Computing desk
< September 19	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 21 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Computing Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

September 20

css html....noob's question.

Hello , I have just learnt CSS and have designed a better looking website for my self, I have a few questions:

1) Am I correct in thinking that CSS drags the look of your website into 2008 and only using HTML keeps the style of your webpage dated (like 1998!)

2) My page looks good in firefox, but in IE6 it all seems to be too big....

3) My main question is regarding layouts... people talk about liquid vs fixed but what is the point of doing liquid and having to endlessly tweak for different browsers in case the page breaks

4) is there any great dedicated CSS/HTML web forums.

thx. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.239.60 (talk) 11:11, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1) Huh. Your question does not even make sense, sounds like you read a brochure straight out of marketing. Use CSS if you need it, it's not going to change the look of your website. Equendil Talk 11:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1) No. Using CSS makes it easier for you to have a uniform look and feel with less duplication of effort. Kushal (talk) 13:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1) CSS makes some things possible (I don't know how you'd do layers or translucency or half-decent printing without CSS), some things easy, and a few things harder. You can still do a compliant modern looking website in HTML only, and you can still do rubbish ones in CSS. CSS is no substitute for graphic design skills and taste.

2) All browsers suck, although some browsers suck less than others. Ideally you'd only support the less sucky ones, but if you plan on your site working nicely on nearly everyone's computer, you needs to support the sucky ones too (and there's worse than IE6).

3) As with 2, above, if your site looks bad on someone's computer you've failed. If you didn't take into account the fonts they have installed, the screen magnification they use, the browser and OS and desktop environment they run, and the disabilities and concomitant accessibility aids they have, then the fault is always yours. Liquid layouts are desirable in many cases, because you can't predict the screen and font sizes used by your customer. Some have narrow screens, some have tiny screens, some have wide screens. Anything you fix will annoy almost everyone.

The upshot of all this (I'm sorry if I sound harsh, but developing serious websites takes place in a harsh environment) is that while knocking out a website that looks okay on your own computer is, frankly, child's play, getting one that works on every reasonable computer you possibly can is much much more work. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 17:07, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I feel your pain. The idea that web design just flows in place with well-written CSS dies in the face of browser inconsistencies. You gotta cobble it out. It's an endless battle, but with CSS some things are a lot easier. But not all things. Sometimes a layout table is a hell of a lot easier to manage than CSS can be, in my experience. Sometimes I use both. Good theoretical style? No. Looks good on more browsers? Yes. Well then. Design—web or otherwise—is not a place for absolutists. --98.217.8.46 (talk) 21:48, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Google Pages - Google Sites transition

Hello, I have a question on Google Sites. What are the rules regarding file storage on Google Sites? It seems that Google Sites does not allow certain filetypes. Is there a page somewhere that Google explains the rules of the game? Thanks. Kushal (talk) 11:14, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

( Please answer if you know the answer. Kushal (talk) 10:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can no hero save me? :'( Kushal (talk) 00:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please? Pretty please? Kushal (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I really hate it when sensible questions that are urgent to the questioner go unanswered, especially when the questioner is someone who has been around here for quite a while. The only rules that I'm aware of are the obvious ones: Google terms of service, see especially "8. Content in the Services". You've probably checked out this page already, but I'm posting it anyway, since you haven't stated explicitly that you've done so. Out of curiosity: why the urgency, and which file types have you had problems with on Google Sites? Does renaming the files help, or are they rejected based on their contents? --NorwegianBlue^talk 20:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, NorwegianBlue. Well, the question is not very urgent. However, Google is preparing for a transition from Google Page Creator to Google Sites. As a Google Pages user, I am not sure what to make of the transition. I would want to be ready when the transition takes place later this year(?). Kushal (talk)

Punctuation and Accent Marks on PC

I have a guide that shows me how to create punctuation and accent marks on PC. There are 2 methods: CTRL + ' + a = a (with an accent mark) and ALT + 160 = a (with an accent mark). The reason why there are no accented letters is that I can't put them in, especially online on the Spanish wikipedia. Since there are many Spanish accented letters, it becomes almost impossible to type a message.

My question: why does my guide not work in wikipedia and is there another guide?

You could be putting in the wrong keys: for me, on Windows XP, Alt+0224 is à and Alt+0225 is á. You have to use the numpad, check that numlock is on. You also have to add the leading zero: Alt+224 is α, while Alt+225 is ß. Xenon 54 14:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An easier way that I used was to change my default keyboard to international version; where ` becomes a dead key that adds a grave accent eg, à; Alt Gr + 2 acts in the same way adding an umlaut, eg ä; Alt Gr + 6 does circumflex, eg â; and Alt Gr + [a vowel] adds an acute accent, eg á. It is the quickest and easiest way I have come across typing accents on an English keyboard. 92.16.148.143 (talk) 16:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are more dead keys on the international keyboard. ~ + n = ñ, ` + a = à, ^ + e = ê, " + o = ö --antilived^{T | C | G} 23:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There aren't on mine... " just displays if I type it, so does ^ and ~. They only seem to add accents when accompanied by Alt Gr instead of shift. 92.16.148.143 (talk) 16:39, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My memory serves that at least ` + a = à is true for the Windows one, not sure though. In the Linux one all of the above are available. --antilived^{T | C | G} 07:01, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]