August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to AJG | I agree totally. I'll work on it. |
August 23, 2005 Re: Fixed Navigation (was "no frames") | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | On Tue, 23 Aug 2005 15:15:54 +1100, Walter <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>
> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message
> news:dee1ij$1pi2$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>>
>> "AJG" <AJG@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:deduje$1mca$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> > Having said that, before some ungodly javascript floating hack is
>> > introduced to create the effect of a fixed menu, please consider using
>> > the official solution, which is CSS.
>> >
>> > Here's a simple example:
>> >
>> > http://limpid.nl/lab/css/fixed/left-sidebar
>> >
>> > Variations, including headers/footers, left and right, etc. can be
>> found
>> > here:
>> >
>> > http://annevankesteren.nl/2004/07/fixed-positioning
>>
>> That looks pretty good.
>
> Oh darn, there is a problem with it - if the left-sidebar is taller than the
> screen. It can't be scrolled!
>
Such behaviour is completely controlled by overflow:hidden CSS option.
|
August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | Walter wrote:
> I agree totally. I'll work on it.
Awesome.
--AJG.
|
August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to AJG | "AJG" <AJG@nospam.com> wrote in message news:deeb3g$27o1$2@digitaldaemon.com... > Walter wrote: > > I agree totally. I'll work on it. > > Awesome. > --AJG. The phobos stuff is done. It only awaits google to reindex it before the search works. |
August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to AJG | In article <dee448$1sh0$1@digitaldaemon.com>, AJG says... > >Hi, > >zwang wrote: >> Walter wrote: >> >>> "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:ded3u7$hkf$1@digitaldaemon.com... >>> >>>> Awful. Not only does it look like a beginner HTML coder made the site, >>> >>> >>> >>> No surprise there, I am a beginner html coder <g>. >>> >>> >>>> it's also a pain to navigate. I miss the frames. >>> >>> >>> >>> The problem with frames is that no other web sites use them for navigation, >> >> >> Sun's JDK online documentation uses frames; >> Microsoft's MSDN documentation uses frames; >> ...and many more. > >I can't speak for the Sun site, but the MSDN navigation menu is a god-forsaken creature best banished to the pits of hell. It's slow, clumsy, overly complex, convoluted, deeply-nested, and is known to crash IE. Worst of all, it uses frames, which are downright sinful by themselves. Avoid such design at _all_ costs. > >That's not to say the _content_ of MSDN is bad. In fact, not at all. It's navigation menu that is its Achille's Heel. I absolutely agree. MSDN's navigation and slow and cumbersome. MSDN's content is good. jcc7 |
August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | In article <debngi$29kg$2@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says... > >Improvement? Keep it? Yes. And yes. I think it's a great improvement. >www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html By the way, I think you forgot to add the sidebar to the glossary: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/glossary.html jcc7 |
August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to J C Calvarese | "J C Calvarese" <technocrat7@gmail.com> wrote in message news:deenko$2oaq$1@digitaldaemon.com... > By the way, I think you forgot to add the sidebar to the glossary: http://www.digitalmars.com/d/glossary.html Fixed. |
August 23, 2005 Re: Fixed Navigation (was "no frames") | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Hasan Aljudy | In case if any of you interested in html/css, and in case didn't know that site before: http://www.csszengarden.com/ "A demonstration of what can be accomplished visually through CSS-based design." ElfQT |
August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Derek Parnell | Derek Parnell wrote: > On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 22:23:22 -0700, Walter wrote: > >> Improvement? Keep it? >> >> www.digitalmars.com/d/index.html > > Yes an improvement, though I didn't have a problem with frames. It looks > cleaner, neater and pleasant. <snip> But still laden with the flaws I pointed out before from here on: http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?digitalmars.D/23990 Not to mention inconsistent fonts, an empty std_base64.html and still more pages that have been left out of the conversion: - the techtips pages (which are in www.digitalmars.com/techtips not www.digitalmars.com/d but are clearly D-oriented - so what's supposed to happen here?) - dnews.html - builtin.html - newsgroup archives That reminds me Derek - you were going have a go at tidying up the pages. How far have you got with it? Stewart. -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 GCS/M d- s:- a->--- UB@ P+ L E@ W++@ N+++ o K- w++@ O? M V? PS- PE- Y? PGP- t- 5? X? R b DI? D G e++>++++ h-- r-- !y ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit. |
August 23, 2005 Re: no frames | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | Walter wrote: > "J C Calvarese" <technocrat7@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:deenko$2oaq$1@digitaldaemon.com... > >>By the way, I think you forgot to add the sidebar to the glossary: >>http://www.digitalmars.com/d/glossary.html > > > Fixed. > > I think techtips has the same problem: http://www.digitalmars.com/techtips/index.html |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation