jamaks

Hi, I would suggest adding in the height as well as the width you wish the image to show. Since the actual is 411 x 66 to display as 450 wide you should use a height of 72 to keep the proportions. Also it appears that you are trying to make the image a link <h1 class="logo"><img width="450" alt="Kissane Associates" src="image/Kissane-Associates-logo.png"><a href="#">Kissane Associates</a></h1> without actually anchoring the image. I do not know if the h1 class logo is important as I have not checked the style behind it but would suggest <a href="#"><img src="image/Kissane-Associates-logo.png" width="450" height="72" alt="Kissane-Associates"></a> would work better, and you could wrap it in the h1 class logo if required. Jim

Hi Robin, just had a play with your coding and made a few small changes. Put the header back to standard size and reordered the divisions so that your content now comes before your nav which is generally better for SEO. Added as attachments so you can compare and use anything you find useful. Jim gd.cssgd.html

Hi David, tried editing your image and this is the best I can come up with. Have a look and I think you will see some improvement. Jim

Hello Everyone, have a domain name for sale and thought I would offer WDF members first chance. Bought it for a project that I never got to and probably never will. Domain Name is with Godaddy and you would need an account there in order that I could push it to you. Domain Name Only. Not looking for any silly figures like that given by the website named by http://www.webdesignerforum.co.uk/topic/2015-your-domain-value/ but hope it will have genuine value to someone here. Make me an offer. PM me or email jim at hosting-a-website.com Thankyou. Jim

Hi, what you can do is place each additional "domain" within a sub domain and then point you domain name towards the relevant sub domain with a frame direction. For instance clarkesforestryservices.co.uk/fencingservices would be the real address but with a frame direction the address bar would show fencingservices.co.uk And by using the corresponding canonical tags it should also appear to be a seperate entity within the SERPS. Hope this makes sense. Jim

Hi, thanks for that. Never seen that used but have never used tables either. Could be a handy one to remember though where cannot for some reason style directly. Thanks again. Jim

Hi, glad you got it, as I was going to suggest that without adding at least one containing division within the html it was not practical. Samus, could you please give me an explanation of your code snippet body > table { width: 760px; margin: 0 auto; } since I am not familiar with the use of > in this manner. Jim

Hi, if you are talking about the textarea it is possible to stipulate the number of rows or columns it has something along the lines of: <p><textarea name="comments" rows="auto" cols="16" id="comments"></textarea></p> Play with the values until you achieve desired effect. Jim

Hi, the checks are simply an indication that the image is transparent. You would not use a gradient to produce a checked background but could make a very simple background image yourself with any image editor. Paint is included in windows and it would be a matter of trial and error to get the result you require. Try opening paint, which if you have not used it before can be found "all programs > accessories > paint" and resize the box offered to 6px square. Click on "colors > edit colors > define custom colors" and in the right hand column which should by default be 0, 0, 0 change those boxes to 240 red green and blue. This gives you a light grey color. Click add to custom colors then okay. back on your opening screen with your 6px square color in any 3 by 3px square that takes your fancy. Save as bg (or any name you want) and use the extension you wish (suggest png or jpg) Save in a location where you can find it again later. If you wish this as a background for the whole page add this into your body style block: background-image:url(bg.png);background-position:0 0;background-repeat:repeat; Edit the url address to suit the actual img name/location. If you only want the background in a certain section them add the additional style to the relative style block. Play with the color and sizing until you find the result you are looking for. Jim

Hi, seems that you rarely get the styling with the w3c validator for some weeks now. Suggests to me that the problem is with their server not meeting the request. Jim

Hi, my feelings towards IE6 are anything but romantic. It is a pain in the proverbial but I enjoy the challenges it provides but refuse to use hacks and workabouts just to accomodate it. I happen to believe that there are some people who would prefer to have a website that just does the job in was designed for, which is to get their message out there, without all the bells and whistles. Getting back to the original posting, and updating the specifics involved, I think that the aims are as valid today as they were when published nearly twenty years ago. Jim

Hi, the point is that it is possible to serve the old and the new browsers and I am not trying to exclude anybody. I used to try everything that came along and made some pretty pointles web pages, and spent many a long hour altering some piece of coding to make it XHTML strict validating, into the bargain. My only aim now is to make the lightest coded, quickest loading, fully validating web page available, and if I really think that I need a gradient or a nicely rounded corner I can produce that with some CSS positioning or a lightwieght image. The day that IE6 becomes the VHS as compared to Firefox being the Blu-ray I shall give up coding any web page. Jim

Hi, do not believe that I ever ever viewed a page IE3 but would like to just to ensure my coding stands up. The original design guidelines starting this discussion where: avoid using 'blinks' unless these are absolutely necessary - blinks are distracting, use fonts, sizes, colors to attract attention keep backgrounds simple and muted minimize audio and video use, this really slows download time use animated files (e.g. animated .GIFs) sparingly use thumbnail .GIFs linked to larger .GIFs specify .GIF size (HEIGHT, WIDTH) - this speeds download times use 'ALTs' for .GIFs where only the .GIF provides the link - this provides linked text information to those only browsing in text mode use image maps sparingly - they are slow and can be annoying - using an invisible table can often give similar results with much faster downloads use frames sparingly and consistently - use absolute widths for frames, scroll bars, avoid menus for small numbers of items, also check that users don't get stuck in a frame avoid 'construction signs' - web pages are meant to be dynamic and therefore should be changed/updated regularly - they are always under construction - try to tell users when content was last changed and what changes were made minimize use of Java, Javascript, Applets (e.g. ticker tape status bars) - they are cute but often provide little useful information content and slow downloads remember that 50% of users have monitors 15" or less and at 640 x 480 resolution, so use a maximum window width of 620 pixels or flexible window widths and test your pages in your browser at low screen resolutions and limited colors (256 or less) provide contact information at the home page location in your site and apart from the obvious one of browser sizes still pretty much apply today. IMHO. Jim

hi, very up to date. (not.) Current browser is IE8, but I still have access to IE6 when required. I do not code for the IE6 browser user specifically but neither do I exclude them. My pages validate as HTML5 just the same as they do in XHTML 1.0 strict and use CSS3 coding. I simply do not use some of the newer methods available but do not think that deprives a "modern" browser user from very much. Jim

Hi, it looks like I used the word "standard" incorrectly. Replace with "common". I shall continue to code for IE6 although it is estimated that there is less than 1% now using it. Even so that is a lot of users. What I will not do is change my browser simply because somebody chooses to use coding that my browser cannot render. Jim