Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On Dec 18, 2008, at 13:39 , Andy Wardley wrote: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ There's a few pages not building properly... working on that now. It is the embodiment of sexiness itself. Which is good because disembodied sexiness is a whole lot less interesting. A few tiny snags (all of these noted in Opera 9.62 Mac but not necessarily limited to it): - the lines on either side of the darker background behind the content area stop about 2-3 em short of the bottom of the viewport. - the view source page doesn't wrap its content (maybe that's deliberate) - the style switcher is triggered on page load, which means that pages that may take a while to load are in the wrong colour or screen width for a while before switching. Since the style switching it based on elements that are really early in the tree, there is no need to wait for onload. I can make patches if you're busy but it might have to wait a couple days. -- Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ Feel like hiring me? Go to http://robineko.com/
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
2008/12/19 Robin Berjon ro...@berjon.com: On Dec 18, 2008, at 13:39 , Andy Wardley wrote: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ There's a few pages not building properly... working on that now. It is the embodiment of sexiness itself. Which is good because disembodied sexiness is a whole lot less interesting. A few tiny snags (all of these noted in Opera 9.62 Mac but not necessarily limited to it): - the lines on either side of the darker background behind the content area stop about 2-3 em short of the bottom of the viewport. - the view source page doesn't wrap its content (maybe that's deliberate) - the style switcher is triggered on page load, which means that pages that may take a while to load are in the wrong colour or screen width for a while before switching. Since the style switching it based on elements that are really early in the tree, there is no need to wait for onload. I can make patches if you're busy but it might have to wait a couple days. Even better I can arrange for you to have commit on the SVN if you want ;-)
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:39:30PM +, the following was promulgated by Andy Wardley: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ Now it has rounded corners, is it time for other web_2.0_ness? Slideshows of appropriately tagged pictures on flicker? The aggregated twitterings of the faithful? Bookmarks pulled in from delicious and reddit? Only half joking... Tony -- Tony Kennick Web: http://www.pint.org.uk/ Blog: http://blog.pint.org.uk/ Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/thegreatgonzo/
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On Dec 19, 2008, at 17:36, Tony Kennick 0995a06aaeaf6b70e79c3aafd6719...@half.pint.org.uk wrote: On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:39:30PM +, the following was promulgated by Andy Wardley: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ Now it has rounded corners, is it time for other web_2.0_ness? Slideshows of appropriately tagged pictures on flicker? The aggregated twitterings of the faithful? Bookmarks pulled in from delicious and reddit? Only half joking... Tony I'm not joking at all when I say I think that's a good idea. I'll try to think up the best way to integrate such thing into content that people will wantto look at. Just hving a London.pmers page would be silly, no-one would look at it.
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On 19 Dec 2008, at 18:22, Avleen Vig wrote: On Dec 19, 2008, at 17:36, Tony Kennick 0995a06aaeaf6b70e79c3aafd6719...@half.pint.org.uk wrote: On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:39:30PM +, the following was promulgated by Andy Wardley: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ Now it has rounded corners, is it time for other web_2.0_ness? Slideshows of appropriately tagged pictures on flicker? The aggregated twitterings of the faithful? Bookmarks pulled in from delicious and reddit? Only half joking... Tony I'm not joking at all when I say I think that's a good idea. I'll try to think up the best way to integrate such thing into content that people will wantto look at. Just hving a London.pmers page would be silly, no-one would look at it. a flickr feed with an agreed tag would be good, as there tends to be a fairly selection of flickr using camera geeks at meetings, Greg
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On 19 Dec 2008, at 19:08, Greg McCarroll wrote: [...] a flickr feed with an agreed tag would be good, as there tends to be a fairly selection of flickr using camera geeks at meetings, That is such an excellent idea that it's worth me finally getting round to signing up to Flickr.
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On 19 Dec 2008, at 19:59, Peter Corlett wrote: On 19 Dec 2008, at 19:08, Greg McCarroll wrote: [...] a flickr feed with an agreed tag would be good, as there tends to be a fairly selection of flickr using camera geeks at meetings, That is such an excellent idea that it's worth me finally getting round to signing up to Flickr. Just in time for Yahoo! to start making cuts in one of the few moneymaking propositions it has. -- Dave HodgkinsonMSN: daveh...@hotmail.com Site: http://www.davehodgkinson.com UK: +44 7768 490620 Blog: http://davehodg.blogspot.com Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/davehodg
It Shines! It Shines!
Behold! http://london.pm.org/ There's a few pages not building properly... working on that now. A
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On 18 Dec 2008, at 12:39, Andy Wardley wrote: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ Lovely! -- Andy Armstrong, Hexten
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
Andy Wardley wrote: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ Awful! It's barely readable on Netscape 2.0! Seriously - good work. Does the new site mean we'll all have to shave, wear polo-necks and drink frappucinos or some such? There's a few pages not building properly... working on that now. Ah - you'll be wanting one of those animated man-digging icons. -- Richard Huxton Archonet Ltd
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Andy Wardley a...@wardley.org wrote: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ There's a few pages not building properly... working on that now. A Brilliant stuff! Looks much improved! One thing I've just noticed is that I can't seem to select text in the main body of the page? Are you using some sort of overlay? Cheers, --James
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
2008/12/18 James Laver james.la...@gmail.com: On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Andy Wardley a...@wardley.org wrote: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ There's a few pages not building properly... working on that now. A Brilliant stuff! Looks much improved! One thing I've just noticed is that I can't seem to select text in the main body of the page? Are you using some sort of overlay? I think you *can* select text but you just can't see you've selected it :-)
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
2008/12/18 Andy Wardley a...@wardley.org: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ Yay! That's groovy ;-)
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
2008/12/18 Andy Wardley a...@wardley.org: Behold! http://london.pm.org/ This is wonderful! Thanks for your hard work, Andy. Léon
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 1:02 PM, Jonathan Stowe
j...@integration-house.com wrote:
2008/12/18 James Laver james.la...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:39 PM, Andy Wardley a...@wardley.org wrote:
Behold!
http://london.pm.org/
There's a few pages not building properly... working on that now.
A
Brilliant stuff! Looks much improved!
One thing I've just noticed is that I can't seem to select text in the
main body of the page?
Are you using some sort of overlay?
I think you *can* select text but you just can't see you've selected it :-)
Aha, you're right on that. C-c works nicely for copying it out. It
even shows up nicely on the whiteish theme.
Quick investigation with firebug tells me that firefox thinks the
background the text is on is some darkish orange/brown so it chose a
nice white background to help it stand out... I assume it's some
bizarre div stacking bug.
Specifically the rule qq/ #page { background-color:#C66300; } / is the
one it objects to. Firebug claims this is line 280 in orange.css. If I
comment out that line, the only negative effect I notice is that at
the very bottom of the page there is no longer a darker orange/brown
band extending down, the bottom is the main background (bright)
orange.
I assume the same applies to the other two broken colour themes.
Oh, and it works fine for me without the fix in IE7, I assume IE6 is
equally ignorant of CSS standards in this respect.
Cheers,
--James
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
James Laver wrote: Quick investigation with firebug tells me that firefox thinks the background the text is on is some darkish orange/brown so it chose a nice white background to help it stand out... I assume it's some bizarre div stacking bug. Hmm... it appears to work OK for me on FF (3.0.4 Mac) I've explicitly added a white background to the #body div on top to see if that helps. But I'm playing blind here so you'll need to be my eyes. Oh, and it works fine for me without the fix in IE7, I assume IE6 is equally ignorant of CSS standards in this respect. I must admit, I've only just looked at the site for the first time on IE6 and IE7 (sorry, I was too busy punching myself in the face to get around to it :-) Imagine my great surprise and considerable relief to see that it looked OK (apart from a minor wrap-around issue in the menu bar, which is now fixed). I mean, I like to think I know a bit about browser friendly markup, but really, that's unheard of! I can only assume that somewhere else in the world, a number of cute and fluffy kittens were put to death in rather unpleasant circumstances in order to balance the karma in the universe. Happy days! Unless you're a fluffy kitten, of course. A
Re: It Shines! It Shines!
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 4:33 PM, Andy Wardley a...@wardley.org wrote: Hmm... it appears to work OK for me on FF (3.0.4 Mac) I've explicitly added a white background to the #body div on top to see if that helps. But I'm playing blind here so you'll need to be my eyes. Oh, and it works fine for me without the fix in IE7, I assume IE6 is equally ignorant of CSS standards in this respect. I must admit, I've only just looked at the site for the first time on IE6 and IE7 (sorry, I was too busy punching myself in the face to get around to it :-) Imagine my great surprise and considerable relief to see that it looked OK (apart from a minor wrap-around issue in the menu bar, which is now fixed). I mean, I like to think I know a bit about browser friendly markup, but really, that's unheard of! I can only assume that somewhere else in the world, a number of cute and fluffy kittens were put to death in rather unpleasant circumstances in order to balance the karma in the universe. Happy days! Unless you're a fluffy kitten, of course. A I encountered that one on 3.0.4/WinXP (or if you're a fan of UA strings: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.4) Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4). Anyway, you have the fix in my previous email if you do manage to replicate it. More than likely it's some lovely quirk of windows. Hateful Software! Cheers, --James
