[thelist] request to UNSUBSCRIBE failed
katherine
kbjork at attbi.com
Mon Apr 15 15:22:00 CDT 2002
I am trying, and have tried for several days to UNSUBSCRIBE from this
list, using the website, and have also written to the admin but have
received no response. I will continue to post this message with each
list that comes in until my request has been honored.
To others on the list, it has been my pleasure, pardon me for the
intrusion and if you have a connection to the list moderator please let
them know my dilemma.
Thanks!
Katherine
On Monday, April 15, 2002, at 04:51 AM, thelist-request at lists.evolt.org
wrote:
> Send thelist mailing list submissions to
> thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://lists.evolt.org/mailman/listinfo/thelist
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of thelist digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: hiding CSS (aardvark)
> 2. RE: Screen Captures again (Gary Pool)
> 3. Re: hiding CSS (aardvark)
> 4. Re: RE: [thelist] Screen Captures again (sasha)
> 5. Re: Flash Player 6 breaks swfs made on flash 5? (Josh Earl)
> 6. RE: Screen Captures again (aardvark)
> 7. Re: hiding CSS (sasha)
> 8. Re: Which Netscape? (Karen J. Bowen)
> 9. RE: hiding CSS (Hugh Blair)
> 10. Tip Harvest for the Week of Monday Apr 08, 2002 (Tip Harvester)
> 11. Re: hiding CSS (Peter-Paul Koch)
> 12. RE: hiding CSS (Joel Canfield)
> 13. RE: hiding CSS (Peter-Paul Koch)
> 14. RE: hiding CSS (Bill Mason)
> 15. Re: hiding CSS (Erik Mattheis)
> 16. RE: hiding CSS (Erik Mattheis)
> 17. Re: hiding CSS (Erik Mattheis)
> 18. Re: NS4 and nested tables GRRR! (Nedret Saidova)
> 19. Re: hiding CSS (Duncan O'Neill)
> 20. Re: Screen Captures again (Joseph A Borg)
> 21. vbs..W2rk..cscript..HELP (Chris Price)
> 22. RE: ASP Newbiw Question (Olly)
> 23. Curious log data (Adrian Fischer)
> 24. Re: Curious log data (Peter-Paul Koch)
> 25. RE: NS4 and nested tables GRRR! (Olly)
> 26. RE: Curious log data (Adrian Fischer)
> 27. HTML Email (Paul Backhouse)
> 28. Re: HTML Email (martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com)
> 29. RE: HTML Email (Paul Backhouse)
> 30. RE: HTML Email (DESCHAMPS =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?= DvSI/SICoR)
> 31. Other Scripts (Holographic)
> 32. Re: HTML Email (Kevin)
> 33. RE: HTML Email (Paul Backhouse)
> 34. Re: HTML Email (Cristian Secara)
> 35. Re: HTML Email (michael ensor)
> 36. RE: HTML Email (Steve Cook)
> 37. RE: HTML Email (DESCHAMPS =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?= DvSI/SICoR)
> 38. RE: NS4 and nested tables GRRR! (niklaus.haldimann at xmedia.ch)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 23:40:48 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> i didn't address this because i don't have IE4 here at home... i can't
> help, so it
> seemed pointless to comment on it...
>
> i *do* think you need to test on a real IE4 install, but you really
> don't need to
> read a post from me saying that, right?
>
>> From: "Duncan O'Neill" <dbaxo at ihug.co.nz>
> [...]
>> The reason I asked the question in the first place
>> was to try to find out whether the page I was referring to;
>> http://pixels.pixelpark.com/~koch/hide_css_from_browsers/import/
>>
>> was giving me inaccurate information, or whether my version of WinIE4
>> was playing tricks on me. As I said, it's Win IE4 being run in
>> compatibility mode alongside IE5. Aarvark, this is a post of yours
>> from April 8th;
>>
>> =================================================
>> but it *is* running with IE5 components and just
>> trying to emulate IE4... i've noted some CSS differences (between a
>> true IE4 install and the emulation mode), but i haven't taken the time
>> to sit down and document them...
>> =================================================
>>
>> So, what I'm trying to find out is whether a "true IE4 install" (which
>> I don't have) honours or ignores a stylesheet linked thus;
> [...]
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 20:48:21 -0700
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> From: Gary Pool <gary at whiteroseproductions.com>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] Screen Captures again
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> Could someone please point me to a site where there are some
>> 'successful'
>> screen captures so I can gauge whether I am just being too fussy here
>> or
>> whether I am not doing this correctly?
>
>
> Here are some I have done:
>
> http://www.whiteroseproductions.com/pages/clients.html
>
> They work for me.
>
>
> --
> Gary Pool
> gary at whiteroseproductions.com
> Web Developer White Rose Productions
> http://www.whiteroseproductions.com
>
> "10 percent of computer users are Mac users, but remember, we are the
> top 10 percent."
>
> - Douglas Adams
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 23:53:37 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> [...]
>> Agreed, I'm not saying it's _always bad_ to use @import, but the
>> simple fact is that it's an insufficient method in some cases: there
>> are _major_ differences in CSS interpretation among browsers that
>> understand @import. If you don't run into those differences, fine, use
>> it ... but apparently Duncan has run into one of the situations where
>> you can't.
>
> i'm still waiting to see if he can find a true IE4 install, first...
>
>>> if we switched to JS instead of @import, we'd now punish not just
>>> users of older browsers, but users without JS enabled on their
>>> primary browsers -- like me...
>>
>> Well, you may be in the position to confirm why I consider requiring
>> JavaScript in order to see the styled HTML: People who don't use
>> JavaScript enabled browsers don't care about the style of the
>> presentation.
>
> there's a difference between a browser that has no JS capabiliity, and a
> browser that just has it disabled...
>
> in the former, you're assuming Lynx, and you may be generally
> correct -- the
> user doesn't care about layout within that context... but if you don't
> assume
> Lynx, and assume some other browsers that may not have JS capability,
> but
> could read CSS (Amaya?), then you'd be incorrect...
>
> in the latter, you have me... surfing in IE5.5, N6, O6... JS
> disabled... i use the
> browsers *because* i want to see cleaner, nicer layout (i do surf in
> Lynx
> regularly when i'm just info-crawling)... so, no, my lack of interest
> in JS has
> no relationship to my desire to see pretty layout...
>
> anyway, i'm just assuming i've misinterpreted you, because your
> assertion
> sounds all wrong to me...
>
>> So what's wrong with not showing them styles? Certainly you're not
>> advocating a site that requires CSS ... that would be unlike you!
>
> what's wrong with not showing them styles is that there's no reason
> *not* to...
> JS != CSS, so not having JS enabled shouldn't automagically result in no
> CSS -- NN4.x only had that flaw thanks to its JSSS implementation...
>
> conversely, if i were to 'disable' CSS, should JS also go with it?
> should they
> be inextricably linked? surely you wouldn't advocate having things like
> disabling images, cookies, or CSS result in automatic disabling of
> JS... that
> would be unlike you!
>
> [...]
>> Maybe someone else can suggest modifying the syntax of @import - but
>> if that doesn't work, the only solutions left (that I can think of)
>> are
>>
>> a. use a combination of JavaScript and @import
>> b. require JavaScript
>> c. Forget about what you were trying to do
>
> i'd go with (c) before i even hack the @import syntax, but i try to be
> a purist,
> so that's a given...
>
> and by (c), i think we both mean try to find another way to do it...
> failing that,
> gut it...
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> From: sasha <sasha at bittersweet2.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 00:04:02 -0400
> Subject: Re: RE: [thelist] Screen Captures again
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> http://www.bittersweet2.com/portfolio/web.php
>
> I chop out the browser's chrome before I resize mine.
> Normal text can't be read, but heading & logo text is
> fairly clear. I could use unsharp to make them a bit
> crisper, but I think mine are clear enough for me.
>
> I have heard of some people masking out the text of the
> site and adding it back in with Photoshop in a small
> point size to make the text clearer. Sounds like a lot
> of work to me, but the results might be what you're
> looking for.
>
> Christy "sasha" Siepker
> http://bittersweet2.com
>
> 4/14/2002 11:32:41 PM, "Derry Talvainn"
> <derry at artema.com.au> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for all suggestions:
>>
>> Could someone please point me to a site where there are
> some 'successful'
>> screen captures so I can gauge whether I am just being
> too fussy here or
>> whether I am not doing this correctly?
>>
>> sasha - the screen resolution I took the captures is
> 800 x 600 - so using a
>> higher screen resolution is not the problem
>>
>> Hugh - Downloaded hypersnap - it is a great little
> utility - but it doesn't
>> do any better with the quality of the image when scaled
>>
>> Hassan - No point zooming in as I want Full Screen
>>
>> Janet - Printkey - couldn't get it to install
>>
>> Ken - tried 640 x 480 with no better results - was
> using 800 x 600
>>
>> Pat - was resampling - so this is not the problem
>>
>> Christian - I tried 'Snag It' but it isn't the quality
> I was looking for
>> either - also tried using 50%, 75% and 25% but didn't
> think that was an
>> improvement on the quality in fact it was worse - what
> am I doing wrong?
>>
>> Aardvark - Downloaded a utility called 'Screen Ruler'
> but I am not sure
>> exactly how you mean me to use it nor how to use the
> javascript. I am
>> viewing my files at 100% in Photoshop. To capture a 800
> x 800 file using
>> altprintscreen I would have to increase my screen
> resolution to above 1024 x
>> 768 to get the length - did you mean me to do this?
>>
>> I wanted full web pages scaled from 800 pixels to 600
> pixels in width
>> (cropping to reduce the page further) - the height
> varies depending on the
>> page content.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Derry Talvainn
>> Artema Interactive Design
>>
>> He who says it cannot be done should not interrupt
> someone doing it.
>> (Chinese Proverb)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
>> [mailto:thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org]On Behalf Of
> aardvark
>> Sent: Sunday, 14 April 2002 6:19 PM
>> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>> Subject: Re: [thelist] Screen Captures
>>
>>
>>> From: "Derry Talvainn" <derry at artema.com.au>
>> [...]
>>> Anyone know of a way to reduce the size of a screen
> capture without
>>> making the text look bad?
>>
>> the text will be resampled, no matter what you do...
> part of the bicubic
>> interpolation method requires that pixels get averaged
> as you downsample, so
>> letters won't map to individual pixels anymore... they
> will instead 'smear'
>> across multiple pixels...
>>
>> you could use nearest neighbor, for example, instead of
> bicubic, but that
>> won't
>> help you...
>>
>> instead, determine your final desired size... let's
> say you need a screen
>> capture to display at 200x200 pixels... you want to
> (ideally) reduce an
>> image
>> size to 25% of its original size to maintain the most
> clarity (4 pixels get
>> crammed into one -- square to smaller square), and
> failing that, by 50% if
>> possible (2 pixels get crammed into one, but it's a
> rectangle getting
>> stuffed
>> into a square, so it's not as good)... other
> percentages require even more
>> odd
>> shape cramming, resulting in less ideal images...
>>
>> so get your browser window to 800x800, do the cap, and
> resample to
>> 200x200 (or 25%) from there...
>>
>> you may want to run an unsharp mask filter on it to
> clean up the edges of
>> some things, but that might not be necessary...
>>
>>> My first attempt at screen capturing was to use Print
> Screen and paste
>>> into Photoshop - but that was awful even at 100%.
> Then I found the
>>> CorelCapture utility which does a great job at 100%
> but that is all. I
>>> have tried reducing the size in Photoshop, Photopaint
> and also with
>>> CorelCapture all to no avail.
>> [...]
>>
>> i use alt+PrtScrn to get the current window, and it's
> worked wonderfully for
>> me
>> for a long time... make sure that in Photoshop you're
> viewing the image as
>> pixels at actual size (100%), so every pixel in the
> image is mapped to a
>> screen pixel...
>>
>> there's no need to get a utility for what you want to
> do, you can do it all
>> with
>> alt+PrtScrn (you're on windows) and Photoshop... a
> little advance planning
>> and window sizing will take care of the rest...
>>
>> and if you need to get your window to the right size
> and don't feel like
>> downloading Screen Ruler:
>>
>> javascript:resizeTo(800,800);
>>
>> where the 800,800 is your 800x800 window size (or
> whatever number you
>> want)...
>>
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>>
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>>
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> From: "Josh Earl" <jearl at adel.tafe.sa.edu.au>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Flash Player 6 breaks swfs made on flash 5?
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:39:55 +0930
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>
> => Message: 27
> => Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:18:33 -0500
>
> => Can you be more specific than "the movie falls over"? (I'm not being
> => a smart ass, instead "yes" these problems do exist, and there's
> => things you can/can't do about them)
>
> The movie shows up, and some of the simple stuff works but anything that
> relies on actionscript seems to be non-functional.
>
> => You can do version detection within Flash and force someone to use
> => specific versions, but forcing someone to use an old version wouldn't
> => be a wise decision ...
>
> I meant in the browser...ie dyamically loading and unloading different
> versions of the Flash plugin to view what the Movie looks like thru
> different plugins...
>
> Thanks for the help!
>
> Josh
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 00:04:36 -0400
> Subject: RE: [thelist] Screen Captures again
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: "Derry Talvainn" <derry at artema.com.au>
> [...]
>> Could someone please point me to a site where there are some
>> 'successful' screen captures so I can gauge whether I am just being
>> too fussy here or whether I am not doing this correctly?
> [...]
>
> sure, but these are all dirtier than they need to be:
> http://evolt.org/article/rating/20/5816/
> http://evolt.org/article/list/20/15177/
> http://evolt.org/article/list/20/22547/
> http://algonquinstudios.com/document_262.html
>
> [...]
>> Aardvark - Downloaded a utility called 'Screen Ruler' but I am not
>> sure exactly how you mean me to use it nor how to use the javascript.
>
> erm, i was suggesting you can *avoid* having to use screen ruler to get
> your
> windows to the desired size just by pasting the JS i provided into the
> address
> bar (adjusting the numbers as necessary)...
>
>> I am viewing my files at 100% in Photoshop. To capture a 800 x 800
>> file using altprintscreen I would have to increase my screen
>> resolution to above 1024 x 768 to get the length - did you mean me to
>> do this?
>
> the numbers were just a sample so the math would be easier... it's up
> to you
> to determine your final image size and initial browser size...
>
>> I wanted full web pages scaled from 800 pixels to 600 pixels in width
>> (cropping to reduce the page further) - the height varies depending on
>> the page content.
>
> the shift from 800px to 600px is going to create a messy resample,
> simply
> because it's trying to cram 3 pixels of data into one as it scales
> down...
>
> if possible, send the URL of a page you want capped, tell me the final
> image
> size and initial window size you need, and lemme have a go at it...
>
> and if possible please trim your replies...
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> From: sasha <sasha at bittersweet2.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 00:14:20 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> 4/14/2002 11:26:33 PM, Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Well, you may be in the position to confirm why I
> consider requiring
>> JavaScript in order to see the styled HTML: People who
> don't use
>> JavaScript enabled browsers don't care about the style
> of the
>> presentation.
>>
>> So what's wrong with not showing them styles? Certainly
> you're not
>> advocating a site that requires CSS ... that would be
> unlike you!
>>
>> __________________________________________
>> - Erik Mattheis
>>
>> (612) 377 2272
>> http://goZz.com/
>>
>> __________________________________________
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>>
>
> Ah yes, but many consider JavaScript to be a potential
> security vulnerability (and some turn it off because
> they can't stand pop-up windows). I've never heard such
> things about CSS. At any rate, I can't think of a
> single site that has been inaccessible because a browser
> did not support css (which mostly controls formatting).
> But, I have encountered many sites that are completely
> inaccessible for browsers without JS on/availible.
>
> I'm not going to suggest doing one thing or another.
> Just choose what is best for your intended audience.
>
> Christy "sasha" Siepker
> http://bittersweet2.com
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 14:30:01 +1000
> From: "Karen J. Bowen" <karen at miinx.com.au>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Meredith Tupper wrote:
>> Also, I think
>> it's time for me to ditch Netscape as a mail program, and
>> I'm considering Pegasus or The Bat. Any recommendations?
>
> Mozilla (so also N6) also has a Mail client, works well, some cool
> features, stable. Plus doesn't catch IE virii... a definite bonus! If
> you're looking at moving to the Moz browser, check out Moz mail too.
>
> Cheers,
> Karen
> ------------
> Miinx Design & Development
> e :: karen at miinx.com.au
> p :: +613 9534 2659
> w :: www.miinx.com.au
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> From: "Hugh Blair" <hblair at hotfootmail.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 23:56:05 -0500
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> On Behalf Of aardvark
>>
>>> Maybe someone else can suggest modifying the syntax of @import - but
>>> if that doesn't work, the only solutions left (that I can think of)
>>> are
>>>
>>> a. use a combination of JavaScript and @import
>>> b. require JavaScript
>>> c. Forget about what you were trying to do
>>
>> i'd go with (c) before i even hack the @import syntax, but i try to
>> be a purist, so that's a given...
>>
>> and by (c), i think we both mean try to find another way to do it...
>> failing that, gut it...
>
> <NewbyMode>
> OK, I've got to ask for an explaination. I'm loading my css like this:
> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="foobar.css">
>
> Why do I need or when is it best to use?
> <style type="text/css">
> <!--
> @import "foobars.css";
> -->
> </style>
>
> Why would you need both in the same page? Is this a case of me not
> looking at the older browsers? Just trying to understand this thread.
>
> -Hugh
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 00:01:18 -0500
> From: Tip Harvester <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: [thelist] Tip Harvest for the Week of Monday Apr 08, 2002
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>
> The tip harvest for the Week of Monday Apr 08, 2002 has been added
> to the lists.evolt.org site. Get it at:
>
>
> http://lists.evolt.org/index.cfm/a/harvest/b/show/c/Week-of-Mon-20020408.
> html
>
> Week at a glance listing at:
>
>
> http://lists.evolt.org/index.cfm/a/harvest/b/week/c/Week-of-Mon-20020408.
> html
>
> Search the tips at:
>
> http://lists.evolt.org/index.cfm/a/harvest/b/search/
>
>
> Harvest Summary
> ---------------
>
> Number of messages: 741
> Number of tips : 24
>
> Tip Authors
> -----------
>
> benji (1)
> Daniel Frey (1)
> David Wagner (1)
> Eric Means (2)
> J Blanchard (1)
> James Aylard (1)
> Janet Green (1)
> Lachlan (1)
> martin at members.evolt.org (2)
> Meredith Tupper (1)
> Michael Pemberton (1)
> nagrom (1)
> nick wilson (1)
> Olly Hodgson (1)
> R.Livsey (1)
> Rob Smith (1)
> rudy (2)
> Sean (1)
> Steve Cook (1)
> Tyme (1)
>
> Tip Types
> ---------
>
> Ain't it Amazing What Google Will Do? (1)
> Clients: Paycheck Producers or Time-Sucking Leeches? (1)
> Color Schemes (1)
> Counting lines (1)
> Database Design; Accessability (1)
> editing (1)
> finding and deleting files older than a certain number of
> days (1)
> Google in other languages (1)
> hardware (1)
> IDE Device Settings (1)
> Making Icons from Fonts (1)
> Microsoft KnowledgeBase Updates (1)
> Photoshop (1)
> PHP (1)
> questions to ponder for Zip code applications (1)
> Quick Access to Commonly Used Folders (1)
> search engines (1)
> spam (1)
> sql (1)
> text (1)
> tools for when you think your favourite site is down... (1)
> winamp plugin (1)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> From: "Peter-Paul Koch" <gassinaumasis at hotmail.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 05:23:17 +0000
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>
>
>
>> The reason I asked the question in the first place
>> was to try to find out whether the page I was referring to;
>> http://pixels.pixelpark.com/~koch/hide_css_from_browsers/import/
>>
>> was giving me inaccurate information, or whether my version of WinIE4
>> was
>> playing tricks on me. As I said, it's Win IE4 being run in
>> compatibility
>> mode alongside IE5.
>>
>> So, what I'm trying to find out is whether a "true IE4 install"
>> (which I
>> don't have) honours or ignores a stylesheet linked thus;
>>
>> @import ("stylesheet.css");
>
> Yes.
>
> ppk
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> From: Joel Canfield <Joel at spinhead.com>
> To: "'thelist at lists.evolt.org'" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:23:12 -0700
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>>> The reason I asked the question in the first place
>>> was to try to find out whether the page I was referring to;
>>> http://pixels.pixelpark.com/~koch/hide_css_from_browsers/import/
>>>
>>> was giving me inaccurate information, or whether my version of WinIE4
>>> was playing tricks on me. As I said, it's Win IE4 being run in
>>> compatibility mode alongside IE5.
>>>
>>> So, what I'm trying to find out is whether a "true IE4
>> install" (which
>>> I don't have) honours or ignores a stylesheet linked thus;
>>>
>>> @import ("stylesheet.css");
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> ppk
>>
>>
>
> I've only been paying partial attention, but I have to ask: 'honours or
> ignores' - yes to which?
>
> joel
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 13
> From: "Peter-Paul Koch" <gassinaumasis at hotmail.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: RE: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 05:41:44 +0000
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>
>
>
>>>> The reason I asked the question in the first place
>>>> was to try to find out whether the page I was referring to;
>>>> http://pixels.pixelpark.com/~koch/hide_css_from_browsers/import/
>>>>
>>>> was giving me inaccurate information, or whether my version of WinIE4
>>>> was playing tricks on me. As I said, it's Win IE4 being run in
>>>> compatibility mode alongside IE5.
>>>>
>>>> So, what I'm trying to find out is whether a "true IE4
>>> install" (which
>>>> I don't have) honours or ignores a stylesheet linked thus;
>>>>
>>>> @import ("stylesheet.css");
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> ppk
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I've only been paying partial attention, but I have to ask: 'honours or
>> ignores' - yes to which?
>
> Oh, sorry, I didn't read the 'honours or ignores' bit: Yes, it *honours*
> @import style sheet. As far as I know IE4.5 Mac does, too, but I'd have
> to
> test that.
>
> My rule of thumb: @import separates NN4 (which doesn't support it) from
> all
> other browsers (which do support it).
>
> ppk
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Join the worldís largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 14
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:54:24 -0700
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> From: Bill Mason <evolt at accessibleinter.net>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> At 10:41 PM 04/14/2002, Peter-Paul Koch wrote:
>>>>> So, what I'm trying to find out is whether a "true IE4
>>>> install" (which
>>>>> I don't have) honours or ignores a stylesheet linked thus;
>>>>>
>>>>> @import ("stylesheet.css");
>>>>
>>>> Yes.
>>>
>>> I've only been paying partial attention, but I have to ask: 'honours
>>> or
>>> ignores' - yes to which?
>>
>> Oh, sorry, I didn't read the 'honours or ignores' bit: Yes, it
>> *honours*
>> @import style sheet. As far as I know IE4.5 Mac does, too, but I'd
>> have to
>> test that.
>
> If you want to exclude IE4/PC from an imported style sheet, format the
> import this way:
>
> @import "stylesheet.css";
>
> Bill Mason
> Accessible Internet
> evolt at accessibleinter.net
> http://www.accessibleinter.net/
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 00:59:15 -0500
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> From: Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> in the former, you're assuming Lynx, and you may be generally
>> correct -- the
>> user doesn't care about layout within that context... but if you
>> don't assume
>> Lynx, and assume some other browsers that may not have JS capability,
>> but
>> could read CSS (Amaya?), then you'd be incorrect...
>
> [...]
>
>> anyway, i'm just assuming i've misinterpreted you, because your
>> assertion
>> sounds all wrong to me...
>
> I think the misinterpretation might be that I'm thinking of styles like:
>
> position: fixed -> between the platforms and browser brands that
> support" it, there is a huge difference in how it changes the
> interpretation of left,top,right,bottom
>
> and
>
> many styles when applied to certain form elements -> render
> completely different in IE Mac and IE Win and NN 6
>
> In these examples, there's no @import fix.
>
>>> So what's wrong with not showing them styles? Certainly you're not
>>> advocating a site that requires CSS ... that would be unlike you!
>>
>> what's wrong with not showing them styles is that there's no reason
>> *not* to...
>
> Certainly there is: If the browser attempts to render the style but
> gets it screwed up in a manner that's not acceptable, you might want
> to hide the style - or better (drumroll...) use JavaScript to serve
> that browser a stylesheet that works (*rimshot*).
>
>> conversely, if i were to 'disable' CSS, should JS also go with it?
>> should they
>> be inextricably linked?
>
> In some cases, actually, yes ... it might be more compatible to hide
> CSS altogether for some browsers when doing DHTML ... or at least the
> style definitions involved in the DHTML.
>
>>> a. use a combination of JavaScript and @import
>>> b. require JavaScript
>>> c. Forget about what you were trying to do
>>
>> i'd go with (c) before i even hack the @import syntax, but i try to
>> be a purist,
>> so that's a given...
>>
>> and by (c), i think we both mean try to find another way to do it...
>> failing that,
>> gut it...
>
> Right, we both understand (c) to mean examining another approach, but
> if there's no other approach, we would seem to disagree:
>
> If given the choice between
>
> 1. Showing something incredibly bad or unusable to perfectly good
> browsers like IE 5 Mac and Opera 6
> 2. Showing no styles to browsers where someone has fiddled with the
> preferences
>
> I'd say, "tough luck" to those without JS.
> --
>
> __________________________________________
> - Erik Mattheis
>
> (612) 377 2272
> http://goZz.com/
>
> __________________________________________
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:12:46 -0500
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> From: Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> OK, I've got to ask for an explaination. I'm loading my css like this:
>> <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="foobar.css">
>>
>> Why do I need or when is it best to use?
>> <style type="text/css">
>> <!--
>> @import "foobars.css";
>> -->
>> </style>
>>
>> Why would you need both in the same page? Is this a case of me not
>> looking at the older browsers? Just trying to understand this thread.
>
> When a browser that understands _some_ CSS has a faulty
> implementation or requires a different syntax, you have to either
> redefine the styles or give different browsers different styles.
>
> You can do this in some cases by having an @import further down the
> page than your <link> tag, or near the bottom of your .css a @import
> which redefines things (I think the latter is a sin in some
> religions).
>
> @import will work sometimes, but not all the time ... there is no
> @import solution to the different problems IE 5.5 Win and Opera 6.01
> has with:
>
> <div style="position: fixed;
> width: 100px;
> height: 100px;
> bottom: 200px;
> right: 40px;
> overflow: scroll;">stuff here stuff here stuff here stuff here
> stuff here stuff here stuff here stuff here stuff here stuff here
> stuff here stuff
> </div>
> --
>
> __________________________________________
> - Erik Mattheis
>
> (612) 377 2272
> http://goZz.com/
>
> __________________________________________
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 17
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:13:30 -0500
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> From: Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> At 1:04 PM +0930 4/15/02, Mark Limburg wrote:
>> I prefer a deeper solution, that of using a reusable PHP object which
>> defines the stylesheet. This allows me the option to import or
>> directly
>> write the shylesheet into the page, as well as allow me to define more
>> than a few stylesheets if needed.
>
> You've probably thought of this already, but you'll have to make sure
> the end user gets the stylesheet intended for their browser and not
> the stylesheet from a proxy server which you intended for a different
> browser.
> --
>
> __________________________________________
> - Erik Mattheis
>
> (612) 377 2272
> http://goZz.com/
>
> __________________________________________
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 18
> From: "Nedret Saidova" <saidovan at rs.uovs.ac.za>
> Organization: University of the Orange Free State
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 08:18:17 +0200
> Subject: Re: [thelist] NS4 and nested tables GRRR!
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Olly,
>
> Sometimes NS does not like align='left'.
> Try creating yet another table with 2 cells - the left one to hold the
> table with the image and "Click..." and the right one to hold the
> text/description.
>
> Just give it a shot.
>
> Nedret
>
> P.S. Nice site.
>
>
> On 14 Apr 2002, at 17:11, Olly Hodgson wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Say I have a table, and inside that I have another, which is left
>> aligned. I put content into the right aligned table.
>>
>> If that makes the table taller than its parent table, NS4 draws it so
>> it overflows ut of its parent, rather than making the parent table
>> tall enough that the child table will fit (example on
>> http://www.olly.websir.co.uk/mtb/gallery.asp).
>>
>> Does anybody know of a way around this?
>>
>> TIA,
>> --
>> Olly
>> - www.gnarly-bitches.co.uk -
>>
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 19
> From: "Duncan O'Neill" <dbaxo at ihug.co.nz>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 18:51:36 +1200
> Organization: The Urban Legend magazine
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> At 10:41 PM 04/14/2002, Peter-Paul Koch wrote:
>>> Oh, sorry, I didn't read the 'honours or ignores' bit: Yes, it
>>> *honours*
>>> @import style sheet. As far as I know IE4.5 Mac does, too, but I'd
>>> have
> to
>>> test that.
>>
>> If you want to exclude IE4/PC from an imported style sheet, format the
>> import this way:
>>
>> @import "stylesheet.css";
>>
>> Bill Mason
>> Accessible Internet
>> evolt at accessibleinter.net
>> http://www.accessibleinter.net/
>>
> Thanks Bill and Peter-Paul for answering the question.
> Bill, I know that that method will hide the stylesheet from IE4/PC and
> N4/PC.
> I'm looking for a method to hide the style from IE4/PC, N4/PC &
> IE4.5/Mac.
>
> The page below tells me the @import url("name.css") will work for all
> three.
> http://pixels.pixelpark.com/~koch/hide_css_from_browsers/import/
> Apparently they have it wrong.
> NN4.x and MacIE4.5 don't honour it, but IE4/PC *does*.
>
> So for now, I'll just use @import "name.css"; to hide the sheet from IE4
> & NN4.x, and the tiny percentage of users wielding MacIE4.5 will
> be presented with a mess.
>
> cheers,
>
> Duncan O'Neill
> ==================================================
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:37:36 +0200
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Screen Captures again
> From: Joseph A Borg <jacborg at mac.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Photoshop is very good, if you have that you do not need anything
> else... except maybe Graphic Converter (but that's for Macs ;-)
>
> *There are two ways of reducing an image:*
> 1 scaling the physical size only ( the pixel data remains the same)
> 2 reducing the resolution ( pixel interpolation needed )
>
> If you're printing_the_stuff_on_paper, current printer output
> discriminates pixels at 200dpi+ you can change a picture's resolution
> from 72 dpi to 200dpi that's a factor of 3 so the text is still readable
> but very small. (the useful pixels are still there)
>
> if on the other hand_you_need_the_pictures_for_a_screen_presentation,
> then, you have to see the smallest needed image data and cater for that.
> *Example* if you have 8 pixel text,there's nothing you can do as
> reducing the pixel width of an image from 800 to, say 400 pixels would
> reduce that text to a grey line 4 pixels high. If the text is larger
> then you can get away with it.
>
> On Monday, April 15, 2002, at 05:32 AM, Derry Talvainn wrote:
>
>> Could someone please point me to a site where there are some
>> 'successful'
>> screen captures so I can gauge whether I am just being too fussy here
>> or
>> whether I am not doing this correctly?
>>
> Joseph A Borg
> Salam, Triq Ta' Brija,
> Siggiewi QRM 16
> Malta
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 21
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:38:24 +0100
> From: "Chris Price" <chris.price at stl.org>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: [thelist] vbs..W2rk..cscript..HELP
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> I would like to have a web page that contains links to some vbs files
> from the Windows 2000 resource kit. These files normally need to run in
> the context of a command prompt set to run cscript. I would then
> ideally like the results of the scripts to be printed in a new web page
> or text file. Do you know of any way of producing this?!!!
>
> --
> Chris Price
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _____________________________________________________________________
> This message has been checked for all known viruses by UUNET delivered
> through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information
> visit
> http://www.uk.uu.net/products/security/virus/
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 22
> From: "Olly" <gnarly at punkass.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] ASP Newbiw Question
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:45:28 +0100
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] ASP Newbiw Question
>
>>> But I dont know how to do "contains" instead of "equals".
>>
>> the instr() function ("in-string")...
>
> Thanks all who offered advice, I'll take a look when I get home this
> evening
> :-)
>
> Olly.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 23
> From: "Adrian Fischer" <adrian at aussiebidder.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 18:57:50 +1000
> Subject: [thelist] Curious log data
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have just been checking my web logs and have seen that a number of
> referring URLs have come from webmail sites like this:
> http://webmail.alphalink.com.au/cgi-bin/dmailweb.cgi and this:
> http://mail.steveswinebar.com/Xd8769dc99ecb9bcfc9600bd5bb/login.cgi?_
>
> I don't see how they could have surfed on in from those addresses, so
> being
> paranoid as I am, I thought that perhaps someone is using them to SPAM
> through my site.
>
> I could be totally wrong and hopefully I am. Any Ideas what is going
> on?
>
> Regards
>
> Adrian Fischer
> http://aussiebidder.com
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 24
> From: "Peter-Paul Koch" <gassinaumasis at hotmail.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Curious log data
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 09:01:17 +0000
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: "Adrian Fischer" <adrian at aussiebidder.com>
>
>> I have just been checking my web logs and have seen that a number of
>> referring URLs have come from webmail sites like this:
>> http://webmail.alphalink.com.au/cgi-bin/dmailweb.cgi and this:
>> http://mail.steveswinebar.com/Xd8769dc99ecb9bcfc9600bd5bb/login.cgi?_
>>
>> I don't see how they could have surfed on in from those addresses, so
>> being
>> paranoid as I am, I thought that perhaps someone is using them to SPAM
>> through my site.
>>
>> I could be totally wrong and hopefully I am. Any Ideas what is going
>> on?
>
> They clicked on a link in their webmail system, probably because they
> received a mail with a URL to your site. The referrer is thus their
> webmail
> page.
>
> ppk
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 25
> From: "Olly" <gnarly at punkass.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] NS4 and nested tables GRRR!
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:31:20 +0100
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
>> Subject: Re: [thelist] NS4 and nested tables GRRR!
>>
>> Sometimes NS does not like align='left'.
>> Try creating yet another table with 2 cells - the left one to hold the
>> table with the image and "Click..." and the right one to hold the
>> text/description.
>
> Thats what I want to avoid - I want the content in the parent table to
> flow
> around the child if the screen is small. I'm trying to be liquid, but
> Netscape wont let me :-(
>
> I think I'll experiment with a floating div or something, but I dont
> think
> that'll work very well in NS4 either. I dont get man NS4 visitors, but
> I'd
> like to make it work properly anyway...
>
>> P.S. Nice site.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Olly.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 26
> From: "Adrian Fischer" <adrian at aussiebidder.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] Curious log data
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 19:40:50 +1000
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Oh...so thats a a good thing then...someone has been spreading me
> around...so to speak..Great
>
> Regards
>
> Adrian Fischer
> http://aussiebidder.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
> [mailto:thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org]On Behalf Of Peter-Paul Koch
> Sent: Monday, 15 April 2002 7:01 PM
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Curious log data
>
>
>> From: "Adrian Fischer" <adrian at aussiebidder.com>
>
>> I have just been checking my web logs and have seen that a number of
>> referring URLs have come from webmail sites like this:
>> http://webmail.alphalink.com.au/cgi-bin/dmailweb.cgi and this:
>> http://mail.steveswinebar.com/Xd8769dc99ecb9bcfc9600bd5bb/login.cgi?_
>>
>> I don't see how they could have surfed on in from those addresses, so
>> being
>> paranoid as I am, I thought that perhaps someone is using them to SPAM
>> through my site.
>>
>> I could be totally wrong and hopefully I am. Any Ideas what is going
>> on?
>
> They clicked on a link in their webmail system, probably because they
> received a mail with a URL to your site. The referrer is thus their
> webmail
> page.
>
> ppk
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
>
> --
> For unsubscribe and other options, including
> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 27
> From: "Paul Backhouse" <paul.backhouse at 2cs.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:51:15 +0100
> Subject: [thelist] HTML Email
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Hi people.
>
> Quick question, a friend of mine has asked if its possible to test how
> an
> HTML email reacts in a mail client that doesn't support the HTML email.
>
> I dont want to install new software on my Pc just to answer this - as
> far as
> I'm aware Outlook has been supporting HTML emails for a while now, and
> obviously web email supports HTML, only thinks I could think of are
> Linux/Unix machines with the built in email client.
>
> Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on how i could find out what an
> HTML
> email looks like on a machine that doesn't support HTML emails - thats
> if
> there are machines that dont>
>
> cheers
>
> Skuff
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 28
> From: <martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:59:31 +0100
> Subject: Re: [thelist] HTML Email
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>
> Memo from Martin P Burns of PricewaterhouseCoopers
>
> -------------------- Start of message text --------------------
>
> Hi Paul
>
> Get a test sent to me - I'm on Lotus Notes and it most definitely
> *doesn't*
> support HTML
>
> Cheers
> Martin
> (notes sucks as a mail client - this is one of the lesser evils of it)
>
>
>
>
> Quick question, a friend of mine has asked if its possible to test how
> an
> HTML email reacts in a mail client that doesn't support the HTML email.
>
> I dont want to install new software on my Pc just to answer this - as
> far
> as
> I'm aware Outlook has been supporting HTML emails for a while now, and
> obviously web email supports HTML, only thinks I could think of are
> Linux/Unix machines with the built in email client.
>
> Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on how i could find out what an
> HTML
> email looks like on a machine that doesn't support HTML emails - thats
> if
> there are machines that dont>
>
>
> --------------------- End of message text --------------------
>
> This e-mail is sent by the above named in their
> individual, non-business capacity and is not on
> behalf of PricewaterhouseCoopers.
>
> PricewaterhouseCoopers may monitor outgoing and incoming
> e-mails and other telecommunications on its e-mail and
> telecommunications systems.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or
> taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
> received
> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from
> any
> computer.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 29
> From: "Paul Backhouse" <paul.backhouse at 2cs.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] HTML Email
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 12:06:10 +0100
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Cheers Martin - I've sent you an email with an HTML signiture in it.
> Let me know what happens - if possible, could you do a screenshot for
> me?
> cheers
>
> Paul Backhouse
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> Hi Paul
>
> Get a test sent to me - I'm on Lotus Notes and it most definitely
> *doesn't*
> support HTML
>
> Cheers
> Martin
> (notes sucks as a mail client - this is one of the lesser evils of it)
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 30
> From: "DESCHAMPS =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?= DvSI/SICoR"
> <stephane.deschamps at francetelecom.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] HTML Email
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:07:28 +0200
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> Hi Paul
>>
>> Get a test sent to me - I'm on Lotus Notes and it most
>> definitely *doesn't*
>> support HTML
>
> As for Eudora --my email client at home, it can be (and WILL BE)
> configured
> in a very strict way not to show HTML images, for example. It's a
> security
> matter on Windows nowadays, most people I know (and nothing so 'exotic'
> as
> linux, I'm talking general Windows, non-geek public) have configured
> their
> email readers to block HTML emails one way or another. True, I helped
> them
> ;-)
>
> A french eCommerce site, alapage.com, sent me an HTML email and I could
> read
> (figure of speech):
> 'You can have up to "" discount on our products.'
> [I guess "" is where someone had the good idea to put an image to tell
> the
> percentage of discount...]
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 31
> From: "Holographic" <holographic at members.evolt.org>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 12:14:10 +0100
> Subject: [thelist] Other Scripts
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Hi
> As some of you know I have been experimenting with different scripts to
> control access to the members area of my site. <http://liveinthemix.com>
> Before I choose a script to purchase I would like to know if anyone can
> recormend something that you have used with some sucsess.
> To see how we are using the script on the site (*nix hosted) you can
> login
> with username:test password:test123
> Or you can create one if you wish.
>
> AL
>
> Thanks Alan
> Admin Team
>
> http://Liveinthemix.com
> admin_team at liveinthemix.com
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
>> [mailto:thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org]On Behalf Of
>> martin.p.burns at uk.pwcglobal.com
>> Sent: 15 April 2002 12:00
>> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>> Subject: Re: [thelist] HTML Email
>>
>>
>>
>> Memo from Martin P Burns of PricewaterhouseCoopers
>>
>> -------------------- Start of message text --------------------
>>
>> Hi Paul
>>
>> Get a test sent to me - I'm on Lotus Notes and it most definitely
>> *doesn't*
>> support HTML
>>
>> Cheers
>> Martin
>> (notes sucks as a mail client - this is one of the lesser evils of it)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Quick question, a friend of mine has asked if its possible to test how
>> an
>> HTML email reacts in a mail client that doesn't support the HTML email.
>>
>> I dont want to install new software on my Pc just to answer this - as
>> far
>> as
>> I'm aware Outlook has been supporting HTML emails for a while now, and
>> obviously web email supports HTML, only thinks I could think of are
>> Linux/Unix machines with the built in email client.
>>
>> Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on how i could find out
>> what an HTML
>> email looks like on a machine that doesn't support HTML emails - thats
>> if
>> there are machines that dont>
>>
>>
>> --------------------- End of message text --------------------
>>
>> This e-mail is sent by the above named in their
>> individual, non-business capacity and is not on
>> behalf of PricewaterhouseCoopers.
>>
>> PricewaterhouseCoopers may monitor outgoing and incoming
>> e-mails and other telecommunications on its e-mail and
>> telecommunications systems.
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>> The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity
>> to
>> which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged
>> material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of,
>> or
>> taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
>> entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If
>> you received
>> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from
>> any
>> computer.
>>
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 32
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 12:13:07 +0100
> From: Kevin <p+evolt at redbrick.dcu.ie>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] HTML Email
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Hey,
>
> If you want to send a mail to me i'm using mutt on a Unix machine.
>
> Usually when I get sent messages from Outlook they get send in plain
> text &
> HTML format and the client just chooses the plain text one.
>
> You'd have to make sure it was doing that as trying ot read heavy HTML
> document is annoying.
>
> - Kevin
>
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2002 at 11:51:15AM +0100, Paul Backhouse wrote:
>> Hi people.
>>
>> Quick question, a friend of mine has asked if its possible to test how
>> an
>> HTML email reacts in a mail client that doesn't support the HTML email.
>>
>> I dont want to install new software on my Pc just to answer this - as
>> far as
>> I'm aware Outlook has been supporting HTML emails for a while now, and
>> obviously web email supports HTML, only thinks I could think of are
>> Linux/Unix machines with the built in email client.
>>
>> Just wondering if anyone has any ideas on how i could find out what an
>> HTML
>> email looks like on a machine that doesn't support HTML emails - thats
>> if
>> there are machines that dont>
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> Skuff
>>
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 33
> From: "Paul Backhouse" <paul.backhouse at 2cs.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] HTML Email
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 12:21:34 +0100
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> So essentially if your email client doesn't support HTML then you get
> nothing in the email - if there is normal text in it then the client
> will
> show this?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
> Hey,
>
> If you want to send a mail to me i'm using mutt on a Unix machine.
>
> Usually when I get sent messages from Outlook they get send in plain
> text &
> HTML format and the client just chooses the plain text one.
>
> You'd have to make sure it was doing that as trying ot read heavy HTML
> document is annoying.
>
> - Kevin
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 34
> From: "Cristian Secara" <secarica at fx.ro>
> To: "thelist at lists.evolt.org" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 14:26:07 +0300
> Subject: Re: [thelist] HTML Email
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 11:51:15 +0100, Paul Backhouse wrote:
>
>> Quick question, a friend of mine has asked if its possible to test how
>> an
>> HTML email reacts in a mail client that doesn't support the HTML email.
>
> I think it depends on the e-mail client that sends the original
> message.
> A good e-mail client will send a message that contains the same text in
> both versions - plain text *and* HTML. The reader that cannot read HTML
> will always see the plain text version.
>
> I have no idea about the physical structure generated by web e-mail
> clients.
>
> If the plain text is missing from the message body, it also depends on
> the e-mail program used for reading. Some will display all the tag
> stuff, making the message practically unreadable by a normal human
> reader. It may be some will display nothing, but I have not seen one
> yet.
>
> Best wishes,
> Cristi
>
> --
> Cristian Secara
> http://www.secarica.ro/
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 35
> From: "michael ensor" <edc at wnc.quik.co.nz>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] HTML Email
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 23:30:31 +1200
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> well most of the time when I disable HTML email it sucks, the
> appearance and
> the lacunae that is.
>
> I have actually spent a lot of time going throughout the lists I
> subscribe
> to making sure that I am have disabled the html option otherwise ,
> depending
> on which client I am using they will bounce.
>
> I don't actually object to HTML email if I subscribe to it, but the
> chances
> of hostile code being embedded in spam are increasing ( yes well I never
> believe my systems are adequately protected), and also I object to
> pushed
> into the next charging range by my ISP because of bandwidth thieves
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Backhouse" <paul.backhouse at 2cs.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Sent: Monday, April 15, 2002 11:06 PM
> Subject: RE: [thelist] HTML Email
>
>
>> Cheers Martin - I've sent you an email with an HTML signiture in it.
>> Let me know what happens - if possible, could you do a screenshot for
>> me?
>> cheers
>>
>> Paul Backhouse
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> Hi Paul
>>
>> Get a test sent to me - I'm on Lotus Notes and it most definitely
> *doesn't*
>> support HTML
>>
>> Cheers
>> Martin
>> (notes sucks as a mail client - this is one of the lesser evils of it)
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>>
>>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 36
> From: Steve Cook <steve.cook at evitbe.com>
> To: "'thelist at lists.evolt.org'" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] HTML Email
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:37:44 +0200
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> That depends on the client. The majority of well written clients will
> show
> the text part of a multipart email. However some don't! I don't have an
> example I'm afraid, but I know that I've had problems in the past with
> some
> text-based email clients.
>
> Another problem that can occur is that some corporate firewalls are set
> up
> to block all multipart emails. A company I used to work with did a test
> of
> this recently and their results are pretty alarming!
>
> http://www.bluewave.com/about_us/wavelength/mn_wave_natasha_barnett.html
>
> As always, you're mileage may vary! Know your users and do all that you
> can
> to allow them to access the content.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------
> WapWarp - http://wapwarp.com
> Wap-Dev - http://www.wap-dev.net
> Cookstour - http://cookstour.org
> ----------------------------------
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Paul Backhouse [mailto:paul.backhouse at 2cs.com]
>> Sent: den 15 april 2002 13:22
>> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>> Subject: RE: [thelist] HTML Email
>>
>>
>> So essentially if your email client doesn't support HTML then you get
>> nothing in the email - if there is normal text in it then the
>> client will
>> show this?
>>
>>
>>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 37
> From: "DESCHAMPS =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E9phane?= DvSI/SICoR"
> <stephane.deschamps at francetelecom.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] HTML Email
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:30:06 +0200
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> So essentially if your email client doesn't support HTML then you get
>> nothing in the email - if there is normal text in it then the
>> client will
>> show this?
>
> Yes, it's multi-part email.
>
> You can send an HTML email to me at home (notabene at members.evolt.org)
> if you
> want a screenshot with Eudora/win. I'll send it back to you tonight
> (I'm at
> the office, as my FROM suggests).
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 38
> From: niklaus.haldimann at xmedia.ch
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: RE: [thelist] NS4 and nested tables GRRR!
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:38:35 +0200
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not
> understand
> this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
>> From: Olly Hodgson [mailto:gnarly at gmx.co.uk]
>> If that makes the table taller than its parent table, NS4
>> draws it so it
>> overflows ut of its parent, rather than making the parent
>> table tall enough
>> that the child table will fit (example on
>> http://www.olly.websir.co.uk/mtb/gallery.asp).
>
> try putting a <br clear="all" /> at the end of the containing td
> element.
>
> cheers.
>
> --
> Nik Haldimann
> Web Developer, Xmedia
> http://www.xmedia.ch
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Help: http://lists.evolt.org/mailman/listinfo/thelist
>
> Archives: http://lists.evolt.org
>
> End of thelist Digest
>
More information about the thelist
mailing list