How do I get a background in Front Page 2003 to be fixed?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KathyTweety
  • Start date Start date
K

KathyTweety

Hi, I am trying to put a background on a new page with "Front page 2003".
And all I keep getting is the background to repeat. I want the background to
just show my image just once on the page. How do I go about that?

Thanks, Katy
 
Use CSS -

body { background-repeat:no-repeat; }

(I assume you are talking about a background on the body)
 
Murray said:
Use CSS -

body { background-repeat:no-repeat; }

(I assume you are talking about a background on the body)
Click to expand...
Hi Murray,
I can't do CSS with FFP2003 There has to be somewhere in the program that I
need to check to make the background of a page to be fixed.

Katy
 
I can't do CSS with FFP2003

Sure you can. If I still had it installed, I could tell you how! Worst
case would be you could just do it manually by changing this -

</head>

to this -

<style type="text/css">
body { background-repeat:no-repeat; }
</style>
</head>
 
Murray, When I try to put in the background with FP2003 this is what I get:

</head>
<body background="darktolight.jpg" style="background-attachment: fixed">
</body>

I'm using a 1inch square. Starting with a dark going to light. I'm getting
long lines of this pattern repeated about 10 times. What I'm wanting is the
whole bg to start from one left side dark going to right side light.
sorry it sometimes takes me awhile to get back to you. We are getting ice
on everything and some times my internet is slow.

Katy
 
Try the manual instructions I gave you, please.

background-attachment is NOT the style you want to use. You want
background-repeat. What you are describing below is precisely what you
would get with your code using only background-attachment.
 
==================
I can't do CSS with FFP2003 There has to be somewhere in the program that I
need to check to make the background of a page to be fixed.
Click to expand...
==============

Kathy, yes you can use css with fp2003. If you download Top Style Lite from

http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/tslite/ and it can be integrated with
FP2003. Not as easy to use as Expression Web but it does work as I used it
for a few years.

Third on the list is the download for TS Lite and integrate with fp by
following these instructions
http://www.bradsoft.com/topstyle/thirdparty/frontpage.asp

Pat
 
If you really don't want to use CSS...

Create your graphic large enough so that it can only "tile" once, e.g., 1024
x 1200.

I suggest you format it as a GIF with no dithering.

GRB
 
Create your graphic large enough so that it can only "tile" once, e.g.,
1024 x 1200.
Click to expand...

Then it will tile on a larger browser viewport. You are trying to nail
jelly to the wall with this, in addition to slugging the page with a
potentially enormous image.
 
With this type of graphic, I believe the graphic needs to be very wide (so
that it is probable that it is larger than any foreseen viewport),
but it doesn't need to be very tall (and will tile down the viewport). That
will cut down the size of the graphic considerably.
CKL
(and please disagree if I am incorrect. That way I learn something
too...........)
 
Why would it need to be 'very wide'? It only needs to be wide enough to do
what it's supposed to do, doncha know? 8)
 
I thought about replying to this thread, but I saw others do so .

Murray,
Doesn't it need to be wide enough so that it doesn't tile horizontally and
since one doesn't know how wide the viewer's viewport is, aren't we back to
"nailing jelly to the wall"? <g>
 
I guess because of the "type" of background that is described.
As I understand it, Kathy wants the color to go from dark to light across
the width of the page. However, the image is small so is repeated. It
needs to go from dark to light across the whole page - no matter what that
width would be.
However, vertically, it would be fine to repeat, as the dark would still be
on the left and then go across getting lighter.
I have seen this effect, so assume that is what is being discussed -
although I could be wrong on what I visualize. It is how "I" would describe
it if that's the effect I want, but may be interpreting incorrectly.
 
==============
CKL said:
I guess because of the "type" of background that is described.
As I understand it, Kathy wants the color to go from dark to light across
the width of the page. However, the image is small so is repeated. It
needs to go from dark to light across the whole page - no matter what that
width would be.
Click to expand...
=============

Could you not do something like this but the opposite of what I have done.
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gearyfamily/images/gradient-bkgrnd.jpg
is the background image. It is tiled horizontally but the background color
is the lightest color of the gradient. That way the dark color is at the
top, which blends to the lighter color, and ends with the background that
the image does not cover the same as the lightest color.

Page itself http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~gearyfamily/

style rule

body {

color: #2e2d2c;

background: #e3c9bf url('images/gradient-bkgrnd.jpg') repeat-x;

font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;

text-align: center;

margin: 0px;

padding: 0px;

}
How wide to make the gradient image but it would not have to be but 5px
high by however wide with the background color the color of the lightest
end.

pat
 
I wasn't the one asking, but you show exactly what I was trying to explain,
but as you said - the gradient going from top to bottom rather than side to
side. (It should work the other way also - just tile vertically - if the
image is wide rather than tall, and wide enough to cover most viewports.)
It seems original poster was hoping to "stretch" the small image to cover
the whole page
(I hope Kathy doesn't miss your illustration )
 
Whichever way you repeat the tiling, you still won't know the viewer's
viewport size.

You can repeat-x with an image 1px wide and h in height
OR
You can repeat-y with an image w wide and 1 px in height

But you don't know what h and w the viewer is using, so it can only be
guaranteed to fit in one direction. I was thinking that JS could be used to
solve this by setting
w = screen.availWidth or h = screen.availHeight as the case may be

But height and width can't be set for background images
(http://www.w3schools.com/htmldom/dom_obj_style.asp#background ) so that is
not a solution.
 
If it is the background for the whole page - as in Patricia's example - does
it have to exactly "fit"?
Tried my best to make hers look "wrong" but I can't.
Oh well - I starting looking into this group because I need to learn
"everything"!
Just thought I was familiar with this concept working in html stationery so
thought what she wanted (using her very small image) was being
misinterpreted by some in the beginning.
Back to lurking mode!
 
CKL
I hope I didn't put you off. Many times, I get responses stating that I am
wrong, and it can annoy. Sometimes it is because of my lack of knowledge,
and other times, the posters are just trying to show off their greater
knowledge. Why I keep posting can be a mystery, but it might be because
occasionally, as I did today, I get a response "Thank you Trevor. That is
exactly what I was looking for."

In this particular case, I am just saying it is not always as easy as it
sounds and people like Murray, who have great experience, also say the same.
To add to the relevance of my comments, I did not actually keep the original
post so I was reading between the lines.

But, if it works, as you say it does, then my misgivings are unfounded.

Please do keep posting and not just lurking.

BTW,
I have learnt a lot (not yet "everything") from this group.
 
If you are going to fill a page with a tiling image, it would be much better
to make the image 20px wide and 1000px tall, or vice versa, to reduce the
load on the browser. Such images are very light weight.
 
Back
Top