Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > background-color: #777777 not working in CSS

Reply
Thread Tools

background-color: #777777 not working in CSS

 
 
Kevin Yu
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-03-2004
When I declare on HTML page

<LINK href="mycss.css" type="text/css" rel=stylesheet />
....
<BODY class=myclass>

in mycss.css

BODY { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Geneva; background-image: url(images/back.jpg); }

BODY.myclass { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 15px; FONT-FAMILY: Arial, Geneva; background-color: #777777; }
....

the background-color in the second declaration is NOT taken but the "normal" background image back.jpg is used for the background.

How do I get #777777 as background-color ?

Kevin

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Els
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
Kevin Yu wrote:

[snip]

To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP had a
follow-up set to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets.
That's where everybody's answers went.

--
Els
http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vo. O resto imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
Els
> Kevin Yu wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP had a
> follow-up set to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets.
> That's where everybody's answers went.


Dickhead
<adds OP to killfile>

The OP, not you Els

--
Cheers
Richard.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Els
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
rf wrote:

> Els
>> Kevin Yu wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP
>> had a follow-up set to
>> comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets. That's where
>> everybody's answers went.

>
> Dickhead
> <adds OP to killfile>
>
> The OP, not you Els


I know that

Btw, I think maybe the FAQ (sorry, don't know which ones) aren't
too clear when they state that in case of crossposting it's a
good idea to set a follow-up to one of the groups. Maybe there
should be a clear(er) wording of "mention the follow-up in the
body of the message!"

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vo. O resto imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Rod Stewart - Hot Legs
 
Reply With Quote
 
rf
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
Els
> rf wrote:
> > The OP, not you Els

>
> I know that
>
> Btw, I think maybe the FAQ (sorry, don't know which ones) aren't
> too clear when they state that in case of crossposting it's a
> good idea to set a follow-up to one of the groups. Maybe there
> should be a clear(er) wording of "mention the follow-up in the
> body of the message!"


I was (oddly enough) reading an FAQ somewhere today wherein it was stated in
big black writing that thou shall include, in the body of the post, the fact
that follow-ups have been set. I'm not sure I agree with followup's anyway.
If the post was important enough to cross post then surely both groups
should recieve all the messages, otherwise why crosspost in the first place,
but that is another story.

I had my time wasted because I don't audit ciwas and didn't see *any*
messages and I suspect it was only your good grace in posting a message
direct to ah that stopped even more people wasting their time.

Bloody trivial question anyway, don't know why I bothered

--
Cheers
Richard.


 
Reply With Quote
 
Els
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
rf wrote:

> Els
>> rf wrote:
>> > The OP, not you Els

>>
>> I know that
>>
>> Btw, I think maybe the FAQ (sorry, don't know which ones)
>> aren't too clear when they state that in case of
>> crossposting it's a good idea to set a follow-up to one of
>> the groups. Maybe there should be a clear(er) wording of
>> "mention the follow-up in the body of the message!"

>
> I was (oddly enough) reading an FAQ somewhere today wherein
> it was stated in big black writing that thou shall include,
> in the body of the post, the fact that follow-ups have been
> set. I'm not sure I agree with followup's anyway. If the
> post was important enough to cross post then surely both
> groups should recieve all the messages, otherwise why
> crosspost in the first place, but that is another story.


True. Let's change the "FAQ somewhere"

> I had my time wasted because I don't audit ciwas


I do, and I first answered the question, as alt.html is
alfabetically listed above ciwas, and then saw 19 people had
done the same. (Well, only 13 answered, and 6 responded to
those answers). So I had my time wasted *plus* was feeling
like a fool 2 minutes later

> and didn't
> see *any* messages and I suspect it was only your good
> grace in posting a message direct to ah that stopped even
> more people wasting their time.


That's why I posted that message

> Bloody trivial question anyway, don't know why I bothered
>


It's automatic, a reflex. You see a question, you know the
answer, you respond. Nothing you can do about it

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vo. O resto imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Don McLean - American Pie
 
Reply With Quote
 
Dylan Parry
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
Els wrote:

> I do, and I first answered the question, as alt.html is
> alfabetically listed above ciwas, and then saw 19 people had
> done the same. (Well, only 13 answered, and 6 responded to
> those answers). So I had my time wasted *plus* was feeling
> like a fool 2 minutes later


I was only the second person to reply... not knowing someone else had
given a perfectly fine answer before mine. Incidentally, I gave the same
solution as you, Els, not the rest of the peeps.

Even being the first person to waste my time, I felt dirty and used <g>

--
Dylan Parry
http://webpageworkshop.co.uk - FREE Web tutorials and references

Listening to: Dream Theater - Act II Scene Seven: II. One Last Time
 
Reply With Quote
 
Els
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
Dylan Parry wrote:

> Els wrote:
>
>> I do, and I first answered the question, as alt.html is
>> alfabetically listed above ciwas, and then saw 19 people
>> had done the same. (Well, only 13 answered, and 6
>> responded to those answers). So I had my time wasted
>> *plus* was feeling like a fool 2 minutes later

>
> I was only the second person to reply... not knowing
> someone else had given a perfectly fine answer before mine.
> Incidentally, I gave the same solution as you, Els, not the
> rest of the peeps.


You're saying you actually read and paid attention to all the
answers? Now that's wasting your time!

> Even being the first person to waste my time, I felt dirty
> and used <g>



You suppose we could sue the OP for abuse then?

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vo. O resto imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Captain Sensible - Wot
 
Reply With Quote
 
lime
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-04-2004
> Kevin Yu wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> To avoid anyone else answering the same question: the OP had a
> follow-up set to comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets.
> That's where everybody's answers went.


Aww, I wondered where my reply went....


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CSS Not Working David Firefox 6 11-30-2005 07:54 PM
wifi not working on new hp, or not working after live update =?Utf-8?B?RHJhZ29ueA==?= Wireless Networking 1 10-01-2005 11:17 PM
css hyperlinks not working kiki ASP .Net 0 08-14-2004 05:10 PM
CSS - Load Balancing SMTP - Not working(HELP) Jim Cisco 2 12-17-2003 09:20 PM
Re: CSS linked in aspx not working Cy Huckaba ASP .Net 0 06-24-2003 11:30 PM



Advertisments