ok jasu i added browser compatibility rule good thinking...
and also added clicky2's idea, no limit to entries i think is ok, think as its open battle no limit should be set, will change if enough objection to any rule added...
in the list of links you have " »" in front of any list item, why?
I *think* you can't order the links the same way as flashkit itself has is, you need the list differently ordened (display:inline) or have classes or id's for each list of links.
The input field and button is missing in this class. (again it could be an id):
In my opinion, the only reason that line was added was because the site had no header (I would have changed <i>...</i> to <h1>...</h1>)
You should be free to change, add, remove any and all classes and ids, as well as add or remove spans and divs wherever you please. The actual content should stay the same.
in the list of links you have " »" in front of any list item, why?
It was part of the content of the original page
I *think* you can't order the links the same way as flashkit itself has is, you need the list differently ordened (display:inline) or have classes or id's for each list of links.
ordering of links is the same as in the original page. The display:inline will be your choice as it would be part of the styling, as well as classes or ids.
The input field and button is missing in this class. (again it could be an id):
BTW why not restrict the xhtml as it is and only have the option to change the css.
Technically, that is how it will be played out, with the exception of divs, spans, classes and ids, the rest of the XHTML should remain unchanged. So, no adding images in XHTML, only through CSS. No adding other sections, and so on.
the only reason that line was added was because the site had no header (I would have changed <i>...</i> to <h1>...</h1>)
that should be fine.
ordering of links is the same as in the original page. The display:inline will be your choice as it would be part of the styling, as well as classes or ids.
display: inline would be in the css. By adding divs, it should be possible to change the lay-out.
There is none in the original page.
Sorry, thought that search box was the same as this page.
That will keep it from wrapping, we wouldn't want
movies
(0)
now would we
I prefer the css way:
PHP Code:
white-space: nowrap
(as it's more design than content)
Technically, that is how it will be played out, with the exception of divs, spans, classes and ids, the rest of the XHTML should remain unchanged. So, no adding images in XHTML, only through CSS. No adding other sections, and so on.
I wrote the base XHTML code (seen here), and I did state that there were a few errors that I didn't have time to correct.
why the <i> here?
Note the source files above, the <i> element is merely there to hide all text within the element from CSS capable browsers (I could have used any element, but this was unused). Thus, CSS browsers see the image, non-CSS'ers see the text within the image.
(why is the logo a class anyway?)
This, and I believe the other errors you pointed out were already in the original source. I did little HTML editing, aside from making everything XHTML compliant.
Originally posted by LiquidGuy Note the source files above, the <i> element is merely there to hide all text within the element from CSS capable browsers (I could have used any element, but this was unused). Thus, CSS browsers see the image, non-CSS'ers see the text within the image.
You know, a span is more traditional as it has no effect on the text
Ok - I was a little bored this afternoon so I thought i'd put something together for this (appologies in advance for the cliché hand on keyboard photo...)
)
Reply With Quote
