Follow-up Note for DavidF and Mike

M

Mike Koewler

Kat,

Usually, if you try your site in IE, FF (or Mozilla, SeaMonkey,
Netscape) and Opera, you will have covered 98.5 percent of all browsers,
maybe more.
the correct image name on my site to create and image link?

Don't worry about what Pub names an image. Create the link to whatever
the image is named when you place it (necklace1.jpg) for instance.

If you want to link to a specific point on a page, put an anchor at that
point. Then the link would be /pagename.html#anchorname

Mike
 
R

Rob Giordano \(Crash\)

I just found it the other day...i don't really use FF that much.


|I never noticed that before. Thanks for making note, as that is an answer
| for those people that want their viewers to be able to copy the image.
They
| can load it in FF.
|
| DavidF
|
| | > ....and notably it don't werk in FF.
| >
| >
| > | > |I am sorry, I misspoke. The right click, save image option is
| > | disabled....not the entire right click context menu. I didn't even try
a
| > | right click when I viewed the site.
| > |
| > | DavidF
| > |
| > message
| > | | > | > It's not there now, somehow she disabled it.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > | > | > | Unfortunately MSFT in their infinitive wisdom decided that users
| > wanted
| > | > | right click disabled by default in Publisher 2003. They also
decided
| > to
| > | > not
| > | > | make it optional. In spite of feedback to the contrary, this is
| > | > unchanged
| > | > in
| > | > | Pub 2007.
| > | > |
| > | > | DavidF
| > | > |
| > | > message
| > | > | | > | > | > You can probably optimize the images more without any loss...try
| > | > IrFanview
| > | > | > (freebie) optimize them before you put them in Pub.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > There is no photo security...the simple fact is all images are
| > already
| > | > | > downloaded to the viewer's machine in order to be viewd (peruse
| > your
| > | > temp
| > | > | > internet cache folder someday with an image viewer and you'll
| > see).
| > | > Also
| > | > | > you
| > | > | > can just do a View | Source for the location of the file, or a
| > | > PrntScrn
| > | > | > then
| > | > | > paste into PS or any image editor...and you'll use this in a
| > minute.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > Word Art can be converted either by PrntScrn and then into image
| > | > editor
| > | > | > cropped and saved as jpg or gif...better still is use a vector
| > based
| > | > | > graphics program like Illustrator, XaraXtreme, MS Expression
| > Designer
| > | > | > etc...then save as jpg or gif.
| > | > | >
| > | > | > ...discouraging word;;;;;; you're on the road to outgrowing
| > Publisher
| > | > webs
| > | > | > :-(
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > | > |I had wondered about thatphoto security. Some of my colleagues
| > use
| > | > it,
| > | > | > some
| > | > | > | don't. Guess if anyone really wants those photos, they will
get
| > | > them!
| > | > | > I'll
| > | > | > | get rid of it (now where did I put that string of code...)
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "The page is cranky" WHICH page? If it's the home page, I'm
not
| > | > | > surprised -
| > | > | > | that's why I want to have a lo-res b/w come up first then let
| > the
| > | > color
| > | > | > | overwrite it - but I don't know how.
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | Any suggestions on the word art? do it all in photo shop?
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | Suggestions, instructions and code snips welcome.
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | The Kat
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | "Rob Giordano (Crash)" wrote:
| > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > Remove the no right click script...it does nothing to
protect
| > your
| > | > | > images
| > | > | > | > and pisses people off when they want to quickly bookmark
your
| > | > | > page....or
| > | > | > | > look at your code.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > The page is cranky...doesn't load slow but it ain't fast.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > Word Art doesn't display well in browsers other than IE and
| > even
| > | > in
| > | > IE
| > | > | > I
| > | > | > | > think it looks....well...like Word Art.
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > Take a gander at your web with FF...see the jaggies?
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > More later..
| > | > | > | >
message
| > | > | > | > | > | > | > | > |I thought all of you knew what it was!
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | David,, which links aren't working? I know the page to
spot
| > on
| > | > | > another
| > | > | > | > page
| > | > | > | > | isn't up. Are NONE of the links working, even the HREFs?
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | I posted a query about using the image as a link - I'd
like
| > the
| > | > | > photos
| > | > | > on
| > | > | > | > | the Home page to link to the individual sections. How long
| > did
| > | > it
| > | > | > take
| > | > | > to
| > | > | > | > | load with all those pix?
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | As for the black background - nothing I did woulld change
| > the
| > | > color
| > | > | > of
| > | > | > the
| > | > | > | > | links to a lighter shade. Is that because the page has the
| > style
| > | > | > squib
| > | > | > at
| > | > | > | > the
| > | > | > | > | top? (I can't re-style mid-page!)
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | The interpage links and the thumbnail links are next. AND
| > the
| > | > | > shopping
| > | > | > | > cart.
| > | > | > | > | But I've got to catch up on work (the spiders will be
upset)
| > | > before
| > | > | > I
| > | > | > | > spend
| > | > | > | > | the required hours for that.
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | Can you tell anything at all from the pictures there now?
| > I've
| > | > got
| > | > a
| > | > | > 18"
| > | > | > | > | monitor at hi res. I've got to check in on the TV in the
| > | > basement
| > | > to
| > | > | > see
| > | > | > | > what
| > | > | > | > | it looks like on that - a hi-res tv is low -es compared to
a
| > | > | > monitor.
| > | > | > Did
| > | > | > | > the
| > | > | > | > | fancy text on the glass pages come up - I think I got all
of
| > | > them
| > | > | > | > installed
| > | > | > | > | as pictures.
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | Have fun tearing it apart. If you can't find some of the
| > code,
| > | > let
| > | > | > me
| > | > | > | > know.
| > | > | > | > | You wrote most of it, cutting weeks off the development
| > time!
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | MANY thanks to all of you.
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | The Kat
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | "Mike Koewler" wrote:
| > | > | > | > |
| > | > | > | > | > http://www.2-lions.com/
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > I looked at the old messages to find it!
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > Mike
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | > | > DavidF wrote:
| > | > | > | > | > > What's the URL Mike?
| > | > | > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > | > > DavidF
| > | > | > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > | > > | > | > | > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > | > >>Kat,
| > | > | > | > | > >>
| > | > | > | > | > >>And your links don't work in Mozilla. :-( I also find
| > the
| > | > dark
| > | > | > blue
| > | > | > | > (?)
| > | > | > | > | > >>text on the black background hard to read, but the
| > mouseover
| > | > | > effect
| > | > | > | > makes
| > | > | > | > | > >>it easier.
| > | > | > | > | > >>
| > | > | > | > | > >>Mike
| > | > | > | > | > >>
| > | > | > | > | > >>The Kat wrote:
| > | > | > | > | > >>
| > | > | > | > | > >>
| > | > | > | > | > >>>The site is up and running.
| > | > | > | > | > >>>
| > | > | > | > | > >>>The Kat
| > | > | > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > | > >
| > | > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > |
| > | > |
| > | >
| > | >
| > |
| > |
| >
| >
|
|
 
D

DavidF

Who are you talking to? I didn't read anywhere that someone suggested not
having two menus. There is nothing wrong with one on top and one on the
bottom. Seem appropriate to me.

"Has anyone figured out why I can't change the color of the home page bottom
panel? Is there only one code to guide the whole page?" Once again, what are
you talking about?

DavidF
 
D

DavidF

I never noticed that before. Thanks for making note, as that is an answer
for those people that want their viewers to be able to copy the image. They
can load it in FF.

DavidF
 
D

DavidF

Once again, what do you mean by "I don't like having to program an entire
interface every time I log on."? IE and FF can live happily together, and
there is no programming involved with FF. I installed FF primarily to test
websites, but have found that I actually enjoy it more than IE in some ways.
If you want to be serious about this website of yours, you need to install
it and use it. Its your website, not ours.

The rest of your questions I answered as best as I could in your post above.

DavidF
 
M

Mike Koewler

David,
websites, but have found that I actually enjoy it more than IE in some
ways. <<

Careful, you're giving credibility to the browser stats I posted! I
checked another site I maintain, one that should appeal to a completely
different crowd, and saw close to the same percentage.

BTW, I've seen a shift in the last month or two toward 1024 x 768
monitors. It's now over 50 percent of visitors. Not justification to
start making pages wider yet, but I would guess that at this time next
year, you'll start seeing way more of them.

Mike
 
D

DavidF

Mike,

Times, they be a changn'...

DavidF

Mike Koewler said:
David,

websites, but have found that I actually enjoy it more than IE in some
ways. <<

Careful, you're giving credibility to the browser stats I posted! I
checked another site I maintain, one that should appeal to a completely
different crowd, and saw close to the same percentage.

BTW, I've seen a shift in the last month or two toward 1024 x 768
monitors. It's now over 50 percent of visitors. Not justification to start
making pages wider yet, but I would guess that at this time next year,
you'll start seeing way more of them.

Mike
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top