| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| A styling suggestion | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 22 2011, 12:27 PM (786 Views) | |
| Pando-ZNS | Jul 22 2011, 12:27 PM Post #1 |
|
Member
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The <tr> tag that contains td.c_username and td.c_post contains an id of the post number. Can the tr's containing td.c_user, td.c_post and the tr with the postfoot class contain the id as well to allow individual post styling without Javascript? If possible the blog entries could also have an id of the blog entry id. Also, just a note, the first td of tr.c_postfoot (the one that has the profile and on/off pm buttons) doesn't have a class. Although that doesn't matter so much as tr.c_postfoot td:first-child can style it instead. Another note, -moz-opacity should really be removed from Zeta Original. Only Firefox 0.8 and below support it. Edited by Pando-ZNS, Jul 22 2011, 12:28 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Ben | Jul 22 2011, 01:44 PM Post #2 |
|
Quantum-locked when observed.
![]()
|
You can use sibling selectors, e.g.
will change the background of your post to pink. According to this chart its support is actually pretty good, with IE once again leading the suck brigade. Ideally, it would be even better if the various table rows that make up a single post in a topic were contained in their own table, which would have the post ID as an attribute. Don't get me started on the semantic murder carried out by the ZetaBoards markup. I completely agree that more classes on various elements would be awesome, so don't take this post as a "we don't need this". However, until such time that the markup undergoes such revisions, try my suggestion above.
|
![]() |
|
| Geoffrey-ZNS | Jul 22 2011, 05:09 PM Post #3 |
![]()
I want you for worse or for better
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Ben, shouldn't there be a ; after pink?
Edited by Geoffrey-ZNS, Jul 22 2011, 05:09 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Reid-ZNS | Jul 22 2011, 05:58 PM Post #4 |
![]()
C'est un piège!
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Not necessarily. The semicolon is optional on the last key-value pair in a CSS style set. Most people put a semicolon after each key-value pair, but not all.
|
![]() |
|
| Ben | Jul 22 2011, 08:37 PM Post #5 |
|
Quantum-locked when observed.
![]()
|
As Reid said, it is optional. In my own CSS I will always put a semicolon, because it prevents me from forgetting to add one if I add another property afterward. I would have added a semicolon in the above post, but I was writing it at work, and new typography union rules prohibit non-union members from operating the semicolon key on our keyboards. So I would have had to put in a work order, and that would have taken too longer (especially because it was a Friday). |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Service Discussion and Feedback · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
8:43 PM Jul 10
|



![]](http://b1.ifrm.com/0/1/0/p601690/pipright.png)




I completely agree that more classes on various elements would be awesome, so don't take this post as a "we don't need this". However, until such time that the markup undergoes such revisions, try my suggestion above.


8:43 PM Jul 10