more minor style tweaks

| 13 Comments

I've once again made style mods to the site at a time when all I have in front of me are Gecko-based browsers. I'm happy with the changes but if I've made the site unreadable in some other decent browser (like safari or opera) then let me know and I'll see what I can do to fix it or, even better, if something's broken and you can offer a fix that maintains the current look for Firebird (and other gecko browsers,) I'll not only fix it but sing your praises right here on this blog :-)

The changes are fairly minor. I've dropped the "no underline until you mouse into the post" thing in favor of a "sort of underline it and then make it almost button-like when you mouse into the post but try to do it with some subtlety" thing. If your browser doesn't understand -moz-border-radius then you don't get the nice rounded corners (but that's nothing new.)

update: It seems like IE and Konq don't like the border: transparent; bits. That just sucks. Safari and Mozilla seem fine. What's it look like in Opera?

13 Comments

there are browsers that aren't gecko based? Why would anyone use something like that?

Seriously though, I really like the way your site is coming together, I'm a mellow color type of person and the greys are pleasing to the eye.

One of these days I'll get off my lazy butt and finish the design I've had laying around for a few months now.

Oh. Very, very nice. Me likey. :)

It looks fine in Opera7. Except when you click on the text. Then, the textbox becomes very small.
I often use '//' to hide css from Mozilla. I know it is not valid css.

Attractive, very. Usability, a:hover is marginally better than bad old fashioned blue links on a black background. a:visited is good.

What was I thinking when I wrote that? The nav div links are fine whether a:hover or a:visited. However, the links ending each blog entry, whether or not visited, are only slightly better than invisible. And, why are they set to open in a new window? Why isn't "remember info" remembered when it was checked the last time? Why the skimpy (cols=46) comments textarea? Why not as wide as a mailnews compose window?

Felix: something like
textarea { width: 100%; max-width: 50em }
?

Internet Explorer doesn't support -moz-border-radius, but IE6/WinXP has border-radius.

I find it quite usfull - IE6 has about the same support for CSS3 as Mozilla, while not always with the same properties.

Yup, the site looks ugly and boxy with IE6 -- boxy, because the box edges are not rounded as in Gecko based browsers; and ugly because all the links are rendered with their top, left, right borders in a dark blue color.

However, in Gecko based browsers, the site looks prettier than usual. Its amazing how you manage to make a site look beautiful by using just a few light colors -- the sites both simple and pleasing to the eye (I am a sucker for light colors ...). :)

Is the "transparent" value in "border: ... transparent" a part of CSS2 or CSS3?

Rakhesh, I believe that transparent is a part of css1. I learned about it in the css1 spec at w3c.org. http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS1 It seems like IE is broken and doesn't understand this. Too bad.

--Asa

Asa: perhaps you want "border: inherit;" instead? I don't see what a transparent border (instead of none at all) could accomplish o_O

S�ren:
borders take up space. For example, if you have:

div { border: none; }
div:hover { border: thin solid black; }

Then the size of the div will change, which is usually not the intended effect. If you use

div { border: thin transparent; }

instead, the size will not change on :hover.

Safari uses Konqueror's KHTML layout engine, so should it work in konqueror if it works in safari?

You could use

div {�margin: 2px; border: none; }
div:hover {�border: 2px dotted blue; margin: none; }

or something like that.