[thelist] requested to UNSUBSCRIBE failed

[katherine]

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 Sunday, April 14, 2002, at 08:43 PM, 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. VB.net question (Cameron McCormick)
>    2. Re: (Intel + Linux) vs (Sun + Solaris) (Matt Liotta)
>    3. Re: XML parsing the homemade way (Warden, Matt)
>    4. Re: trash my new site pls (Joseph A Borg)
>    5. Re: look and feel (Joseph A Borg)
>    6. Re: trash my new site pls (Joseph A Borg)
>    7. *mini-survey* results posted (carole guevin)
>    8. mac & localhost (George Klingenhoffer)
>    9. Re: (Intel + Linux) vs (Sun + Solaris) (Samir M. Nassar)
>   10. ASP Newbiw Question (Olly Hodgson)
>   11. Re: ASP Newbiw Question (Warden, Matt)
>   12. Re: mac & localhost (Joseph A Borg)
>   13. Which Netscape? (Meredith Tupper)
>   14. RE: XML parsing the homemade way (Chris Mason)
>   15. Re: Which Netscape? (Simon Willison)
>   16. Re: Which Netscape? (J Isaac Swiderski)
>   17. Flash Player 6 breaks swfs made on flash 5? (Josh Earl)
>   18. Re: Which Netscape? (Simon Willison)
>   19. Re: Which Netscape? (aardvark)
>   20. Re: Which Netscape? (Meredith Tupper)
>   21. Re: ASP Newbiw Question (aardvark)
>   22. Re: Which Netscape? (sasha)
>   23. Re: Which Netscape? (Meredith Tupper)
>   24. hiding CSS (Duncan O'Neill)
>   25. Re: Which Netscape? (aardvark)
>   26. _target= opening new window parameters? (Hugh Blair)
>   27. Re: Flash Player 6 breaks swfs made on flash 5? (Erik Mattheis)
>   28. Re: _target= opening new window parameters? (Erik Mattheis)
>   29. RE: _target= opening new window parameters? (Hugh Blair)
>   30. Re: hiding CSS (Erik Mattheis)
>   31. Re: _target= opening new window parameters? (aardvark)
>   32. Re: hiding CSS (aardvark)
>   33. Re: hiding CSS (Duncan O'Neill)
>   34. RE: _target= opening new window parameters? (Hugh Blair)
>   35. Re: hiding CSS (Duncan O'Neill)
>   36. Re: hiding CSS (Erik Mattheis)
>   37. Re: Which Netscape? (Warden, Matt)
>   38. Re: hiding CSS (Mark Limburg)
>   39. Re: CSS site check : www.cache-22.co.uk/index_css.php (Karen J.
> Bowen)
>   40. RE: Screen Captures again (Derry Talvainn)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 13:31:10 -0400
> From: Cameron McCormick <lordcutter at telocity.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: [thelist] VB.net question
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> hey guys,
>
> I installed vb.net today, as I want to make a windows version of one of
> my web database apps (basically it will be a pretty interface to make a
> twitchy client happy)
>
> after playing with it some, I find no way to distribute an application,
> it compiles an exe, and if I add stuff to it, it gets bigger in size -
> is this all there is to it? do the apps need the .net framework or some
> kind of runtime?
>
> thanks,
> Cameron
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2002 10:12:48 -0700
> Subject: Re: [thelist] (Intel + Linux) vs (Sun + Solaris)
> From: Matt Liotta <mliotta at r337.com>
> To: Evolt <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> On 4/13/02 10:01 AM, "sasha" <sasha at bittersweet2.com> wrote:
>
>> Have you tried real hardware before?  I never said not
>> to go intel (being an AMD person, I actually would say
>> that...).  There was very little foresight put into
>> making the i386 arcitecture, and as a result, we have to
>> work around the same limitations we did back in the
>> 80's.
>>
> Sure, I have administered just about every type of platform you would
> ever
> find in a data center. There are limitations with every architecture.
> Why
> don't you point out the specific problems you have with x86 as it
> relates to
> web serving. It is easy to make sweeping generalizations without
> anything to
> back it up.
>
>> They have 3 people who know how to "administer Linux
>> properly", and none of them can go back in time and
>> prevent mistakes made by the people writing Linux.
>> There are still issues with Linux relating to PCMCIA,
>> and there were 2 other seperate Linux bugs that were
>> causing the crashes (it took them 2 months to fix
>> these).  So, Linux in and of itself *was* the problem.
>>
> So let me get this straight, this ISP uses servers that require PCMCIA
> cards? Maybe I'm just stupid, but why in the world would a server need
> PCMCIA? Again, point out the bugs you refer. What version of the kernel
> were
> you running? Did you share the bugs with LKML? Did they fix it for you?
>
> If you want anyone to actually believe that x86 and Linux aren't
> reliable
> you are going to have to point out specifically what is wrong with them.
> Other wise we will be left to assume you it is a user problem.
>
> -Matt
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 12:35:53 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Warden, Matt" <mwarden at mattwarden.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] XML parsing the homemade way
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> On Apr 14, Daniel Fascia had something to say about [thelist] XML
> parsing...
>
>> I have looked at some of the XML parsers available in various
>> languages and it would seem simpler for my project to create
>> my own system as follows:
>>
>> 1) Open XML learning module as text file
>> 2) Parse file using string handling regexpressions of PHP or
>> ASP/Javascript
>> 3) Fire parsed data into one of 5 body templates as defined in the XML
>> file
>
> oy. i think you're greatly oversimplifying #2 there. there is a lot
> involved in "parse file". your lack of headaches will thank me when i
> say: use what's already been done for you.
>
> asp has a msxml object which takes about 5 lines
> php has xml functions that's similarly easy to use
>
>> I am wondering if this is significantly slower and what potential
>> risks are with this system vs a traditional database (which is
>> available) or using a language's inbuilt XML parser such as that in
>> PHP?
>
> yeah, it's probably slower too since you're using script code rather
> than
> compiled objects or native functions
>
> either way, good luck.
>
> --
> mattwarden
> mattwarden.com
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:55:24 +0200
> Subject: Re: [thelist] trash my new site pls
> From: Joseph A Borg <jacborg at mac.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> thanks for the criticism...
>
> On Wednesday, April 10, 2002, at 04:01 PM, Miriam Frost wrote:
>
>> Hi, Joe!
>>
>> Nice start, and I hope this doesn't sound like I'm harshing out on you.
>> Most
>> of my questions were/are regarding copy, I think that's where you
>> really
>> could improve things --
>>
>> Why do you need to "confess" that you're a dreamer? Why not just say
>> it? Or
>> if you're looking for work with this site, is that what you really want
>> to
>> convey? I mean, to a lot of potential employers, that might sound like
>> they're going to get someone they need to prod a lot...
> that's the way I am, if somebody has problems dealing with it, it's up
> to them.
> I love 'spreading' my knowledge more than 'focusing'
>> D.T.P.? Desktop publishing? That's a pretty unusual acryonym - what if
>> you
>> just spell it out?
> good point, sounds too much like hey I know the word and you don't!
>> What does "Trespassers to be enlightened" mean? Oh. Got it. Not shot.
>> Enlightened about what?
> If you came over to little Malta 17x27km most public spaces have this
> keep out notices set up by hunters on public land... then everybody
> wants to build up walls real, virtual, social...
>> Typography section -- from my experience, when I see a link named this
>> on a
>> designer's site, I think I'm going to see fonts that they've designed.
>> What
>> is your goal with this section? Who is Charles Bigelow? (Yes, I know,
>> but do
>> your potential clients? Why should they care?)
> good point. I intend to put stuff where I use type. Though I have added
> some maltese characters to fonts I use frequently (Univers, Frutiger,
> Bembo, Officina, Isadora...) I still don't have that great idea to
> produce a diplay font (reading fonts require loads of experience, me
> thinks)
>> "The evolving art of messing with photos" --  err. What?
> ops this is also a personal site so can i have some expressive license
>> There's a typo at the bottom of the page - "especialy" shb.
>> "especially."
>> I've really liked your photography throughout, but you might take
>> another
>> look at a lot of the copy. It might be a little punchier, and more
>> effective
>> if it flows logically form one paragraph to the next.
> yeah, this one has go through the sieve. I tend to think too many ideas
> at once and end up with a mess, usually I spot most inconsistencies
> after second third read...
>> The red background on your illustration in the bottom right corner does
>> not
>> match the red of the page. On the about you page (I like the way the
>> illustration is in color now!), the backrounds on all the links are
>> grey,
>> you might want to think about consistency here.
> well, I thought that since I did all the pages and the content and want
> to work in all these fields and... I selected them all ;-)
>> Err... say someone wants to hire you -- how do they get in touch?
>> Maybe I
>> missed it but I'm not seeing any contact information...
> usually I point people to this page, I would like to have a good
> criticism first (thank you), finish my assignments (just did) and do my
> finals (early May-shudder). Then I plan to have a really good mail shot
> for local business (shhh... don't tell the competition though;-)
>
>> Hope that was helpful, and good luck!
> that was and thanks
>> best regards,
>> Miriam
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:13:24 +0200
> Subject: Re: [thelist] look and feel
> From: Joseph A Borg <jacborg at mac.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> http://www.matthewgarrett.biz
>
> wow mat, wow... nice work, not much criticism until you beef up the
> site.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:16:19 +0200
> Subject: Re: [thelist] trash my new site pls
> From: Joseph A Borg <jacborg at mac.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> --
> [ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
> I tried to make it playful: the most important info is in the menus, the
> rest are like easter eggs...
>
> I intend to use the site together with conventional promotion... thanks
> for the layout comment though, much appreciated
>
> regards
>
> On Wednesday, April 10, 2002, at 05:10 PM, Tara Cleveland wrote:
>
>> In general, I really like the layout. It's great to see something other
>> than
>> the 3 column, menu at top thing. Anyway, what I'm trying to say it that
>> it
>> is eye-catching and draws you in. However, I didn't realize I could
>> click on
>> your picture or on the bird until well into my visit.
> --
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 7
> From: "carole guevin" <carole at soulmedia.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 16:28:52 -0400
> Subject: [thelist] *mini-survey* results posted
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> hi everyone,
>
> Simultaneously as the End of Free by Aardvark -
> http://evolt.org/article/End_of_Free_Content_Ride/1/22708/ - was
> published -
> netdiver was doing a mini-survey.
>
> The compilation of the *Pay for content?* is done. You can read the
> results
> + insights here:
>
> http://netdiver.net/survey_pfc.php
>
> There are a few open end questions at the bottom of that page. If you
> have
> constructive comments or suggestions - I am interested in reading them.
>
> Together we can build What the Web Will be!
>
> .c
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 8
> From: "George Klingenhoffer" <georgeklingenhoffer at hotmail.com>
> To: "Thelist at Lists. Evolt. Org" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 13:52:59 -0700
> Subject: [thelist] mac & localhost
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Is there a way for MacOS9x or OSX to recognize the computer name of my
> web
> server (which runs WinXP)?  I could use the IP address but it's easier
> to
> remember the computer name.
>
> Example:
> http://chewbacca/new.asp
>
> Thanks!
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 9
> Subject: Re: [thelist] (Intel + Linux) vs (Sun + Solaris)
> From: "Samir M. Nassar" <nassarsa at redconcepts.net>
> To: Evolt <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: 14 Apr 2002 17:50:29 -0500
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> <cite>
>> If you want anyone to actually believe that x86 and Linux aren't
>> reliable
>> you are going to have to point out specifically what is wrong with
>> them.
>> Other wise we will be left to assume you it is a user problem.
> </cite>
>
> Hear hear.
>
> I went from Windows to Linux cold penguin, so to speak, and the first
> month was hellish. It was easy to blame things on how crappy Linux was.
>
> Until I dug my head out from between my glutes I wanted to treat Linux
> like a free version of Windows, and think like a windows (Solaris??)
> user. Maybe thinking of Linux as Linux might help your problem Sasha.
>
> Remember man pages, google, Linux Users Groups, and IRC are your friend.
> (better informed that MSFT techlines, cheaper, friendlier (mostly),
> years of experience) And the hell of it is this, many LUG's lean heavily
> towards prgrammers and net/sys admins so if anyone can help, they can.
> If you can articulate your problem in English, French, German, or
> Spanish then you probably find it on the web.
>
> As for x86 it is very simple; x86 is ugly, you know it, I know it, the
> world knows it. Then why do we use it? Because it works. It is as simple
> as that. Not only that, it actually works really well when you have a
> good operating system to power the hardware. In my most unhumble of
> opinions I'd have to say that the only good candidates are Windows 2000
> (specifically) and Linux (in general).
>
> Hey, knock yourself out, use Sun/Solaris to your hearts content, but
> follow Matt's advice and back up your statements if you want to go into
> OS bashing. After all, nobody knows the limitations of Linux better than
> the people who use Linux. Especially admins.
>
>
> Samir M. Nassar
> member: Twin Cities Linux User Group  - http://www.mn-linux.org
> Open Source, Open Systems, Open Borders, Open Minds.
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 10
> From: "Olly Hodgson" <gnarly at punkass.com>
> To: "theList [evolt]" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 00:15:15 +0100
> Subject: [thelist] ASP Newbiw Question
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Whats the syntax for "if variable contains string then" ?
>
> I got as far as
> <% if Request.ServerVariables("URL") = "Portfolio" then %>
> But I dont know how to do "contains" instead of "equals".
>
> Help?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> --
> Olly (learning, slowly :-)
> - www.gnarly-bitches.co.uk -
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 11
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 19:27:01 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Warden, Matt" <mwarden at mattwarden.com>
> To: "theList [evolt]" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] ASP Newbiw Question
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> On Apr 15, Olly Hodgson had something to say about [thelist] ASP Newbiw
> Question
>
>> Whats the syntax for "if variable contains string then" ?
>>
>> I got as far as
>> <% if Request.ServerVariables("URL") = "Portfolio" then %>
>> But I dont know how to do "contains" instead of "equals".
>>
>> Help?
>
> Olly,
>
> here ya go:
> http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?url=/library/en-
> us/script56/html/vsfctinstr.asp
>
> hth,
>
> --
> mattwarden
> mattwarden.com
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 12
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:46:37 +0200
> Subject: Re: [thelist] mac & localhost
> From: Joseph A Borg <jacborg at mac.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> on system 9- you should be able to set a list of dns entries for local
> machines.
> haven't done it for a looong while, can try to find info. try to check:
> http://kbase.info.apple.com/cgi-
> bin/WebObjects/kbase.woa/110/wa/query?searchMode=Expert&type=id&val=KC.58138
>
>
> On Sunday, April 14, 2002, at 10:52 PM, George Klingenhoffer wrote:
>
>> Is there a way for MacOS9x or OSX to recognize the computer name of my
>> web
>> server (which runs WinXP)?  I could use the IP address but it's easier
>> to
>> remember the computer name.
>>
>> Example:
>> http://chewbacca/new.asp
>>
>> Thanks!
>> --
>> For unsubscribe and other options, including
>> the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
>> http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !
>>
>>
> Joseph A Borg
> Salam, Triq Ta' Brija,
> Siggiewi QRM 16
> Malta
> Tel: +356 21466218
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 13
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 20:30:15 -0400
> From: Meredith Tupper <meredith at pintsize.com>
> Organization: PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting, Inc.
> To: "thelist at lists.evolt.org" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Hi all,
>
> Time to upgrade Netscape; should I step up to the 6.0
> version or stay within the confines of 4.7?  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?
> I'm using Win98 at least until the new suse linux comes out
> this month.
>
> TIA,
> Meredith
>
> <tip>Running out of tips?  Me too.  If you are stuck owing
> tips and you're fresh out of ideas to share, look around
> places like http://www.langa.com/ for tip fodder, BUT troll
> through the existing tips first to avoid duplication.</tip>
>
> --
> PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting, Inc.
> http://www.pintsize.com
> meredith at pintsize.com
> 3225 S. MacDill Ave. #208
> Tampa, FL 33629
> 813-835-5382
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 14
> From: "Chris Mason" <masonc at masonc.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] XML parsing the homemade way
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 20:32:47 -0400
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> ezSystems in Norway have released an opensuorce php based xml parser -
> no
> compiling, easy to use.
> http://ez.no
>
> Chris Mason
> masonc at masonc.com
> Box 340, The Valley, Anguilla, British West Indies
> Tel: 264 497 5670 Fax: 264 497 8463
> Take a virtual tour of the island
> http://www.anguillaguide.com/ The Anguilla Guide
> Find your perfect rental villa www.mycaribbean.com
> Talk to me in real time:
> MSN Instant Messenger: masonc92 at hotmail.com
> ICQ 118159388 Yahoo:netconcepts_anguilla
> US Fax and Voicemail: (605)253-1759
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org
> [mailto:thelist-admin at lists.evolt.org]On Behalf Of Warden, Matt
> Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 12:36 PM
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] XML parsing the homemade way
>
>
> On Apr 14, Daniel Fascia had something to say about [thelist] XML
> parsing...
>
>> I have looked at some of the XML parsers available in various
>> languages and
> it would seem simpler for my project to create
>> my own system as follows:
>>
>> 1) Open XML learning module as text file
>> 2) Parse file using string handling regexpressions of PHP or
>> ASP/Javascript
>> 3) Fire parsed data into one of 5 body templates as defined in the XML
>> file
>
> oy. i think you're greatly oversimplifying #2 there. there is a lot
> involved in "parse file". your lack of headaches will thank me when i
> say: use what's already been done for you.
>
> asp has a msxml object which takes about 5 lines
> php has xml functions that's similarly easy to use
>
>> I am wondering if this is significantly slower and what potential
>> risks are
> with this system vs a traditional database (which is
>> available) or using a language's inbuilt XML parser such as that in
>> PHP?
>
> yeah, it's probably slower too since you're using script code rather
> than
> compiled objects or native functions
>
> either way, good luck.
>
> --
> mattwarden
> mattwarden.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 !
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 15
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 01:45:37 +0100
> From: Simon Willison <simon at incutio.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Meredith Tupper wrote:
>
>> Time to upgrade Netscape; should I step up to the 6.0
>> version or stay within the confines of 4.7?
>>
> Neither - go for Mozilla instead. It's the open source version of
> Netscape - in fact NS6 is based on Mozilla. However, Mozilla is far mroe
> current than NS6 (the latest version of Mozilla is light years ahead of
> NS6 in terms of stability and performance). Grab the latest Win32
> talkback build from here:
>
> http://www.mozilla.org/releases/
>
> Once you've got mozilla there are plenty of funky things you can do with
> it, such as adding gesture recognition:
> http://optimoz.mozdev.org/gestures/
>
> I'm currently considering writing my first ever Evolt article about
> Mozilla, with a bit of advocacy and a whole load of practical advice on
> how to get the most out of the browser (good add-ons, configuration
> options, where to get skins, that kind of thing). I don't know if
> there's much interest in this though, I get the idea from this list that
> I might at least in part be preaching to the converted...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Simon Willison
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 16
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:00:33 -0400 (EDT)
> From: J Isaac Swiderski <jswiders at cs.oberlin.edu>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> CC: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>
> The cows mooved Simon Willison to say:
>> I don't know if there's much interest in this though, I get the idea
>> from this
>> list that I might at least in part be preaching to the converted...
>
> I can think of two reasons to write it anyway:
>
> 1 - there are tons of people (djc or someone can give you proper
> numbers) who find
> 	EVolt through the various search engines and such who may not be
> members or
> 	even converts already. . .
>
> b - we can *all* always learn something from somebody else. . . .
> there's always
> 	something about whatever your argument is that someone hasn't
> heard already.
> 	Although I use Mozilla on a frequent basis, I know neither how to add
> 	gesture recognition nor skins, for instance.
>
> so everybody -- you may *think* what you have to say has already been
> said, but
> chances are most people haven't quite seen it from your angle to the
> world.  So
> write that article!
>
> :-)
> -jis-
>
> --
> Jonathon Isaac Swiderski      jswiders at cs.oberlin.edu
>    135 w lorain ocmr 2678 // oberlin oh 44074-1081
>    "What we have to learn to do we learn by doing"
>     -- Aristotle, Ethica Nicomachea II (c 325 BC)
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 17
> From: "Josh Earl" <jearl at adel.tafe.sa.edu.au>
> To: "Thelist at Lists. Evolt. Org" <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:34:10 +0930
> Subject: [thelist] Flash Player 6 breaks swfs made on flash 5?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Hi Guys,
>
> Our team's flash ppl are jumping up and down because it seems that some
> flash they have made using Flash 5 was working fine on both development
> machines and client machines...that is, until the latest plugin was
> downloaded by the clients, at which point the movie falls over.
>
> This effect has been reproduced by one of our developers on his home
> machine - Win 98 IE 5.5 going from the default shipping flash player 5
> to
> the latest version of the Flash Player downloaded from the Macromedia
> website (Flash player 6).
>
> Has anyone heard of this before?
>
> Does anyone know of any applications that allow you to switch which
> versions
> of plugins are available to your browser? It would be neat to be able to
> have a library of plugins available and define which one the browser is
> using for display.
>
> thanks for your time,
>
> Josh
> -CALS Online Unit.
>
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 18
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 02:12:13 +0100
> From: Simon Willison <simon at incutio.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> J Isaac Swiderski wrote:
>
>> I can think of two reasons to write it anyway:
>>
>> 1 - there are tons of people (djc or someone can give you proper
>> numbers) who find
>> 	EVolt through the various search engines and such who may not be
>> members or
>> 	even converts already. . .
>>
>> b - we can *all* always learn something from somebody else. . . .
>> there's always
>> 	something about whatever your argument is that someone hasn't
>> heard already.
>> 	Although I use Mozilla on a frequent basis, I know neither how to add
>> 	gesture recognition nor skins, for instance.
>>
>> so everybody -- you may *think* what you have to say has already been
>> said, but
>> chances are most people haven't quite seen it from your angle to the
>> world.  So
>> write that article!
>>
> OK then, I'm convinced (not that it took much).
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 19
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:20:18 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: Meredith Tupper <meredith at pintsize.com>
> [...]
>> Time to upgrade Netscape; should I step up to the 6.0
>> version or stay within the confines of 4.7?  Also, I think
>
> depends on your needs... personally, i'd suggest you install both...
>
> have a later 4.x version handy for testing (some day a client may say
> something is broken in that browser, it'll be nice to have at least for
> that) and
> development...
>
> have a 6.x version to test the newer users and standards...
>
> and grab a mozilla build to see where the browser is going... even
> though your
> average web surfer won't have it, it'll help you be ready for the
> consumer point
> releases of netscape...
>
>> it's time for me to ditch Netscape as a mail program, and
>> I'm considering Pegasus or The Bat.  Any recommendations?
>> I'm using Win98 at least until the new suse linux comes out
>> this month.
>
> i'm a fan of Pegasus, even though the 4.01 version has a few bugs, it's
> a great
> package all around...
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 20
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:39:55 -0400
> From: Meredith Tupper <meredith at pintsize.com>
> Organization: PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting, Inc.
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Simon Willison wrote:
>
>> Meredith Tupper wrote:
>>
>>> Time to upgrade Netscape; should I step up to the 6.0
>>> version or stay within the confines of 4.7?
>>>
>> Neither - go for Mozilla instead. It's the open source version of
>> Netscape - in fact NS6 is based on Mozilla. However, Mozilla is far
>> mroe
>> current than NS6 (the latest version of Mozilla is light years ahead of
>> NS6 in terms of stability and performance). Grab the latest Win32
>> talkback build from here:
>>
>> http://www.mozilla.org/releases/
>
> Cool!  Thank you.
>
>> I'm currently considering writing my first ever Evolt article about
>> Mozilla, with a bit of advocacy and a whole load of practical advice on
>> how to get the most out of the browser (good add-ons, configuration
>> options, where to get skins, that kind of thing). I don't know if
>> there's much interest in this though,
>
> Heck no, there's plenty of interest from clueless people like me!  I
> depend on
> evolt for this kind of info, and I greatly appreciate it.
>
> Meredith
>
> --
> PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting, Inc.
> http://www.pintsize.com
> meredith at pintsize.com
> 3225 S. MacDill Ave. #208
> Tampa, FL 33629
> 813-835-5382
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 21
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:40:56 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] ASP Newbiw Question
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: "Olly Hodgson" <gnarly at punkass.com>
>>
>> Whats the syntax for "if variable contains string then" ?
>>
>> I got as far as
>> <% if Request.ServerVariables("URL") = "Portfolio" then %>
>> But I dont know how to do "contains" instead of "equals".
>
> the instr() function ("in-string")...
>
> IF instr(1,Request.ServerVariables("URL"),"Portfolio",1) > 0 THEN
> 	do stuff
> END IF
>
> it returns a number... if the number is 0, the thing you're looking for
> isn't in the
> string... if the number is greater than 0, that's the position of the
> start of the
> occurrence...
>
> i can see that you're using it to parse out a directory name from a
> URL...  you
> might want to take a look at an example of code that does a similar
> thing
> (with a lot more string manipulation):
>
> Breadcrumbs for Those Using ASP
> http://evolt.org/article/list/17/4438/
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 22
> From: sasha <sasha at bittersweet2.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:52:00 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> If you are a serious web designer, there is no reason
> why you should be "ditching" Netscape 4.x.  My site
> stats still show it as the #1 non-IE browser.  You
> should keep it to at least continue checking your
> progress in that browser.
>
> If you're looking for a different primary browser, I
> highly recommend Opera.  I use Opera 6.1 as my browser
> and mail reader.  The mail files are in the simple unix
> mbox format, making it easy to import the files into
> other mail clients.  The client itself is decent.  Can't
> imagine too many features a mail client might have that
> would make one better than any other (except IE.. unless
> you like security holes).
>
> Might want to read this (Opera vs Mozilla vs IE):
> http://www.searchengineworld.com/opera/faceoff.htm
>
> Christy "sasha" Siepker
> http://bittersweet2.com
>
> 4/14/2002 8:30:15 PM, Meredith Tupper
> <meredith at pintsize.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Time to upgrade Netscape; should I step up to the 6.0
>> version or stay within the confines of 4.7?  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?
>> I'm using Win98 at least until the new suse linux comes
> out
>> this month.
>>
>> TIA,
>> Meredith
>>
>> <tip>Running out of tips?  Me too.  If you are stuck
> owing
>> tips and you're fresh out of ideas to share, look
> around
>> places like http://www.langa.com/ for tip fodder, BUT
> troll
>> through the existing tips first to avoid duplication.
> </tip>
>>
>> --
>> PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting, Inc.
>> http://www.pintsize.com
>> meredith at pintsize.com
>> 3225 S. MacDill Ave. #208
>> Tampa, FL 33629
>> 813-835-5382
>>
>>
>> --
>> 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: 23
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:45:24 -0400
> From: Meredith Tupper <meredith at pintsize.com>
> Organization: PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting, Inc.
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> aardvark wrote:
>
>>> From: Meredith Tupper <meredith at pintsize.com>
>> [...]
>>> Time to upgrade Netscape; should I step up to the 6.0
>>> version or stay within the confines of 4.7?  Also, I think
>>
>> depends on your needs... personally, i'd suggest you install both...
>>
>> have a later 4.x version handy for testing (some day a client may say
>> something is broken in that browser, it'll be nice to have at least
>> for that) and
>> development...
>>
>> have a 6.x version to test the newer users and standards...
>
> I am setting up a standalone Win98 machine for testing, and I'll
> definitely include
> both, thanks for the tip.
>
>
>> and grab a mozilla build to see where the browser is going... even
>> though your
>> average web surfer won't have it, it'll help you be ready for the
>> consumer point
>> releases of netscape...
>
> Has anyone heard anything about what AOL will do to Netscape when/if
> they switch?
> Will AOL finally ditch their wretched mail client for a modified
> Netscape one?
>
> Meredith
>
> --
> PintSize Graphics & Web Hosting, Inc.
> http://www.pintsize.com
> meredith at pintsize.com
> 3225 S. MacDill Ave. #208
> Tampa, FL 33629
> 813-835-5382
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 24
> From: "Duncan O'Neill" <dbaxo at ihug.co.nz>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:49:39 +1200
> Organization: The Urban Legend magazine
> Subject: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm updating my site, and have a question about hiding CSS
> from old browsers.
>
> Until I saw what a mess MacIE4.5 made of the page, I was using
> the @import "stylesheet.css";   method to hide stylesheets. But
> according to the page below, the @import url("stylesheet.css");
> hides CSS from WinIE4 and lower, Netscape 4.x, and Mac IE4.5.
>
> http://pixels.pixelpark.com/~koch/hide_css_from_browsers/import/
>
> I've confirmed that the method hides CSS from Netscape 4.x , and
> MacIE4.5. But the stylesheet is showing in WinIE4, so either the
> page is wrong or my version of IE4 is suspect. The latter is possible
> since I'm running WinIE4 in "compatibility" mode (as an add-on to
> IE5), so that it may understand things that a "true" version of IE
> wouldn't.
>
> Would someone with a "true" standalone version of WinIE4 please
> visit the above page and let me whether the method does hide the
> stylesheets.
>
> thanks in advance,
>
> Duncan O'Neill
> The Urban Legend magazine
> http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~dbaxo/urban_legend.htm
> =============================================
>
> Duncan O'Neill
> The Urban Legend magazine
> http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~dbaxo/urban_legend.htm
> =============================================
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 25
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:58:27 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: Meredith Tupper <meredith at pintsize.com>
> [...]
>> Has anyone heard anything about what AOL will do to Netscape when/if
>> they switch? Will AOL finally ditch their wretched mail client for a
>> modified Netscape one?
>
> who knows...
>
> IOW, i know nothing more than what i wrote last month around this time,
> but if
> you follow some of the links to primary news sources, they may post
> updates
> as they go:
>
> Is Netscape the Browser for the Next AOL?
> http://evolt.org/article/list/1/22549/
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 26
> From: "Hugh Blair" <hblair at hotfootmail.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:13:16 -0500
> Subject: [thelist] _target= opening new window parameters?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> <a href="../info.html" target="_blank" ????????????>
>
> OK - I'm lost. I can't find the other attributes for this
> tag, like: size, position, chrome,
>
> -Hugh
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 27
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:18:33 -0500
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> From: Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Flash Player 6 breaks swfs made on flash 5?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> At 10:34 AM +0930 4/15/02, Josh Earl wrote:
>> flash they have made using Flash 5 was working fine on both development
>> machines and client machines...that is, until the latest plugin was
>> downloaded by the clients, at which point the movie falls over.
>
>> This effect has been reproduced by one of our developers
>
> 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)
>
> For the meantime, there's a new version of the 6 player: 6,0,23,0 ...
> try it with that.
>
> Here are some known issues regarding bad coding that would work in
> the Flash 5 Player, but not Flash 6:
> http://www.macromedia.com/support/flash/releasenotes/player/rn_6.html
>
>> Does anyone know of any applications that allow you to switch which
>> versions
>> of plugins are available to your browser?
>
> 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 ...
> --
>
> __________________________________________
> - Erik Mattheis
>
> (612) 377 2272
> http://goZz.com/
>
> __________________________________________
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 28
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:20:26 -0500
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> From: Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> Subject: Re: [thelist] _target= opening new window parameters?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> <a href="../info.html" target="_blank" ????????????>
>>
>> OK - I'm lost. I can't find the other attributes for this
>> tag, like: size, position, chrome,
>
> I don't know of any and if they exist, they'd be browser-specific ...
> you have to use JavaScript to change anything about the chrome.
> --
>
> __________________________________________
> - Erik Mattheis
>
> (612) 377 2272
> http://goZz.com/
>
> __________________________________________
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 29
> From: "Hugh Blair" <hblair at hotfootmail.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] _target= opening new window parameters?
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:28:40 -0500
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> On Behalf Of Erik Mattheis
>>
>>> <a href="../info.html" target="_blank" ????????????>
>>>
>>> OK - I'm lost. I can't find the other attributes for this
>>> tag, like: size, position, chrome,
>>
>> I don't know of any and if they exist, they'd be browser-specific ...
>> you have to use JavaScript to change anything about the chrome.
>
> Yeh, I figured that support for various attributes would be browser
> specific, and I used to have link to a chart that showed them, but I'm
> disappointed that JavaScript will be required for them. Ouch, I *was*
> trying to do as much without JS as possible. Thanks for the help.
>
> Still searching...
>
> -Hugh
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 30
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:27:52 -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
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm updating my site, and have a question about hiding CSS
>> from old browsers.
>>
>> Until I saw what a mess MacIE4.5 made of the page, I was using
>> the @import "stylesheet.css";
>
> People may disagree with me, but for the exact type of problems you
> cite, I thing using @IMPORT to give different CSS to different
> browsers is a bad idea. Use JavaScript and document.wrote a link to
> an external stylesheet. Resort to using navigator.userAgaent is a
> necessity if you want the greatest level of control over CSS display
> unless you don't care about anything but the most common browsers.
> --
>
> __________________________________________
> - Erik Mattheis
>
> (612) 377 2272
> http://goZz.com/
>
> __________________________________________
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 31
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:29:43 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] _target= opening new window parameters?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: "Hugh Blair" <hblair at hotfootmail.com>
>>
>> <a href="../info.html" target="_blank" ????????????>
>>
>> OK - I'm lost. I can't find the other attributes for this
>> tag, like: size, position, chrome,
>
> that kind of control isn't available through the target attribute...
> you need to
> use scripting to access that level of control on a new window... so, for
> example, you might have script like this on your page (watch for wrap):
>
> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
> 	function HughWindow() {
> 		newWindow =
> window.open("../info.html","WinName","toolbar=no,location=no,scrollbars=yes,
> width=400,height=500");
> 	}
> </script>
>
> and then you'd call that thusly (which ensures those without JS enabled
> will
> still see the page view just a new window, but at least they'll see it):
>
> <a href="../info.html" target="_blank"
> onClick="javascript:HughWindow();return false;">
>
> you'll get a lovely window with no toolbar, no location bar, scrollbars
> enabled,
> a width and height as specified, and it won't move the user to the top
> of the
> page firing the window, either...
>
> you can see more about the lovely mix of JS and HTML that allows for
> pleasant degradation across all users in a lovely article by .jeff:
>
> Links & JavaScript Living Together in Harmony
> http://evolt.org/article/list/17/20938/
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 32
> From: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:36:36 -0400
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> From: Erik Mattheis <gozz at gozz.com>
> [...]
>>> Until I saw what a mess MacIE4.5 made of the page, I was using
>>> the @import "stylesheet.css";
>>
>> People may disagree with me, but for the exact type of problems you
>> cite, I thing using @IMPORT to give different CSS to different
>> browsers is a bad idea. Use JavaScript and document.wrote a link to an
>> external stylesheet. Resort to using navigator.userAgaent is a
>> necessity if you want the greatest level of control over CSS display
>> unless you don't care about anything but the most common browsers. --
>
> i do disagree with you, primarily because @import *isn't* necessarily a
> hack... it's actually akin to include and extremely useful for
> compiling CSS
> files so you can have one handle layout, another do colors, another
> control
> type, etc...
>
> however, currently, many of us use @import to prevent older browsers
> from
> seeing code that would otherwise break them...
>
> 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...
>
> JS document.write certainly has its place, and the decision should be
> made
> on a case-by-case basis, but so far i've had very good luck *not* using
> JS to
> dynamically write in links, also reducing page size (a bit) and
> rendering time
> (a little bit)...
>
> now, if we really want to use some CSS hacks, then the original poster
> can
> try modifying the syntax of the @import call to see what causes to be
> seen/hidden from all desired browsers...  things like removing the
> quotes or
> the parentheses, or using @import to @import another sheet, etc...
>
> i would probably go the JS route before i start hacking my CSS, but
> again, i've
> not needed to do either...
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 33
> 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 14:42:47 +1200
> Organization: The Urban Legend magazine
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Erik Mattheis wrote;
>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I'm updating my site, and have a question about hiding CSS
>>> from old browsers.
>>>
>>> Until I saw what a mess MacIE4.5 made of the page, I was using
>>> the @import "stylesheet.css";
>>
>> People may disagree with me, but for the exact type of problems you
>> cite, I thing using @IMPORT to give different CSS to different
>> browsers is a bad idea. Use JavaScript and document.wrote a link to
>> an external stylesheet. Resort to using navigator.userAgaent is a
>> necessity if you want the greatest level of control over CSS display
>> unless you don't care about anything but the most common browsers.
>> --
>
> Erik,
>
> I'm one of those who will disagree with you.:-)
>
> What happens to the 10%-20% of users with no javascript? No
> stylesheets.
>
> Another problem is the number of forks required.  A comprehensive
> javascript browser-sniffer has to fork for platform, browser, & version,
> which is going to take multiple lines.
>
> Using import takes one line, and in its simplest form only requires two
> stylesheets, one of which can be very basic.
>
> cheers,
>
> Duncan O'Neill
> ================================================
>
>
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 34
> From: "Hugh Blair" <hblair at hotfootmail.com>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] _target= opening new window parameters?
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:52:59 -0500
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> On Behalf Of aardvark
>>
>> that kind of control isn't available through the target attribute...
>> you need to
>> use scripting to access that level of control on a new window... so,
>> for
>> example, you might have script like this on your page (watch for wrap):
>>
>> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
>> 	function HughWindow() {
>> 		newWindow =
>> window.open("../info.html","WinName","toolbar=no,location=no,scrollbars=
>> yes,
>> width=400,height=500");
>> 	}
>> </script>
>>
>> and then you'd call that thusly (which ensures those without JS
>> enabled will
>> still see the page view just a new window, but at least they'll see
>> it):
>>
>> <a href="../info.html" target="_blank"
>> onClick="javascript:HughWindow();return false;">
>>
>> you'll get a lovely window with no toolbar, no location bar,
>> scrollbars enabled,
>> a width and height as specified, and it won't move the user to the top
>> of the
>> page firing the window, either...
>>
>> you can see more about the lovely mix of JS and HTML that allows for
>> pleasant degradation across all users in a lovely article by .jeff:
>>
>> Links & JavaScript Living Together in Harmony
>> http://evolt.org/article/list/17/20938/
>
> Thanks for the detailed help. I had just read that article and this one:
> <http://evolt.org/article/User_Defined_Window_Targeting_w_JavaScript/17/16286/
> in
> dex.html>
> also by .jeff.  Thanks.
>
> "J'va me coucher moins niaiseux a soir"
> Translated in something like "I'll get to sleep less dumb tonight"
> -- or so I'm told --
>
> -Hugh
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 35
> 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 15:17:36 +1200
> Organization: The Urban Legend magazine
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
>> now, if we really want to use some CSS hacks, then the original poster
>> can
>> try modifying the syntax of the @import call to see what causes to be
>> seen/hidden from all desired browsers...  things like removing the
>> quotes
> or
>> the parentheses, or using @import to @import another sheet, etc...
>>
>
> 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;
>
> @import ("stylesheet.css");
>
> as the above site *says* it does, or whether this is one of those "CSS
> differences" between a true install and the emulation mode.
>
> thanks,
>
> Duncan O'Neill
> ===============================================
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 36
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 22:26:33 -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 10:36 PM -0400 4/14/02, aardvark wrote:
>> i do disagree with you, primarily because @import *isn't* necessarily a
>> hack... it's actually akin to include and extremely useful for
>> compiling CSS
>> files so you can have one handle layout, another do colors, another
>> control
>> type, etc...
>>
>> however, currently, many of us use @import to prevent older browsers
>> from
>> seeing code that would otherwise break them..
>
> 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.
>
>> 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.
>
> So what's wrong with not showing them styles? Certainly you're not
> advocating a site that requires CSS ...  that would be unlike you!
>
>> try modifying the syntax of the @import call to see what causes to be
>> seen/hidden from all desired browsers...  things like removing the
>> quotes or
>> the parentheses, or using @import to @import another sheet, etc...
>
> If it works, great ... but there are times when it will not.
>
> At 2:42 PM +1200 4/15/02, Duncan O'Neill wrote:
>> I'm one of those who will disagree with you.:-)
> [...]
>> Another problem is the number of forks required.  A comprehensive
>> javascript browser-sniffer has to fork for platform, browser, &
>> version,
>> which is going to take multiple lines.
>
> Indeed ... I didn't say it was an eloquent solution, but that it may
> be the _only_ solution. I'm OK with always doing it with JS for the
> reason stated above, when I've done it I've done in it a manner which
> only requires me to edit one file if it has to change; and used
> capability testing in the "sniffer" except when capability testing
> wasn't sufficient ... but you gots to do what you gots ta do.
>
> 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
>
>
>
> --
>
> __________________________________________
> - Erik Mattheis
>
> (612) 377 2272
> http://goZz.com/
>
> __________________________________________
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 37
> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 23:26:59 -0400 (EDT)
> From: "Warden, Matt" <mwarden at mattwarden.com>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] Which Netscape?
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> On Apr 14, aardvark had something to say about Re: [thelist] Which
> Netscape?
>
>>> From: Meredith Tupper <meredith at pintsize.com>
>> [...]
>>> Has anyone heard anything about what AOL will do to Netscape when/if
>>> they switch? Will AOL finally ditch their wretched mail client for a
>>> modified Netscape one?
>>
>> who knows...
>>
>> IOW, i know nothing more than what i wrote last month around this
>> time, but if
>> you follow some of the links to primary news sources, they may post
>> updates
>> as they go:
>>
>> Is Netscape the Browser for the Next AOL?
>> http://evolt.org/article/list/1/22549/
>
> there is currently a beta version of AOL7 that uses "the 0.9.9 build of
> Netscape Gecko as its internal browser". this beta was released April
> 10th.
>
> I dunno if that's old news or not, but there ya go...
>
> --
> mattwarden
> mattwarden.com
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 38
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:04:50 +0930
> From: Mark Limburg <mlimburg at users.sourceforge.net>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] hiding CSS
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> Howdy,
>
>>>> I'm updating my site, and have a question about hiding CSS
>>>> from old browsers.
>>>> Until I saw what a mess MacIE4.5 made of the page, I was using
>>>> the @import "stylesheet.css";
>
>>> People may disagree with me, but for the exact type of problems you
>>> cite, I thing using @IMPORT to give different CSS to different
>>> browsers is a bad idea. Use JavaScript and document.wrote a link to
>>> an external stylesheet.
>
>> I'm one of those who will disagree with you.:-)
>>
>> What happens to the 10%-20% of users with no javascript? No
>> stylesheets.
>>
>> Another problem is the number of forks required.  A comprehensive
>> javascript browser-sniffer has to fork for platform, browser, &
>> version,
>> which is going to take multiple lines.
>>
>> Using import takes one line, and in its simplest form only requires two
>> stylesheets, one of which can be very basic.
>
> 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.
>
> A good example is a basic CSS1, tricked out CSS1, and CCS2 sheets.
>
> Oh, and I'm strill writing the object :P
>
> ^M^
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 39
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:40:39 +1000
> From: "Karen J. Bowen" <karen at miinx.com.au>
> To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
> Subject: Re: [thelist] CSS site check : www.cache-22.co.uk/index_css.php
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> R.Livsey wrote:
>>
>> http://www.cache-22.co.uk/index_css.php
>>
>> Should look pretty much the same as the main index page.
>
> Richard,
>
> I had a look at the actual page (which I assumed was
> http://www.cache-22.co.uk/index.php) and found the top bar is breaking
> up in moz 0.9.9 Win2k -- screenshot here:
> http://www.miinx.com.au/others/cache-22.png
>
> Cheers,
> Karen
> ------------
> Miinx Design & Development
> e :: karen at miinx.com.au
> p :: 03 9534 2659
> w :: www.miinx.com.au
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> Message: 40
> From: "Derry Talvainn" <derry at artema.com.au>
> To: <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
> Subject: RE: [thelist] Screen Captures again
> Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2002 13:32:41 +1000
> Reply-To: thelist at lists.evolt.org
>
> 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 !
>
>
>
> --__--__--
>
> _______________________________________________
> Help: http://lists.evolt.org/mailman/listinfo/thelist
>
> Archives: http://lists.evolt.org
>
> End of thelist Digest
>