crisp

Hi there I've got some HTML output that I'd like to be able to copy into Word 2010 and adopt the Word document's formatting. I have found that <h1> tags correlate to Heading 1 styles in word, but is there a way to map other tags or CSS styles to Word styles? Thanks.

Aha, not sure how I missed that - sorted! Thanks, Zed.

I've just done a new iteration of a website and I've only just noticed that there's a horizontal scroll bar present, even though the website is still centered to the actual screen (probably why I didn't notice). I can't find what might be causing this, I wonder if anyone else can? The issue is present on all pages, so it must be a global template problem and not anything on any one specific page. The URL is www.agile.uk.com - any suggestions would be well received, it's a fairly new issue; I looked back at an older version and it wasn't there before. Cheers.

I know! I think my monitor 10 years ago had higher res than most "HD" TVs... I might ask him to get a web page up on it and see if the text is viewable when made large - if it's not, this might be a no go area. I'm not sure of what other options are out there. There are other people at my company who might be able to come up with something not website oriented.

Hi there, one of my clients has approached me about designing a webpage for a 47" tv in their foyer (unsure of the resolution at this stage). Currently they have an old powerpoint presentation cycling on it, but would like to have basic content management, rss feeds, a couple of photos and a clock etc. I can do all of this... with normal computer useage in mind. I've never done anything specifically for a big screen before, so is there anything I should be aware of before I begin? It obviously cant scroll, so if I limit it to height 100% and use % and em throughout, it should look the same on my computer (more or less) as it will on their tv, right? Also, they have a dedicated computer for this but what kind of connection will they need to ensure text is readable etc - hdmi? Any thoughts around this would be useful. Cheers.

It seems like you can turn them into a "smart object", is that the desired method?

I've done that and it does show them as all linked, however when I used the arrow keys to move (this is with the move tool selected) either with one of the layers selected or all of the layers selected, it doesn't move them all in unison - it just moved one of the layers as before. Any ideas?

So there's no way to have it as a (semi) permenant arrangement?

Coming from the web development side of things, I've recently decided to push my web design skills. When I've had to do anything graphic oriented before, it's been GIMP to the rescue. But I've decided it's time to get to grips with Photoshop. So, here comes a photoshop layer question: Is there a way to "lock" layers to each other? The desired effect is that two or more seperate layers are positionally locked to each other. For example, I might have a box as one layer, and in the center of that a small image. If I want to reposition these, at the moment I'm selecting the first layer, hitting right 10 times, then going to the "associated" later, and hitting right 10 times on that too. Ideally I'd be able to freely move any of these two layers and the other would move with it. Sometimes I may need to do this with more than two layers. If I've not explained this correctly, please let me know and I'll try to elaborate. Cheers in advance.

Stay away from iframes as your website won't be easily crawlable by search engines. The easiest way would probably be to use PHP includes or something along those lines.

To add to the forum point, don't even consider rolling your own. It'll take ages, be bug ridden, have security holes, lack of features, etc. Go with one of the many excellent free ones out there that have many people constantly working on and evaluating them. All of these provide theme abilities, so you can make it look however you want. Also explain to them that they won't be making any kind of real money from ads until they have substantial traffic, and even then it wont be loads. To get that kind of traffic, a constantly updated live and happening website is required. If they just want a few static pages and then leave it to rot then forget it, they'd be better off without ads - it'd look better too. I'm talking news updates, articles, etc. This takes time, something a lot of people underestimate with a successful website. The above being the case, you'd definitely need to integrate it with a CMS. Again, no point reinventing the wheel, there are plenty of very good (and lots of very free) solutions out there. You are out of your depth as bocaj said, but depending on your existing skillset a solid weekend or two should get you up to speed on one CMS and one piece of forum software. Go from there.

Your index can be anything, index.html, index.php, index.haha, home.ohhai... it just depends on how you've configured your server. Apache looks down a list of preset file names for the index, and the first one it hits it uses. By convention we use index in the Apache world, but there's nothing to stop you using something else. Now, unless you configure your server setup to interpret .html files as PHP files, you're going to run into trouble using any PHP in a HTML file. Therefore, by default, if there is any amount of PHP going on in your pages it should have a .php extension, therefore index.php. It sounds like you're a little confused though. The filename & extension is almost irrelevant. The best practise would be to use some kind of templating system (e.g. see Smarty for PHP) to keep your logic away from your presentation layer, especially if this is to be a big project. If you don't do this then it doesn't matter what the file is called, so long as your server is setup to know which file names should be interpreted as directory "home pages" and which extensions should be interpreted as PHP.

Yup, look up Quirks mode, it's falling back on that. Edit: In fact on removing the rogue " it seems fine. you should still add a doctype though.

I tend to include it as part of an SEO package regardless of the monthly fee, which of course depends on their industry, goals, etc. If they just want basic stats (i.e. not as part of an SEO campaign) to have a rough idea of how much traffic they're getting and other related stats, then I'd provide them with awstats or the like. Again, this usually comes free as part of the hosting. I can't see the value in providing reports if it's not part of an SEO campaign, and if it is then it should probably be a standard included feature.

Looks fine to me, could you explain exactly what you mean?