h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_intro.asp

Soory, just re-read it, I have to balance learning CSS with recovering mathematics. The mathematics I do, is worked out independently, since an accident I haven't a memory. After coming up with a proof I then check my books the web and here for inconsistencies, such as might occur in graph theory since I've not studied it.

So opacity is CSS3, but filter(alpha=x) will never be, I missed that and assumed since it was on the page it was already implemented.

W3C recommendations were understood to mean recommended usage since so many examples are given, and I have seen '>' strongly urged usage on a W3C site, but I haven't bookmarked it, and it appears to work anyway.

The XHTML on my site is validated to XHTML1.0 transitional, I have six styleesheets for the site two of them inline, and four of them are validated to CSS3, the others are specific to IE and can't validate.

The sites current appearance is exactly as intended partly due to your input.

I found my crummy drive you up the wall editor claims to be able to convert HTML to XHTML. I tried it and got the 141 errors on a plugin I want down to one error.

This I can cope with and got it validated, it is now on my site, under the comment in source code <!-- Definitely not my code, I wouldn't do it like this, honest.-->

Safari is rubbish, looking at my web page in other three browsers, new pics ok, but safari only sees the old ones. Using Ccleaner to clear any remnants from safari, and the same? but ok in other three.

Do you think Safari appends URI's to a URI of a great website in the sky, saving pics to give the illusion of speed?

I cleaned all the browsers with Ccleaner, and have to sign in manually but Safari still sees the old pics

Can anybody help? I can't get the table example in the following code to remain fixed size.










table {border-collapse:separated;max-width:100px;max-height:50px;border:3px ridge #a32700;}
td {border:1px double #333333;max-width:50px;max-height:50px;}
.table {background-color:transparent;width:45px;height:45px;padding:15px;font-family:"times new roman";font-size:1.2em;color:#a32700;text-align:center;cursor:help;}

#r0c0,#r0c1 {display:none;position:relative;left:50px;height:50px;width:100px;
Background-color:#ffffcc;border:3px ridge #95bef7;z-index:1;text-align:center;vertical-align:middle;font-family:impact;font-size:18pt;}



var toggle=1;

function ToggleElement(cell){

if(toggle==0)
{
document.getElementById(cell).style.display="none";
toggle=1;
}
else
{
document.getElementById(cell).style.display="block";
toggle=0;
}}











Rx{re}
{r1}Ry

At first glance I don't know, but it would greatly increase readability if you didn't use reserved words for class names...

(i.e. change "class=table" to "class=table_class" or somesuch...)

Done it, it takes an awful long time for me to do things new I mean nowadays.







table {border-collapse:separated;max-width:100px;max-height:50px;border:3px ridge #a32700;}

td {border:1px double #333333;max-width:50px;max-height:50px;}

.table_thing {background-color:transparent;width:45px;height:45px;padding:15px;font-family:"times new roman";font-size:1.2em;color:#a32700;text-align:center;cursor:help;}

#r0c0,#r0c1 {display:none;position:absolute;height:50px;width:100px;Background-color:#ffffcc;border:3px ridge #95bef7;z-index:1;text-align:center;vertical-align:middle;font-family:impact;font-size:18pt;}




var Position=new Array();
Position=[50,100,150];
var Toggle=0;
var LastCell=null;

function ToggleElement(cell,pos){

if(Toggle==0 && (LastCell==cell || LastCell==null))
{
document.getElementById(cell).style.display="block";
document.getElementById(cell).style.left=Position[pos];
Toggle=1;
LastCell=cell;
}

else if(LastCell==cell)
{
document.getElementById(cell).style.display="none";
Toggle=0;
LastCell=null;
}}














Rx{re}

{r1}Ry

Hokay. Just to clarify, then...

I had time to try it this morning, and in both Firefox and Opera the Table *is* a fixed size, in that resizing the browser doesn't change the size of the table. However, it's a *different* fixed size in each browser. Is this the problem you were experiencing?

No, the table used to jump and get bigger when clicked, but this is fixed by setting position absolute and
document.getElementById(cell).style.left=Position[pos];
a single dimension array with index passed by the function ToggleElement(x,y).

How do you define a two dimensional array?

I go weak in the knees at the thought of what this is all for; a table of symmetries of the tetrahedron with 625 entries, sorted into cosets so that it will fit in a 400x400 table.

"How do you define a two dimensional array?"

I can't remember.

I have memory problems, so I tend to have to look these things up in a manual or on Google every time I need to do them.

Two dimensional arrays in javascript are two silly. The way to get positioning right relative to a box container, is to set that box to position relative.

Since the table selector above isn't set you get random positioning, setting td to position relative doesn't make logical sense although if you do you can do away with the array.

So that's it all sorted; set table {position:relative;

create a new array for height and pass 3 parameters. This will not only work for tables but also drop down lists, in fact if you like fancy pages it's not hard to see how to do a blind effect using a timer.

Couldn't validate it so I put it all in a html comment, and it still seems to work.

> Where are IE bookmarks stored on my computer, so that I can import bookmarks?

Should be in %userprofile%\favorites, or c:\documents and settings\USERNAME\favorites in XP (I think) or c:\users\USERNAME\favorites in Vista.

IE doesn't store favourites in single HTML files or databases like SeaMonkey and Firefox do (can't remember what Safari and Opera do). I suppose IE's way has its advantages (can't really think of any right now, though), but I much prefer what Firefox 3 uses - History and Bookmarks unified under Places, single SQLite file with a single-file HTML back-up every time Fx is closed.

Got new memory delivered one day after ordering it. I've got a non standard (bespoke) system and I've got instructions for everything to build a computer from scratch, except how to get into it.

The only obvious entry point is the back but this has studs in it not screws, oh but their are a few screws holding things on

Tradesman don't seem to be very keen to install it, so how do you get inside a computer?

From your description, I would suggest...

Look under the bottom edge of the front plastic face panel (assuming there is one) - are there two holes big enough to stick a couple of fingers in, one at each side? If there are, pull that bit forward very hard. The front panel should detach (it's held on by what are, essentially, big pop-studs...) and you'll see screws at the *front* of each side-plate.

Looking at the front, tou only need to remove the screws from the left-hand plate, then slide it forwards towards you to release it. That should let you see in to the motherboard.

Just reverse the sequence to put it back together again. Be careful when you remove the front panel not to rip any wires off that may be attached to lights etc. - they should be long enough to move the panel out of the way without disconnecting them.

Good luck, hope that helps.

That makes a lot of sense because the original manufacturers, a warehouse are keen to fit it free, but they are 30 miles away.

The only thing that worries me is that you ordered it without first looking inside the computer to see if there was anywhere to fit it.

I know of someone who bought a pre-built computer with 1GB of memory, then ordered another 1GB online thinking he was being clever. When he opened it up he found that it only had two memory sockets containing two 512MB modules, so he had to remove 512MB to upgrade... If he'd ordered the 2GB model originally he wouldn't have had that problem.

I've had a crucial.co.uk scan, now this matched my information about my PC CHIPS M810DLUv7.5 and their are already two 256mb sticks in the only 2 sockets. As on receipt.

My old crummy system can only take 512mb x 2 = 1024 which is what I got.

Couldn't get Kingston CL2 so have to put up with Crucial CL2.5. The only difference between the pair was latency, and Kingston part available in USA unavailable here.

At the moment the PF memory usage is around 386MB, and I have a 1.4GB cache, so a lot of file swapping going on.

However this pc runs at 2.1GHz and 1GB memory should be enough for me, since I'm not a gamer but do run lots of windows when doing my web page.

Oh yes, I'm still trying to get a tradesman before I physically have to move myself down to a shop to buy anti-static. I just hoped to find one cheaper than the cost of travelling 30 miles, to the manufacturers who kindly offered to fit them free.

Don't know why they can't tell me how to do it myself though?

You don't have to buy any anti-static devices. Just leave the machine plugged in but switched off at the wall and keep one hand pressed on a bare metal part of the case at all times when the other hand is holding the memory chips. Anti-static wristbands only really help when you're in a hurry to build the system and would rather use both hands at all times. (e.g. when assembling 100 machines in a commercial environment...)