photo gallery css erratic
in [CSS]
|
From: dorayme on 3 Apr 2010 19:27 In article <20100403073853.7b081885(a)bootnic.eternal-september.org>, BootNic <bootnic.bounce(a)gmail.com> wrote: > IE 8 supports inline-block just fine. > > IE 6 & 7 life support is 100 days and counting, would it be worth > correcting the css for that? > > At any rate, there is no need to edit the html. > > <!--[if lte IE 7]> > <style type="text/css"> > #wrap div { > display:inline; > zoom:1; > } > </style> > <![endif]--> > > [snip] That's the bit I have somewhere filed on this machine. I should have a folder with Bootnic in the name so I can find it when my memory fails. As it is buried in stuff on IE, it can't easily be found! When I was on Mac OS 6 or was it 8, there was a program one could buy to store things in a way that was more like the way a wet memory works, you could stick any old thing in a big bin with various keywords attached. And this made it easy to search to dig it out. -- dorayme
From: Jonathan N. Little on 3 Apr 2010 20:07 Mason C wrote: > > My month of March server reports: > (less than 5% of the Operas were mine) > (versions are not reported) > Opera 31.1 % > Firefox 30.4 % > MS Internet Explorer 21.9 % > Mozilla 7.6 % > Safari 7 % > Unknown ? 1.2 % > Nokia Browser (PDA/Phone browser) 0.1 % > Curl Yes 0.1 % > Konqueror 0.1 % > Netscape 0 % > Others 0.1 % You must use Opera, I have yet to see Opera garner more than 2% on any of my sites. -- Take care, Jonathan ------------------- LITTLE WORKS STUDIO http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
From: Mason C on 3 Apr 2010 23:51 On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 20:07:45 -0400, "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art(a)gmail.com> wrote: >Mason C wrote: > >> >> My month of March server reports: >> (less than 5% of the Operas were mine) >> (versions are not reported) >> Opera 31.1 % >> Firefox 30.4 % >> MS Internet Explorer 21.9 % >> Mozilla 7.6 % >> Safari 7 % >> Unknown ? 1.2 % >> Nokia Browser (PDA/Phone browser) 0.1 % >> Curl Yes 0.1 % >> Konqueror 0.1 % >> Netscape 0 % >> Others 0.1 % > > >You must use Opera, I have yet to see Opera garner more than 2% on any >of my sites. I suspect that you are right. My use of Opera in re-designing my site may have involved many more hits than I realized, although my editor uses MSIE and off line.
From: Rob W. on 4 Apr 2010 05:30 Op 3-4-2010 23:22, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schreef: > Rob W. wrote: > >>> On Sat, 03 Apr 2010 12:02:02 GMT, "rf"<rf(a)z.invalid> wrote: >>>> And how many people are still using versions 7 and 6? >>>> >>>> In the real world? >> >> 1. Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 5.779.670 39,80% >> 2. Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0 4.750.849 32,71% >> 3. Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 876.458 6,04% >> 4. Mozilla Firefox 3.5.7 492.731 3,39% >> 5. Safari 4.0.4 416.556 2,87% >> 6. Mozilla Firefox 3.6 379.801 2,62% > > Whether your numbers resemble reality or not, they are definitely worthless > in the way you have posted them. There is no statement with regard to their > source, or time or method of data collection whatsoever. > > > PointedEars You're absolutely right. Country: the Netherlands Period: Jan 1, 2010 - April 2, 2010 Site: large websites of gov agency Measured by Nedstat -- RW
From: Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn on 4 Apr 2010 08:55
Rob W. wrote: > Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn schreef: >> Rob W. wrote: >>>> "rf"<rf(a)z.invalid> wrote: >>>>> And how many people are still using versions 7 and 6? >>>>> >>>>> In the real world? >>> >>> 1. Microsoft Internet Explorer 7.0 5.779.670 39,80% >>> 2. Microsoft Internet Explorer 8.0 4.750.849 32,71% >>> 3. Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 876.458 6,04% >>> 4. Mozilla Firefox 3.5.7 492.731 3,39% >>> 5. Safari 4.0.4 416.556 2,87% >>> 6. Mozilla Firefox 3.6 379.801 2,62% >> >> Whether your numbers resemble reality or not, they are definitely >> worthless in the way you have posted them. There is no statement with >> regard to their source, or time or method of data collection whatsoever. >> [...] > > You're absolutely right. > > Country: the Netherlands > Period: Jan 1, 2010 - April 2, 2010 > Site: large websites of gov agency > Measured by Nedstat Much too unspecified. For a start: - How was it made sure that the visitors were only from the Netherlands, if at all? - From which to which times have the data been collected? On every day? - Which sites were watched exactly? - Which method exactly did "Nedstat" employ to collect the data? I must further inform you, then, that the figures you have posted are irrelevant with regard to the question above, even for the Netherlands, and worthless as they are not representative. The question was _not_ how many visitors or which percentage of visitors of a specific Web site or subset of Websites used Internet Explorer, versions 7 and 6, in the last months (that is, provided that "Nedstat" could reliably determine that, which it cannot as the User-Agent header is subject to deliberate forging by vendors and users, if it is sent at all). The question was instead how many *people* *are using* these browsers distributed over a *representative* set of Web sites (at best: all Web sites), the collection of data being supported by a reliable method to determine those versions. HTH PointedEars -- Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee |