typography.css and HTML block
Permalink
using the following in html block (global)
wanted the link default to be white so changed typography.css line 33 to show white
link does not change colour so checked site on chrome and safari using inspect element and it keeps showing that the code has not changed. Have cleared cache on site as well as browsers etc . Anyone experienced this where the Typography is not updating ?
I even deleted the Typography.css to see if it was the problem and the colour changed so placed back with same coding and the link does not change.
attached screen copies
<ul id="myRoundabout"> <li> <img src="http://www.mysite.co.uk/files/1413/1971/9861/Dreamy_s.jpg" width='400' height='235' title='dreamy template' alt='Roundabout Gallery' /> <span> <a href="http://www.mysite.co.uk/index.php/templates/dreamy" title="Google Main Page" >select</a> / .........................
wanted the link default to be white so changed typography.css line 33 to show white
a:link, a:visited, strong, b { /*customize_content_link*/color: #FFFFFF;/*customize_content_link*/ }
link does not change colour so checked site on chrome and safari using inspect element and it keeps showing that the code has not changed. Have cleared cache on site as well as browsers etc . Anyone experienced this where the Typography is not updating ?
I even deleted the Typography.css to see if it was the problem and the colour changed so placed back with same coding and the link does not change.
attached screen copies
Hi Beebs93
I used the HTML instead of the content block as all I needed to imlement was some script and HTML so thought this would be best.
The bit I am confused on is that the inspect element (using Chrome) seems to show the css for the Div concerned coming from the typography.css even though I am using HTML block. If I say remove the typography.css file then link colour changes so in effect it must be the typography.css that is affecting this.
I used the HTML instead of the content block as all I needed to imlement was some script and HTML so thought this would be best.
The bit I am confused on is that the inspect element (using Chrome) seems to show the css for the Div concerned coming from the typography.css even though I am using HTML block. If I say remove the typography.css file then link colour changes so in effect it must be the typography.css that is affecting this.
Ok, let's back up a step.
Are you using the HTML block or the HTML source window of a content block (I don't think it matters off the top of my head, but curious)?
Are you manually including the typography.css in your header.php file (or elsewhere)?
Unless I'm missing something basic (it is Monday, after all) the typography.css rules only apply to when you're in the visual editor.
Are you using the HTML block or the HTML source window of a content block (I don't think it matters off the top of my head, but curious)?
Are you manually including the typography.css in your header.php file (or elsewhere)?
Unless I'm missing something basic (it is Monday, after all) the typography.css rules only apply to when you're in the visual editor.
Are you using the HTML block or the HTML source window of a content block (I don't think it matters off the top of my head, but curious)?
HTML Block which contains the UL and the Li that has the link.
Are you manually including the typography.css in your header.php file (or elsewhere)?
its included in the header php
Unless I'm missing something basic (it is Monday, after all) the typography.css rules only apply to when you're in the visual editor.
It seems also on the html block. I added the following on a standard theme using the html block and it shows it is using the typography.css
HTML Block which contains the UL and the Li that has the link.
Are you manually including the typography.css in your header.php file (or elsewhere)?
its included in the header php
Unless I'm missing something basic (it is Monday, after all) the typography.css rules only apply to when you're in the visual editor.
It seems also on the html block. I added the following on a standard theme using the html block and it shows it is using the typography.css
<span> <a href="http://www.google.co.uk" title="select " >select</a> </span>
"its included in the header php"
If it's manually being included in the header.php file then take it out as it supposed to get loaded automatically whenever a visual editor window is launched. The main.css is the only CSS file from your theme folder you should be including in your header.php file (of course, any 3rd party plugins' CSS or CSS frameworks files can also be added - but they are all for the end presentation of the page; not for the concrete5 core itself).
If it's manually being included in the header.php file then take it out as it supposed to get loaded automatically whenever a visual editor window is launched. The main.css is the only CSS file from your theme folder you should be including in your header.php file (of course, any 3rd party plugins' CSS or CSS frameworks files can also be added - but they are all for the end presentation of the page; not for the concrete5 core itself).
if i look at the default theme included in the core it has typo.css included in the header.php so am confused as to why i need to take my ref out ?
TBH, I don't know exactly why it's there. My guess is that typography rules were meant to be placed in that file and the rest to go into main.css then the visual editor would take those typography rules into the visual editor (so you wouldn't have to style both your site and the editor).
If you asked me now, I couldn't tell you why I first removed the typography.css file, but I guess it was to keep the main CSS all in once place and not worry about the visual editor's look as much.
Maybe I've been a bad developer and did something I shouldn't? Either way, I'm in favour of keeping it all in once file and using proper ordering of rules to determine precedence and inheritance.
If you asked me now, I couldn't tell you why I first removed the typography.css file, but I guess it was to keep the main CSS all in once place and not worry about the visual editor's look as much.
Maybe I've been a bad developer and did something I shouldn't? Either way, I'm in favour of keeping it all in once file and using proper ordering of rules to determine precedence and inheritance.
Any changes you want to make to control the look of the HTML *after* you add it will have to be done in your theme's main.css as normal.
Out of curiosity, why aren't you using the content block?