Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > HTML > Re: Replacing tables with divs

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Replacing tables with divs

 
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-12-2012
Hot-Text wrote:
> "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:jjkq74$ctf$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hot-Text wrote:
>>>
>>> For UL LI can not be on the same line

>>
>> Aside of the fact that *no one* is using that ancient version of
>> Netscape that didn't support the STYLE element, UL and LI can
>> ABSOLUTELY "be on the same line" in a stylesheet rule. You need to
>> look up *descendant selectors*.
>>

>
> CSS1 in 1996 that old and not all browser is able to support it today...


Rubbish. You do not need to use HTML comments around CSS within a STYLE
element. NN2 is long long dead.

>
> LI is not a grandchildren of UL, but a Child thereof..


Who said otherwise?

>
> LI is a grandchildren to TD, Div and more,
> For UL is the child of TD, Div and more..


Could be yes, but not the point of your error.

>
> You need to look at the family tree for STYLE element..
>


family tree?

>
> < http://software.visicommedia.com/en/products/acehtml/ >


What does this have to do with the price of rice in China? Are you a
salesman or do you rely on a IDE because you do not know HTML?

<style type="text/css">
/* this is a perfectly VALID rule */
ul li { font-size: 8em; }
</style>

You need to look up *descendant selectors*, here I will assist you:
<http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#descendant-selectors>

Your inaccurate "advice" does not help newbies.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-12-2012
Hot-Text wrote:
> "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message


<snip>

>> <style type="text/css">
>> /* this is a perfectly VALID rule */
>> ul li { font-size: 8em; }
>> </style>
>>
>> You need to look up *descendant selectors*, here I will assist you:
>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#descendant-selectors>
>>
>> Your inaccurate "advice" does not help newbies.
>>

>
> ul li { font-size: 8em; } it not a perfectly VALID rule
> 3 Conformance: Requirements and Recommendations
>
> < http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/conform.html#replaced-element >
>


What? How is that applicable, neither UL nor LI are replaced elements?
And what does that have to do with have a descendant selectors rule.

BTW descendant can be a child, grand-child great-grand-child... so this
is also valid

UL A { text-decoration: none; }

<ul>
<li><a href="http://example.com">Link with NO underline</a></li>
</ul>



--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2012
Hot-Text wrote:
>
>
> "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:jjl7dk$u87$(E-Mail Removed)...
>> Hot-Text wrote:
>>> "Jonathan N. Little" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message

>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> <style type="text/css">
>>>> /* this is a perfectly VALID rule */
>>>> ul li { font-size: 8em; }
>>>> </style>
>>>>
>>>> You need to look up *descendant selectors*, here I will assist you:
>>>> <http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/selector.html#descendant-selectors>
>>>>
>>>> Your inaccurate "advice" does not help newbies.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ul li { font-size: 8em; } it not a perfectly VALID rule
>>> 3 Conformance: Requirements and Recommendations
>>>
>>> < http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/conform.html#replaced-element >
>>>

>>
>> What? How is that applicable, neither UL nor LI are replaced elements?
>> And what does that have to do with have a descendant selectors rule.
>>

>
> read it and you till me...


"read it and you tell me..."

I have is has nothing to do with descendant selectors which is obvious
that you do not understand.

>
>>
>> BTW descendant can be a child, grand-child great-grand-child... so
>> this is also valid
>>
>> UL A { text-decoration: none; }
>>
>> <ul>
>> <li><a href="http://example.com">Link with NO underline</a></li>
>> </ul>
>>
>>

>
> Now like that is right a true.......


Crying "uncle" here, I can not make any sense of you are trying to say
with that. However, safe to say what you previously stated as "advice"
about CSS is absolutely incorrect.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2012
Jonathan N. Little wrote:

> Hot-Text wrote:
>> Now like that is right a true.......

>
> Crying "uncle" here, I can not make any sense of you are trying to say
> with that. However, safe to say what you previously stated as "advice"
> about CSS is absolutely incorrect.


It's hard to get valid code (or valid spelling, grammar and conversation)
out of his random word generator.

--
-bts
-This space for rent, but the price is high
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jonathan N. Little
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2012
Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

> It's hard to get valid code (or valid spelling, grammar and conversation)
> out of his random word generator.


I think random would be more coherent.

--
Take care,

Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Beauregard T. Shagnasty
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-14-2012
Hot-Text wrote:

> Jonathan N. Little wrote:
>> Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> It's hard to get valid code (or valid spelling, grammar and
>>> conversation) out of his random word generator.

>>
>> I think random would be more coherent.

>
> look like you are unable to comprehend, or grasp the meaning,
> or understand the nature of something, being it of a conversation
> questions, in good English grammar lessons,
> or invalid spelling generator......


You should upgrade to Generator 2.0 because the one you are using still
isn't working.

--
-bts
-This space for rent, but the price is high
 
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
Re: Replacing tables with divs dorayme HTML 15 03-11-2012 02:28 AM
Re: Replacing tables with divs idle HTML 14 03-09-2012 04:17 AM
Re: Replacing tables with divs Jukka K. Korpela HTML 3 03-08-2012 01:40 PM
Re: Replacing tables with divs Gus Richter HTML 0 03-08-2012 01:16 AM
Managing divs within divs.... rich HTML 0 02-02-2006 07:38 PM



Advertisments