Comments for Web Design Bradford | Shubox: Website Designer

Comment on The curious case of ‘bleeding’ CSS borders by Morris

Morris — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 12:45:49 +0000

Try this mate – http://tumble.sneak.co.nz/post/928998513/fixing-the-background-bleed

Comment on Opera, CSS3 and border-radius. Oh dear. by Keith

Keith — Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:38:27 +0000

I’m testing in Opera 10.10 – and this edition doesn’t support border-radius at all. I was still surprised to see how it handled borders for inline elements though. Border-radius only renders correctly in the latest webkit (Safari, Chrome) and Gecko (Firefox) browsers.

Comment on Opera, CSS3 and border-radius. Oh dear. by Aljan Scholtens

Aljan Scholtens — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:05:21 +0000

i’m using Opera all the time, thanks for the tip. I guess you are using 10.5 beta? Because 10.1 doesn’t support border-radius.

Comment on Optimising your website is Still important! by Oh, what’s a poor web designer to do? « Shubox Web Design | Serving Bradford

Thu, 18 Feb 2010 18:45:11 +0000

[...] Mike Kus has been somewhat naive in his blog post and unfortunately, as a ‘celebrity’ (re: previous post) he won’t ever need to be fully aware of this. His adoring public will convince him he’s right. [...]

Comment on The curious case of ‘bleeding’ CSS borders by Keith

Keith — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 18:38:48 +0000

Thanks Jake. Yes, I know what you mean. And it makes sense that the ‘correct’ method would be to ready the edges to lock into the adjacent side of the border. So Safari is the black sheep, but does make it look so much more elegant. Safari recognises that if I set a border value on only one side, or at least a side without an adjacent border – I’ll want my edges squared off. It’s an interesting little phenomenon none the less.

Comment on The curious case of ‘bleeding’ CSS borders by Jake

Jake — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 13:27:31 +0000

hey Keith,

The effect isn’t a bleed, it’s how the borders are actually drawn. Firefox et al are drawing them correctly, as if you made the border on the right 3px, you’d see how the inner corner of the frame joins the outer corner of the frame, kind of like the woodwork of a door, where an upright joins the top beam and the corners are cut at a 45º angle.

Safari seems to have made a visually more appealing effect, but isn’t technically correct, I don’t think.

hope this makes sense!

Comment on Mac OSX 10.5.8 and a broken Apache Web Server. by Jason Hulbert

Jason Hulbert — Wed, 27 Jan 2010 17:54:46 +0000

If there was a ‘donation’ button under this article – I would press it. Thanks a ton, sir.

Comment on Mac OSX 10.5.8 and a broken Apache Web Server. by Jason

Jason — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:39:48 +0000

Thanks for the tip…exactly what I needed.

BTW, found via Google

Comment on SEO and the HTML ‘address’ tag by Keith

Keith — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:11:42 +0000

Well, of course there’s a flippancy to my post, but in seriousness, to use the ADDRESS tag for anything other than the Author and/or owner of a document is against the meaning of the tag. The podcast implied that ADDRESS tag can and should be used for all addresses, irrespective of their relationship to the document. In that sense, the tag is being redefined.

Comment on SEO and the HTML ‘address’ tag by Nick

Nick — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 01:00:24 +0000

Err no not quite.

The address tag ‘defines the contact information for the author or owner of a document’, so putting a postal address in it is perfectly ok.

And Google isnt redefining it, Google is just checking for valid addresses in the address tag (as well as elsewhere).
If it finds a address then it can use it.

Its a lot like Gmail.
If Gmail finds a address or even a event date in your email then it will give you additional functions like to see the address on a map or add the event to your calendar.