?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Zinzibar - Graphic Resources
Mod Post: Sponser + Accounts and my layouts 
19th-Jun-2006 09:16 pm
I know that my layout doesn't work with Sponsor . This has everything to do with how LJ adds those ads to your journal. For the record, I only create the css with a free account in mind. This is because only free accounts and paid/perm accounts are void of any ads. I don't take into consideration Sponsor accounts because it is still in beta and changes all the time. This ends up making the layout look like crap.

I'm sorry but I have no solution for this problem. This is one of those times when you just have to decide what is more important. Sponsor features or a customized layout and no features. Or if you wish to have everything, a paid account.


EDIT: I'm sorry but officially the layouts are as is. No way around it. You cannot alter in any way shape or form the ad css. If you try LJ disables your css sheet.


/* suspect CSS: trying to alter LiveJournal ad placement */


So sorry guys. Can't have it all.
Comments 
20th-Jun-2006 02:07 pm (UTC)
I've been doing a bit of work with Sponsored+ accounts lately. Is this something I can help with? What goes wrong with a S+ account?
20th-Jun-2006 02:26 pm (UTC)
If you want to see the problem in action, you can check out my journal zinzibar_mod For some reason, since they added that extra advert ontop of the skyscraper, it stretches out the whole layout. It is almost impossible to control the css for that site without messing it up and in turn violating the TOS.

But if you can figure out a solution, that would be great. I look at it for 5 minutes and decided it wasn't worth the hassle. :)
20th-Jun-2006 02:37 pm (UTC)
By adding a width to the entryholder and the footer-menu you can work around it. Playing with your stylesheet, a width of 545px for the entryholder and 530px for the footer-menu (the background is still gray on the footer menu, BTW) it all fit in the pageblock nicely. The bottom ads still cause a horizontal scroll, but it's not as bad as before.
20th-Jun-2006 02:36 pm (UTC)
It seems it is the long google text add at the bottom of the page. (That they will hopefully get rid of if the rumors are true.)

.ljad5linkunit
{
width:300px;
overflow:hidden;
margin-left: auto;
margin-right: auto;
}


Seems to fix it but it also hides half of it which is against the TOS so people would have to do it at their own risk.
20th-Jun-2006 02:39 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I tried that first. You can acutally get rid of it altogether, but that's silly. If people choose S+, they choose ads. I'm trying to make some more templates for everyone (S+ included) and have not gotten around to S2 quite yet.
20th-Jun-2006 02:43 pm (UTC)
I think I found a solution. It may take a bit as it goes through the proxies to show up on my journal and I'm not sure about compatibility.

I made the advert an absolute position of bottom:0; left:0; and then added padding to the .pageblock so that it wasn't on top of anything.

I agree with you that people need to bite the bullet and just understand you can't have it all but the person in me that has to problem solve anything cannot leave it ALONE!

I appreciate you helping me out.
20th-Jun-2006 02:48 pm (UTC)
Okay. officially you cannot alter any of the css code for the ads. It won't go through the cleaner. So people will have to put up with not having as many choices in s2 layouts.

/* suspect CSS: trying to alter LiveJournal ad placement */
20th-Jun-2006 02:54 pm (UTC)
Ah, I guess that makes sense. It looks "OK" with the width applied to the entries. it's not perfect, but it would be better. It stinks that the bottom ad is inside the entryholder. That is the problem. I have one other idea I'm going to try out.
20th-Jun-2006 03:24 pm (UTC)
Ok, this is what I have. I don't know if it will get by the cleaner or not. Again, it's a "use at your own risk" proposition:


body{
overflow-x:hidden;
}

iframe {
width:55%;
float:left;
}

table div div div{
width:75%;
clear:both;
}

table div.sidebar div div{
width:auto !important;
}
20th-Jun-2006 05:48 pm (UTC)
Anonymous
Great, when I get home from work, I'll try it out on my account and see what happens. This was very sweet of you. ;)

-Zin
20th-Jun-2006 07:39 pm (UTC)
Nope. :( It chokes on the iframe. I think we can safely say that those who use support do so by giving up the flexibility of their journal looks.
20th-Jun-2006 08:07 pm (UTC)
Bah. I thought for sure it would work. Oh well.
This page was loaded Aug 17th 2019, 11:21 pm GMT.