I would like to create the menu that is shown in the “Menu.png” file which is currently in my taliesinsoft Public folder on my iDisk.
The intent is to have the menu be included on a master page so that the same menu will appear on a number of individual pages.
The menu normally consists of just a single horizontal row of selections. When the user hovers over one of those a dropdown will occur and the user can then hover over that to make a selection.
The problem I’m having is that if the menu is over a graphic on the active page it doesn’t work.
The menu has been implemented as a collection of graphic rectangles, each containing text. This method was chosen so that the menu doesn’t break up if the user chooses to enlarge the text elsewhere in the site.
So, the question is, what do I need to do to make the menu work?
Many thanks in advance for suggestions and/or advice!
I actually had downloaded the video and developed my own CSS menu by doing each step as a stopped and started the video in synchrony with what I was doing. Unfortunately the video didn’t seem to address the problems I previously posted.
I do think that your suggestion of making the men holder a layer will be useful even if the menu is created other than as a CSS menu.
The main menu should be 1024 pixels wide 30 pixels high. There are six menus, each with a drop-down, one of which is shown in the mockup. Four of these menus have a width of 171 pixels and two have a width of 170 pixels, so that the combined with totals 1024. The text is in 18 point Helvetica Bold, centered both vertically and horizontally.
And, as I’ve said, I was unable to achieve this with the CSS Menu action. Repeating my question, is creating a menu that precise in specification possible with the CSS Menu action.
Sometime around 2/11/08 (at 10:11 -0500) James L. Ryan said:
Well, it looks like the Freeway discussions don’t like URLs embraced
by “<” and “>” so here we go yet agian…
Actually, if you want to make a URL behave as a universally clickable
link (if not I rarely bother looking, and yours and many others
aren’t), put the protocol at the beginning - like this:
Sometime around 2/11/08 (at 10:11 -0500) James L. Ryan said:
Well, it looks like the Freeway discussions don’t like URLs embraced
by “<” and “>” so here we go yet agian…
Actually, if you want to make a URL behave as a universally clickable
link (if not I rarely bother looking, and yours and many others
aren’t), put the protocol at the beginning - like this:
If you’re looking at this message on the Web, you might still be missing the point Keith is trying to make. The text-to-HTML formatter that I used in creating this system turns any properly-formed URL into a clickable link. This means that you need the http:// (protocol) part at the beginning if it’s a Web address, and ftp:// if it’s one of those, etc. When you see the result of that link on the Web, the protocol part is snipped off for simplicity’s sake, but if you were to look at this message in e-mail, you would see that it’s still there.
If you want to wrap such an address in angle-brackets, that’s actually a very good idea because it will keep most e-mail clients from breaking off the link prematurely. A significant percentage of the readers of this forum do so exclusively through e-mail. But anything inside of angle brackets will be considered a try at inserting code, and unless it fits through the sanitizer sideways, it will be stripped out.
What might be confusing is that some e-mail clients turn anything that begins with www. into a clickable link, but that’s not a reliable thing, and also misses any other hostname even if it is actually a Web address. So best to be intentional, and make a link that would be clickable in any situation. Just write it as HTML and you won’t go wrong.
I guess I’ve gotten “spoiled” in that so many websites, when a url is embraced within angle brackets, will, in the absence of a specific protocol such as “http://” will just go ahead and add it. Guess I got spoiled!
If you are posting these from mail, then there’s a bit of a learning curve to creating messages that look the way you intend. But if you’re using the web, there’s a live preview on screen below the entry box, and it uses the exact same formatter as the rest of the site. If it looks (and links) there, then you know you’ve got it right.
Big “shame on me” as I was not paying attention to the live preview. If I had I might have noted why the URL I was posting wasn’t being interpreted as such!
