shubox

Just because a site renders better in FF than Opera, it doesn't men that FF is interpreting the CSS more correctly. There maybe a problem with the CSS and FF is more forgiving?

That's exactly what I said - in both posts. I give up

<span> is perfectly valid. Using a <b> tag is non-semantic. You did not say that you required your text to be bold, rather to be underlined. The meaning of the <b> tag is 'bold' - so it's inappropriate to use it. If you wish to semantically emphasise the text, use <em> or <strong>, if you wish to make the emphasis purely visual, you use the <span> tag (attach a class to that if you have more than one style).

Wrap your chosen words in a <span> tag and use CSS to style it with an underline. If you are semantically emphasising the words, then you could use <em> and use css to remove the italics and to add the underline.

There's only Twitter that I use regularly. It suits me as you can drift in and out of it as much or as little as you like. And it's been useful for finding aout about new events, software or getting help from social peers in the same industry. I like it.

Bauhaus was more of a design ethic than a look. Perhaps Swedish modernism might be more what you're after? The master of type-centric design for me is Joseph Muller Brockmann.

That's right - you don't use the line-height property on an inline element. This will always be set on the parent block element.

I'm sure there was a thread with twitter user-names sometime last year...? But here's mine again unsurprisingly it's shubox I'm happy to follow all who follow me - after all it's a social networking tool and not a celebrity stalking tool as it sometimes seems to be these days.

I find it scary that some people are advocating putting one block element inside another merely for styling. The mind boggles.

Use css to apply background images to h1, h2, h3 etc. You may need to specify the width and height to ensure that the images show fully. eg. h1{ background:transparent url('myimage.jpg') no-repeat; }

They're both just called muffins here. You can get a larger, flatter version of the bread muffin called oven-bottom muffin, but that's still just a muffin lol. Context determines which muffin your talking about.

If you wish the text to appear at the end of the URL, then use the GET method rather than POST.

I meant by 'Why?' : why use xHTML at all? The choice of HTML vs xHTML is determined by the nature and content of the site being created. Evaluate each site on its merits before deciding on HTML 4.01, xHTML1.0 or xHTML 1.1 - but always use strict.

Why?

HTML 4.01 Strict. I'm not going to re-open the tired old debate between html vs xhtml - but that's my choice. There is no reason to use transitional for a new build. In the case of target attribute, it is deemed non-accessible and flouts good usability practice, and is deprecated.