Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!


Click here to return to the 'Doubleing of colouring' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Doubleing of colouring
Authored by: Anonymous on Feb 23, '02 02:17:42AM

I am a big fan of CSS, but this site uses it in addition to using the standard HTML colouring. For example, you define the background of table cells, and things like that in HTML, rather than (or maybe in addition to) CSS. This means that to a non-CSS browser, the page is mostly unreadable... and provides no benefit for those browsers that support CSS.

Other CSS handling improvements that I can see is if you linked to a separate CSS file, rather than embedding it in every web page. This would reduce the size of each web page, and is supported by evey CSS supporting browser.

Blibbler.



[ Reply to This | # ]
GL update should help
Authored by: robg on Feb 23, '02 02:08:04PM

I believe that the new GL version will help with the multiple-coloration due to the implementation of themes. I'll know more on that in the next few weeks.

As for why the sheet is included instead of LINKed, I believe the problem is that the CSS is dynamically generated. HTTP_USER_AGENT is used to determine browser type and variations on font sizes are then set based on the result. This is done via some embedded PHP in the CSS file. Unfortunately, the PHP won't function if called via a LINK or @IMPORT tag (I tried both methods); it only runs when it's INCLUDEd. This may also be changed in 1.3.2.

-rob.



[ Reply to This | # ]
GL update should help
Authored by: babbage on Feb 23, '02 05:03:31PM
Can't you just include the relevant <link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="$RELEVANT_CSS_URL"> line, rather than the corresponding CSS source? This should fit into your current scheme, meet the original poster's concerns, and reduce the strain on storage, computation, and bandwidth (thus making the site cheaper to operate!).

[ Reply to This | # ]