«

What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags? I want to
locate a counter two or three screens below the last line in the page.
Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter invisible.

mcp6453 wrote:
> What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
> HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags? I want
> to locate a counter two or three screens below the last line in the
> page. Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter invisible.

Too late, April Fools Day was a few days ago!
--
Andrew Urquhart
- Reply: www.andrewu.co.uk/contact/

Andrew Urquhart wrote:
>
> mcp6453 wrote:
> > What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
> > HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags? I want
> > to locate a counter two or three screens below the last line in the
> > page. Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter invisible.
>
> Too late, April Fools Day was a few days ago!

I guess I miss the joke. Any suggestions?

mcp6453 wrote:
> Andrew Urquhart wrote:
>
>>mcp6453 wrote:
>>
>>>What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
>>>HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags? I want
>>>to locate a counter two or three screens below the last line in the
>>>page. Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter invisible.
>>
>>Too late, April Fools Day was a few days ago!

> I guess I miss the joke. Any suggestions?

What hit counter do you want to use?

Google has lots of hits for 'invisible hit counter'.

http://www.statcounter.com/
http://darkcounter.com/
http://www.t-counters.com/
http://www.freewebcounter.com

mcp6453 wrote:

> What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
> HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags? I want to
> locate a counter two or three screens below the last line in the page.
> Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter invisible.

There are invisible counters out there.

The most efficient way would be through a GIF file.

50 <br /> tags takes up 400 bytes of data.

This GIF file, 1000 pixels long, 1 pixel wide, white, is 63 bytes in size.
www.dancingborg.co.uk/white.gif


Even allowing for:

<div align="right">
<img src="images/white.gif" />
</div>

That's 59 bytes of data. In total that's 122 bytes of data. That's 327%
more efficient than doing 50 <br />s.

On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 19:39:11 -0500, mcp6453 wrote:

> I guess I miss the joke. Any suggestions?

Yes.

>> mcp6453 wrote:
>> > What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
>> > HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags?

"I want to do something but I refuse to use the tool designed specifically
for this task" (CSS)

>> > I want to locate a counter two or three screens below the last line
>> > in the page. Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter
>> > invisible.

"I want to do something but I refuse to use the tool designed specifically
for this task" (read the webserver log files, or use a tool like analog to
read them for you)

--
Some say the Wired doesn't have political borders like the real world,
but there are far too many nonsense-spouting anarchists or idiots who
think that pranks are a revolution.

mscir <news:>:

> mcp6453 wrote:
[snip]
>>>mcp6453 wrote:
>>>
>>>>What is the most efficient way to add white space to the
>>>>bottom of an HTML page without using Style Sheets or without
>>>>50 <br> tags?

I have yet to see a valid reason for doing such a thing. It is
akin to adding 6 inches to the bottom of a printed book page -
except in a printed book, that space might be used for notes.

>>>>I want to locate a counter two or three screens below the
>>>>last line in the page. Unfortunately, I don't know how to
>>>>make the counter invisible.

There's no point to this. A typical user will see that the page
scrolls 'beyond the content' and go to see what is there.

> Google has lots of hits for 'invisible hit counter'.

Yep, many can be made invisible or you can cheat and make the
tracking image very small. Or you can get some paid hosting with
server logs to analyze and forget the hit counter.

--
Rob - http://rock13.com/
Web Stuff: http://rock13.com/webhelp/

Weyoun the gowd damn Dominion Vorta who certainly didn't dance wrote:
>
> mcp6453 wrote:
>
> > What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
> > HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags? I want to
> > locate a counter two or three screens below the last line in the page.
> > Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter invisible.
>
> There are invisible counters out there.
>
> The most efficient way would be through a GIF file.
>
> 50 <br /> tags takes up 400 bytes of data.
>
> This GIF file, 1000 pixels long, 1 pixel wide, white, is 63 bytes in size.
> www.dancingborg.co.uk/white.gif
>
> Even allowing for:
>
> <div align="right">
> <img src="images/white.gif" />
> </div>
>
> That's 59 bytes of data. In total that's 122 bytes of data. That's 327%
> more efficient than doing 50 <br />s.


Finally, a reasonable answer. Thanks.

, Once upon a time in a land far away mcp6453 was alleged to have said:
> Weyoun the gowd damn Dominion Vorta who certainly didn't dance wrote:
>
>>mcp6453 wrote:
>>
>>
>>>What is the most efficient way to add white space to the bottom of an
>>>HTML page without using Style Sheets or without 50 <br> tags? I want to
>>>locate a counter two or three screens below the last line in the page.
>>>Unfortunately, I don't know how to make the counter invisible.
>>
>>There are invisible counters out there.
>>
>>The most efficient way would be through a GIF file.
>>
>>50 <br /> tags takes up 400 bytes of data.
>>
>>This GIF file, 1000 pixels long, 1 pixel wide, white, is 63 bytes in size.
>>www.dancingborg.co.uk/white.gif
>>
>>Even allowing for:
>>
>><div align="right">
>><img src="images/white.gif" />
>></div>
>>
>>That's 59 bytes of data. In total that's 122 bytes of data. That's 327%
>>more efficient than doing 50 <br />s.
>
>
>
> Finally, a reasonable answer. Thanks.

Of course, a 1x1 pixel gif displayed at a height of 1000 would be even
smaller......



--
RUDE BABIES & LITTLE PUSSY SPORTSWEAR

Funny shirts for babies & their moms
http://www.cafeshops.com/rudebabies

Weyoun the gowd damn Dominion Vorta who certainly didn't dance wrote:

> 50 <br /> tags takes up 400 bytes of data.

50 <br> tags (assuming HTML rather than XHTML) takes 200 bytes -- not 400.

See the directory listing here:

http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/scratch/

Look at the file "50br.html". This is 201 bytes in size (the extra 1 byte
is for the line break at the end).

> This GIF file, 1000 pixels long, 1 pixel wide, white, is 63 bytes in size.
> www.dancingborg.co.uk/white.gif
>
> Even allowing for:
>
> <div align="right">
> <img src="images/white.gif" />
> </div>
>
> That's 59 bytes of data. In total that's 122 bytes of data. That's 327%
> more efficient than doing 50 <br />s.

Total crap. You're completely ignoring the extra HTTP request for an
external image file, which would add on about an extra quarter of a KB,
making the line breaks far more efficient.

Of course, even more efficient would be this:

<p style="height:99em">&nbsp;</p>

Which is 33 bytes. However, the OP seems to have some kind of CSS allergy.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me - http://www.goddamn.co.uk/tobyink/?page=132