png transparencies, ie filter and css

[jeanjean]

i built a site that made use of transparent png:
<a href="http://212.233.10.100/ouff/assets/pokdb/index.asp">here</a>

i wasn't really happy that ie screws it up but i didn't want to build a second version w/ nested tables and fake rendered transparency

so i used filter built-in functionnality inside ie (iich you do with what you have right?)

<a href="http://212.233.10.100/ouff/assets/pokdb2/index.asp">there</a>

works really fine w/ ie i have the same look'n feel and that's a good thing

xhtml still validate but not css now..

i'll do with that and maybe built a sniffer that write in the document a valid css for gecko based browser and another one that doesn't validate for ie

question are

will those css be accessible through dom? i'm using a styleswitcher based on dom to change the style of the site on the fly.. will the html link tags written in the doc by javascript beeing accessible by the dom under ie and geckobased browser?

now about my css.. is it possible that one day my css and the site would break down because of that filter's styles i defined in the css? i mean.. the parser wouldn't read further because it found an 'error' and the css and would ignoe the rest of the css or any other behavior that would break down the usability of the site?

and finally.. i noticed some problems under gecko.. firebird ignore the filter attribute and 'just' renders the png.. but from time to time it blurs the whole page's contents... just like the ie filter was applied to every elements or the png were set above the page or something

png aren't fully supported yet even by gecko and i wondered if it had something to do w/ filter attributes being defined in the css (kind of built-in ie squirt mode??)

note that since i defined the filter attribute gecko based browser render png w/ less opacity variations differences (using the same bckgrd for different div but opacity used to differ) (??)

[clav]

you shouldn't use document.write() to add things in xhtml documents. instead you would use something like:

var link = document.createElement("link");
link.setAttribute("rel","stylesheet");
... set other attributes ...
document.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(link);

and it would of course be accessible through the DOM.


personally I would just accept the CSS not validating though.

[alanjstr]

you shouldn't use document.write() to add things in xhtml documents. instead you would use something like:

var link = document.createElement("link");
link.setAttribute("rel","stylesheet");
... set other attributes ...
document.getElementsByTagName("head")[0].appendChild(link);

and it would of course be accessible through the DOM.


personally I would just accept the CSS not validating though.

That would have kept me from redoing all of my web pages every time I added a style sheet. But I'm not smart enough to know all that stuff.