justsomeguy

Well, you don't want the $breadcrumb code in the configure.php file, I think that goes in the page that outputs everything. So don't add any code that wasn't there before, just change what is already there (or copy and paste an existing line to add another one).

Well, either you are telling it to replace the text with the string "HTTP_LINK", or you have set the value of the constant HTTP_LINK to "HTTP_LINK", or there is an error in the algorithm that actually does the replacement. If you are sure that the first two possibilities are not true, then paste the code that does the replacement and we can take a look at that.

I think he's talking about a text box that someone can type a comment in to have the comment appear on the page (like a guestbook).I've never used blogger.com, but I would think that would have to be something that they support, I don't know if you can add your own code or not.

I don't understand what the problem is. You can put the dropdown anywhere you want. You can have it before the table:

<select name="dropdown"><option /></select><table>...</table>

Or in the table:

<table>...<tr><td><select name="dropdown"><option /></select></td></tr></table>

Or after the table:

<table>...</table><select name="dropdown"><option /></select>

You probably have this:$breadcrumb->add(HEADER_TITLE_TOP, 'HTTP_LINK');HTTP_LINK should not be in quotes. $breadcrumb->add(HEADER_TITLE_TOP, HTTP_LINK);

I just don't really agree that a table is a spreadsheet-style table, and nothing else. It is an element, it's a way to structure content, whether that content is a list of numbers and averages or a series of images that frame a paragraph.But I know what the W3C is trying to do, they are trying to build the semantic web, where elements have meaning other than as containers. It would be a good thing, it would allow for a much more broad use of the information on the web, but I don't agree with how they are trying to do that. They are taking the structural elements that we have always used, and redefining them (or, actually just narrowing the definition). I would instead like to see them add meta attributes to all tags, so that the developer can say what the table is, or what the image is, or whatever, and assign it meaning that way, instead of saying that all tables are now for tabular data only.Just my opinion.. I could be wrong.

You can also just hit the Print Screen button, and then open up Paint Shop Pro, or MS Paint or some image application and paste the screenshot from the clipboard. If that's all you want to do.

ExplorerDestroyer is a little agressive. I like this site, it adds humor:http://www.killbillsbrowser.com/I'm with the camp who, if IE were a person, I would try to physically hurt it. Repeatedly. Until it stops moving. And then I would run over it with my car. A few times..My own browser of choice is Opera. I use Firefox for some minor things, but Opera is it for me. I prefer to have everything I use built-in, as opposed to Firefox's legion of extensions. What I'm saying is if Opera were a woman, I would attempt to copulate with it.Also, about the whole "notify Microsoft about IE problems or you can't complain" thing. That's not true, because I still have to use IE. Not as a user, but as a developer. I have to support IE, therefore I have a license to whine about it's problems. Also, I don't think notifying Microsoft would have any effect. The things I'm concerned about are standards compliance, I don't use IE so I don't care how non-secure it is. I don't think notifying Microsoft about standards will do anything, because they are on their own schedule and have their own priorities, and it doesn't seem like they will change either of those based on user response. I think Jonas was absolutely correct, the best way to get Microsoft to produce a browser that plays nice with everything else is to threaten it's position as the dominant browser. Microsoft doesn't respond to "please", it responds to threats. The reason Microsoft is developing IE7 right now (instead of leaving IE6 where it lay, like they originally intended) is because of Firefox, plain and simple. The reason that IE7 has support for tabs isn't because some developer at Microsoft had a great idea, it's because they were implemented in Opera, and then Firefox, and MS realized that it was becoming a major reason why users were switching from IE. They aren't trying to make a "better user experience", they are responding to a threat. Now that only goes for management, the developers working at Microsoft are in fact real people (users, even) who are doing things for the betterment of the user base. But they aren't the ones making the decisions about what goes in (tabs) and what doesn't (CSS support).

I also feel like its worth mentioning that I feel people do come here to learn, contrary to what justsomeguy said.

I didn't mean it that way, there are definately a lot of people (the majority) that are genuinely here to learn. But some of the questions that get asked, or rather the way they get asked, seems to indicate that there are some people who aren't interested in learning. But I do enjoy helping people out, so hopefully they are able to take something away from it.

I learned practically everything I know from copy-n-paste. In fact, I keep a library of code on my USB drive in case I ever get lost trying to figure something out I know I've done before. What I think the real issue in this matter is the amount of critical thinking that is conducted AFTER you copy and paste.

That's true. I guess I'm generalizing here, I'm not expressing myself well. I was referring to what you're talking about, the types that copy and paste code from several places, try to put it all together without understanding it, and then wondering why it doesn't do what they want. I also started in the HTML world by copying and pasting code (or, actually just saving whole pages) and then changing things to see what happened. That's one of the great things about the web, if you see someone do something that interests you, you can just see how they did it and figure it out. It's a great way to learn how to do new things. I don't carry around code with me, but I do have a 'framework' of sorts that I've built up over the years that I use as a start for everything I do. I've been working on a template engine recently (I'm the type who builds my own wheel instead of using the next guy's), so I'm expecting to be able to reuse a lot of the HTML I do as well. Up until recently I've just reused all the PHP, but most of the HTML I rewrite. I tend to concentrate on the functionality, and so my applications are typically centered, no graphics, barebones. I call up my design buddy to make it look decent.

What is funny is that I notice I rarely hold on to details, I focus more on concepts.

That's true, if you know the concepts you don't need to remember the details. That's what places like w3schools and the php.net reference are for. I don't know what the syntax is for using the setcookie function, but I know how to use it and I can identify when I encounter a situation where I can or should use it. When I reach that point, then I head over to the reference and look up the details on implementing it. The same holds for a lot of javascript and css, I don't need to remember the syntax as long as I know where I can go to find it.

would i be right in saying that if tables and css are implemented correctly and used together in an effective way to create an excellent layout would it be good to use them.

I guess that's the question. There are two answers:1) it accomplishes what you are trying to do, so yes, that's right2) the W3C says that tables aren't to be used that way, so no, that's not rightVarious members here agree with one or the other.

SELECT * FROM data, data1 WHERE (sno=sno1 AND ven_dor=ven_dor1) AND (emp_no like ? OR emp_no1 like ?)";

Webservers typically are pretty lean. Certain versions of Windows come with IIS, you don't need to install Apache. I have my main machine at home running XP Pro, and I have IIS running all the time, even when I'm gaming. It doesn't slow anything down noticeably, a server with few hits hardly requires anything. From what I remember MySQL was no problem to install, but PHP requires a little manual configuration and can get a little tricky. But like Nakor said, there is a lot of documentation for it. Check the installation guides on php.net.

there is NO way to get all the browsers to render code consistantly the same way and to standards

This is true. Not to beat a dead horse, but this is what keeps me coming back to tables, because they have been supported forever and I know exactly how it's going to look. Right now CSS feels to me the same way javascript felt 4 years ago, but that's just me. I haven't read any books on CSS, I spend most of my time on PHP and that sort of thing. So part of the problem could be my own non-mastery of CSS, but I would like to think it doesn't require mastery to use well. Anyway, this won't be the case forever, it's a matter of time either way.

In my personal opinion, if you have to use a hack or a browser sniffer (especially for using a whole new set of files) then you have bitten off more than you can chew and should fill out an application at White Castle.

That's probably a little extreme. I mean look at the questions that people ask here, there are plenty of people who don't want to learn, they want you to make their code work. But don't get me wrong, the reason anyone can write and upload content to the web is the reason that the web is so disjointed and fractured. If the only people publishing content online were people who know what they're doing (as opposed to copy/paste artists), the web would be a much nicer place.

Don't get me wrong, this is a HUGE issue for web development.  But it is a nonissue for the web developer.

In an ideal world.. but when the web developer is a kid who just got online yesterday, he's not going to go over to the W3C and read about how they think he should make his site, he's going to start copying and pasting.. and then come here and tell me to fix his code.

I think he's referring to all the red headings in the profile, with the large first letter.Give us an example of what you're changing, and what you add to make the space show up.

change it to a . (apostraphy) if you want to use a class instead.

That's a period, btw. Apostrophe is 'For the divs, if you want to use the IDs, you do it like this:

#container {  ...}#col1 {  ...}etc<div id="container">  <div id="col1"></div>  <div id="col2"></div></div>

If you want to use classes instead:

.container {  ...}.col1 {  ...}etc<div class="container">  <div class="col1"></div>  <div class="col2"></div></div>

You could just have several tabs, and have a content div (or a div for each tag), and use javascript to either load content into the single div, or to change which div is visible for each tab you click on. With the div, you can have a background image and text over it as well.

Yeah, when you install ConTEXT it asks if you want to replace Notepad or not. The best thing about these editors is that they are all free, and they all play nice together. Install a few, and give em a go. There are some editors with better features than ConTEXT, but it has always just felt right to me.

You need to use the $_SERVER array. Figure out where you want to save them, in a file or database or whatever, and use the information in that array. If you want to see everything in the array, use this statement:print_r($_SERVER);http://www.php.net/manual/en/reserved.vari...ariables.server'PHP_SELF' - file name'HTTP_REFERER' - page that linked to this page'HTTP_USER_AGENT' - browser string'REMOTE_ADDR' - user's IP'REMOTE_HOST' - user's host, based on reverse DNS

Well it's probably easier if you just looked up a regexp reference. Here is the PHP reference:http://www.php.net/manual/en/reference.pcr...tern.syntax.phpI don't remember the syntax either, so when I'm answering this I'm looking everything up, it's something you could easily do yourself.How about something like this. You enclose the whole thing in delimiters, and include a caseless modifier so that it is case-insensitive.//iThat's a start. Then you want to match the literal string '<meta', so add that/<meta/iThen you need 0 or more characters after that. So add that./<meta*/iThen it ends with a closing >, so add that./<meta*>/iAnd voila. That wasn't so hard.

You do whatever you want, but you're missing out..screenshots

That's right, generally Flash movies do not interact with the HTML page, other than HTML being able to send initial parameters to the Flash movie. All internal navigation and play or audio control needs to be done in the movie itself, not in the HTML that holds it.

When you refresh a frame, it generally refreshes the frameset (not the individual frames), and reloads whatever frames it started with. With several modern browsers you can right-click on a specific frame and reload just that frame.

If you're trying to make one page that looks good on both 1280x1024 and 320x240, then you're going to have problems. You can always try to detect the user agent and send them a small-screen-formatted version of the same content.

And mark in the code somewhere which links work and which don't.

In that case, all you need is a case-insensitive pattern that finds "<meta ... >", right? That's not difficult to write, are you looking for something more specific?

I would go with pulpfiction's suggestion, that's the way I do all of my own stuff. Have a hidden form variable that tells the page which action it needs to perform.