If I don't specify z-indexes, my table will appear above my logo. If I set the logo to appear above the table, I'm unable to click any text that ends up underneath it (It's transparent, so you can see it... just not do anything about it.) If I do set z-indexes, the table has to be put underneath the image. So I set a z-index on a div layer that I position inside the table, but the image is STILL showing up above it. This is the page: http://www.conwear.org/index.php What can I do to fix that? EDIT: the reason I use tables is because I want the top and bottom to be the rounded corners, and to expand depending on how much text is in them. Is there another way to do that?
1) your background is so dark I couldn't tell one way or the other. 2) Yes, there is a better way, and it's called 'sliding doors', which uses just one image to do the job you are doing with 2-3. Because image encoders can make REALLY quick work of really long-runs of the same color in a row (both .gif and .png do this GREAT) you just make a image wider than your total total area - you then nest one element inside another. The outer one you show one edge with a repeating background, and pad that side, then the nested one you use to show the opposite side of the image. Which you can take even further as I do in my "Eight corners under one roof" method. On page, you've got all sorts of alignment issues here, like the bottom half of the leg not even lining up with the top image. Peeking under the hood, I see javascript to replicate something that was deprecated for a reason (target), and a train wreck of non-semantic markup, meaningless empty tables, tags like 'center' that have no place on a modern page... 27 validation errors in 5k of code means you've got a lot bigger problems than z-index issues - Most of those issues having something to do with that whoever/whatever you have been learning from is a decade or more behind the times, teaching you techniques that were a bad idea back then, and have no place today. You might want to pick up Build Your Own Web Site The Right Way Using HTML & CSS by Ian Lloyd. First edition is available on many library shelves, it's at most major booksellers, and you can buy it from SitePoint. In the book he skips right past outdated coding techniques like tables for layout and deprecated tags and right into separation of presentation from content and semantic markup - frankly, it's the only recent book on the subject I've seen that's worth a damn.
I'm not going to pay to do anything. Almost none of this except the main page (which has been edited beyond what I asked for in the first post) are my coding. I don't know javascript; I'm not in a position to pay to learn or pay someone else to do it for me. Thanks for your response, but you shouldn't have bothered with that condescending attitude and those insults.
All I have to say is this. I'll be fair death and post your latest site first.. http://www.classicbattletech.com/ Look at his older sites if you want. Do yourself a favor and don't talk crap about peoples personal design preferences. Yours are pitiful IMO. You may have your htm "language" down to a science, but your design work blows. http://battletech.hopto.org/
ok you are talking about the logo and the leg on background here is what to do just add this img.leg { left:660px; position:absolute; top:250px; z-index:-1; } Please Add reputation if you like my post
My latest site? 2003 is my latest Site? I don't think so. Nice try at trolling and not contributing to the discussion though. My skills have come a LONG way since I wrote that shlock. www.deathshadow.com is my latest site (as in a week old), www.ewiusb.com preceding it by a few months... and that's not counting client websites. Though I am retired now and not taking on clients anymore so I can concentrate on working on my own projects.
Then, just exactly what are you after? What did you hope to accomplish posting in a programming thread if not to get advice on actually fixing the page? You start out talking about your z-index like you know something about coding, ask how to fix it via coding, and now magically you aren't a coder and don't want to learn how to fix it? Insults? What insults?!? Christ, that was laid back for me. I criticized the work, not you. You asked how to fix it, fixing it involves programming - I outlined what was wrong on the page and what needs to be fixed. If your not the developer you shouldn't have taken any offense, but you should also realize it needs to be pitched and started over. It also makes no sense to ask how to fix it in a programming forum using terminology like a programmer, and then to say "I don't have time to learn or to pay someone to do it" - which pretty much means you don't want to fix it or have it fixed.
I don't have time to learn Java or PHP as those take more than looking at some CSS and figuring it out. I just wanted advice on what to do about the z-index problem, which I ended up fixing myself after some tinkering. All I can do, I meant, is manipulate CSS and HTML. Java is a whole other story. Criticizing the work, which is my work is criticizing me. I might have cared to look at your website if you hadn't been so condescending.
... and where do I mention either? Well, that's good to hear. ... and I don't mention Java - I do mention javascript which has the unfortunate problem of sharing a name while being completely unrelated, but what I said about it is that a piece of javascript you do use on the page (now that you are saying it is your work) is doing something we've been told not to do for a reason. I'm sorry if you thought I was being condescending, but it makes me question if you even read my original post. I was being frank - the markup techniques used are a decade out of date. This is not your fault or a reflection upon you, but a reflection upon whatever sources you have been learning from. This is why I suggested the perusal of a book that I've got zero involvment in apart from liking it - and is as I said, freely available in most public libraries. Seriously, how exactly is one supposed to interpret Is it your work or isn't it?!? I link to a book you can probably read for free, point out other problems with the page, answer your question on if there's a better way of doing it - and I'm being insulting and condescending? I think not. The closest I come to an insult is calling the markup a train wreck - what else do you call a broken layout built using CENTER tags, tables for layout, nobreaks, presentational attributes, multiple H1's, breaks inside paragraph tags, underline tags inside anchors, fails to open html and body or close the body and html, lacks a doctype (which is why it's broken in IE, and might be why it's breaking in Opera though that's probably my LF/120dpi system settings), non-table elements declared inside the table tag, and tags closed in the opposite order they are opened? It's a miracle it works in any browser - that's NOT my trying to be insulting or condescending, that's me being HONEST with you. I don't sugarcoat the truth. You want insulting or condescending, that's what I did to that 'technoblue' nimrod.