Re: [css-d] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[cr.vegelin]

Hi Rob,
What about http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_units.asp ?
HTH, Cor


- Original Message - 
From: "Rob Emenecker" 
To: "'css-d'" 
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 1:49 PM
Subject: [css-d] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs


> Hi all,
>
> I am looking for a few good web locations that explain and clarify the
> differences between EMs and PERCENTS, and recommendations for using one or
> the other. I do not want the W3C specification, I know where that is. I am
> looking for practical information in the real world application of one
> versus the other.
>
> Thanks!
>
> ...Rob
>
> P.S. I've also posted this message to the Yahoo-Dreamweaver list. Please
> excuse the cross-post; I am trying to cover my bases.
>
> __
> css-discuss [cs...@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 [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Bobby Jack]

--- On Thu, 3/19/09, Rob Emenecker  wrote:

> I am looking for a few good web locations that explain and
> clarify the
> differences between EMs and PERCENTS

Rob, do you mean:

a) For font sizing
b) For layout
c) In general (i.e. including both the above)

There are a few quite considerable differences if you're talking anything more 
than basic syntax.

- Bobby
__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Virgilio Quilario]

> Hi all,
>
> I am looking for a few good web locations that explain and clarify the
> differences between EMs and PERCENTS, and recommendations for using one or
> the other. I do not want the W3C specification, I know where that is. I am
> looking for practical information in the real world application of one
> versus the other.
>
> Thanks!
>
> ...Rob
>

Probably you are looking for this
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=EmVsPercentWidths

Cheers,

Virgil
http://www.jampmark.com
__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Rob Emenecker]

> Rob, do you mean:
> 
> a) For font sizing
> b) For layout
> c) In general (i.e. including both the above)
> 
> There are a few quite considerable differences if you're 
> talking anything more than basic syntax.

More for (a), but also (b). I understand the basic principles behind them
both, however I am trying to come to grips with when/why to use one over the
other. That is especially true when it comes to font sizing and the box
model.

...Rob

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[David Laakso]

Rob Emenecker wrote:
> Hi all,
>  
> I am looking for a few good web locations that explain and clarify the
> differences between EMs and PERCENTS, and recommendations for using one or
> the other. I do not want the W3C specification, I know where that is. I am
> looking for practical information in the real world application of one
> versus the other. 
>  
> Thanks!
>  
> ...Rob
>  
>
>   

Why limit yourself to one or the other :-) ? Need of the moment 
determines structure-- pixel, em, or percent. And I suppose, if push 
came to shove,  you could go for broke and employ the best advantages of 
pixel, em, and percent widths all within the same layout structure. 
Georg Sortun [1] seems to pull it off quite well.



-- 

A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.

http://chelseacreekstudio.com/

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Rob Emenecker]

> Why limit yourself to one or the other :-) ? 

LOL. I'm not. I just want a solid understanding of how EM vs. PERCENT is
them, so that if I am using one, the other, or a mixture, I don't lose my
mind when results are not what I expect.

I think Tim's concise explanation helped with that understanding.


Rob Emenecker @ Hairy Dog Digital
www.hairydogdigital.com
 
Please note: Return e-mail messages are only accepted from discussion groups
that this e-mail address subscribes to. All other messages are automatically
deleted.
 

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Kenny Leu]

Hi all!

I'm a long-time stalker of this thread, first-time poster.  :)

I'm very curious about this question as well...it was always my
understanding that, analogously,  em --> decimal & percent --> percent.  Is
there a subtlety that I'm missing?

Kenny



On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 7:31 AM, David Laakso
wrote:

> Rob Emenecker wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I am looking for a few good web locations that explain and clarify the
> > differences between EMs and PERCENTS, and recommendations for using one
> or
> > the other. I do not want the W3C specification, I know where that is. I
> am
> > looking for practical information in the real world application of one
> > versus the other.
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > ...Rob
> >
> >
> >
>
> Why limit yourself to one or the other :-) ? Need of the moment
> determines structure-- pixel, em, or percent. And I suppose, if push
> came to shove,  you could go for broke and employ the best advantages of
> pixel, em, and percent widths all within the same layout structure.
> Georg Sortun [1] seems to pull it off quite well.
> 
>
>
> --
>
> A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.
>
> http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
>
> __
> css-discuss [cs...@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 [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Kenny Leu]

D'oh!

I should've read that link above before posting...

To redeem myself:
EM:
- always relative to font size
- fonts affect absolute widths of things set with EM! (e.g. could cause
horizontal scroll)
- however, relative widths are not affected.
e.g. if a particular sentence fits all on one line, it will always fit on
one line even if the font is changed to be very large.

PERCENT:
- always relative to containing block (could be parent font as well)
- this means that containing blocks can get very crowded.





On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 8:48 AM, Kenny Leu  wrote:

> Hi all!
>
> I'm a long-time stalker of this thread, first-time poster.  :)
>
> I'm very curious about this question as well...it was always my
> understanding that, analogously,  em --> decimal & percent --> percent.  Is
> there a subtlety that I'm missing?
>
> Kenny
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 7:31 AM, David Laakso <
> da...@chelseacreekstudio.com> wrote:
>
>> Rob Emenecker wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I am looking for a few good web locations that explain and clarify the
>> > differences between EMs and PERCENTS, and recommendations for using one
>> or
>> > the other. I do not want the W3C specification, I know where that is. I
>> am
>> > looking for practical information in the real world application of one
>> > versus the other.
>> >
>> > Thanks!
>> >
>> > ...Rob
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Why limit yourself to one or the other :-) ? Need of the moment
>> determines structure-- pixel, em, or percent. And I suppose, if push
>> came to shove,  you could go for broke and employ the best advantages of
>> pixel, em, and percent widths all within the same layout structure.
>> Georg Sortun [1] seems to pull it off quite well.
>> 
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.
>>
>> http://chelseacreekstudio.com/
>>
>> __
>> css-discuss [cs...@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 [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Climis, Tim]

> I think Tim's concise explanation helped with that understanding.

I didn't send that to the entire list, because the website that got sent out 
right before I finished it said pretty much the same thing, but if it was that 
helpful, I'll share it with everyone.

Rules of thumb:

"em" is like a variable that means "font-size." if the base font-size is 16px 
(default) then 2em is 32px, .5em is 8px.

The difference is what the percentage is relative to.

For font-sizing, the percent is relative to the font-size, so they both do the 
exact same thing. Font-size:2em is the same as font-size:200%. Use which ever 
you like.  It doesn't matter.

For box sizing, em is still the font-size.  But percent is relative to the 
container.  If you want the box size to change with the font use ems. (ex. if 
you have a box that you want to always display 3 lines of text then set it to 
3.6em -- the height of a line is generally 1.2em, unless you specifically set 
it to be otherwise)

If you want the box to change size with the screen, use percents (height:50% is 
50% of the parent container - sometimes the window, sometimes something else, 
never the font-size)

---Tim

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Sarah Atkinson]

On 3/19/09 10:31 AM, "David Laakso"  wrote:
 
> 
> Why limit yourself to one or the other :-) ? Need of the moment
> determines structure-- pixel, em, or percent. And I suppose, if push
> came to shove,  you could go for broke and employ the best advantages of
> pixel, em, and percent widths all within the same layout structure.
> Georg Sortun [1] seems to pull it off quite well.
> 
> 


I'm very interested in this topic too. I feel it's important but I still
don't have a firm grasp on it's roots. Exactly when is the best time to uses
witch? I'd like to see Georg's thoughts on the subject. And maybe Erics's if
he can be persuaded to comment.
Sarah


__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Rob Emenecker]

> I didn't send that to the entire list, because the website 
> that got sent out right before I finished it said pretty much 
> the same thing, but if it was that helpful, I'll share it 
> with everyone.

Lol. True. But I read your message and responded before checking out the web
site link.


Rob Emenecker @ Hairy Dog Digital
www.hairydogdigital.com
 
Please note: Return e-mail messages are only accepted from discussion groups
that this e-mail address subscribes to. All other messages are automatically
deleted.

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Michael Stevens]

-Original Message-
From: Climis, Tim [mailto:tcli...@indiana.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 9:04 AM
To: 'Rob Emenecker'; 'David Laakso'
Cc: 'css-d'
Subject: Re: [css-d] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

For box sizing, em is still the font-size.  But percent is relative to the
container.  If you want the box size to change with the font use ems. (ex.
if you have a box that you want to always display 3 lines of text then set
it to 3.6em -- the height of a line is generally 1.2em, unless you
specifically set it to be otherwise)

If you want the box to change size with the screen, use percents (height:50%
is 50% of the parent container - sometimes the window, sometimes something
else, never the font-size)

--

GREAT explanation!

So, is it uncommon, or bad practice, to use both in this situation?

{height: 7.2em; width: 20%;}

To give you a menu with six lines (no matter what size type) but still only
occupying 20% of the parent container so it scales with window size.

Mike

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Climis, Tim]

> So, is it uncommon, or bad practice, to use both in this situation?

> {height: 7.2em; width: 20%;}

> To give you a menu with six lines (no matter what size type) but still only
> occupying 20% of the parent container so it scales with window size.

Personally, that's my default way of laying out a page: vertical dimensions in 
ems and horizontal dimensions in percents.  It often (IMO) makes sense to size 
vertically with ems (since you've mostly got text and want sizes in relation to 
it) and horizontally in percents (so your page doesn't have to scroll 
horizontally).  As for best practice, I've never heard anything either way, but 
it certainly makes sense.

---Tim
__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Bobby Jack]

--- On Thu, 3/19/09, Michael Stevens  wrote:

> So, is it uncommon, or bad practice, to use both in this
> situation?
> 
> {height: 7.2em; width: 20%;}

More and more, I find myself using the two in various combinations. It gets 
particularly interesting if you throw pixels into the mix (which *can* still 
have valid uses!) and/or combine different measurements with, for example, 
width, min-width, and max-width.

Generally speaking, I think the following are relevant points:

1. Line lengths are less legible if they are too short or too long; this 
suggests some level of box-sizing related to font-size, i.e. ems.

2. That's not to say the line length cannot vary; min-width and max-width in 
ems can still achieve readable copy with varying font sizes.

3. Horizontal scrolling is BAD. Unrestricted em-sizing tends to lead to 
horizontal scrolling, but this can be mitigated (esp. on the good browsers) 
with max-width as a percentatge - e.g. 100%

4. Users with v. wide screen resolutions might like to take advantage of the 
fact. This suggests some level of percentage-based box sizing (for width).

5. Equally, users with narrow resolutions are increasingly common - mobile 
phones, handheld games consoles, pdas, etc. It would be wise to ensure your 
content is at least readable by them, so large fixed widths may not be the best 
long-term strategy.

I think 'combined measure' layouts are the way of the future; georg (I /think/ 
- apologies if someone else!) discussed these at great length in an excellent 
mail the other day. Em layouts have fallen out of favour recently with the 
introduction of page zooming, especially given that percentage-based layouts 
tend to behave 'nicely' with this technique (i.e. NOT causing horizontal 
scrollbars in good browser implementations). I don't think 'unrestricted' 
percentage-based layouts are the end of the story, though.

I'm currently experimenting with a (much improved) layout for my site's home 
page which will combine some of these concepts to produce a layout that scales 
nicely with font size, adapts to browser width appropriately, and gives 
everyone 'screen estate' value for money. More on 
http://www.fiveminuteargument.com very soon.

- Bobby
__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Rob Emenecker]

> Just for clarification, if anyone else is as confused by this 
> thread as I am.

I am glad I was able to confuse. It means the coffee is being consumed at
too great an intake level. 


Rob Emenecker @ Hairy Dog Digital
www.hairydogdigital.com
 
Please note: Return e-mail messages are only accepted from discussion groups
that this e-mail address subscribes to. All other messages are automatically
deleted.

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[David Laakso]

>>   
>> 
>
> Why limit yourself to one or the other :-) ? Need of the moment 
> determines structure-- pixel, em, or percent. And I suppose, if push 
> came to shove,  you could go for broke and employ the best advantages of 
> pixel, em, and percent widths all within the same layout structure. 
> Georg Sortun [1] seems to pull it off quite well.
> 
>
>
>   

Just for clarification, if anyone else is as confused by this thread as 
I am. My reply above to Rob *assumed* he was referring in question to 
the use of em or percent to structure a layout.






-- 
A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming.
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/

__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Michael Adams]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 09:03:15 -0700
Came this utterance formulated by Kenny Leu to my mailbox:

> D'oh!
> 
> I should've read that link above before posting...
> 
> To redeem myself:
> EM:
> - always relative to font size
> - fonts affect absolute widths of things set with EM! (e.g. could
> cause horizontal scroll)
> - however, relative widths are not affected.
> e.g. if a particular sentence fits all on one line, it will always fit
> on one line even if the font is changed to be very large.
> 

But this is dependant on at least one other factor. Fonts on the user
computers, different fonts have different letter widths. So the sentence
width may vary with regard to a set EM container width.

> PERCENT:
> - always relative to containing block (could be parent font as well)
> - this means that containing blocks can get very crowded.
> 

-- 
Michael

All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall
be well

 - Julian of Norwich 1342 - 1416
__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Michael Adams]

On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:28:08 + (GMT)
Came this utterance formulated by Bobby Jack to my mailbox:

> 
> --- On Thu, 3/19/09, Michael Stevens  wrote:
> 
> > So, is it uncommon, or bad practice, to use both in this
> > situation?
> > 
> > {height: 7.2em; width: 20%;}
> 
> More and more, I find myself using the two in various combinations. It
> gets particularly interesting if you throw pixels into the mix (which
> *can* still have valid uses!) and/or combine different measurements
> with, for example, width, min-width, and max-width.
> 
> Generally speaking, I think the following are relevant points:
> 
> 1. Line lengths are less legible if they are too short or too long;
> this suggests some level of box-sizing related to font-size, i.e. ems.
> 
> 2. That's not to say the line length cannot vary; min-width and
> max-width in ems can still achieve readable copy with varying font
> sizes.
> 
> 3. Horizontal scrolling is BAD. Unrestricted em-sizing tends to lead
> to horizontal scrolling, but this can be mitigated (esp. on the good
> browsers) with max-width as a percentatge - e.g. 100%
> 
> 4. Users with v. wide screen resolutions might like to take advantage
> of the fact. This suggests some level of percentage-based box sizing
> (for width).
> 

I use ems for widths to try to work to readable line lengths.
Recommended line lengths generally vary from 40 - 75 letters depending
on whom you are reading:
http://desktoppub.about.com/cs/typelayout/a/linelength.htm
http://blog.anthonyjones.biz/2009/01/typography-101-line-length/
http://artsci.wustl.edu/~gssw/2004/dw/typography.htm

> 5. Equally, users with narrow resolutions are increasingly common -
> mobile phones, handheld games consoles, pdas, etc. It would be wise to
> ensure your content is at least readable by them, so large fixed
> widths may not be the best long-term strategy.
>

I do use percentages for maximum widths when i consider the browser
may be anything from a phone to a very wide screen. I have also used a
pixel maximum width of around 1250 for the site design width. To cater
to IE<7 (without maxwidth support) i generally supply a fixed width on
the wrapper div, in a seperate style sheet which works for 800px
screens unless i know the customer is on 1024px throughout - in this
case IE<7 users on 800px screens scroll the menu bar out of view (bad,
yes, but these IE users are in the under 10% minority).

> I think 'combined measure' layouts are the way of the future; georg (I
> /think/ - apologies if someone else!) discussed these at great length
> in an excellent mail the other day. Em layouts have fallen out of
> favour recently with the introduction of page zooming, especially
> given that percentage-based layouts tend to behave 'nicely' with this
> technique (i.e. NOT causing horizontal scrollbars in good browser
> implementations). I don't think 'unrestricted' percentage-based
> layouts are the end of the story, though.
> 

I tend to turn text only zoom on before zooming and i personally use
zoom on a lot of sites where i want to read.

> I'm currently experimenting with a (much improved) layout for my
> site's home page which will combine some of these concepts to produce
> a layout that scales nicely with font size, adapts to browser width
> appropriately, and gives everyone 'screen estate' value for money.
> More on http://www.fiveminuteargument.com very soon.
> 
> - Bobby
> __
> css-discuss [cs...@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/


-- 
Michael

All shall be well, and all shall be well, and all manner of things shall
be well

 - Julian of Norwich 1342 - 1416
__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Theophan Dort]

> i generally supply a fixed width on
> the wrapper div, in a seperate style sheet which works for 800px
> screens

How do you serve different CSS to different people?  I'm assuming some  
sort of JavaScript sniffer?

I love your Julian of Norwich quote, BTW.  Did you ever read her book   
_Showings_?  Really weird, but fascinating, and wonderful in places.

Thanks!

Theophan
__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Cheryl D Wise]

If IE is the only one you are concerned about use a conditional comment, no
javascript necessary since only IE parses them.

Cheryl D Wise 

April Session Classes http://starttoweb.com: 
Introduction to CSS
Introduction to Expression Web



-Original Message-
From: Theophan Dort

> i generally supply a fixed width on
> the wrapper div, in a seperate style sheet which works for 800px
> screens

How do you serve different CSS to different people?  I'm assuming some  
sort of JavaScript sniffer?



__
css-discuss [cs...@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] [OT] EMs vs. PERCENTs

[Theophan Dort]

> If IE is the only one you are concerned about use a conditional  
> comment, no
> javascript necessary since only IE parses them.

I apologize to the list -- I had intended my previous post to go off- 
list and didn't realize it wound up going to the list instead.  I fear  
this is off-topic, not being about CSS.  I'll reply in more detail off- 
list.

Theophan
__
css-discuss [cs...@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/