Stylesheets - Opaque background on table

Author

Opaque background on table

Tania

2004-11-18, 11:15 pm

I have a scenic picture for the background of a page. I would like to make a
table, with an opaque background, over top to hold content, that will still
somewhat show my page background. How do I do this?

Chris Leipold

2004-11-19, 7:14 am

Hi Tania,

> I have a scenic picture for the background of a page. I would like to make a
> table, with an opaque background, over top to hold content, that will still
> somewhat show my page background. How do I do this?
If you "would like to make a table, [...] to hold content", you're wrong
here, I guess.
If you give the table a background, it will coceal the page-background,
unless you use a (semi-)transparent table-background-image.

Chris

Harlan Messinger

2004-11-19, 12:18 pm

"Tania" <taniaj@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:L4dnd.193397$9b.1283@edtnps84...
> I have a scenic picture for the background of a page. I would like to make
a
> table, with an opaque background, over top to hold content, that will
still
> somewhat show my page background. How do I do this?

This is like asking for a watertight sieve. You ought to look up "opaque" in
the dictionary.

Anyway, you can specify either that a background have a color OR that it be
transparent, not both. You can try using a background image with a lot of
transparency, or a background image designed to look like the page's
background image as seen through a transparent color filter.

Tania

2004-11-20, 12:15 pm

So how can I have an area with text in it, that one can read over the scenic
background?

"Chris Leipold" <cleipold@dietzk.de> wrote in message
news:305pmoF2s6kdjU1@uni-berlin.de...
> Hi Tania,
>
make a[color=darkred]
still[color=darkred]
> If you "would like to make a table, [...] to hold content", you're wrong
> here, I guess.
> If you give the table a background, it will coceal the page-background,
> unless you use a (semi-)transparent table-background-image.
>
> Chris

Els

2004-11-20, 12:15 pm

Tania wrote:

> "Chris Leipold" <cleipold@dietzk.de> wrote in message
> news:305pmoF2s6kdjU1@uni-berlin.de...
>
>
> So how can I have an area with text in it, that one can
> read over the scenic background?

By setting the background of the text to transparent.
Just make sure that the scenic background has enough contrast
with the text to be able to read it properly.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: Pink Floyd - Money

Harlan Messinger

2004-11-20, 7:15 pm

"Tania" <taniaj@nospam.com> wrote:

>So how can I have an area with text in it, that one can read over the scenic
>background?
>
>"Chris Leipold" <cleipold@dietzk.de> wrote in message
>news:305pmoF2s6kdjU1@uni-berlin.de...
>make a
>still

Please don't top-post. You can see from this what a nuisance it is to
follow a thread when people write their responses out of order with
the earlier messages. Write your response at the bottom, or underneath
the part of the earlier message(s) to which it pertains.

As to your question: background: transparent; ("transparent" is the
opposite of "opaque").
[color=darkred]
>

--
Harlan Messinger
Remove the first dot from my e-mail address.
Veuillez ôter le premier point de mon adresse de courriel.

Christoph Paeper

2004-11-20, 7:15 pm

*Tania* <taniaj@nospam.com>:
>
> I have a scenic picture for the background of a page. I would like to
> make a table, with an opaque background, over top to hold content, that
> will still somewhat show my page background. How do I do this?

Certainly not with an opaque background for the table, but with a
semi-transparent one. In CSS2 that can only be done with a 'transparent'
'background-color' and a 'background-image' in a format that supports more
advanced than binary transparency (like PNG, "alpha channel").

With the CSS_3 module Color (<http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-color/> ) there are
almost certainly coming ways to give background color an alpha value
('rgba()', 'hsla()'¹) or to give the whole box a reduced 'opacity', thus
removing the need for a second background image.

¹ <rant>In a quite unintuitive way, which seems to be what graphics
designers like to use²: the alpha value is always given as a float between
0 and 1, not a percentage, which would be the established CSS way, and
neither in the same way as the color components, i.e. 'rgba(255, 127, 0,
255)', 'rgba(100%, 50%, 0%, 100%)', '#F70F', '#FF7F00FF' would---despite
being logic assumptions---all be incorrect (well, the first one would
probably be shaped to 'rgba(255, 127, 0, 1.0)'.</rant>
² <rant>See the unsystematic color names of that very draft.</rant>

--
"Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on a
Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web, when
you had very little chance of reading a document written on another computer,
another word processor, or another network." Tim Berners-Lee, 1996

Tania

2004-11-21, 12:17 pm

"Harlan Messinger" <hmessinger.removethis@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:5k1vp0te34l1lgcnt39c5plm9chd83o3l2@4ax.com...
> "Tania" <taniaj@nospam.com> wrote:
>
scenic[color=darkred]
>
> Please don't top-post. You can see from this what a nuisance it is to
> follow a thread when people write their responses out of order with
> the earlier messages. Write your response at the bottom, or underneath
> the part of the earlier message(s) to which it pertains.
>
> As to your question: background: transparent; ("transparent" is the
> opposite of "opaque").
>
wrong[color=darkred]
>
>
> --
> Harlan Messinger
> Remove the first dot from my e-mail address.
> Veuillez ôter le premier point de mon adresse de courriel.

Hey Harlan, you really might want to remove that stick out of your XXX. All
I asked for was some help and you've been nothing but rude. Oh, and you
might want to look THAT up in the dictonary.

Neal

2004-11-21, 7:16 pm

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 15:39:33 GMT, Tania <taniaj@nospam.com> wrote:

> Hey Harlan, you really might want to remove that stick out of your XXX.

If he has one there, I probably agree. It's a pain in the XXX.

> All
> I asked for was some help and you've been nothing but rude.

Nothing but rude would imply "never helpful". He did mention "transparent"
which is what you're looking for, so I doubt your assertion.

BTW, your bottom post was quite easy to find and reply to, thanks. One
other tip - trim parts of the post irrelevent to your next bit. Reduces
bandwidth and the detective-ness you and I must use when reading.

These conventions don't exist to bully new posters, they exist to
facilitate the process. Hope you appreciate that.

Tania

2004-11-21, 7:16 pm

> These conventions don't exist to bully new posters, they exist to
> facilitate the process. Hope you appreciate that.

You obviously didn't see his other message. Anyway, I know now not to look
here for help. Thanks.

Brian

2004-11-21, 7:16 pm

Tania wrote:

> Anyway, I know now not to look here for help. Thanks.

Good, then I won't bother to killfile you.

Bye.

--
Brian (remove "invalid" to email me)

Harlan Messinger

2004-11-21, 7:16 pm

>
>Hey Harlan, you really might want to remove that stick out of your XXX. All
>I asked for was some help and you've been nothing but rude. Oh, and you
>might want to look THAT up in the dictonary.

I'm sorry you consider helpful advice politely offered to be rude. I
suppose if you were in Washington, DC, and stopped me to ask how to
get onto I-95 South to get to New York, you'd consider me rude if I
told you that you needed to take I-95 *North* if you wanted to get
anywhere near New York. I suppose the courteous thing for me to do
would be to give you the directions to I-95 South and let it be your
problem when you didn't realize your mistake until a hundred miles
later.

As for the *nothing but* rude part, OK, I suppose that even the parts
where I gave you the information you were looking for was sheer
rudeness.

In short, you're mistaken about whose XXX the stick is up.

--
Harlan Messinger
Remove the first dot from my e-mail address.
Veuillez ôter le premier point de mon adresse de courriel.

Neal

2004-11-21, 11:18 pm

On Sun, 21 Nov 2004 18:17:29 GMT, Tania <taniaj@nospam.com> wrote:

>
> You obviously didn't see his other message.

I did, and it did not seem at all rude.

> Anyway, I know now not to look
> here for help. Thanks.

Sorry you're so easily offended.