Guest denied Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 I want to make a rounded corner. I use this: border: 1px solid gray; How to make it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnmendel Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 heres a tutorial. http://kalsey.com/2003/07/rounded_corners_in_css/Google, and thou shall recieve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgrath Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 heres a tutorial. http://kalsey.com/2003/07/rounded_corners_in_css/Google, and thou shall recieve.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> is there anyway making rouded corners with out using images Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnmendel Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 yup. again i take no credit. http://pro.html.it/esempio/nifty/, that uses multiple margins going in a pixel on each side, sucessivly, to round the corner. again, google is your friend if you get to know him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspnetguy Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 yup. again i take no credit. http://pro.html.it/esempio/nifty/, that uses multiple margins going in a pixel on each side, sucessivly, to round the corner. again, google is your friend if you get to know him.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> that is friggin awesome!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Rounded corners, no pictures, pure css:http://www.cssplay.co.uk/boxes/snazzy.htmlhttp://www.cssplay.co.uk/boxes/curves.htmlOther corners:http://www.cssplay.co.uk/boxes/krazy.htmlhttp://www.cssplay.co.uk/ is the best css demonstration site out there, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~Shinta Posted January 27, 2006 Report Share Posted January 27, 2006 Woah, that is awesome. I will be using this all the time now! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 http://www.cssplay.co.uk/ is the best css demonstration site out there, IMO. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Their examples could be better though, I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted January 28, 2006 Report Share Posted January 28, 2006 Their examples could be better though, I think.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ok, then why don't you make a site and do it better.CSS generated snowman picture Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcgrath Posted January 30, 2006 Report Share Posted January 30, 2006 its really awesome!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Ok, then why don't you make a site and do it better.CSS generated snowman picture <{POST_SNAPBACK}> At least I don't send XHTML 1.1 as text/html :)Also, I HAVE made a better site to learn advanced CSS skills, I just don't go around advertising my successes like some other people on here...... :(Quite a number of different professional-level CSS layouts, and other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspnetguy Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Jonas, Eric you are being petty...your energy could be better used helping people with your vast knowledge instead of this pissing match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plantigrade Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Stu Nicholls is a living god.IMHO.plantigrade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspnetguy Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I wish I had as much time as he does to play with this stuff...lol....oh what...I probably do I just spend it playing GTA3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 At least I don't send XHTML 1.1 as text/html <{POST_SNAPBACK}> http://www.cssplay.co.uk/menu/snowman.html<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="application/xhtml+xml; charset=UTF-8" />Seems like application/xhtml+xml to me though. Anyhoo, I love his site, you don't. Whatever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 http://www.cssplay.co.uk/menu/snowman.html<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="application/xhtml+xml; charset=UTF-8" />Seems like application/xhtml+xml to me though. Anyhoo, I love his site, you don't. Whatever.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Please don't tell me you're THAT (I won't say it)META DOES NOT DETERMAND THE CONTENT TYPE. THE SERVER HEADER DOES, BUT YOU CAN CHANGE THIS IN .HTACCESS OR PHPThat reply just made me lose respect points for you Jonas http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&ur...%2Fsnowman.htmlLook there, that is what the server header is putting out.The site is being sent as text/htmlOMGWTF NOOB!!!!Please Note: Anything I said in this post in just in joke. I'm supprised you didn't know that about <meta> actually NOT determanding content type, but I didn't mean the "noob" or "respect" comments. I still like you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspnetguy Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Eric...you have some anger issues...but you are right.At the risk of being verbally bashed by you.... What are the REAL advantages/disadvantages of send XHTML 1.1 as text/html instead of XML???I know IE does not support it if sent as XML but really what is the big deal??? I send 1.1 it as text/html all the time...it isn't any different then 1.0 strict (so I guess it defeats the purpose) but so what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 The advantage is it's correct.The disadvantage is that W3C said in the XHTML 1.1 Specification that you're not allowed to use text/html. Using text/html is in violation of the specification.The validator has limitations (as noted by the W3C) so it will say your page is valid, but it truely isn't if sent in text/html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspnetguy Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 The advantage is it's correct.The disadvantage is that W3C said in the XHTML 1.1 Specification that you're not allowed to use text/html. Using text/html is in violation of the specification<{POST_SNAPBACK}> enough said, thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Glad I could help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Please don't tell me you're THAT (I won't say it)META DOES NOT DETERMAND THE CONTENT TYPE. THE SERVER HEADER DOES, BUT YOU CAN CHANGE THIS IN .HTACCESS OR PHPThat reply just made me lose respect points for you Jonas http://validator.w3.org/check?verbose=1&ur...%2Fsnowman.htmlLook there, that is what the server header is putting out.The site is being sent as text/htmlOMGWTF NOOB!!!!Please Note: Anything I said in this post in just in joke. I'm supprised you didn't know that about <meta> actually NOT determanding content type, but I didn't mean the "noob" or "respect" comments. I still like you <{POST_SNAPBACK}> :DRiiiiight.Ok, so strike one for me. How many respect points does that leave me with actually? <meta> doesn't set content-type. So what's the point of meta code? Why include it, why does the w3 html validator demand it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 W3 html validator asks for it for the character setExample:<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />The part in red is what is really read when going thru the validator.If you use .htaccess or PHP to set the character set, then the <meta> tag isn't needed at all.If you'd like, I can show you a webpage with no <meta> tag at all, and still 100% valid by the validator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonas Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aspnetguy Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I was confused about that too. thx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 (edited) Shoot.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> *edits out website*I decided I don't want any trace of websites I've worked on to be linked to this website Edited February 9, 2006 by Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now