Border, listbox??

[Smirre]

Why cant I change the border of a listbox with a stylesheet???

Is there any way to do it??

/Smirre

[CiberTHuG]

I would imagine that the recommendations do not dictate how the UA has to render the listbox. As a result, you can set a border around it with style elements, but you can't actually affect how it is rendered.

The quote below is from the recommendations and gives you an idea of how much the standards dictate and how much is left to the UA.

Visual user agents are not required to present a SELECT element as a list box; they may use any other mechanism, such as a drop-down menu.

[scoutt]

if I remember right a list box is not rendered by the browser but by windows itself.

[Smirre]

Hmmm...

How the f..k should I get the same look of every element of my page???

I cant even set the border with stylesheets. The other elements work fine, like buttons, textboxes and textarea.

Looks like I'm going to have to use a textarea....

/Smirre

[punkpie_uk]

Your right, Select is rendered by Windows. Its really annoying with Opera because hardly any controls can be rendered with style sheets ;o)

[scoutt]

Originally posted by Smirre
Hmmm...

How the f..k should I get the same look of every element of my page???
/Smirre

you can't if you use a select box.

[Smirre]

Hmm..

could a textbox be generated dynamiclly with javascript....???

/Smirre

[CiberTHuG]

You can build a block line element that has events that let you select and edit. I've seen a div built to act like a textarea. You can completely change the look/feel of the div.

[scoutt]

<div style="overflow: auto; height:150px;"> your data here </div>

but will not work in NS4.xx

[CiberTHuG]

Again, why is anyone bothering with Navigator/Communicator 4.x? These browsers are simply not compliant with modern standards. Ignore them, they are not necessary to support. If your manager thinks otherwise, then tell him he is an idiot.

[scoutt]

travis you are the only one here that thinks IE is not compliant and opera is. opera is no better then Netscape. I just let the user know it even if he doesn't use netscape, just in case he comes back and says it doesn't work in NS.

some people use it, and you can't stop useing it if they keep making it. they jsut have to get there head out and make it more compliant. some are anti-microsoft as yourself.

so ask yourself,

use Netscape which is a better broswer to code in or IE which will let you code anything and it will interpret it for your bad code and all, or opera which is no better then Netscape as being comliant.

[CiberTHuG]

Normally I would just calmly say, "Dude, I didn't say anything about IE. Calm down."

But I am not in a happy mood today, so STFU!

Originally posted by scoutt
travis you are the only one here that thinks IE is not compliant and opera is.

First off, I didn't say a damned thing about IE. IE is compliant, but it extends the standards in and attempt to undermind them. MS seeks to destroy the standards by making stupid people like you think that the "other" browsers suck ass because they don't do everything that IE does.

Opera is not 100% compliant, but it has 0 extensions! And it supports @media, which means you will never need to use PowerPoint again.

opera is no better then Netscape.

Opera has MDI. You may not like it, but that makes it better in my book. Again, I didn't say anything about Opera or IE! What are you, carrying baggage?

some people use it, and you can't stop useing it if they keep making it.

"They" don't keep "making it". Netscape 6+ is complaint with modern standards. Netscape Navigator/Communicator 4.x are not complaint with modern standards. They were compliant with the standards at the time, but the standards have changed!!!

they jsut have to get there head out and make it more compliant.

What are you? A complete moron?!!! Netscape 6+ is compliant with modern standards! And Navigator/Communicator were compliant with the standards at the time because NETSCAPE OWNS JAVASCRIPT, AND THEY ARE THE END ALL BE ALL OF SETTING JAVASCRIPT STANDARDS!!!!!

In other words, there will never be a browser on this planet that is as compliant as one made by Netscape for the simple reason that Netscape owns the standard.

some are anti-microsoft as yourself.

This has nothing to do with anti-MS. So get out of my face, you stupid little man.

use Netscape which is a better broswer to code in or IE which will let you code anything and it will interpret it for your bad code and all, or opera which is no better then Netscape as being comliant.

Oh my god?! You mean your only reason for using IE is because you are too ****ing stupid to write good code? Get away form he damned keyboard. The only thing easier to write than this candy-ass Visual Basic is HTML/CSS/JavaScript. It honestly doesn't get any easier than that. If you can't handle that, then you really have no business working with computers. You are just a wannabe programmer who should go back to playing with Excel.

By the way, I've never notice IE being more forgiving than Opera or Netscape. They both work for you to try and cover some mistakes made by the page creator. This is one of the things that slows page rendering in any browser.

But I suspect that you think IE is better because you honestly don't know what the standards are. That you are so ****ing blinded by your hardon for MS and Bill's ass that you honestly think that <insert proprietary extension here> is part of the standard that Netscape and Opera aren't supporting.

Again, Netscape wrote the standard, not Microsoft.


And again, to this thread...

Navigator and Communicator are not modern browsers. Don't worry about supporting them. If you have users who still use these browsers, they need to upgrade. If they find that their system is too old to load bloatware such as Netscape 6 (or any version of IE which requires bloatOS Windows), then they can look into other modern browsers such as Mozilla or Opera.

My apologies, Scoutt, but you strayed from the topic on the wrong day.

[scoutt]

well if your head wasn't so far up your ass you could understand what I was saying.

First off, I didn't say a damned thing about IE. IE is compliant, but it extends the standards in and attempt to undermind them. MS seeks to destroy the standards by making stupid people like you think that the "other" browsers suck ass because they don't do everything that IE does.

I agree, IE is more bloat ware as anything else.

but, like you, I state my "opinion". I do not us IE to code. I think it is the worse browser out there to code for as it excepts everything. if you forget a tag IE will work anyway, Netscape will not so that means you have a problem. Also AOL made Netscape4.79 just like 2 months ago, so it is brand new version so yes they are still making that browser on top of NS6.

Opera is not 100% compliant, but it has 0 extensions! And it supports @media, which means you will never need to use PowerPoint again.

I don't use powerpoint to begin with, and I don't have any need to use @media.

Opera has MDI. You may not like it, but that makes it better in my book. Again, I didn't say anything about Opera or IE! What are you, carrying baggage?

because you think NS is the worse browser out there as you are always putting it down. and I know you use opera. since you bost over it all the time.

I never said you said anything about IE. you always say netscape sucks but you use a just as sucky browser becuase you have said quite a few times you don't like IE.

your right I don't like opera because it looks like crap and it made my site look like crap. it looked better in Netscape4.xx then in the latest version of opera.

In other words, there will never be a browser on this planet that is as compliant as one made by Netscape for the simple reason that Netscape owns the standard.

I will have to agree, but goes right along with "they are still making NS4.xx"

Again, Netscape wrote the standard, not Microsoft.

I never heard that. I was under the impression that W3 set the standards.

By the way, I've never notice IE being more forgiving than Opera or Netscape

no, just make a table and don't close any tag. run it in IE and then in NS. bet you it won't work in Netscape. you can even forget to close the html tag, IE will work and NS won't. so IE is very forgiving.

This has nothing to do with anti-MS. So get out of my face, you stupid little man.

no?? well do you run windows? no, do you run IE no, so in my book you are anti-MS hence (bloatOS Windows)

forgive my typing as I hate editing.

no offense travis but you need to get off your high horse and come down to the average user as there is still a lot of NS4.xx browser out there as it won't go away if they still make it. and what day is a good to stray as you are always in a bad mood.

[CiberTHuG]

I'm back from lunch. I feel better.

Originally posted by scoutt
Also AOL made Netscape4.79 just like 2 months ago, so it is brand new version so yes they are still making that browser on top of NS6.

Sorry, as soon as you mentioned AOL, you lost the point. No one should go out of their way to support a system that clearly was not designed to work with the current standards, regardless of who clings to it. AOL users can still install any other browser, or use IE.

That aside, I'm going to suspect that AOL's integrated browser may use Netscape's modern engine, regardless of the version number AOL uses. If this is not the case, I'm sure it is the direction they are heading. So again, why support old standards just so you can upgrade when they finally do?

because you think NS is the worse browser out there as you are always putting it down. and I know you use opera. since you bost over it all the time.

I actually think IE is the worst browser, not Netscape. And Navigator/Communicator were never bad browsers. I liked them more than IE 4. The problem is, the standards have changed.

your right I don't like opera because it looks like crap and it made my site look like crap. it looked better in Netscape4.xx then in the latest version of opera.

I will imagine that is because you wrote your site very poorly. Post the code and we can all show you where your mistakes are.

I never heard that. I was under the impression that W3 set the standards.

The W3C sets the standards for HTML, CSS, and the DOM. Mind you, the fourth generation of browsers were out before the W3C began controlling the DOM.

The ECMA has put forth a recommendation for mapping scripts to the DOM (ECMA-262), and for baseline syntax and data types.

Netscape owns JavaScript, and try to keep it compliant with ECMA-262 and publish an open standard so other browsers can use it.

To this day you still find extensions that work in IE that work in no other browser and are not part of the JavaScript standard.

no, just make a table and don't close any tag. run it in IE and then in NS. bet you it won't work in Netscape. you can even forget to close the html tag, IE will work and NS won't. so IE is very forgiving.

Well, hurrah for IE. But I grew up with out crutches, so I'm not going to complain if a browser refuses to second-guess me.

And while I may be anti-MS, my post in this thread had nothing to do with MS in anyway!!!

Again, there is no reason to support HTML 1 or 2. There is no reason to support DOM 0. This means, there is no reason to support Navigator/Communicator 4.x.

Where these bad browsers? No, these were awesome browsers. But the standards have changed so dramaticly, that they are no long compliant, and can be replaced for free.

[JoshT]

Go to http://www.dejavu.org/ and pick emulator.

Them were some real browsers.

[scoutt]

Originally posted by CiberTHuG
[B]I'm back from lunch. I feel better.

Sorry, as soon as you mentioned AOL, you lost the point. No one should go out of their way to support a system that clearly was not designed to work with the current standards, regardless of who clings to it. AOL users can still install any other browser, or use IE.

True, I should have smacked myself on that one. I despise AOL, but they did buy Netscape.

That aside, I'm going to suspect that AOL's integrated browser may use Netscape's modern engine, regardless of the version number AOL uses. If this is not the case, I'm sure it is the direction they are heading. So again, why support old standards just so you can upgrade when they finally do?

actually I thnk AOL's browser still runs on IE's engine, ever since ver.3. And I agree why support old standards, Probably because there is still millions of people that do. one person won't change anything.

I actually think IE is the worst browser, not Netscape. And Navigator/Communicator were never bad browsers. I liked them more than IE 4. The problem is, the standards have changed.

I will have to agree on that one too.

I will imagine that is because you wrote your site very poorly. Post the code and we can all show you where your mistakes are.

my motto is if it will work in NS4.xx and looks half way decent tehn it will work in all browsers. but, opera was no where close. mind you I have not tried it in over a year so I suspect opera will look a little bit better on my site. I have used the lastest opera and still didn't like it. didn't check any site out though.

The W3C sets the standards for HTML, CSS, and the DOM. Mind you, the fourth generation of browsers were out before the W3C began controlling the DOM.

The ECMA has put forth a recommendation for mapping scripts to the DOM (ECMA-262), and for baseline syntax and data types.

Netscape owns JavaScript, and try to keep it compliant with ECMA-262 and publish an open standard so other browsers can use it.

To this day you still find extensions that work in IE that work in no other browser and are not part of the JavaScript standard.

I thought we were talking about CSS not javascript.

Well, hurrah for IE. But I grew up with out crutches, so I'm not going to complain if a browser refuses to second-guess me.

but that is a crutch and if are not going to complain then you my friend are a bad coder.

And while I may be anti-MS, my post in this thread had [b]nothing to do with MS in anyway!!!

true and I appologise.

Again, there is no reason to support HTML 1 or 2. There is no reason to support DOM 0.

I agree with you on this as well. but some people don't like to move into the 21st century. and believe me they are out there.

This means, there is no reason to support Navigator/Communicator 4.x.

I have to disagree with you. why in the world would they continue to make NS4.xx then? I am sure they have recieved plenty of hate mail because their broswer sucks as far a standards, but they still continue to make it. sure that doesn't say much for AOL, what does?

the fact is users are ignorant and if they like a browser they will not get rid of it because it doesn't support the strandards then you can't force them to.

Where these bad browsers? No, these were awesome browsers. But the standards have changed so dramaticly, that they are no long compliant, and can be replaced for free.

true, but you tell the millions to upgrade. in fact the browser makers keep the old version around because users still use them.

Travis, don't get me wrong, I would love to advance and not have to worry about the older versions, but if they still make them and people still use them, we has webmasters, have to code for them.

look at the big sites that bring in more money than you, they still code for the ver. 4 browsers. so there must be a reason.

[CiberTHuG]

Originally posted by JoshT
Go to http://www.dejavu.org/ and pick emulator.

Them were some real browsers.

Lynx!

[CiberTHuG]

Originally posted by scoutt
True, I should have smacked myself on that one. I despise AOL, but they did buy Netscape.

Which is why I don't use Netscape. They have adopted the AOL mindset and have more style over substance.

Besides which, Opera has MDI! I soooo love that. So much less clutter. Mouse gestures, cross platform, and a much better full-screen mode than IE.

I don't like the way it does bookmarks, though.

actually I thnk AOL's browser still runs on IE's engine, ever since ver.3. And I agree why support old standards, Probably because there is still millions of people that do. one person won't change anything.

There was something in the news recently. Since AOL/TW owns Netscape, they will be switching over to the Gecko engine (if they haven't already).

but that is a crutch and if are not going to complain then you my friend are a bad coder.

I think you missunderstood me. I'm not going to complain if the browser refuses to second guess me. I'm going to fix the problem so the browser doesn't have to guess. I'm going to be a better coder because the browser refuses to cover my mistakes.

look at the big sites that bring in more money than you, they still code for the ver. 4 browsers. so there must be a reason.

Well, I will admit that I will include a graceful fail in my pages. And the 4th gen browsers will get the "dumbed down" version of the page. But this is around not just for them, but for browsers on devices which can't display everything. Embedded devices, text devices.

So there is nothing wrong with having a simple version of your page that is minus JavaScript/CSS/HTML 4, that just has HTML 3. But I don't see the need to try and make your page a flashy in an older browser as it is in a new.

So in the case specific to this thread...

If they have IE 5+ (and you may need to limit it to 5.50 or 6, depending on what you do), Netscape 6+, or Opera 6+ (or any compatible browser, Mozilla, K, et al), then show them the div that acts like an input element.

If they don't, don't worry about how you can get the same affect, just use a simple input element. Use straight HTML 3 and move on.

I use the Client-Sniffer JavaScript from Netscape/Sun. Because I do this, I will only detect for JavaScript enabled browsers, which is a slight problem (one that I could fix if I felt like it). But you simply can't accurate detect by looking at the request headers.

Sorry for screaming before.

[scoutt]

no harm done, just a little friendly discussion.

I think you missunderstood me. I'm not going to complain if the browser refuses to second guess me. I'm going to fix the problem so the browser doesn't have to guess. I'm going to be a better coder because the browser refuses to cover my mistakes.

and that is why I like Netscape4.xx well I am not sure if NS6 does it, but I like the layout of NS4 and the way it does bookmarks.

maybe that is why I don't like opera, I remember something about bookmarks that I didn't like.

and I don't see nothing wrong with dumbing down your site for the less compliant browser, maybe one day we won't have to.

but if he wants a scrollable table then that is the only way to get it.