tedd wrote: > However, if one removes your graphic from your layout, then it's > easily read. I think that allowing the user to see/read a graphic via > scrolling is preferable than presenting something that they can't > read at any zoom level. Don't you think?
Yes, and I would give the user something completely different on a normal web page. I do prefer images to stay within their containers (columns), as long as a visually pleasing result can be achieved. This means I _do_ prefer to use max-width for images when that works, but the actual image dictates the actual solution. However, since that particular page is one of my test pages where solutions are _supposed_ to be tested to breaking-point and far beyond, that image isn't there to be read. It is there to break solution - and browsers. The image in question is a full-size (1280 x 635 pixels) screenshot of a similar page, and is included to test how well different browsers scale images. The result, which anyone can test out, is that few browsers can scale images well enough to at least make such an image _look ok_ - the positive exception being Opera. BTW: the relevant article for how to make 'conditional elastic' work across (most of) browser-land, is here... <http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_additions_14.html> regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
