fast michaels

Thanks for the suggestion mate, but the script works, just not when there is another of the same on the same page, there must be a way of fixing the problem. But thanks for taking the time to give some imput, I appreciate it. I am wondering if I should have put this on the coding forums, say the first one on the the xhtml one, or if there is one suited to java script. If anyone knows how to get it moved, can they post here so I can request it to be moved. I have looked all over for a way of requesting it but I must be blind as I can't find anything. If a moderator happens upon this can you move this thread please to the xhtml coding forum please. Thanks everyone Kind regards

Any other ideas? Anyone

Yes, there is one for each. Insidentely, in ff 3, it is the last fader that is working (allbeit to fast) and the first two frozen, so if the references were missing, I gues ff 3 would display the same as ie7. Cheers

Now, I have a small problem, but thats another matter, so I'll stick to the point. I have 3no javascript image faders side by side on a web page. Each fader has 4 images in it, and each fader is controled by its own .js file and styled in an external css. The faders are placed in a row and when the page is loaded the initial image of each fader is displayed, so you have three images in a row. The problem is that only the first fader starts to scroll through it's 4 images, and at lightning speed, the other two faders apear frozen on their initial image. All the java script for all three faders was in one .js file, but only the last fader worked and the first two didn't even display their initial images, so it looked like there was only one fader. I separated the js into individual files so now all the faders diplay initially, but like I said, only the first fader scrolls, and to fast. The code I am using for all three faders is the the same, except each one has its own reference in the script. The script is: window.addEventListener?window.addEventListener("load",so_init,false):window.attachEvent("onload",so_init); var d=document, imgs = new Array(), zInterval = null, current=0, pause=false; function so_init() { if(!d.getElementById || !d.createElement)return; css = d.createElement("link"); css.setAttribute("href","design/iccdstyle.css"); css.setAttribute("rel","stylesheet"); css.setAttribute("type","text/css"); d.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(css); imgs = d.getElementById("imageContainerleft").getElementsByTagName("img"); for(i=1;i<imgs.length;i++) imgs[i].xOpacity = 0; imgs[0].style.display = "block"; imgs[0].xOpacity = .99; setTimeout(so_xfade,2500); } function so_xfade() { cOpacity = imgs[current].xOpacity; nIndex = imgs[current+1]?current+1:0; nOpacity = imgs[nIndex].xOpacity; cOpacity-=.05; nOpacity+=.05; imgs[nIndex].style.display = "block"; imgs[current].xOpacity = cOpacity; imgs[nIndex].xOpacity = nOpacity; setOpacity(imgs[current]); setOpacity(imgs[nIndex]); if(cOpacity<=0) { imgs[current].style.display = "none"; current = nIndex; setTimeout(so_xfade,2500); } else { setTimeout(so_xfade,50); } function setOpacity(obj) { if(obj.xOpacity>.99) { obj.xOpacity = .99; return; } obj.style.opacity = obj.xOpacity; obj.style.MozOpacity = obj.xOpacity; obj.style.filter = "alpha(opacity=" + (obj.xOpacity*100) + ")"; } } The code is the same for each fader, but I just wonder why only one is working. There must be some kind of conflict with them being on the same page. I called the script up like: <script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="imagefaderleft.js"></script> <script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="imagefadermiddle.js"></script> <script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript" src="imagefaderright.js"></script> Any ideas why it is not working? Thanks anyone

Princess Rachael, thanks for your help, it solved the problem and I will now endevour to use this principle as you and all the other guys suggested. Thanks everyone

Thanks everyone, I will definatley take your advice a look deeper in external css. Pat24 thanks for looking into it for me, there must be something else effecting it, which I will look into. Thanks everyone.

Anyone?

Bro, I thought the same thing as you, but it moves the h2 down in ff and ie, they maintain their relative difference in positions. As I set the margins and padding to zero, it did not change the ie position, but sent the ff position higher, but too high, so when padding was applied it applied it from both current positions, which were not the same. I have now taken the font tag out, and applied the 0 padding and margin to the <h2> tag and now both titles are in the same position, but I now do not know how to style to h2 text without adding back in the font tags. Any ideas?

Thanks mate, just tried that and still not perfect. It has now gone the oposite way and is now to high.

I changed the div to: <div style="position:absolute; top:200px; left:40px; z-index:8; padding:0; margin:0;"> But it hasn't helped

Cheers mate, I'll wack those derametres into my div and see if that helps. You are right, I should make all my divs externally specified, I realised that 90% through the design of the site. I'll do that for sure on my next project. Thanks again

Anyone know why the following <h2> is displaying wiered in ff. <div style="position:absolute; top:200px; left:40px; z-index:8;"> <h2> <font face="arial" size="2" color="#000000"><b>International City Church Doncaster</b></font><font face="arial" size="3" color="#000000"></font> </h2> </div> IE shows its fine, and it is valid html, as is the whole page it is on, but in ff the position of the text apears far lower down the page then in IE, which displays it in the correct place. The only way I can get around it is to put the <h2> tags to the outside of the div, therefore wrapping the div and text within the tag, which is not valid markup, but gives me the position control in ff. I am concerned that doing this will not identify the title as <h2> and therefore hinder the search engines identify its importance. Any ideas

Hay mate, I can't spell and I use terrible grammer, and from a person who may need such a service in the future I was not actually totally clear from this first page what "Copywriting" is and what you are offering the customer, you say what simply say what "Vivid copy" is . I guessed what it is that you offer - you will write the copy for peoples sites in a optimised way - but you don't actually say that's what it is. Maybe this comes later on your other pages but I just felt I needed to know exactly what service you are offering me. Do you know what I mean, I was left guessing a bit, not everyone who may need this service will know what copywriting is. All the best

That's fine Rob, I thought it seemed out of character from what I have seen of your other posts. Being tired does weird stuff. It makes me not able to spell. I must be tired all day. All the best friend.

Roblet, I was not being picky mate I was just clarifying the team I was refering to in my previous post, you said I meant AFC Wimbledon, and I said my comment was refering to Ebsfleet, no being picky there brother, just saying what I meant. In addition I was comparing the process by which Ebsfleet was purchased by fans with the proccess of myf1dream's. To many people on this site are just too quick to mouth off at others, it make people feel like not commenting because they are concerned that the big wigs of the forum will have a go. It makes the culture of the site rather negative. your not at school now. I very much liked your site Rob, your website of the month is well deserved, All the best friend

The design needs to look proffessional to suggest it is trustworthy, at the moment I don'tthink it looks very proffessional. The idea I think is very very good indeed, perfect time in light of the perceived credit crunch, however, getting people to use it is another think. Most people in this country are in debt, allot with unmanagable debt, so there is a market for this site, and making it free is a good start, but getting people to use this tool, no matter how much it WILL help them is such a difficult task. I know because I have a product, not online, that does what your offeing (And some more) and I have given it free to some people who really could benefit from it and they just don't even bother tryin to use it, they don't even get it out of the box, and their finances are in a right state some most people don't even wan to help themselves, the first time they do something about it is when they file for bankrupsy or run to the CAB, or just get a consolidating loan. You may have to think of some creative ways to get peole using this thing. As it is a free service you offer, get in touch with moneysavingexpert guy and ask him to recommend it, its worth a try (I think it is martin lewis). But first the design needs working on, you will be happy you dd. Take a look at other free service websites and see how their site is structured, that may help with the new design. All the best mate, I hope it works for you.

Ashley, You've come into allot of stick about your vision, but don't be put off, only time will tell if your idea will become reality. I trully hope you succeed in this, you have already a few thousand members (Unpaid I know) but that at least shows that there are many people who think it is a good idea, more than the membership of this forum. I would say like ErisDS suggested that you make sure you have done all the research (you may have already) and get the idea into the public domain by any means you can, then it could take off. If the man on the street new of your website without reading this forum then I'm sure you would be half way there, but failing that it is critical that as many F1 fans as possible need to be aware of it. I don't know, maybe biting the bullet and buying an add in the top three F1/motosport magazines would be a start. If that doesn't get the punters in then what will? But £35 quid is not allot really, hundreds of thousands of people spend double that on a boozy night out week in week out, the £35 pound cost is not the problem, its creating awareness of the site in the people that matter, and making the site more suffisticated in its design and discription that will make or break this idea. If you don't dream it, you can never create it. If you don't try, you can never succeed. Very much all the best Ash

Hi mate, I like your pages that fit on one screen, I personally would like to design my next site in that fashion. I would however make all pages that fit on one screen the same height, the two examples that you gave are differents heigts and that is beause of the different amount of content, so if you did decide to go ahead with no scrolling, I would suggesting making all the pages the maximum height you can get away with. If they are different sizes the page will apear to me moving around everyway as you go through the site which will not look very slick and therefore defeat the purpose of no scrolling designs. For the pages with allot of content you can concider splitting the page into two pages or more and you unique "continue" and "back" links to navigate the section. I like this way of doing it, but some people don't, but it will keep everything on one page/s. So to sum up, you can design the site for no scrolling at that res, I like it (though I would dop the header down a bit to creat space above and give the page a centred appearance), but you would have to inform the client of the downsides i.e. Different resolution screens could lead to scrolling anyway, and you would have to break some of the pages up into two or more pages. just give them the pros and cons and let them decide, but it is doable obviously. Making it scrolless on all resolutions though is a nighmare. All the best.

I followed dizzis sticky on how to centre the page, but I can only get it to work horizontally but not vertically. I used: #wrapper { margin: 0 auto; width: 1003; position: relative } Any suggestions for making it work vertically? I am viewing it in FF3. Thanks

Well done, The changes you have made complete the design. Stunning and exciting. All the best.

No, its not AFC wimbledon, it was Ebbsfleet United, in the blue square premier, and the idea for this F1 site is based on that I think. This site that organised the buyout of Ebbsfleet was MyFootballClub and it was 20,000 stakeholders of the site who each put in £35 and paid £700,000 for the team, see this bbc link about the storey http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...eet/7089473.stm, the team website is myfootballclub.co.uk, they won a trophy last season. All the best everyone.

Hi guys, I have tried to create a fluid design as I wanted there to be no space around the design edge and any browser resolution would display it the same. But I have eperienced the design breaking up on any resolution other than 1024x768, this I think is due to me not specifying the size of the images and text in %, but in pixels. Is this the problem other people experience with fluid designs? All I want is for the design to fill the entire viewable area with no scrolling, and look good in any res, is this posible at all?

The idea is like fans buying a football team, but this is fans buying an F1 team. Football fans have bought a team down south I think, all decisions are made by the stakeholders, i.e. the fans who have put in the money. I don't know if this will work like it does with football because running a semi-pro non-leauge football team must cost allot less then an F1 team? Who knows, all the best though. The design is o.k.

Would like to know how you guys design your sites to fit all or most resolutions and browsers. I'm sure there are different preferences, but I would like to know yours so I can decide on mine. The resolution thing is an problem I'm having at the moment.

Never been much of a speller. I have seen it on TV though. But what is your point? is Manila a very tidy, clean and steralised place then? You must have been, what is it like?