Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] Getting a draft watermark
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-06-22 09:42:36
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-docs-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-docs-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of
> Paul A. Bristow
> Sent: Friday, June 17, 2011 4:00 PM
> To: 'Discussion of Boost Documentation'
> Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] Getting a draft watermark
Daniel James's suggestion seems to be accepted, and this should mean that order is not important to
selection of background-image.
Dimitri van Heesch writes (see attached).
"Using background-color seems like a sensible thing to do.
I'll change this in the next subversion update."
Paul
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: boost-docs-bounces_at_[hidden]
> > [mailto:boost-docs-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Rene Rivera
> > Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2011 8:02 PM
> > To: Discussion of Boost Documentation
> > Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] Getting a draft watermark
> >
> > On 6/16/2011 1:53 PM, Daniel James wrote:
> > > On 16 June 2011 18:09, Paul A. Bristow<pbristow_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Reading http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/colors.html, I'm still puzzled my
> > >> specifying background-image doesn't override the 'background : white" command.
> > >
> > > I really can't say without seeing what you've got.
> >
> > You might want to:
> >
> > 1. Use something like "Web Developer Tools" on FF, or just the DOM
> > inspector in Opera (this is
> particularly
> > good), to figure out why the CSS is being overridden, and where.
>
> That good advice was also given by Daniel James, and I've been using IE9's Dev Tool, but it didn't
reveal to
> me why it *seemed* that the "background : white" over-powered "background-image:
> draft.png".
>
> I'll try the Opera DOM Inspector.
>
> > 2. Or add "!important" to the declaration to hopefully override a subsequent style.
>
> > And to answer the general question.. "background-image" doesn't
> > override "background". When one specifies "background" it splits that
> > into the individual CSS properties. So when you use
> "background-
> > image" you should get an image over a white background, and if the
> > image is alpha you'll see that
> white.
>
> So if the "background-image: draft.png" comes after, it should still take effect?
>
> I suspect it may be the order of .css that is confusing me.
>
> <head>
> ...
> <link href="../checks_doxygen.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"/> ...
> </head>
>
> The 'background : white' is in this custom doxygen.css and the
> background-image: draft.png is in the Doxygen_header.html, thus
>
> <!-- Add draft background here if, for example, not yet accepted or otherwise not finalised.
-->
> <body style="background-image: url(../../images/draft.png);">
>
> So would you not expect the image to take effect?
>
> (It may be complicated by the way Doxygen uses the custom heater and footer around the other main
> contents files?)
>
> I'll start with afresh and see if I can resolve my confusion. (Not assisted by being a novice
with html/css!).
>
> Thanks
>
> Paul
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-docs mailing list
> Boost-docs_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-docs
attached mail follows:
https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=652741
doxygen | build | 1.7.4
Dimitri van Heesch <dimitri> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #2 from Dimitri van Heesch <dimitri_at_[hidden]> 2011-06-19 07:57:45 UTC ---
Using background-color seems like a sensible thing to do.
I'll change this in the next subversion update.
-- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You reported the bug.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:41 UTC