asked on

Problem Hiding Disabled Vertical Scrollbar in IE7

I'm trying to hide the disabled vertical scroll bar to unify the appearance of the web page regardless of whether it's viewed in IE7 or FF3.

If I put 'html { overflow: auto; }" in the head of the html sheet it works.

However, as part of trying to eliminate cross-browser issues, I'm trying to use a global reset css style sheet. Why does placing the same 'html { overflow: auto; }" statement not work when it's placed at the bottom of the referenced stylesheet (attached).

ps. I commented it out of the html head in the attached code to illustrate.

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
 
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
<title>index.html</title>
 
<link href="../css/global_reset_mgq.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />
<!--<style type="text/css">
html {
overflow: auto;
}
</style>-->
 
</head>
 
<body>
 
<h1>this is h1</h1>
<h2>this is h2</h2>
<h3>this is h3</h3>
<h4>this is h4</h4>
<h5>this is h5</h5>
<h6>this is h6</h6>
 
<p>this is p</p>
 
<div style="border: 1px solid black;">this is a plain div with a border around it</div>
 
</body>
</html>

Open in new window

global-reset-css.txt

qwerty021600

Because HTML renders CSS the way they are placed as HTML is the starting Tag so it's better to define it properties initially. As we do when we call Script in a page. It's always advisable to use <script> tag in the head section. Same goes for HTML tags as well.

ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION

David S.

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

SOLUTION

Michel Plungjan

membership

This solution is only available to members.

To access this solution, you must be a member of Experts Exchange.

Start Free Trial

qeng

ASKER

Thx Kravimir. Not sure if you see my last post when you get this or not but I'd goofed-up the path as you suspected. The location and order of the rule in this case is irrelevant.