Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP!

Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Web Development] >> Microsoft FrontPage Help

Message

Finny -> Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/4/2003 22:41:20)
I need help on putting scrollbars in tables in frontpage 2000. I' ve tried everything! i have no idea how to do it, or if it' s even possible. I' m making a webpage, and i have a table built, and instead of the table getting larger, i just want it to scroll down. please help!! Fin =)[:' (]

ACEDISH -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/4/2003 23:08:57)
Easy way would be to use frames in FP. you can then activate scollbars and you can use you exsisting pages also just go to new page and select frames... Coz

Kitka -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/5/2003 3:03:43)
Is this the sort of thing you are looking for?... http://www.siteexperts.com/tips/html/ts04/page1.asp

bobby -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/5/2003 10:53:50)
Adding the following will give you a scrollbar in a table cel, when necessary: <td width=" 50%" style=" overflow: auto;" > But only works in IE5+ (I haven' t tested NN7...)

Kitka -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/5/2003 15:39:24)
quote: But only works in IE5+ (I haven' t tested NN7...) W3schools CSS reference indicates that overflow is a CSS2 property and is supported by IE4+ and NN6+. They emphasise that it is not supported by NN4 [&:]... When will that browser die, so we can give it a decent burial?[:@][:D]

bobby -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/5/2003 15:50:06)
Thanks Kitka... I' ve tried it in NN6 w/o success, but I' ll admit that I didn' t proofread my CSS. It' s highly possible that there was something else in my sheet that fowled it up... [;)] I like the overflow property... very handy when you want to have more control over page appearance... Makes it much easier to work with positioning via Layers (div' s) because you don' t have to worry about relative height... you can set a div to a specific size and use overflow for those pages where the content stretches past the layer... If everyone stopped coding web pages for NN4, do you think people would stop using it? Or would they stop surfing all together out of spite? [&:]

Kitka -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/5/2003 16:12:19)
quote: I' ve tried it in NN6 w/o success, I' m wondering if it might have been because you used style=" overflow: auto;" . Try style=" overflow: scroll;" instead and see if that makes a difference. quote: If everyone stopped coding web pages for NN4, do you think people would stop using it? Or would they stop surfing all together out of spite? [&:] I doubt it![:(] They' ll just think we are hopeless designers[:o][>:][8D][:D]

Nancy -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/6/2003 0:09:46)
quote: ORIGINAL: bobby If everyone stopped coding web pages for NN4, do you think people would stop using it? Or would they stop surfing all together out of spite? [&:] I vote we try it and find out! [:D] Nancy

enrightd -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/6/2003 12:18:55)
What' s NN4? Just kidding.

abbeyvet -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/6/2003 12:47:47)
quote: If everyone stopped coding web pages for NN4, do you think people would stop using it? I think that is a serious question, and I think that as long we DO continue designing for it, basically to the exclusion of using CSS/HTML4 to their full extent (not to even mention XHTML!), we are contibuting to our own browser compatiblity problem. I say the time has come to let NN4 go. Of course we do then have a duty to explain the whole thing to our clients, and, in the end, let them make the choice. I am just finishing a site that will be more or less unusable in NN4. Well, thats not true exactly, but it will NOT be pretty. They will be warned - a pop up box will tell them the story and send them for more information about why if they are interested. This site will use CSS for positioning and layout, it will (hopefully!) validate as CCS 2 and HTML 4, AND it is a commercial site. The owners are aware of the implications, as I have started to explain to people that they can do things two ways: 1. Design fully with CSS/HTML 4, using whatever is in the standards and supported by the currently available standards compliant browsers. Effect: Have better FORWARD compatibility, a faster loading site which is more search engine friendly BUT it may be considerably less that perfect looking in NN4 and the occasional thing may not work at all in NN4. OR 2. Design with tables, so that the site is (more or less) the same in all browsers, old and new. Use CSS to the extent that it is supported by older browsers. Effect: Have better BACKWARD compatibility, a site with a heavier footprint that will be more difficult to alter in the future and that cannot incorporate many things that are supported by newer browsers BUT it will be usable in all browsers (for the moment) including older versions of NN. I do think we need to start explaining all this to clients and letting them choose. I started doing it recently - 3 clients so far, 2 have gone for " forget the NN4 people" , one went for the other way. Their choice, I really do not mind either way. But at least the client knows the deal and cannot say later that they did not. It also potentially means another fee for me when the site needs to be totally redone at some point in the future to comply with standards. On the other hand, the compliant sites could potentially be completely redesigned in a day, by editing just the CSS and a few images. I know this opens a major kettle of fish for FP users who are not good at writing code or at CSS, which is a great pity. I well remember reading a post by Gil, a long time ago, when he said that the font tag would be deprecated and we needed to start using CSS for styling text. I was so horrified I literally hyperventilated!! [:@] But I can' t remember now when I last used a <font> tag, other than to have a quick look at how something looked in a different style. I REALLY hope that in the next version of FP they will have a way for people to layout pages using valid CSS rather than relying on tables, because tables are on the way out as a layout method. That' s just a fact.

bobby -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/6/2003 13:01:30)
quote: ... as long we DO continue designing for it... we are contibuting to our own browser compatiblity problem. I say the time has come to let NN4 go. So let it be written, so let it be done... I' m with you Kathrine... let NN<6 and IE<5 die of neglect. It still amazes me that with the host of free browsers out there people are still surfing with outdated versions... *Thus begins the revolution!*

pageoneresults -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/7/2003 21:10:09)
quote: I say the time has come to let NN4 go. Of course we do then have a duty to explain the whole thing to our clients, and, in the end, let them make the choice. Actually, you need to let the website statistics speak for themselves. I have some clients in the industrial sector where we still see 4-12% of the users with NN4.x. I' ve seen some report as high as 20% and it is all relative to the industry. The current worldwide stats for NN4.x are in the 1-4% range depending on the source. A year ago that was 4-8%. It is slowly dying. Educational institutions are mostly to blame for the remaining 1-4% of NN4.x users. If you are going to use pure css layouts like I' ve been doing for over a year now, designing for backwards compatibility starts at the core. It requires a different design mindset and you have limitations to work within. You can also build an additional style sheet for NN4.x users and serve them a site that is readable. I do it now using the @import command. I have two external css file references; one goes to the main style sheet, the other goes to the NN4.x style sheet. I' ve been able to successfully duplicate site appearance and functionality between a multitude of browsers including Lynx. Depending on the volume of your audience and what the statistical data shows for NN4.x users, will determine which route you need to take with your css. One important point I should make here. You need to think about the 17 other popular browsers that are out there. Not only that, you now have the entire handheld generation that requires even further development skills and the ability to serve someone surfing on their mobile phone a site that is readable. Using css is the only way that you' ll be able to truly target a much broader range of users. Since I use absolute positioning in my css, I' m able to literally place my html where I want it to appear behind the scenes. Go ahead, take a look at the code for our SEO Consultants Directory. It' s upside down! Go figure. Now take a look at the site in NN4.x, Opera 6.05 and 7.0, Mozilla, Lynx, etc.

pageoneresults -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/7/2003 21:21:54)
quote: I REALLY hope that in the next version of FP they will have a way for people to layout pages using valid CSS rather than relying on tables, because tables are on the way out as a layout method. That' s just a fact. Katherine, I hear what you are saying. Unfortunately, I don' t think this is going to happen real soon. You can use FP and produce valid html and css, but it is not for the novice. To make FP work to its full potential, you have to know how to write basic html and understand the basic concepts of style sheets. I' ve been working with css for over a year and half now and I' m still just skimming the surface. I' ve seen some absolute masterpieces out there using all css and that is what I strive for. We won' t be breaking away from tabular data anytime soon. You will still need to use tables when it comes to proper formatting of tabular data. The trade off trying to make a tabular layout with css just isn' t worth it and tables are here to stay for a while.

bobby -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/8/2003 0:17:29)
quote: you now have the entire handheld generation that requires even further development skills and the ability to serve someone surfing on their mobile phone a site that is readable Oh no... and I had almost convinced myself that it was all a dream... [:)] I' ve only glanced at WAP... so far still procrastinating... quote: I' ve been working with css for over a year and half now and I' m still just skimming the surface Amen... but the deeper I get the more some things make sense (and the more I dislike older browsers [8\|])

abbeyvet -> RE: Scroll Bars in Tables... HELP! (2/8/2003 6:30:49)
quote: We won' t be breaking away from tabular data anytime soon. I understand that alright, I really should have said for ' page layout/design' as distinct from for ' layout' . I also agree that it is unlikely that FP in a new version will make it possible for those with little or no knowledge of CSS to layout pages without using tables, I can see why too, it would be a difficult thing to automate. I just think it is a great pity. I so well remember when I first started out and even looking at HTML view gave me a stress headache. And while I know that eventually most users of FP or the like have to delve into code, start learning HTML and CSS and the devil knows what else if they are to progress, it seems that they have to keep reinventing the wheel on their way to learning it. First learn to layout with tables, because you don' t really need to know any HTML for that, though learning to do it well is a fairly big task. Then forget about all that later and learn to do it with CSS. Edward' s wonderful SEO consultants site was my road to Damascus. I cannot count the hours I spent looking at the pages and dissecting the style sheets and I am very grateful for all they taught me. My first attempt at laying out using CSS was essentially an offline experiment where I just adapted his CSS and made it happen on a page and as I did the logic and wonderful efficiency of it all dropped slowly into place. I now find myself answering questions here and giving advice about how to do something with tables, when I really want to say that the best way to do this or that is to forget about tables and use CSS, but that is not a realistic option for people using FP because they want a WYSIWYG tool as the learning curve is significant. I like the democratising effect that FP has, allowing pretty much anyone to create their own sites and have complete control over them. I dislike the derision poured by some not just on the software (which is plain ignorance) but on those who use it to create their own sites (which is ignorance of a different kind). I also dislike the fact that as more and more sites move to CSS for layout, and that is happening pretty quickly now, that the average FP user will be stuck doing things the ' traditional' way, without very much choice in the matter. And of course the so-called ' pros' will again use this as a stick with which to beat not just the software but its users. I don' t care what they say on a personal level, I too am happily using FP as my primary tool to make sites with CSS layouts and a very fine tool it is, it just gets wearisome to hear all this stuff over and over again.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.078125