RJM
-
Content Count
34 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
100%x100% Table With filler cells on the bottom and right.
RJM replied to RJM's topic in Websites and Web Designing
I'm thinking I might need to do a script function for the Div's width... I'll see if I know enough JS yet... -
100%x100% Table With filler cells on the bottom and right.
RJM replied to RJM's topic in Websites and Web Designing
Here's my latest code...I simplified it to just the divs and color coded each div to see exactly what each is doing. The RightShadow div is the one I need to fix. I want to make it 100% of RightbarDiv. I want RightbarDiv to fill the space between the BkgDiv div and the right side of the window. But RightbarDiv is contained by ContentDiv and so 100% covers the whole thing. How do I make RightbarDiv "see" and stop at BkgDiv? <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ xmlns="http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/ http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" /><title>Imagaeon Branding</title><style type="text/css"><!--body { margin-left: 0px; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px;}div {display:inline-block}#SiteHolder { position:absolute; width:100%; height:100%; z-index:1;}#BannerDiv { position:relative; width:100%; height:92px; z-index:1; left: 0; top: 0;}#ContentDiv { position:relative; width:100%; height:808px; z-index:1; left: 0px; top: 0px;}#BkgDiv { position:relative; width:767px; height:808px; z-index:2; float:left;}#RightbarDiv { position:relative; z-index:2; float:right;}#RightShadow { position:relative; height:25px; z-index:3; width: 100px;}#FooterDiv { position:relative; width:100%; z-index:1; visibility: inherit; height: 30px;}--></style></head><body><div id="SiteHolder" style="background-color:#99FF00"> <div id="BannerDiv" style="background-color:#FF0000"> </div> <div id="ContentDiv" style="background-color:#666666"> <div id="BkgDiv" style="background-color:#33FF00"> </div> <div id="RightbarDiv" style="background-color:#CC9900"> <div id="RightShadow" style="background-color:#FF00FF"> </div> </div> </div> <div id="FooterDiv" style="background-color:#999999"> </div></div></body></html> -
100%x100% Table With filler cells on the bottom and right.
RJM replied to RJM's topic in Websites and Web Designing
Here's what I have: }#SiteHolder { position:absolute; width:100%; height:100%; z-index:1;}#BannerDiv { position:relative; width:100%; height:92px; z-index:1; left: 0; top: 0;}#ContentDiv { position:relative; width:100%; height:808px; z-index:1; left: 0px; top: 0px;}#BkgDiv { position:relative; width:767px; height:808px; z-index:2;}#RightbarDiv { position:relative; float:right; z-index:2; background-image: url(images/sky-bkg.gif);}#RightShadow { position:relative; height:25px; z-index:3; background-image: url(images/shadow.gif);}#FooterDiv { position:relative; width:100%; z-index:1; background-image: url(images/tile.gif); top: 900px; visibility: inherit;}--></style></head><body><div id="SiteHolder"> <div id="BannerDiv" style="background-color:#000000"> <img src="images/Logo_main.gif" width="380" height="92" align="left" /> </div> <div id="ContentDiv" style="background-image:url(images/tile.gif)"> <div id="BkgDiv"> <img src="images/bkg.gif" width="767" height="808" align="left" /> </div> <div id="RightbarDiv"> <div id="RightShadow"> </div> </div> </div> <div id="FooterDiv"> </div></div> -
100%x100% Table With filler cells on the bottom and right.
RJM replied to RJM's topic in Websites and Web Designing
I tried with div, but I get problems with some things. Like what width do I set the right box at? 100% and it's 100%+800px off to the side and I get a scrollbar going way out in right field.And same with the bottom box. -
I'm laying out my site and I'm trying to come up with a layout like the one in this sketch I did: Should I use Div, Frames, or Tables? Can I do this using only CSS and HTML? Or do I need to write a script? Also the box on the right will have an x-repeat image across the top 25px tall and the rest a full tile background. Do I need to split it with a 25px tall cell? First responder with working solution gets my manginity.
-
I know. I see way more activity in other sites with way less topics. I'm used to posting on one topic, looking at another, returning 5 minutes later and reading three or four responses. I know for a fact that there must be plenty of users out there that take one look and never return. I'm 50/50 on staying. I'll test it for the free hosting, but will probably pay another hosting place eventually.
-
Here is the convo I had with this guy last night on IM.
-
Oops. Too long. Damn it that was like 1/8th of what I wrote! haha. Max 400 characters. Good to know. I'll PM you. hahaha
-
I can start with pathetic poetry proving I have a severe attachment disorder, absolutely no talent in poetic prose and horrendous grammar, then move on to somehow finding your number and calling you at 1:30 in the morning and wheezing in to the phone (because of my allergies and asthma) while in the background you can actually hear "fapping" noises. Once I get bored of that (after about 2
-
Our economy has it's fingers all over the world. Our debts are financed by foreign countries. So really there is no "Economy in the USA". I looked at some of the videos and it portrays the Fed being private like it was some big secret. It's not. There's a lot of truth to those videos, but it IS distorted. Our banking system has way too much influence by Congress and the White House. That didn't really happen until the Great Depression made FDR and Hoover think the government controlling the banking system is a good idea. And THAT is what we have today. TECHNICALLY it's a private corporation, but the Fed Chair is appointed by the president and the rest are private bankers. That sounds like, "OMG, PRIVATE? So they are trying to make a quick buck off the public???" But who are you going to have run the most important bank in the world? Someone who never ran a bank?? Of course not. The first thing I saw in the video that makes me question it's veracity was the statement: "Wealth can never be destroyed. Only transferred." That is absolutely not true. Depreciation is a perfect example. You buy a car for $40k and the next day it is worth $35k. Where did that money go? Thin air. No body gained $5,000. Same goes for real estate right now. The value is what someone is willing to pay. Not what it is "worth".
-
That propagates money already generated. Revenue is generated by making a product. Take a natural resource, add labor and sell it for a profit. Service-based businesses allow manufacturers to do so more efficiently. The government jobs take a large cut of the profits, and add bureaucracy. Saying having jobs and spending money is what makes the economy work is what the basis of socialism is about and it doesn't work. The difference this time is that it's not part of the natural fluctuations. It's a credit crisis. You want to sell? Fine. Try to sell. But no one can buy. You want to buy? Fine. Try to get a loan. It's not going to happen. Same goes for if you want a business loan. Tough luck, buddy.
-
If I have to scroll way the f to the bottom of a mile long page to find the forum I'm looking for, there's something amiss. I would rather take a quick glance, click, maybe click another sub category after that, then be reading...Yes, GUI is the graphical user interface. Did I confuse you?I don't get the impression that it's that busy. The other forums I go to get a lot more busy and have far fewer categories. A LOT of the categories can be combined with others of the same general interest. It only appeals to the type of user that doesn't mind reading through long lines of text.You guys are thinking more like programmers than designers. No decent web designer would make it's user scroll that far to get to what he or she wants. It's frustrating as hell. I've resorted to just using the "View New Posts" link 99% of the time.
-
I've watched, I've listened, and I've read. I know what caused the credit market failure because I was NECK DEEP in it's build-up and it's collapse. Yes, you can blame me for a part of it. I'll explain later. Now we are at a stage where we are taking drastic measures to secure our future. Are we taking the right steps? Yes. And No. Yes: We are investing money that will create huge government-funded construction projects putting people to work as they are being built and employing future work to keep them up and running. This makes jobs. Yay Jobs! Let's all have a job orgy! No: We are investing in projects that won't create a single dime for the economy. Why? Because building government buildings and creating government jobs does not create wealth. It takes tax money to keep them up and running. So we just secured nearly a TRILLION DOLLARS in future taxes, PLUS TRILLIONS MORE that it will take to run them in the future. Now we are looking at a possible additional stimulus bill that will cost us nearly as much. A trillion dollars equals $2700 for every citizen. Another trillion puts that at $5,400 per person. That's per person, not per TAX PAYER. So if you have a family of 4, you're looking at $21,600! This is on top of the 40% the government takes form you now. Worse yet: The stimulus bill doesn't address what went wrong: Congress FORCED the banks to give loans that were doomed to fail. -Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (Carter) (Required banks to report the race and gender of applicants on home loans, added a plethora of regulations, made loan applications look like War and Peace, with footnotes.) -Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (Carter) (Required banks to lend to disqualified borrowers if they were a minority race or had bad credit: ) -Depository Institutions Deregulation Act 1980 (Carter) (Reduced the amount banks had to keep in the Reserve) -Alternative Mortgage Transaction Parity Act of 1982 (Reagan) (Allowed banks more flexibility in lending... meh, had an effect.) -Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (Clinton) (Made it so advocacy groups could influence lending practices.) -1995 revision to the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 (Clinton) (Heavily revised the act, making it so banks could take money from securities showing a false AAA rating (which regulators ignored in the name of "affordable housing", and forced more bad loans, without any stipulation that they still be able to operate at a profit. According to Obama, the sole act that created the meltdown was the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which allowed banks to do insurance. WTF??? This makes banks MORE stable by diversifying!!! What are you talking about Mr. Obama??? It resulted in mergers between insurance companies, and banks. But I'm real interested in hearing Obama's theory on how those mergers caused these banks to go down. Bush and the republican congress warned of a possible financial meltdown as a result of lending policy as early as 2003, but were voted down. Congress, namely the Democrats were in denial: said Rep. Barney Frank, then ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. The war-time economy may have actually postponed the meltdown several years. Still today, about the only hiring industry is the defense industry. Oh, but wait... Obama's cutting defense spending as well! So if I was the president, this is what the solution would be: Stimulus Package would be primarily a reserve account for banks to draw from gradually over 3 years free of interest, for the purpose of purchasing bad equity from other banks that are in the can. This makes the stronger banks healthier and relieves the unhealthy banks of bad equity. That's about it. The rest would be fluff. Once you do this, the credit market would move on it's own and jobs would return as a result of private investment again. Private investment the engine that actually CREATES WEALTH!!! And for those of you that point to his tax cuts as proof that it won't cost you anything, take a look at the costs of services when companies are forced to pay for you. Guess what? They just went up. Everything does. But your income did not. Know what that's called? INFLATION! So F*** YOU OBAMA, NOT ONE OF THOSE EARMARKS WILL GET ANY OF MY PROJECTS OFF THE GROUND, AND WILL ONLY COST ME MORE! So what did I do to destroy the economy? I designed the homes that are sitting empty now. I saw who was getting the loans, and knew I was designing homes for people that should not be qualified to live in them. Average homes went from 1,600 sq. ft. to 2,500 sq. ft.! But I designed them anyway. Sorry.
