Eric

On another IPB2 forum I've been on, someone wanted to see what would happen if he nested [codebox], a couple is fine but he nested like 15-20 of them and it crashed the browser by just clicking on the topic.It might be a good idea to remove it from the list of custom BBCode in the ACP and just have [code] that people can use. Just incase someone comes along and decides to nest a bunch of them for fun codeboxCODE [edit] added warning to title per Chocolate570 - skemcin

Oh well, I just ended up doing what I said, having two sepeate CSS bits with the two different background colors. It works and no warnings.Thanks for your help.

You get a warning then, saying that you have a color with no background-color :)And it did work before when I had a transparent background, but damn W3C warns that nowIs there anything else you could suggest, other than having two sepeate classes (a:hover.navlink1 and a:hover.navlink2) with background colors?All this extra code can make a website run slower >_>

I can't really set a background color for obvious reasons (it has to blend in with the color of the box, either .nav1 or .nav2 I used background-color: transparent before but when W3C decided to label a 'warning' to it I switched to inherit Nope, Windows XP and IE6

All in one.Apache server, PHP, and others such as CGI, Perl, MySQL, PhpMyAdmin, etc.Uniform Server -> http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.p...ackage_id=48193

When you mouse-over some text, it's supposed to change from white to yellow. But in IE is screws up.This works correctly in Mozilla Firefox and Opera.But fails in Internet Explorer, wow what a supprise </sarcasm>IE is known for it's problems >_>Here's the CSS: .nav1 { background-color: #9F9F9F; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center; padding-left: 3px; padding-right: 3px;}.nav2 { background-color: #6F6F6F; color: #FFFFFF; text-align: center; padding-left: 3px; padding-right: 3px;}a:link.navlink,a:visited.navlink,a:active.navlink { color: #FFFFFF; text-decoration: none; background-color: inherit; font-weight: bold;}a:hover.navlink { color: #FFFF00; text-decoration: none; background-color: inherit; font-weight: bold;} Any help?

If you NAME the file favicon.ico and upload it to the root of your website, then you don't need that <link> tag :(It will automatcally be used as the favorite icon for your entire website.If you have sub-domains, add favicon.ico to the root of your sub-domain or else it won't work on the sub-domains.

There have been many complaints for months on the mail list pages of w3.org from various people eversince this change.Bascally, it was said by a few people that 'warnings' aren't bad :)They said as long as you don't get any 'errors' then your CSS is valid :(if you have a transparent background, they issue a warning saying you have no background color (but transparent backgrounds register as valid).Also, they said at w3.org that if you don't like seeing 'warnings' then you can switch them off when validating. So you only see errors (if any) on the validating page.A few months ago, I was annoyed too. But now I accept it :)Some things you HAVE to use transparent backgrounds, in which case you get 'warnings', but oh well.

I think it will also work with 755Just keep in mind when you deal with fopen fwrite and fclose you want to give the file you're trying to write to premission to allow you to write to it

I remember building websites before CSS was added to browsers, and it wasn't pretty :)And about the "<br>" annoyment you seem to have, it's just 1 extra key stroke to make it <br />. The > and / keys are right next to each other on the keyboard.By the way, your site has 10 errors on it @ ~Shinta, correct use of XHTML 1.1 isn't supported by IE6, so I'd stick with XHTML 1.0 Strict if I was you :(Correct use of XHTML 1.1 requires that you send the document as application/xhtml+xml and IE6 only supports text/htmlHopefully IE7 will support application/xhtml+xml, I'm not sure as it's not publicly released yet and I don't have a Beta copy to test on.

Well, w3schools is written in ASP so it's possible that they put a variable in the menu section of the table, so if it needs to be updated it will update on all pages.That's what I do on my site with PHP, although my layout is pure CSS (and looks good on all major browsers )If it was a choice between tables or frames, I'd go with tables. Older browsers don't support frames. And as hard as it is to believe, some people do use old outdated browsers :)Plus, search engines usually can't read frames, so you won't get a very good rating from popular search engines like Yahoo! and Google.

Fantasico usually has a few auto-install shoppingcart scripts on it.On my own site I just use Paypal. A user can use a Credit Card through it if they don't have a Paypal account, so it works out for everyone

summery is only used by voice browsers for the hard of seeing, or blind.Voice browsers can't read the contents of tables, so the summery is read to tell the user what the table is aboutIt's mainly for accessablility purposes only

Also I think some of the pages have a printer-friendly version, you can print some out

Well, in CSS2 you can add some content, however it doesn't work in IE but does in the other browsers (hopefully IE7 gets better CSS support)table:before { content: content here;}table:after { content: content here;}IE currently doesn't reconize the :before and :after which also means it doesn't reconize 'content'.

That's pretty cool, I've always been using this<a href='somepage.html' onclick="this.target='_blank';return true;">Open Me</a> Works the same way, it will still open if JS is disable, just not in a new window.

But be careful of what type of JavaScript you're going to use. A lot of people rely on the window.open() JavaScript, but if a user has JS disabled in their browser than the link won't work at all.There are other JS methods that offer a type of "fallback" incase the user does have JS disabled

@DeathRay2K, I've read that px IS a fixed value in an e-book I saw a while ago.It's weird, the offical W3C site says differently Anyway, Firefox and Opera can resize even fixed values. Only IE would have a problem changing px (meaning that IE don't resize text written in pixels)The e-book I read also suggests that if you want your text to resize in IE, use em.1em is the size the normal text size2em is double the size0.5em is half the normal sizeetc.

Have you looked at the WAP / WML Tutorial?http://www.w3schools.com/wap/default.asp

I don't see a difference and I checked in Firefox 1.5, IE6, & Opera 8.51

Your code is all weird :)View the page source, and you'll see what I mean.It centeres fine in Firefox and you have valid CSS, so that's all good :)I'd work on validating your HTML though.In your CSS, have you tried centering the body itself?I see this is the only thing in your body (the centering you seem to reply on .wrapper)body { height:100%; margin-top:0px; font:normal 12px "times new roman"; background-color:black;}Where you have this in .wrapper (part in red), try adding to the body and see if it centered in IE..wrapper { margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; position: relative; background: url(theme_images/back2.gif); width:744px;}

You could suggest this to the W3C if you wanted: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/They have an email address there where you can contact them.Although I don't think they would add this to a new version of CSS anytime soon, mainly because W3C doesn't like targets They've been not allowed in all "Strict" versions of HTML.

It looks black to me

You can use floats if you want then, since you don't want to use absolutes.float-left and float-right (you can't float up or down)Here's a floating tutorial I found on google http://css.maxdesign.com.au/floatutorial/introduction.htm

Besides better CSS support (hopefully), I hope IE7 will support Alpha Transparent PNG images. It's so annoying that they don't in IE6 >_> I actually prefer Mozilla Firefox. But one good thing about Opera is that when you increase text size it also increases image size to try to keep the page aligned.Other browsers that I've tried (IE, Firefox, etc.) just increase the text size, meaning that they can overlap images if you increase them by a lot. This messes up the alignment.An example of this: Hold Ctrl and use the scroll-wheel on your mouse (both up and down to see both smaller and larger text).Another bad thing about IE is for accessability issues. If you can't see that well, want want larger text. You can't change the font size in IE if the web arthur sets the font size in pixels or point. Example: 15px 12ptIt only changed the font size if you use em. Example: 1em (normal size) 0.9em (one smaller) 2em (larger) etc.But both Mozilla Firefox and Opera don't have this problem. They can increase font size as large or small as the user wants.