Thanks for the reminder Daniel! I was going to get to that next. If you try out
the file I attached, you'll see there are still a few small issues I need to
work out. So, it's a work in progress.
Daniel Kunkel wrote:
Hi Adrian
This is great, but I think Chris Howe had a great idea a little while
back when he talked about defining text in em so browsers can adjust the
font size.
Thanks
Daniel
-----
This is a vague recollection of things read/done on
css. Instead of setting the font size in pixels, you
"should" use em units. The most common approach is
the following:
BODY {
font-size: 62.5%;
}
This makes 16px = 10px and so now:
0.8 em = 8 px
1 em = 10px
1.2 em = 12 px
1.4 em = 14 px
and so forth. em instead of pixels is used because
IE/Win doesn't allow the user to resize text that is
set in px. This may or may not have been
fixed/changed in IE7, but it's a much easier
convention to apply consistently than is pixels.
----
On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 14:17 -0800, Adrian Crum wrote:
I've spent the last two days consolidating the two main css files and cleaning
up the target file. There were a lot of duplicate and unnecessary assignments. I
also found font sizes expressed in points AND pixels, so I changed them all to
pixels. I also changed color names to color values - so that a simple global
replacement of color values will change the look of the site.
So far, the new maincss.css file renders almost exactly the same. The only
difference seems to be in INPUT box widths.
I have attached what I've done so far - if you'd like to take a look at it.
Thanks for the book recommendation, btw. I'll definitely pick up a book or two.
So far I've been able to answer all of my questions with online CSS references.
David E. Jones wrote:
Adrian,
I see, no problem. Yeah, it was a project started and never finished!
You'll probably also notice that there is still some table-based
formatting on the productdetail page that is a bit evil (well, and
ugly!) and needs to be converted to a CSS-based layout like much of the
other stuff was.
-David
On Jan 12, 2007, at 2:56 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
David,
Thanks for the reply! I understand completely what the ID attribute
is for. I was questioning why it was done differently than the rest
of the file.
David E. Jones wrote:
This was part of the experimentation with the Zen CSS Garden way of
doing CSS. Using id attributes to mark regions and styling
implicitly is the way we want to go in the future. If you're
planning on working on CSS stuff and you haven't read through The
Zen of CSS Design, I highly recommend it. Really cool stuff. There
is a link to the book on the Docs & Books page on ofbiz.apache.org.
-David
On Jan 12, 2007, at 2:42 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
In the maincss.css file, Just below the comment
/* ===== Product Detail Styles ===== */
are six css classes defined using IDs instead of class names. Is
there a reason for that?
