(no subject)

[sebastienne]

I'm in a significantly better mood after discovering that cycling hurts this sprained ankle less than walking. Thanks to everyone who was lovely to me when I was feeling rubbish the other day.

I maded a website! All by myself and I didn't even steal a little bit of anybody else's code.

The logo went slightly pixelly when I changed the .png to a .gif (bloody IE6 not supporting .png transparency) but it now works in every browser I've tested it in.

I am aware that everybody else acquired these skills in utero but I am nevertheless exceedingly proud of my baby-steps towards actually having some tech skills.

Also, this news pleases me: Oxford cops reprimanded for tobogganing on riot shields.

Comments

[sebastienne.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure I can apply that here - if I'm understanding correctly I could use that technique to show the .gif additionally, but only in IE browsers; I don't see how I could use it to replace the .png altogether. The solution on your OxIce site looks so lovely and elegant, I'm tempted to steal it, but I'm so proud of my little validating-buttons (because I am, apparently, unable to resist the lure of the Gold Star).. I might try image-fiddling as a first approach.

[h0m54r.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure I can apply that here - if I'm understanding correctly I could use that technique to show the .gif additionally, but only in IE browsers; I don't see how I could use it to replace the .png altogether.

If you also use a conditional comment to hide the PNG in IE6 - so you end up using two conditional comments: one hidden-by-default one around the GIF, showing only in <= IE6 (i.e. of the form ) and another shown-by-default one showing in >= IE7 and in third-party browsers, of the form STUFF . (If that makes sense?)

[sebastienne.livejournal.com]

Not entirely; if only IE browsers interpret the contents of a conditional comment, how will, eg, Firefox display something that's inside one?

Sorry, I'm using you as my tech support a bit here, please don't feel obliged to reply; I'll have another re-read of that site tomorrow and see if I can get my head round what you mean.

[h0m54r.livejournal.com]

No, it's fine :-)

Ah, my comment tags were interpreted as comments by LJ and hence swallowed - not helpful!

The first type has all of the content inside of the HTML comment (<!-- comment STUFF end comment -->); the second type has only the conditional comment code inside comments, with the actual content outside (<!--comment --> STUFF <!-- end comment -->)) - non-IE browsers will ignore the comment entirely, and just show the STUFF that is not enclosed with a comment.

[sebastienne.livejournal.com]

ah-ha! I shall give that a try when I update the site tomorrow - thanks very much!

[sebastienne.livejournal.com]

hmm, perhaps emailing test versions to people with IE isn't the most sensible way to do this; I'll work on it next time I'm near a PC with IE, I think.