htc path?

hi i'm developing a website and am stuck with a htc problem:

say i'm making a .htc that serves as an aqua-styled button. the button will be made up of images and i need to tell the .htc where to look for them. normally i'll implement the .htc like this --

if i put the images together with the .htc, then i can programme the htc to parse its style.behavior attribute to figure out where the images are. however, this method fails when i try to implement things a lil neater:

div.aquabutton { behavior: url((/path1/path2/aquabutton.htc) }

[...]

now this won't work because there is nothing in style.behavior for that calling div. does anyone have any clues as to how to rip that value from the

btw my site is www.euasiatrading.com/peterlee, and i've made a few interesting htcs already. if anyone is interested in them pm me and i will send them to u...

#331990

STOP! My website can only be viewed properly with Internet Explorer 5.5 or above.

Active Server Pages error 'ASP 0126'

I don't even want to know what else comes up. Sorry, but what you are doing with the .htc files and stuff is like against the rules. I mean you can do it, but in my opinion you should ask on the MSDN if they can help you with their nonsense.

#332007

While I don't really approve of the IE specific code, I must ask why you are calling:

div.aquabutton

If the "aquabutton" class is only applied to divs, then you can just call it:

.aquabutton

That should work if your html is like:

#332027

Am I the only one that finds it ironic how the site is aqua themed... but gives you an error with anything other than IE and advertises the crap outta Microsoft products?

#332034

yes the site is aqua-themed using micro$oft products, but i don't find it ironic in any way...after all if it displays what i want it to display i won't give a damn how it is done.

does anyone else hit the error neal got? how about the internet chat and emoticon button in 'leave comment' in blog?

have posted on msdn as well but THEY'VE GIVEN ME NOTHING, not even CRAP!!!

#332157

Just noticed that if you view the page directly in Firefox (http://www.euasiatrading.com/peterlee/main.asp), everything very nearly works. Most of the basic content is accessible, and most of the layout seems to display fine.

With that in mind, I think you should ammend the "Incompatible Browser" page to make the "continue on to browse my site" link more prominent. And perhaps instaed of saying "incompatible browser", just say "optimized for IE 6+". You don't want to make people think the IE is their first and formost option - especially if their using Mac of Unix.

I haven't gotten the error neal got. And emoticons seem to work - even under Firefox (with the emoticon dialog positioned at 0,0px).

Can you explain what the "aquabutton" would look like exactly? I'm sure there's a simpler *cross-platform* solution to this.

#332271

you may find this interesting. i tried testing the site with Internet Explorer 7 beta (tho I'm a regular Firefox user) and it tells me that my browser is incompatable. however when i went on to the site anyway, it displayed the aqua material just fine, which it does not using Firefox.

#332373

this is a demo of skin buttons

#332570

yes it says:

Your browser software is: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 7.0b; Windows NT 5.1).

#332588

what i'm trying to achieve is a skinnable button that is not a static image file

- It would take you an extra 5 mins to prepare the animated GIFs

- It requires about 2 lines of CSS code

- It will work in IE, Firefox, Opera, Safari...

but i don't find it ironic in any way...after all if it displays what i want it to display i won't give a damn how it is done.

- The web is a varied format, making your target audience unpredictable.

- That's why the ideal is a cross-browser solution.

- At the end of the day, it's none of my business if you want to do things a certain way.

- ...but never give people who visit your site the impression that they are in the wrong.

To sum up - Use IE specific code if you like.

I actually think some of the effects you have there are pretty nifty.

But the "error page" needs to look more like a splash page, or else people who see the page will think that either their browser is broken, or your page is broken.

The fact is most people do not read error messages, they just close the window.

That's not your fault, you just need to work around this mentality.

#332636

to be fair i think htc, though a micro$oft invention, is a great deal more refined than raw javascript when making dhtml, bcos these custom tags are just so cool we're like working with web controls on a webpage! i would stick to insist people to use ie to surf my site until firefox support htc!

No offense but this is why the web sucks so bad. Web developers feel that everyone should conform to means that make their work look the best, and not hte other way around. A good web developer conforms to his audience. All the stuff you can do with platform specific code, you can do just a easily with cross-browser supported code. That's really the line betwen being a script kiddie and a web developer in my mind.

#332643

okok guys relax! i know people here feel kind of strong against using ms products, but as msg says i'm only a script kiddie here with limited time on my hands and i'm trying to create a site, that delivers, out of scratch!! :slant:

point taken about possibly making surfers feel they're 'wrong' in not using msie, but i'm really just trying to say that their browser is potentially incompatible with my site, which is true when i'm using htc.

i'm not sure if you guys have used htc before, but i stand by my words that this is the most developer-friendly thing compared to x-compatible alternatives (which is javascript ONLY)...maybe i'll make a firefox version of the site when i have time, but when time is of the essence, htc is my best friend...

tks sakura for the info...has msie7.0b got a lot better than ie6?

#332715

Not to be an ass, but you missed the point.

I don't care wehether you use MS products or not.

i'm not sure if you guys have used htc before, but i stand by my words that this is the most developer-friendly thing compared to x-compatible alternatives (which is javascript ONLY)

That's your problem. A website should be user friendly, developer friendly is jsut a bonus.

Compatability is of greater importance than how easy it is to make for the developer.

#332720

A website should be user friendly, developer friendly is jsut a bonus.

But seriously Mgs0008b221, the site degrades pretty well in other browsers, so it's not really a problem.

Being "user friendly" is more about content accessibility.

In this case, after you get past the error page, pretty much all of the content is accessible.

#332740

That's a good way of saying it - mind if I borrow that quote for my students?

Sure. Go for it.

But seriously Mgs0008b221, the site degrades pretty well in other browsers, so it's not really a problem.

Being "user friendly" is more about content accessibility.

In this case, after you get past the error page, pretty much all of the content is accessible.

True. To tell the truth I think it looks fine in Firefox and Opera, and as you said it's not like it's unusable. I just know, from the quality of the website already, that the author could easily make it look identical in all browsers.

#332742

From a user/developer standpoint, resizing my window is annoying (it's my window... not yours). Develop the site to work in any resolution.

#333001

Which server using for developing or testing this html components? If you are using Apache, you must tell the mime-type declaration.

text/x-component htc

http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=306231

#333066

ake: it's on win2003, so no prob about setting mine type.

fanon: tks for the suggestion. though it's quite impossible for the site to work in ANY resolution, i've commented out the script that force the window to reposition at the center of screen.

gtn & mgs: can you tell me just how bad the degrading is on alternative browsers? a screenshot?

#333131

gtn & mgs: can you tell me just how bad the degrading is on alternative browsers? a screenshot?

Evrything is readable, and nothing really looks out of place.

Left-hand sidebar ends up missing the osx style frame, and the animted effects don't work (incl. headline scroller).

All in all, no major dramas.

#333166

I said "degrades pretty well", which is a good thing!

Evrything is readable, and nothing really looks out of place.

Left-hand sidebar ends up missing the osx style frame, and the animted effects don't work (incl. headline scroller).

All in all, no major dramas.

What he said

#334721