I just need something that will display the number of visits to my site. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
  5. babyboomer

    The getElementsByClassName method won't accept a list

    Ah, okay. That makes sense.
  6. According to my research, all indications are that the getElementByClassName method can accept multiple arguments. for example: var x = document.getElementsByClassName("class1 class2"); I haven't gotten this to work. I have been experimenting with it on CodePen. What am I missing?
  7. Thank you, dsonesuk! Wow! That was easy! I can't believe I missed that. I'm feeling kinda silly right now.
  8. Okay, here's my dilemma… I've published a website which runs an MP4 file. I've tested the site in numerous browsers, including Opera and Safari. The problem is that when using Firefox to access the site from a Linux system, the video doesn't run. I tried switching from MP4 to WEBM. That solved the problem with Firefox. Unfortunately, the trade-off was that the Microsoft browsers won't run the WEBM file. I guess one consolation might be that the percentage of people using Firefox to access my site from a Linux system is relatively small. But that's pure speculation on my part. I did find error messages in the log: I even conducted a little bit of online research. Ultimately I concluded that there wasn't much I could do about it other than including an admonition to the users. I believe I saw a recommendation to add something to the .htaccess file. Unfortunately, I don't remember what that recommendation was. I didn't follow through on that, but if something can be added to the .htaccess file that would help, it's worth a try. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!
  9. babyboomer

    Inconsistent results when using the color: property

    This link looks interesting!
  10. babyboomer

    Inconsistent results when using the color: property

    Thank you, Funce. Ideally I'd like to implement browser-specific styling. What little research I've done seems to indicate that browser detection is not an exact science. While waiting for a perfect solution, however, I'm willing to implement whatever is the current best practice. I looked at Polyfills, but didn't find anything applicable. Perhaps someone has authored a script that would do the job. A point in the right direction would be greatly appreciated.
  11. I've been using the following CSS rule… .inset-shadow { color: Transparent; background: #8C2633; text-shadow: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.4) 2px 2px 2px, 0 0 0 rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.5); } … to produce the following result: The following is another example of this text effect… …which can be found in the following exercise on CodePen The problem is that the behavior of this construct is inconsistent. Specifically, the Microsoft browsers are having difficulty displaying the text when I use the "transparent" value for the CSS color property. Subsequent research would indicate that there is no such value for the color property. I tried replacing the "transparent" value with the CSS rgba function with something like this: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0.0) – but it didn't work. I have found variations on the theme, but they aren't as effective. I'm not sure that there is a solution, but if I can get the code to work in Microsoft browsers, that would be preferable.
  12. babyboomer

    embedded TrueType font not working

    Thank you, Ingolme! To answer your question, it is the Internet Explorer browser with which I'm having the problem. Surprisingly, I'm not having this problem with Microsoft Edge. I went to the font squirrel site to try converting the font (Comic Sans MS), only to discover that It has been "blacklisted."
  13. babyboomer

    embedded TrueType font not working

    I'm trying to "embed" a TrueType font using the CSS font-face facility. To do so, I copied the TrueType font files from the Windows/Fonts folder to a folder in my website directory. the corresponding CSS looks like this: @font-face { font-family: 'Comic Sans MS'; src: url(../../resources/fonts/comic.ttf) format('truetype'), url(../../resources/fonts/comicbd.ttf) format('truetype'), url(../../resources/fonts/comici.ttf) format('truetype'), url(../../resources/fonts/comicz.ttf) format('truetype'); } I've elected to use this technique to ensure that the appropriate typeface is displayed even on systems where the specified typeface is not installed. Unfortunately, it does not appear to be working. On my system where I'm running Windows 10, the comic font is displayed…, that is, until I add the font-face construct. I have used this technique before to embed typefaces, but those were typefaces for which I acquired a license. I'm just wondering whether I have run up against a licensing issue. Perhaps I'm being presumptuous, but I thought I could (re)use the typefaces installed on my system. if I am mistaken, there's an easy remedy. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. By the way, in the event I need to purchase a license, does it matter which foundry I use?