Re: [css-d] IE footer problem - nct-res
Michael Clayton wrote:
> Thanks, I wasn't aware that NN 6.x were betas. I'll stop fretting now.
> Yesterday I went a bit insane and downloaded 20+ old browsers. My thinking
> was this, "It will be awesome if I can make my sites work in everything."
> The odds of anyone using an old Netscape are about as good as the odds of my
> head quantum tunneling through my desk as I bang it in frusteration. But
> there's always a chance.
>
> As for the font sizes, I'm still working off this old ALA article. It's two
> years old now, though.
>
> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/elastic/
>
> Is pt now preferred over ems?
Points may be preferred for print, but not the screen.
> I've not stayed in the loop as much as I
> should have. The advantage I see of ems with a 90~% font size is that the
> text is readable at any IE size, from smallest to largest. With ems, but
> without 90% font size in place, the actual size change from smallest to
> largest is far too drastic. Smallest becomes impossibly small, and largest
> is so big that it breaks the layout.
When setting with em's it is best to use percent on the body or html.
Not doing so triggers a bug in IE that causes the font-sizes to go a bit
goofy on + or - zoom.
> 90% font size makes the users' size
> changes significant, but not extreme. In IE, pt seems to have the same
> problem as px, it cannot be resized by the user. I would be happy to learn
> a better method, of course.
>
There are many methods that one may use to set fonts. And there are more
opinions than you can shake a stick at, about which method is best. See
the wiki for methods, and pick the version of poison that best suits
*your users.*.
FWIW, I use something like this:
body { font: 100%/1.2 sans-serif;}
With no font-size declared on the content-text p; and, with individual
selectors targeted with percent font-size, and line-height expressed as
a unit-less raw number,
(please see note below).
> --
> Michael Clayton
> www.twilighted.com
>
> On 3/8/06, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> almost certainly wrote:
>
> Do your browser stats actually show a material number of people using
>
>> those insecure, buggy, slow, old, beta browser versions? They need a
>> good hard push to upgrading to secure non-beta software. All Netscape
>> 6.x versions are betaware. Security issues alone rule out safely using
>> all Netscapes except the newest 8.whatever, and even that may be a risk,
>> since Netscape isn't too quick to implement the security fixes
>> implemented in Mozilla Project CVS.
>>
>> Different subject: Why don't you want users by default seeing their
>> choices of the font sizes and families that work best for them?
>> http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/michac1.jpg
>> http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/tmp/showcased.html
>> --
>> "Blessed are they whose ways are blameless, who walk according
>> to the law of the Lord."Psalm 119:11 NIV
>>
>> Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>>
>> Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth
>>
>>
>
>
BTW, it's a good idea to write below those you reply to, rather than
above them. This will help preserve the archives, and make it easier for
others to follow a logical thread.
Regards,
~davidLaakso
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7b2 testing hub -- 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/
Re: [css-d] IE footer problem - nct-res
Thanks, I wasn't aware that NN 6.x were betas. I'll stop fretting now. Yesterday I went a bit insane and downloaded 20+ old browsers. My thinking was this, "It will be awesome if I can make my sites work in everything." The odds of anyone using an old Netscape are about as good as the odds of my head quantum tunneling through my desk as I bang it in frusteration. But there's always a chance. As for the font sizes, I'm still working off this old ALA article. It's two years old now, though. http://www.alistapart.com/articles/elastic/ Is pt now preferred over ems? I've not stayed in the loop as much as I should have. The advantage I see of ems with a 90~% font size is that the text is readable at any IE size, from smallest to largest. With ems, but without 90% font size in place, the actual size change from smallest to largest is far too drastic. Smallest becomes impossibly small, and largest is so big that it breaks the layout. 90% font size makes the users' size changes significant, but not extreme. In IE, pt seems to have the same problem as px, it cannot be resized by the user. I would be happy to learn a better method, of course. -- Michael Clayton www.twilighted.com On 3/8/06, Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> almost certainly wrote: Do your browser stats actually show a material number of people using > those insecure, buggy, slow, old, beta browser versions? They need a > good hard push to upgrading to secure non-beta software. All Netscape > 6.x versions are betaware. Security issues alone rule out safely using > all Netscapes except the newest 8.whatever, and even that may be a risk, > since Netscape isn't too quick to implement the security fixes > implemented in Mozilla Project CVS. > > Different subject: Why don't you want users by default seeing their > choices of the font sizes and families that work best for them? > http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/michac1.jpg > http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/tmp/showcased.html > -- > "Blessed are they whose ways are blameless, who walk according > to the law of the Lord."Psalm 119:11 NIV > > Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 > > Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth > __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7b2 testing hub -- 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/
Re: [css-d] IE footer problem
Though peace now reigns in IExplorerville, danger is brewing in Netscapia. The same problem --but probably with a different cause-- is occuring in NN 6.0 and NN 6.01. It doesn't impair accessability at all, so normally I wouldn't worry too much about it. Unfortunately it is concealing the Copyright notice, a fatal flaw. http://www.twilighted.com/ntc/index2.html - This is the fixed version of the page, which works in all browsers I have tested except for the regrettable bug in NN 6.0 and NN 6.01. If you don't have these versions of NN and want them, you can dig them up at http://browsers.evolt.org/ I don't expect anyone to go to all that trouble on my account, but they're there if you want 'em. :) -- Michael Clayton www.twilighted.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7b2 testing hub -- 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/
Re: [css-d] IE footer problem
From: "Michael Clayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>I discovered that the following code is what breaks the site in IE.
>
>ul.nav {
>list-style: url(bullet_small.jpg);
>line-height: 1.5em;
>margin-left: 18px;
>padding: 0;
>}
>
>The list-style specifically is what kills it. Does anyone know why applying
>a bullet image mucks up IE? I guess that's a dumb question. ;) Does anyone
>know how to get around it? For now I'll just apply a background image, I
>guess.
You may have more success with a background image anyway, but there is another
trigger for this little problem, and that is the padding at the top of the
columns (probably specifically the left column). You can probably solve things
and get to keep your list-style-image with the following change to your CSS -
.column-one-content, .column-two-content, .column-three-content
{
padding: 0 6px 6px; /* remove top padding */
border: none;
color: #000;
margin-top: 6px; /* add top margin to compensate for padding loss */
}
I hope that helps,
~holly
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7b2 testing hub -- 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/
Re: [css-d] IE footer problem
> In IE 6, the footer is only pushed down by the left and right columns, but
> not the center column. This can be fixed by resizing the window, but the
> initial load is bugged.
Tough one. Try adding these lines at the end of your style,
* html .column-one {
margin-left: 25%; float: none;
}
* html .column-two {
position: absolute; top: 0.1em; width: 25%; margin: 0;
}
* html .column-three {
float: right; margin: 0.1em 2.5em 0 0;
}
You can see the result here;
http://kalkadoon.net/sandbox/ie-footer/footer.html
How many browsers sacrificed with this fix = not known :(
--
Cem Meric | http://www.kalkadoon.net/
Kalkadoon Corporate Solutions
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7b2 testing hub -- 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/
Re: [css-d] IE footer problem
I discovered that the following code is what breaks the site in IE.
ul.nav {
list-style: url(bullet_small.jpg);
line-height: 1.5em;
margin-left: 18px;
padding: 0;
}
The list-style specifically is what kills it. Does anyone know why applying
a bullet image mucks up IE? I guess that's a dumb question. ;) Does anyone
know how to get around it? For now I'll just apply a background image, I
guess.
--
Michael Clayton
www.twilighted.com
__
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
IE7b2 testing hub -- 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/
[css-d] IE footer problem
I nabbed this layout from the famous http://www.fu2k.org/alex/css/layouts/3Col_NN4_FMFM.mhtml My current progress is here: http://www.twilighted.com/ntc/ In IE 6, the footer is only pushed down by the left and right columns, but not the center column. This can be fixed by resizing the window, but the initial load is bugged. This bug is mentioned in the source code, sort of: CSS HACK: position:relative needed by IE6 otherwise the header and col 2 don't show up on initial rendering - they're there but you have to minimise the window or switch to another app and back to see the full effect. But IE5(pc) doesn't like it. And nor does NN4. NB. the use of pos:rel has to go way beyond skin-deep - any nested element that needs a background colour appears to require to be be relatively positioned That's not exactly the same bug I'm seeing, but it's similar. I've tried adding everything with a background color to the pos:rel list, but it hasn't helped. I've also tried removing the background color from everything, but that hasn't helped either. Another slightly more minor bug is that when the window is shrunk, IE 6 pushed the navs to the bottom of the page. Any advice for either problem? Thanks for any help. :) -- Michael Clayton www.twilighted.com __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7b2 testing hub -- 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/
