[help] Need Help Wih Some Scrolling Bars In

My Webpage

Well thats what i have so far form mi site, i havent finished the design yet but i just needed some help from anyone who could prolly know...

As you can see there is some text in the middle, what i want is that if this text is bigger, the design of the site remains the same (that menas no browser scrolling bbut scrolling in the oundaries of the white space allocated in teh design for the text)

I could do it in flash, but it doesnt really justofy it, plus i want people to be able to copy and paste tecxt...

any ideas?!

THANX!

Seph

PS, ive you have some comments criticism regarding the site, please let me know...

#61861

Sounds like you want an IFrame.

#61865

Use an iframe ""

in the

that you have the text you want to be in put

<iframe src="../../unavailable.html"></iframe>

I'll get an example up in a second with some properties. (Y)

#61866

Hmm but i think iframes are only supported by iexplorer or are they browser independant?

Another thing, does the text (or info to be there) need to be in a diff page??

EDITs below

Thanx for your effort wizard and cerebral!

I just realized i have 3 staaaaars!!! yippie! hahaha

#61868

I'm using them in Firebird

Edit, here's an example

link

some properties are

border=#

frameborder=no,yes,0,1

framespacing=#

marginheight=#

marginwidth=#

name="" (to link to)

width=#

height=#

scrolling=yes,no,auto

scrolling, src, name, width and height are the only ones gaurantee to work with all browsers, but the others work with Firebird.

#61870

Don't use IFRAMEs

Okay...

At the moment, you would have HTML pages embedded using elements. Instead of using these, you replace these in your pages as follows:

<div style = "overflow: scroll; width: 686; height:375;">
<CURRENT CONTENT GOES IN HERE />
</div>

This would then mean that all users of all browsers could view your page, whether they use a mobile device, a text browser (like Links), or a screen reader (like JAWS), or, in fact, anything else you can point at flat (X)HTML...

Then your site looks cool to people who can/want to see how cool it looks, and is readable to those who can't/don't.

#61878

@ Stevie, ive tried the overflow ina layer and the layer seems to move around (canges palce on screen) in diff browsers and in diff resolutions!

Which browsers cannot handle iframes?

Im using opera with no problems...

#61879

Plus, it always gives me a horizontal scrollbar! and the text is soemtimes overlapping the vertical one...

>.<

#61881

Im know that the 3 big can (ie, mozilla, and opera) i dunno about safari. If you have those four, you basically covered the mosty used engines. Keep in mind that alot of third party browsers use ie and mozilla engine.

#61882

Originally posted by Seph@Oct 4 2003, 05:26 PM
My Webpage any ideas?!

Maybe I'm missing a fundamental point but why not just use bog-standard frames, as opposed to an IFrame? Especially as IFrames are just so plain damned annoying.

#61884

In a layer?

Unfortunately you will have IE, Mozilla, and Opera render the position of the div slightly differently, but you'd get that with anything that you position absolutely.

There is a way to get rid of the horizontal scrollbar, but I can't remember it off the top of my head...

Googling for "CSS2 overflow" returns a few decent examples, but for a quick showcase, this CSS2 test suite has a good overflow example page.

I don't recommend against IFRAMEs because they don't work in the main browsers - I recommend against them because they're not actually part of any web standard (and because they make sites bad, from a usability point of view) - they're an extension that Microsoft introduced to HTML, and everyone else had little choice but to add support for them...

#61885

@Sniper

WEll i dont really want to use normal frames, it would mess up my image based site...

@Stevie BM

Yeah, sometimes it can get annoying but this time i just want to get the text to scroll inside the layout... so people dont miss any part of the design...

Im going to look into those links you kindly posted...

Cheers...

#61888

Originally posted by SniperX@Oct 4 2003, 06:16 PM
Maybe I'm missing a fundamental point but why not just use bog-standard frames, as opposed to an IFrame? Especially as IFrames are just so plain damned annoying.

Because "bog-standard frames" are the spawn of the devil. Anyone who uses them should be shot on sight.

I thought people might be offended, so here's clarification of why not to use frames.

"Why Frames Suck Most of the Time" by Jakob Nielsen (the web usability expert)

#61889

Originally posted by Seph@Oct 4 2003, 06:20 PM
Yeah, sometimes it can get annoying but this time i just want to get the text to scroll inside the layout... so people dont miss any part of the design...
Im going to look into those links you kindly posted...
Cheers...

My pleasure...

I'd heartily recommend looking into CSS2 and XHTML - they alone make so much possible with web design... OK, so you have to do a little "legwork" to get the design to look the same in IE and Mozilla, but it's less than you'd have to have done to get something to look the same in IE4 and NN4...

*shudders at the thought of NN4*

#61891

Originally posted by Stevie BM@Oct 4 2003, 05:23 PM
*shudders at the thought of NN4*

HAHAHHAHAHAHA yeah man, i hear you!!

I will give a look into xhtml, if i dont use it now, i will use it later, knowing how to do it is never "over the top"

#61892

Originally posted by Stevie BM@Oct 4 2003, 06:20 PM
"Why Frames Suck Most of the Time" by Jakob Nielsen

If we all went by what that egomaniac writes, we'd be stuck in a perpetual void of Times New Roman fonts, bland white pages and we'd all hide in the dark, away from any source of colour.

Pssst. By the way, Seph, you're supposed to think of these problems before not after.

#61899

hahhaa, well but this guys does know his stuff, ive read his usability book and really, i agree with most of what he has to say..

I consider framesets an ancient way of coding sites... gosh, my first website was with frames!!

#61900

Originally posted by SniperX@Oct 4 2003, 06:43 PM
If we all went by what that egomaniac writes, we'd be stuck in a perpetual void of Times New Roman fonts, bland white pages and we'd all hide in the dark, away from any source of colour.

He's not advocating poor design - he's advocating accessible design - he has nothing against things like CSS positioning, HTML tables and frames when used properly but most "web designers" know too much design and not enough web, so they make things that look pretty, but are completely unusable in a web environment.

Likewise programmers who think that they know how to design good user interfaces.

For example, b0se's OpusWorks site is valid XHTML and CSS2, with nary a frame in sight, and is only 48K... I'm not saying don't make sites look pretty - I'm saying don't make them difficult for people to use...

Oh, and there's a good reason Times New Roman is the most common font used worldwide - it's been proven to be the most easy to read by the human eye after countless hours of research.

#61903

Originally posted by Stevie BM@Oct 4 2003, 06:51 PM
Oh, and there's a good reason Times New Roman is the most common font used worldwide - it's been proven to be the most easy to read by the human eye after countless hours of research.

So has Hungarian Notation. I don't see everyone jumping up to adhere to that as a standard. And yes, we know, the pretty little points on TNR make it easy to recognise an individual letter, even when part of the letter is covered. (Yes, I studied that subject too.) So?

Oddly, I'm not disagreeing with you on the useability issue. There is a fine line between creativity and useability. Yes, many designers cross that line on many occasion. However, I firmly believe that ol' Jacob is thinking in terms of yesterday's users and yesterday's technology.

Let's also remember his typical audience. It wasn't that many years ago he was at SUN. I just think there are better people to vocalise on what is good web-fodder in this day and age than Jacob (Black & White) Nielsen.

It feels like my Dad dishing out advice on teen culture.

LOL Now look at what you've started, Seph.

#61906

The problem isn't Jakob's recommendations - it's that people do things too far to one extreme or the other - they either make things unusable, or they make them like Jakob's site. There should be a happy medium where a site is usable and looks good, and personally I think that XHTML and CSS2 are well on their way to providing that.

I'm not saying "read his work and take it as gospel", I just think that the points he raises are valid ones to consider... If you still feel, after considering what he says, that a design is worth forsaking usability over, then go for it. I'd like to think that there are very few cases, however, that people would consciously design something and not make it usable on purpose.

#61911

Originally posted by Stevie BM@Oct 4 2003, 12:51 PM
He's not advocating poor design - he's advocating accessible design - he has nothing against things like CSS positioning, HTML tables and frames when used properly but most "web designers" know too much design and not enough web, so they make things that look pretty, but are completely unusable in a web environment.
Likewise programmers who think that they know how to design good user interfaces.
For example, b0se's OpusWorks site is valid XHTML and CSS2, with nary a frame in sight, and is only 48K... I'm not saying don't make sites look pretty - I'm saying don't make them difficult for people to use...
Oh, and there's a good reason Times New Roman is the most common font used worldwide - it's been proven to be the most easy to read by the human eye after countless hours of research.

I have to agree with sniperX. There's a line that we need to just cross every once in a while. Even though it makes sense to make something to be available for every single person, what you sacrafice is originality and creativity. Look at automobiles. Not a single car is made to suite every person imaginable perfectly, nor anything else that is produced. Yes, complexity is becoming to be a major part in web design and programming, I agree with that. I think that simplexity is what make OSX so popular. The beauty and simplicity are combine ingeniously. BTW, georgia is far much easier and more pleasant than TNR.

Edit:

I wrote this response while StevieB posted his previous one so somethings are nulled. Secondly, I wanted to say that my post seemed a little hostile, so not to take it personally. Finally, I agree, we a web-designers have quite a was to go to the formula for a flawless design perfect.

#61912

And while I'm in rant mode, let's not forget that Times New Roman has it's long-standing good name because of newspapers and magazines, not because of screen readability! The latter, I think you may find, belongs to Arial, Verdana, or Georgia.

Then, we have audience. Let's commision a survey on how many of the energetic, colour-seeking youths are enamoured with Mr. Neilsen's designs. Then let's ask the older generation. I know which my money is on to have the largest fan group.

Design for your audience and forget the "rules". That's my nugget of wisdom for the day.

#61916

You both seem to think that I'm advocating that we all should go back to using Times New Roman for everything we do, and have flat text. I never said that.

I merely linked to Jakob's site to further my point about not using frames.

What you also forget is that Jakob isn't a designer - he's a usability architect. In other words, he takes designs and analyses them for areas which may cause users to have difficulty. This is not sysnonymous with plain black and white text.

"Look at automobiles..." Yes, I agree that not everyone can use cars, by their very nature, but the fact of the matter is that the ideal tools to make attractive, dynamic, well designed websites are the same tools to make usable websites - CSS2 and XHTML.

"Design for your audience and forget the "rules". That's my nugget of wisdom for the day." That's a very good maxim to work by... The only thing I would say, though, is that you can design for your audience and adhere to the rules by using... Wait for it... XHTML and CSS2!

#61918

Originally posted by Stevie BM@Oct 4 2003, 07:38 PM
The only thing I would say, though, is that you can design for your audience and adhere to the rules by using... Wait for it... XHTML and CSS2!

LOL Right, deal. Done. I'll settle for that. Anyway, I'm getting bitten by the muse now and need my fix of Photoshop.

#61922