Re: [css-d] Flexible parent container height?

[Peter Ankelein]

Georg/Barney,

Thanks. It looks like I missed clearing the parent blocks for some of the
sections. The site's working the way it should now though I think I need to
create some simple CSS tests for myself to get a firmer grasp on block level
elements, clearing floats (clearfix), overflow, etc. when laying things out.
I found myself trying them out during the build but wasn't getting the
results I wanted.

Regards,
Pete

-- 

*Peter Ankelein* | Sr. Creative Developer | Medidata Solutions
Worldwide 
79 Fifth Avenue, 8th Floor, New York, NY  10003
pankel...@mdsol.com | direct: +1 212 918 1785 | main: +1 212 918 1800


The information in this transmittal and any attachments are
confidential and intended only for the recipient(s) listed above.
You are hereby notified that any unauthorized distribution or copying
of this transmittal or its attachments is prohibited.
If you have received this transmittal in error, please notify the sender.
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] ADMIN: Reply setting (was Re: font-size html)

[Eric A. Meyer]

At 5:10 PM -0500 2/22/11, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Kevin A. Cameron wrote:

...

 PS - list mod: can you change the list options so the 'from' field is the
 mailing list instead of the recent poster?


   Or change Reply-to: to the list.


   The answer to both is "sorry, but no".  See 
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/wiki/Css_Discuss_List_Headers for more 
detail.


--
Eric A. Meyer (http://meyerweb.com/eric/), List Chaperone
"CSS is much too interesting and elegant to be not taken seriously."
  -- Martina Kosloff (http://mako4css.com/)
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Kevin A. Cameron wrote:

...

PS - list mod: can you change the list options so the 'from' field is the
mailing list instead of the recent poster?


   Or change Reply-to: to the list.

--
   Chris F.A. Johnson, 
   Author:
   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] ADMIN: font-size html

[Germán Martínez]

Sorry about that, perhaps I should've started asking about differences between 
styling  and  elements.

Thanks for all the interesting input :)

Best,
Germán

On Feb 22, 2011, at 4:49 PM, Eric A. Meyer wrote:

> Folks,
> 
>   I have to break this up because it's about to become the classic "should 
> the fonts be resized to something different than user default" flame war, and 
> we've gone years without having that here so I'm not about to start.  There 
> is some discussion on the wiki 
> (http://css-discuss.incutio.com/wiki/Font_Size) but there's no point having 
> the argument on the list.  So don't.  Thank you.
>   Germán, I'm not aware of any functional problems with sizing both 'html' 
> and 'body' in modern browsers.  Some old browsers didn't let 'html' be styled 
> but it's been so long I've forgotten which ones.  If anyone has come across 
> browser bugs regarding styling 'html', that would be interesting to hear.
> 
> -- 
> Eric A. Meyer (http://meyerweb.com/eric/), List Chaperone
> "CSS is much too interesting and elegant to be not taken seriously."
>  -- Martina Kosloff (http://mako4css.com/)
> __
> css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
> http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
> List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
> List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
> Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/



Germán Martínez, UX Designer

http://martinez.pe



__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[Kevin A. Cameron]

Just as a note, I ('and many other people') like small fonts in some cases.
Anything between 10px and 25px can be appropriate for main copy depending on
it's usage. You can't accommodate all users. And although
maximum readability is important, small compromises to meet design needs is
acceptable and expected.

Where you declare font-size and what size it is, is not as important as it
being able to scale up/down properly in the browser (ie, not breaking the
layout when a user does this).

Line height, font-face/weight, letter spacing, colour, line width and rag
can all play a factor in how readable your text is (and a million other
typographic terms I probably don't know).

Kevin

PS - list mod: can you change the list options so the 'from' field is the
mailing list instead of the recent poster?
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] ADMIN: font-size html

[Eric A. Meyer]

Folks,

   I have to break this up because it's about to become the classic 
"should the fonts be resized to something different than user 
default" flame war, and we've gone years without having that here so 
I'm not about to start.  There is some discussion on the wiki 
(http://css-discuss.incutio.com/wiki/Font_Size) but there's no point 
having the argument on the list.  So don't.  Thank you.
   Germán, I'm not aware of any functional problems with sizing both 
'html' and 'body' in modern browsers.  Some old browsers didn't let 
'html' be styled but it's been so long I've forgotten which ones.  If 
anyone has come across browser bugs regarding styling 'html', that 
would be interesting to hear.


--
Eric A. Meyer (http://meyerweb.com/eric/), List Chaperone
"CSS is much too interesting and elegant to be not taken seriously."
  -- Martina Kosloff (http://mako4css.com/)
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[Jukka K. Korpela]

Germán Martínez wrote:


I'm giving the body a 1.4em so it will be like 14px.


It will be whatever follows from the browser settings.


I know 14px is not an optimal font-size, but we're not discussing
readability here.


Maybe you aren't, but it's still relevant that your setting will often 
create that problem.



I'm doing this because my markup has nested sections and I can't use
section {font-size: 1.4em;} or can I?



   Why would you want to?


What do you mean with that?


You haven't explained what you wish to accomplish, still less why you would 
do that.


What is your reason for trying to enforce a font size other than the one 
chosen by the user, and exactly how are you trying to accomplish that 
mission? A URL would explain much more than snippets of code.


You originally wrote: "I've always used body {font-size: .625em;}". Are you 
seriously saying that you always try to make the font size just 62.5% of the 
user's preferred size? That would most commonly result in a size of 7.5pt, 
which is surely too small to read at least as copy text size. Well, maybe 
not to all people, but to the majority of mankind. So do you expect that 
most people have set their browser's basic font size to essentially larger 
than the factory default?


--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ 


__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[Germán Martínez]

On Feb 22, 2011, at 4:34 PM, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Germán Martínez wrote:
> 
>> I'm giving the body a 1.4em so it will be like 14px.
> 
>Why? That's too small for me (and many other people) to read.

I know 14px is not an optimal font-size, but we're not discussing 
readability here.

> 
>> I'm doing this because my markup has nested sections and I can't use
>> section {font-size: 1.4em;} or can I?

>Why would you want to?

What do you mean with that?
> 
>> On Feb 22, 2011, at 4:07 PM, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
>> 
>>> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Germán Martínez wrote:
>>> 
 Hello,
 
 I've always used body {font-size: .625em;} as a way to manage more easily 
 the font-size and I was wondering if using:
 
 html   {
 font-size: .625em;
 }
 
 body   {
 font-size: 1.4em;
 }
 
 will be a better solution, are there any known quirks for defining 
 font-size on the html element?
>>> 
>>> Why not: body { font-size: 100%; } ?
>>> 
>>> That way you will use the size that the user prefers rather than one
>>> that is probably too small to read comfortably (87.5% of the
>>> viewer's comfortable size).
> 
> -- 
>   Chris F.A. Johnson, 
>   Author:
>   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
>   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)

Best,
Germán

Germán Martínez, UX Designer

http://martinez.pe



__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Germán Martínez wrote:


I'm giving the body a 1.4em so it will be like 14px.


Why? That's too small for me (and many other people) to read.


I'm doing this because my markup has nested sections and I can't use
section {font-size: 1.4em;} or can I?


Why would you want to?


On Feb 22, 2011, at 4:07 PM, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:


On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Germán Martínez wrote:


Hello,

I've always used body {font-size: .625em;} as a way to manage more easily the 
font-size and I was wondering if using:

html{
font-size: .625em;
}

body{
font-size: 1.4em;
}

will be a better solution, are there any known quirks for defining font-size on 
the html element?


 Why not: body { font-size: 100%; } ?

 That way you will use the size that the user prefers rather than one
 that is probably too small to read comfortably (87.5% of the
 viewer's comfortable size).


--
   Chris F.A. Johnson, 
   Author:
   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[G.Sørtun]

 [...] are there any known quirks for defining font-size on the html
 element?


A small start-size may cause blown-up text-size throughout the page in 
some browsers when subjected to 'minimum font size', and IE7 and older 
IE-versions are buggy when starting with 'em'. Other than that it 
doesn't matter if you start sizing on the html or body element or 
anywhere else, and/or what size and unit you choose.


The .625em (supposed to equal 10px when it was invented) as "start" 
value has caused millions of pages across the web to blow up or break 
over the years, and that small start-value doesn't work one bit better 
today.


I always start at browser-default (=100%), either by declaring that as 
"start" value or by not declaring anything to "start" on. Has always 
worked 100% in all browsers, and always will.


regards
Georg

__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[Germán Martínez]

I'm giving the body a 1.4em so it will be like 14px.
I'm doing this because my markup has nested sections and I can't use section 
{font-size: 1.4em;} or can I?


On Feb 22, 2011, at 4:07 PM, Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

> On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Germán Martínez wrote:
> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> I've always used body {font-size: .625em;} as a way to manage more easily 
>> the font-size and I was wondering if using:
>> 
>> html {
>> font-size: .625em;
>> }
>> 
>> body {
>> font-size: 1.4em;
>> }
>> 
>> will be a better solution, are there any known quirks for defining font-size 
>> on the html element?
> 
>  Why not: body { font-size: 100%; } ?
> 
>  That way you will use the size that the user prefers rather than one
>  that is probably too small to read comfortably (87.5% of the
>  viewer's comfortable size).
> 
> -- 
>   Chris F.A. Johnson, 
>   Author:
>   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
>   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)



Germán Martínez, UX Designer

http://martinez.pe



__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] font-size html

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Germán Martínez wrote:


Hello,

I've always used body {font-size: .625em;} as a way to manage more easily the 
font-size and I was wondering if using:

html{
font-size: .625em;
}

body{
font-size: 1.4em;
}

will be a better solution, are there any known quirks for defining font-size on 
the html element?


  Why not: body { font-size: 100%; } ?

  That way you will use the size that the user prefers rather than one
  that is probably too small to read comfortably (87.5% of the
  viewer's comfortable size).

--
   Chris F.A. Johnson, 
   Author:
   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] font-size html

[Germán Martínez]

Hello,

I've always used body {font-size: .625em;} as a way to manage more easily the 
font-size and I was wondering if using:

html{
font-size: .625em;
}

body{
font-size: 1.4em;
}

will be a better solution, are there any known quirks for defining font-size on 
the html element?



Germán Martínez, UX Designer

http://martinez.pe



__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] styling table to have blank rows?

[Chris F.A. Johnson]

On Tue, 22 Feb 2011, Tom Livingston wrote:


If only I could stay on this page long enough to inspect it, before
being redirected to lynneheller.com


   


   Oops! I put the refresh on the wrong page. Now fixed.

--
   Chris F.A. Johnson, 
   Author:
   Pro Bash Programming: Scripting the GNU/Linux Shell (2009, Apress)
   Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] styling table to have blank rows?

[Tom Livingston]

If only I could stay on this page long enough to inspect it, before
being redirected to lynneheller.com

>    
>



-- 

Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic |
ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

[css-d] Test on thead, tbody, tfoot and background images

[Gabriele Romanato]

Results are pretty frustrating:

http://onwebdev.blogspot.com/2011/02/css-thead-tbody-tfoot-and-background.html

have you ever tested something similar? find anything better? a better  
fix? let me know :-)


HTH.


http://www.css-zibaldone.com
http://www.css-zibaldone.com/test/  (English)
http://www.css-zibaldone.com/articles/  (English)
http://onwebdev.blogspot.com/  (English)








__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Flexible parent container height?

[Barney Carroll]

Georg is right, but overflow:hidden can be overkill — wrapping the
contents is an incidental property of setting overflow, the intended
function of which is to clip all content beyond it: any relative,
fixed or absolutely positioned elements nested within the block that
may want to render outside of it will be cropped as a result. If you
have tooltips or modal panels generated inside for instance, their
functionality will be impaired.

IE is the only browser to have a specific way of setting the 'wrap
contents' aspect without (too many) other effects, by setting the
proprietary zoom:1 CSS property. Other browsers require what is known
as the 'clearfix' hack — triggering the equivalent of a clear:both
element after the contents.

The following class [1] will address this:

clearfix{*zoom:1}

clearfix:after{clear:both;display:block;visibility:hidden;overflow:hidden;height:0
!important;line-height:0;font-size:xx-large;content:" x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x "}

[1] ripped off of Nicole Sullivan's oocss grids framework:
https://github.com/stubbornella/oocss/blob/master/core/grid/grids.css

Regards,
Barney Carroll

barney.carr...@gmail.com
07594 506 381



On 22 February 2011 09:23, "G.Sørtun"  wrote:
>>  How can I get the height of a parent container to re-size according
>>  to any nested container(s) content similar to the way tables work?
>>  Here's a sample page that demonstrates the issue:
>>
>>  http://www.mdsol.com/conferences/mug2/amug.html
>
> For your example you don't need "table behavior". Declaring 'overflow:
> hidden' on the parent container and avoid setting a height on it, will make
> it expand in height to contain all its children.
>
> Apart from that: CSS tables work the way HTML tables work - in all the
> latest browser-versions.
>
> Here 4 "non-table equal height column" methods are linked to, in addition to
> CSS table being described and demo'ed...
> 
> ...with workarounds for old IE6/7 included for good measure.
>
> regards
>        Georg
>
>
>
> __
> css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
> http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
> List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
> List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
> Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
>
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Re: [css-d] Flexible parent container height?

[G.Sørtun]

 How can I get the height of a parent container to re-size according
 to any nested container(s) content similar to the way tables work?
 Here's a sample page that demonstrates the issue:

 http://www.mdsol.com/conferences/mug2/amug.html


For your example you don't need "table behavior". Declaring 'overflow: 
hidden' on the parent container and avoid setting a height on it, will 
make it expand in height to contain all its children.


Apart from that: CSS tables work the way HTML tables work - in all the 
latest browser-versions.


Here 4 "non-table equal height column" methods are linked to, in 
addition to CSS table being described and demo'ed...


...with workarounds for old IE6/7 included for good measure.

regards
Georg



__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/