Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Trane Francks]

On 8/28/14 6:28 PM, Patrick Turner wrote:


Thanks for the variety of replies since my last post.
I dunno what to do to make everyone happy.

Once upon a time there was nice free access to Usenet Groups and when anyone 
signed up to an ISP to get access to browsing the net etc, access to groups was 
automatic and the bulletin board style of the access meant it as all so much 
easier to reply than its ever been for last 10 years via google, and mauled a 
bit by Firefox.

So sure I am a curmudgeon and many might fight to read what I am saying here 
but you can't blame me for the degradation of use of usenet group access, and 
if you are to blame me, then save a few brickbats for the arsole nerds who made 
everything worse to use after about 2005, and made it far more likely I'll copy 
and paste what someone said without their name included or date of something 
that with old system was impossible to do because you could just type a reply 
withing someone's text with better indication retained about who said what to 
who.
Someone said I was too complicated, and SeaMonkey composer was too old. Well, seems 
despite what I have said, SM works best for me. Many have said I'm "too 
complicated". Yeah, often shielas said that who didn't want to be married to me any 
more after 6 mths because they couldn't be a wife, couldn't communicate with me, had no 
ideas they could express except bitter disagreement, yet again, eg, when dinner time came 
and no dinner was prepared, while I'd slaved all day and done the lawns and yard clean 
and put a fire on and paid the bills and mortgage. I made 'em feel useless. I just held 
the door open, closed it gently, and got peace and quiet when they left, and coped well 
cooking my own dinner. by age 40 I made my clothes last longer after buying a sewing 
machine. Sure I liked most of the world's men and women I met, and I still like females, 
but they'd give a man like me nothing but bullshit to listen to while soaking up goods 
and services I'd provide without them deservin
g any of 
it. My orthopedic surgeon said to me yesterday, "There's nothing more I can do to relieve the pain in your knees except to replace both knee joints." In pursuing sensible independence and freedom from taking everyone else's advice, and satisfying everyone's wants, I've worked myself to the bone, literally.


Meanwhile, I could use all sorts of things available to make my web-pages look 
better but everyone who emails me each week around the world wanting info about 
tube audio related subjects finds my website looks just fine. If there was a 
torrent of complaints backed up with exact descriptions of problems, I'd act, 
but there ain't even a trickle, let alone the torrent.

If this reply looks bad, don't blame me; it looks fine here, and its no use me 
questioning why it would look difficult to read, I'm so dumb anyway and I wood 
knot noe wot kweschons two arsk.

Patrick Turner.

Nothing to add except that your images were all the same size in 
SeaMonkey, Firefox and Safari. What you think was the problem was NOT 
the problem.


--
/
// Trane Francks   tr...@tranefrancks.com   Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Thanks for the variety of replies since my last post.
I dunno what to do to make everyone happy.

Once upon a time there was nice free access to Usenet Groups and when anyone 
signed up to an ISP to get access to browsing the net etc, access to groups was 
automatic and the bulletin board style of the access meant it as all so much 
easier to reply than its ever been for last 10 years via google, and mauled a 
bit by Firefox.

So sure I am a curmudgeon and many might fight to read what I am saying here 
but you can't blame me for the degradation of use of usenet group access, and 
if you are to blame me, then save a few brickbats for the arsole nerds who made 
everything worse to use after about 2005, and made it far more likely I'll copy 
and paste what someone said without their name included or date of something 
that with old system was impossible to do because you could just type a reply 
withing someone's text with better indication retained about who said what to 
who.
Someone said I was too complicated, and SeaMonkey composer was too old. Well, 
seems despite what I have said, SM works best for me. Many have said I'm "too 
complicated". Yeah, often shielas said that who didn't want to be married to me 
any more after 6 mths because they couldn't be a wife, couldn't communicate 
with me, had no ideas they could express except bitter disagreement, yet again, 
eg, when dinner time came and no dinner was prepared, while I'd slaved all day 
and done the lawns and yard clean and put a fire on and paid the bills and 
mortgage. I made 'em feel useless. I just held the door open, closed it gently, 
and got peace and quiet when they left, and coped well cooking my own dinner. 
by age 40 I made my clothes last longer after buying a sewing machine. Sure I 
liked most of the world's men and women I met, and I still like females, but 
they'd give a man like me nothing but bullshit to listen to while soaking up 
goods and services I'd provide without them deserving 
 any of it. My orthopedic surgeon said to me yesterday, "There's nothing more I 
can do to relieve the pain in your knees except to replace both knee joints." 
In pursuing sensible independence and freedom from taking everyone else's 
advice, and satisfying everyone's wants, I've worked myself to the bone, 
literally.

Meanwhile, I could use all sorts of things available to make my web-pages look 
better but everyone who emails me each week around the world wanting info about 
tube audio related subjects finds my website looks just fine. If there was a 
torrent of complaints backed up with exact descriptions of problems, I'd act, 
but there ain't even a trickle, let alone the torrent. 

If this reply looks bad, don't blame me; it looks fine here, and its no use me 
questioning why it would look difficult to read, I'm so dumb anyway and I wood 
knot noe wot kweschons two arsk.

Patrick Turner.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[WaltS48]

On 08/27/2014 07:45 AM, Rick Merrill wrote:

On 8/25/2014 4:44 AM, Patrick Turner wrote:

So, until I have another horrible problem I might just STFU and keep on 
cruisin' through my life without needing to learn all about how to do html 
manually.

One way to learn HTML is to run your web page through
the HTML verifier:

http://validator.w3.org/


I found it very helpful.





Added Patrick's full quote above for clarity.

HTML is pretty easy, if you are not doing anything too complicated.

My redo of Patrick's index page consists mostly of:

 
Link Name
The text for that link
 

and so on. It is only links and text, with  a couple images.

A couple header tags, some hacks to maintain consistency with his original.

I think all that can easily be done in Composer. I used Eclipse.

I find styling harder to grasp, but even that is pretty simple for the 
index page. The all bold had to go though. That was hard on the eyes.


So far the .html passes the test.

x-posted and followup set to m.general

--
Sponsored by Firefox 32.0bx and Thunderbird 31.0
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Rick Merrill]

On 8/25/2014 4:44 AM, Patrick Turner wrote:

  learn all about how to do html manually.


One way to learn HTML is to run your web page through
the HTML verifier:

http://validator.w3.org/


I found it very helpful.


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Daniel]

On 27/08/2014 4:53 PM, Ray_Net wrote:

Patrick Turner wrote, On 27/08/2014 00:35:





Its all OK, and I wasn't here to witness the varying levels of skills
with SM which others possess. I think I solved my own problem when I
found out myself how to insert images at custom size I want, and
finding Arial set at 13 is most easily read by most other ppl, etc.

If I may be permitted an analogy...

I never hold grudges long despite having full license to be a Grumm
Pee Olde Bar Stud.

Some users like to use radios, but they are unconcerned with the
innards. They just want to turn them on, fiddle with the tuner and
volume, and listen, end of story. A few hobbyists want to know more, to
design and build their own radios, but that's not you.

Maybe you don't know me, because I have build very fine AM and FM
radios using vacuum tubes which produce lower IMD/THD noise, and
better music than anything else designed by accountants of companies.
I like listening to radio more than I like putting up with ppl who
know not much. That's a hard nasty thing to say, but while alive I
tried to inform or make ppl laugh, and with shielas there was further
you could go without saying a word, except "Gee, that felt good" etc,
etc, etc.

You've come here to a room full of geeks who understand what's going on
"under the hood," some who have built their own radios by hand, and
asked technical questions that must be answered in technical terms, but
refused to accept any of the several helpful answers because they were
couched in technical terms.

Hmm, me, refused accept? Shock horror, why? too much bullshit instead
of real world talk? Maybe not much point analyzing who said what to
who because apart from trifling page color issues, i solved my own
complaints about SM.

Most of us have smiled or chuckled but kept our mouths shut, knowing
your problems are unsolvable on these terms, but a few have tried vainly
to help and a few have expressed their frustration. Now you complain
that a geek is frustrated, and post yet another long question that can
only be answered in technical terms but must not be.

It's time for you to choose. You're entitled to be a hobbyist, and
you're entitled to be a user, but you can't demand user answers to
hobbyist questions. This isn't Ray_Net's fault.


But I digress. ...

Oh well.

OK, it wasn't Ray's fault. Lets get over it. If I had a dollar for
each time I was misquoted or burned to a crisp at rec.audio.tubes
between 2001 and now, I'd be stoinkingly rich. I wrote more than
everyone else put together, and to answer most questions I put up a
55MB website. I find I can make mistakes, and if a man makes none,
then he usually doesn't make much of anything.
I'm now about happy with SM which I cannot expect to be perfect.

The instructions about how to SM should be as easy as turning on the
radio, tuning a station, adjusting volume and maybe tone, and enjoying
the composition, especially if Mozart was involved.
Patrick Turner.




Could you quote text correctly ... there is no differences between the
text Paul B. Gallagher wrote and your reply.

It's completely unreadable 


Ray, the way I read what Patrick sends to the group is ... if it extends 
right across the screen, it's Patrick's reply, ... if it doesn't extend 
right across the page, it's what Patrick is quoting, but you are right, 
the way Patrick composes his posts (using MS Word!!), and how they are 
threaded into the group, make reading them a real hard job!!


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140415200419

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140408191805

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ray_Net]

Patrick Turner wrote, On 27/08/2014 00:35:

Paul B. Gallagher   
Aug 26
Chris Ilias is apparently too distracted by his other work to read
carefully and understand that this is not a personal attack, so I'm
reposting it without the word he's misconstruing. I hope he reads it
correctly this time and lets it though.

Patrick Turner wrote:


   Ed Mullen
Aug 24
Ray_Net pounded out :
- show quoted text -
Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
works.
- show quoted text -

Above we have the breathtakingly helpful reply by someone unable to
make any contribution to better use of SeaMonkey, AFAIAC. We surely
all enjoy helpful advice to make us all understand the Web better,
and expressed in simple language without needing a university degree.
SeaMonkey NERDS are sort of like the brave professorial types who
might stand up to give a lecture for 1/2 an hour without any member
of his audience having any idea what he is saying. I'm sure you've
been at colleges and schools where teachers put you off to sleep.

Actually, Ray_Net has made many contributions to better use of SeaMonkey
over the years, but he is clearly unwilling to help with your specific
issue within the specific terms and conditions that you have established.

Its all OK, and I wasn't here to witness the varying levels of skills with SM 
which others possess. I think I solved my own problem when I found out myself 
how to insert images at custom size I want, and finding Arial set at 13 is most 
easily read by most other ppl, etc.

If I may be permitted an analogy...

I never hold grudges long despite having full license to be a Grumm Pee Olde 
Bar Stud.

Some users like to use radios, but they are unconcerned with the
innards. They just want to turn them on, fiddle with the tuner and
volume, and listen, end of story. A few hobbyists want to know more, to
design and build their own radios, but that's not you.

Maybe you don't know me, because I have build very fine AM and FM radios using vacuum 
tubes which produce lower IMD/THD noise, and better music than anything else designed by 
accountants of companies. I like listening to radio more than I like putting up with ppl 
who know not much. That's a hard nasty thing to say, but while alive I tried to inform or 
make ppl laugh, and with shielas there was further you could go without saying a word, 
except "Gee, that felt good" etc, etc, etc.

You've come here to a room full of geeks who understand what's going on
"under the hood," some who have built their own radios by hand, and
asked technical questions that must be answered in technical terms, but
refused to accept any of the several helpful answers because they were
couched in technical terms.

Hmm, me, refused accept? Shock horror, why? too much bullshit instead of real 
world talk? Maybe not much point analyzing who said what to who because apart 
from trifling page color issues, i solved my own complaints about SM.

Most of us have smiled or chuckled but kept our mouths shut, knowing
your problems are unsolvable on these terms, but a few have tried vainly
to help and a few have expressed their frustration. Now you complain
that a geek is frustrated, and post yet another long question that can
only be answered in technical terms but must not be.

It's time for you to choose. You're entitled to be a hobbyist, and
you're entitled to be a user, but you can't demand user answers to
hobbyist questions. This isn't Ray_Net's fault.


But I digress. ...

Oh well.

OK, it wasn't Ray's fault. Lets get over it. If I had a dollar for each time I 
was misquoted or burned to a crisp at rec.audio.tubes between 2001 and now, I'd 
be stoinkingly rich. I wrote more than everyone else put together, and to 
answer most questions I put up a 55MB website. I find I can make mistakes, and 
if a man makes none, then he usually doesn't make much of anything.
I'm now about happy with SM which I cannot expect to be perfect.

The instructions about how to SM should be as easy as turning on the radio, 
tuning a station, adjusting volume and maybe tone, and enjoying the 
composition, especially if Mozart was involved.
Patrick Turner.



Could you quote text correctly ... there is no differences between the 
text Paul B. Gallagher wrote and your reply.


It's completely unreadable 
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ray_Net]

Patrick Turner wrote, On 27/08/2014 00:10:

Patrick Turner wrote, On 25/08/2014 10:44:

   Ed Mullen
Aug 24
Ray_Net pounded out :
- show quoted text -
Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
works.
- show quoted text -



I never said that 

Sorry if I said you said what I quoted under your name at beginning of that 
post I quoted. Whoever I did quote is a stubborn old curmudgeon who should have 
a wider tolerance of ideas here.

I just said that if you use MS Word to compose a page - READ it with MS
Internet Explorer  and don't play with other browser like SeaMonkey

Yeah, but when one program won't do the other does, and don't recognize the 
other, one or the other or both are acting STUPID, because both should 
recognize what the other does and be compatible because we only want one 
outcome which suits all browsers.

I discovered its probably and I do say probably better to type up a page in 
plain text and do all editing of text before cutting and pasting to SeaMonkey 
composer, then insert pictures. The least fucking up of html seems to occur 
then.

And i have also said that if you think that because your page is OK on
your pc  automatically this page is good on my pc  is WRONG.

Please lift your head out of the sand its in. If I do not get my web page to 
look acceptable both on my local browsers offline AND ONLINE from my browsers 
you would have ZERO chance of seeing it properly on your browsers online. I 
have always had to be vigilant about mistakes and inconsistencies created in 
the composer process,and the mistakes I create. Nobody's perfect.

And last weekend I proved mistakes could get past the local scrutiny but then 
appear after posting pages to a website. But if I can browse my website from 
the ISP server and all is well then you will find that also the case. This has 
been true since 2001. But during that time, generally the offline browsers gave 
same result as online browsing.

I still can't get SeaMonkey or Firefox to display page colours when offline or 
online browsing. Chrome does it OK offline or online, and maybe Internet 
Explorer. I say maybe because I had to give up using IE because mysearch and 
other rubbish kept hi-jacking the setting and slowing everything down and I 
suspected malware so IE was abandoned.

Patrick Turner.
You are too complicated  and the "Composer" part of SeaMonkey SHOULD 
NOT BE USED  It's TOO OLD !

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Paul B. Gallagher   
Aug 26
Chris Ilias is apparently too distracted by his other work to read
carefully and understand that this is not a personal attack, so I'm
reposting it without the word he's misconstruing. I hope he reads it
correctly this time and lets it though.

Patrick Turner wrote:

>   Ed Mullen 
> Aug 24
> Ray_Net pounded out :
> - show quoted text -
> Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
> works.
> - show quoted text -
>
> Above we have the breathtakingly helpful reply by someone unable to
> make any contribution to better use of SeaMonkey, AFAIAC. We surely
> all enjoy helpful advice to make us all understand the Web better,
> and expressed in simple language without needing a university degree.
> SeaMonkey NERDS are sort of like the brave professorial types who
> might stand up to give a lecture for 1/2 an hour without any member
> of his audience having any idea what he is saying. I'm sure you've
> been at colleges and schools where teachers put you off to sleep.

Actually, Ray_Net has made many contributions to better use of SeaMonkey
over the years, but he is clearly unwilling to help with your specific
issue within the specific terms and conditions that you have established.

Its all OK, and I wasn't here to witness the varying levels of skills with SM 
which others possess. I think I solved my own problem when I found out myself 
how to insert images at custom size I want, and finding Arial set at 13 is most 
easily read by most other ppl, etc. 

If I may be permitted an analogy...

I never hold grudges long despite having full license to be a Grumm Pee Olde 
Bar Stud.  

Some users like to use radios, but they are unconcerned with the
innards. They just want to turn them on, fiddle with the tuner and
volume, and listen, end of story. A few hobbyists want to know more, to
design and build their own radios, but that's not you.

Maybe you don't know me, because I have build very fine AM and FM radios using 
vacuum tubes which produce lower IMD/THD noise, and better music than anything 
else designed by accountants of companies. I like listening to radio more than 
I like putting up with ppl who know not much. That's a hard nasty thing to say, 
but while alive I tried to inform or make ppl laugh, and with shielas there was 
further you could go without saying a word, except "Gee, that felt good" etc, 
etc, etc.

You've come here to a room full of geeks who understand what's going on
"under the hood," some who have built their own radios by hand, and
asked technical questions that must be answered in technical terms, but
refused to accept any of the several helpful answers because they were
couched in technical terms.

Hmm, me, refused accept? Shock horror, why? too much bullshit instead of real 
world talk? Maybe not much point analyzing who said what to who because apart 
from trifling page color issues, i solved my own complaints about SM.

Most of us have smiled or chuckled but kept our mouths shut, knowing
your problems are unsolvable on these terms, but a few have tried vainly
to help and a few have expressed their frustration. Now you complain
that a geek is frustrated, and post yet another long question that can
only be answered in technical terms but must not be.

It's time for you to choose. You're entitled to be a hobbyist, and
you're entitled to be a user, but you can't demand user answers to
hobbyist questions. This isn't Ray_Net's fault.

> But I digress. ...

Oh well.

OK, it wasn't Ray's fault. Lets get over it. If I had a dollar for each time I 
was misquoted or burned to a crisp at rec.audio.tubes between 2001 and now, I'd 
be stoinkingly rich. I wrote more than everyone else put together, and to 
answer most questions I put up a 55MB website. I find I can make mistakes, and 
if a man makes none, then he usually doesn't make much of anything.
I'm now about happy with SM which I cannot expect to be perfect. 

The instructions about how to SM should be as easy as turning on the radio, 
tuning a station, adjusting volume and maybe tone, and enjoying the 
composition, especially if Mozart was involved. 
Patrick Turner.



-- 
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
-- 
Paul B. Gallagher
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Patrick Turner wrote, On 25/08/2014 10:44:
>   Ed Mullen 
> Aug 24
> Ray_Net pounded out :
> - show quoted text -
> Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
> works.
> - show quoted text -
>
>
I never said that 

Sorry if I said you said what I quoted under your name at beginning of that 
post I quoted. Whoever I did quote is a stubborn old curmudgeon who should have 
a wider tolerance of ideas here.

I just said that if you use MS Word to compose a page - READ it with MS
Internet Explorer  and don't play with other browser like SeaMonkey

Yeah, but when one program won't do the other does, and don't recognize the 
other, one or the other or both are acting STUPID, because both should 
recognize what the other does and be compatible because we only want one 
outcome which suits all browsers. 

I discovered its probably and I do say probably better to type up a page in 
plain text and do all editing of text before cutting and pasting to SeaMonkey 
composer, then insert pictures. The least fucking up of html seems to occur 
then. 

And i have also said that if you think that because your page is OK on
your pc  automatically this page is good on my pc  is WRONG.

Please lift your head out of the sand its in. If I do not get my web page to 
look acceptable both on my local browsers offline AND ONLINE from my browsers 
you would have ZERO chance of seeing it properly on your browsers online. I 
have always had to be vigilant about mistakes and inconsistencies created in 
the composer process,and the mistakes I create. Nobody's perfect.

And last weekend I proved mistakes could get past the local scrutiny but then 
appear after posting pages to a website. But if I can browse my website from 
the ISP server and all is well then you will find that also the case. This has 
been true since 2001. But during that time, generally the offline browsers gave 
same result as online browsing.

I still can't get SeaMonkey or Firefox to display page colours when offline or 
online browsing. Chrome does it OK offline or online, and maybe Internet 
Explorer. I say maybe because I had to give up using IE because mysearch and 
other rubbish kept hi-jacking the setting and slowing everything down and I 
suspected malware so IE was abandoned. 

Patrick Turner.  
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Chris Ilias is apparently too distracted by his other work to read 
carefully and understand that this is not a personal attack, so I'm 
reposting it without the word he's misconstruing. I hope he reads it 
correctly this time and lets it though.


Patrick Turner wrote:


Ed Mullen   
Aug 24
Ray_Net pounded out :
- show quoted text -
Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
works.
- show quoted text -

Above we have the breathtakingly helpful reply by someone unable to
make any contribution to better use of SeaMonkey, AFAIAC. We surely
all enjoy helpful advice to make us all understand the Web better,
and expressed in simple language without needing a university degree.
SeaMonkey NERDS are sort of like the brave professorial types who
might stand up to give a lecture for 1/2 an hour without any member
of his audience having any idea what he is saying. I'm sure you've
been at colleges and schools where teachers put you off to sleep.


Actually, Ray_Net has made many contributions to better use of SeaMonkey 
over the years, but he is clearly unwilling to help with your specific 
issue within the specific terms and conditions that you have established.


If I may be permitted an analogy...

Some users like to use radios, but they are unconcerned with the 
innards. They just want to turn them on, fiddle with the tuner and 
volume, and listen, end of story. A few hobbyists want to know more, to 
design and build their own radios, but that's not you.


You've come here to a room full of geeks who understand what's going on 
"under the hood," some who have built their own radios by hand, and 
asked technical questions that must be answered in technical terms, but 
refused to accept any of the several helpful answers because they were 
couched in technical terms.


Most of us have smiled or chuckled but kept our mouths shut, knowing 
your problems are unsolvable on these terms, but a few have tried vainly 
to help and a few have expressed their frustration. Now you complain 
that a geek is frustrated, and post yet another long question that can 
only be answered in technical terms but must not be.


It's time for you to choose. You're entitled to be a hobbyist, and 
you're entitled to be a user, but you can't demand user answers to 
hobbyist questions. This isn't Ray_Net's fault.



But I digress. ...


Oh well.

--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ray_Net]

Patrick Turner wrote, On 25/08/2014 10:44:

Ed Mullen   
Aug 24
Ray_Net pounded out :
- show quoted text -
Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
works.
- show quoted text -



I never said that 

I just said that if you use MS Word to compose a page - READ it with MS 
Internet Explorer  and don't play with other browser like SeaMonkey


And i have also said that if you think that because your page is OK on 
your pc  automatically this page is good on my pc  is WRONG.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Patrick Turner wrote:


Ed Mullen   
Aug 24
Ray_Net pounded out :
- show quoted text -
Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
works.
- show quoted text -

Above we have the breathtakingly helpful reply by someone unable to
make any contribution to better use of SeaMonkey, AFAIAC. We surely
all enjoy helpful advice to make us all understand the Web better,
and expressed in simple language without needing a university degree.
SeaMonkey NERDS are sort of like the brave professorial types who
might stand up to give a lecture for 1/2 an hour without any member
of his audience having any idea what he is saying. I'm sure you've
been at colleges and schools where teachers put you off to sleep.


Actually, Ray_Net has made many contributions to better use of SeaMonkey 
over the years, but he is clearly unwilling to help with your specific 
issue within the specific terms and conditions that you have established.


If I may be permitted an analogy...

Some users like to use radios, but they are unconcerned with the 
innards. They just want to turn them on, fiddle with the tuner and 
volume, and listen, end of story. A few hobbyists want to know more, to 
design and build their own radios, but that's not you.


You've come here to a room full of geeks who understand what's going on 
"under the hood," some who have built their own radios by hand, and 
asked technical questions that must be answered in technical terms, but 
refused to accept any of the several helpful answers because they were 
couched in technical terms.


Most of us have smiled or chuckled but kept our mouths shut, knowing 
your problems are unsolvable on these terms, but a few have tried vainly 
to help and a few have expressed their frustration. Now you complain 
that a geek is frustrated, and post yet another long question that can 
only be answered in technical terms but must not be.


It's time for you to choose. You're entitled to be a hobbyist, and 
you're entitled to be a dummy, but you can't demand dummy answers to 
hobbyist questions. This isn't Ray_Net's fault.



But I digress. ...


Oh well.

--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Philip Taylor]

Patrick Turner wrote:


Then I posted up the completed re-done page and it seems to work OK
when I browse it from my website via the Internet, ie, online.


http://www.turneraudio.com.au/80W-AB1-amp-2014.html

And this :


https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-j6lISKa1Grw/U_r9rGVy-kI/JGQ/IRblj2UxFJA/s640/Fullscreen%2520capture%252025082014%2520100730.jpg

is what it looks like here.

PLEASE, Patrick, invest a tiny tiny part of your life in understand
the web philosophy ("the viewer decides line length, font size, etc.,
not the author") and stop trying to inflict /your/ ideas of optimal
line length on others.  Remove all those horrible s that represent
/your/ idea of an optimal line turn, learn about "p {max-width: 42em}",
and move out of the 19th century into the 21st.  Then, and only then,
will you stand the slightest chance of your visitors seeing the page
at its best, rather than as the monstrosity that it is today.  And then
you might like to pay some attention to the prose, because in places
it appears to demonstrate all the literacy skills of a 10-year-old
with learning difficulties.

Very sincerely :
Philip Taylor

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Ed Mullen   
Aug 24
Ray_Net pounded out :
- show quoted text -
Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it
works.
- show quoted text -

Above we have the breathtakingly helpful reply by someone unable to make any 
contribution to better use of SeaMonkey, AFAIAC. We surely all enjoy helpful 
advice to make us all understand the Web better, and expressed in simple 
language without needing a university degree. SeaMonkey NERDS are sort of like 
the brave professorial types who might stand up to give a lecture for 1/2 an 
hour without any member of his audience having any idea what he is saying. I'm 
sure you've been at colleges and schools where teachers put you off to sleep. 

But I digress. 

2 days back I made up a web page using only MS Word, complete with images. 
http://www.turneraudio.com.au/80W-AB1-amp-2014.html
It worked fine on my local disc browsers with Firefox, and Chrome. So I posted 
it up 
to my website and then some images were shown and some were not, and after a 
few hours of mucking about re-inserting images images and trialing the 
re-posted page, I gave up. Nerds had won. 

Then I copied all text into a Windows Notepad file, and saved it on my C-drive 
as a "rich text doc". About 30kB. I'd redone the line wrapping, took awhile.
 
Then I got rid of the web-page html folder and its files from my site. 
Then I started a new SeaMonkey composer and pasted the contents of Notepad into 
the new page, and of course formatting all vanished, so I went right down the 
page to wrap lines in Composer manually because I don't know how to make text 
wrap so it looks well on a 40cm screen OR a 250cm screen.

I'd also discovered that once you have selected an image you want to include in 
a page, you ALSO can determine its size on the page, but while retaining all 
the picture info. This is done by selecting 'image size' then click dot at 
'custom', and adjusting pixels to anything you want, and this way I get my 
images to look much better with the text. I did minimum alteration and editing 
to text in Composer, maybe its better not to edit too much lest you confuse the 
poor little darling.

Finally, I checked to see if page worked on local 2 local browsers, yes, all 
OK, images now have the size I want, except that Firefox won't show different 
page colors or text colours. I can live with that. 

Then I posted up the completed re-done page and it seems to work OK when I 
browse it from my website via the Internet, ie, online.
So, until I have another horrible problem I might just STFU and keep on 
cruisin' through my life without needing to learn all about how to do html 
manually.
Patrick Turner.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Ray_Net pounded out :

Patrick Turner wrote, On 23/08/2014 07:39:

  Ray_Net
07:59 (7 hours ago)
Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.

I think you misunderstand me, and like so many ppl on chat groups,
become easily made angry or offended when none is intended, and when
my intention is to make sure other ppl see my site without needing to
uses zoom in or out because when THEIR default 100% setting is used,
it looks like it does on my 2003 old machine with XP, using Chrome or
Firefox, to name two browsers I have.



What i am sure, is that you misunderstand me  You think wrongly that
if it's OK on your pc, by miracle, it should be OK on my pc ... that's a
false assumption !


Because the OP is ill-informed and/or clueless about the Web and how it 
works.


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody 
appreciates how difficult it was.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

WaltS48 pounded out :

On 08/23/2014 08:49 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

Daniel pounded out :

On 23/08/14 15:39, Patrick Turner wrote:

  Ray_Net
07:59 (7 hours ago)
Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.

I think you misunderstand me, and like so many ppl on chat groups,
become easily made angry or offended when none is intended, and when
my intention is to make sure other ppl see my site without needing to
uses zoom in or out because when THEIR default 100% setting is used,
it looks like it does on my 2003 old machine with XP, using Chrome or
Firefox, to name two browsers I have.

Patrick Turner.


Patrick, if I have my screen set up at 600 x 480 (o.k., so I'm virtually
blind but refuse to admit it!!) how is that going to look on your 40inch
screen??  because you "see" it just the way I "see" it??

You have no control how I see your website, unless, of course, *I*
select to allow you to determine how I see it!! Check out the bottom of
the Edit->Preferences->Appearance->Fonts screen



Bravo, well said, Daniel.

I would direct all of these newbie Web page devs to go to these groups,
read a year or two of posts, and then contemplate their navels for a
month or two before touching a keyboard and a Web page.

alt.html
comp.infosystems.authoring.html
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylsheets
comp.infosytstems.www.authoring

I would also direct them to validate their pages at:

http://validator.w3.org/

and

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

Once they tackle all that, THEN they can come here and complain about a
Mozilla product not rendering their page "properly."

Until then?  Sorry.  No time for cluelessness.

One final note.  The Web was not created to enable everyone to do
anything.  It doesn't exist under any rules that there should be some
mechanism by which everyone can make a Web page that works, easily, all
the time, everywhere, using free tools.  The closest thing to rules
about the Web that exists can be found at http://www.w3.org/

No one made any promises about the Web.  The OP is sort of going:

"Well, cars exist and I wanna build my own.  But, well, crap!  I got
this 3D printer and software and, but, the doors keep falling off!!!"

"Oh!  And, well, it won't run using standard unleaded fuel!!!"

Cripes.  Gimme a break.

We all tried to help him but his answers were:

-  I don't want to learn anything
-  I don't want spend any money or time
-  I want perfection without knowledge

Well, Toto, you ain't in Kansas anymore.

Get real or just shut up




I would still like to see a screen shot of what he is seeing with his
SeaMonkey.

We might be able to help, but it appears he just wants to whine about it.



+1


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody 
appreciates how difficult it was.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[WaltS48]

On 08/23/2014 08:49 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

Daniel pounded out :

On 23/08/14 15:39, Patrick Turner wrote:

  Ray_Net
07:59 (7 hours ago)
Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.

I think you misunderstand me, and like so many ppl on chat groups,
become easily made angry or offended when none is intended, and when
my intention is to make sure other ppl see my site without needing to
uses zoom in or out because when THEIR default 100% setting is used,
it looks like it does on my 2003 old machine with XP, using Chrome or
Firefox, to name two browsers I have.

Patrick Turner.


Patrick, if I have my screen set up at 600 x 480 (o.k., so I'm virtually
blind but refuse to admit it!!) how is that going to look on your 40inch
screen??  because you "see" it just the way I "see" it??

You have no control how I see your website, unless, of course, *I*
select to allow you to determine how I see it!! Check out the bottom of
the Edit->Preferences->Appearance->Fonts screen



Bravo, well said, Daniel.

I would direct all of these newbie Web page devs to go to these groups,
read a year or two of posts, and then contemplate their navels for a
month or two before touching a keyboard and a Web page.

alt.html
comp.infosystems.authoring.html
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylsheets
comp.infosytstems.www.authoring

I would also direct them to validate their pages at:

http://validator.w3.org/

and

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

Once they tackle all that, THEN they can come here and complain about a
Mozilla product not rendering their page "properly."

Until then?  Sorry.  No time for cluelessness.

One final note.  The Web was not created to enable everyone to do
anything.  It doesn't exist under any rules that there should be some
mechanism by which everyone can make a Web page that works, easily, all
the time, everywhere, using free tools.  The closest thing to rules
about the Web that exists can be found at http://www.w3.org/

No one made any promises about the Web.  The OP is sort of going:

"Well, cars exist and I wanna build my own.  But, well, crap!  I got
this 3D printer and software and, but, the doors keep falling off!!!"

"Oh!  And, well, it won't run using standard unleaded fuel!!!"

Cripes.  Gimme a break.

We all tried to help him but his answers were:

-  I don't want to learn anything
-  I don't want spend any money or time
-  I want perfection without knowledge

Well, Toto, you ain't in Kansas anymore.

Get real or just shut up




I would still like to see a screen shot of what he is seeing with his 
SeaMonkey.


We might be able to help, but it appears he just wants to whine about it.

--
Sponsored by Firefox 32.0bx and Thunderbird 31.0
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Daniel pounded out :

On 23/08/14 15:39, Patrick Turner wrote:

  Ray_Net
07:59 (7 hours ago)
Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.

I think you misunderstand me, and like so many ppl on chat groups,
become easily made angry or offended when none is intended, and when
my intention is to make sure other ppl see my site without needing to
uses zoom in or out because when THEIR default 100% setting is used,
it looks like it does on my 2003 old machine with XP, using Chrome or
Firefox, to name two browsers I have.

Patrick Turner.


Patrick, if I have my screen set up at 600 x 480 (o.k., so I'm virtually
blind but refuse to admit it!!) how is that going to look on your 40inch
screen??  because you "see" it just the way I "see" it??

You have no control how I see your website, unless, of course, *I*
select to allow you to determine how I see it!! Check out the bottom of
the Edit->Preferences->Appearance->Fonts screen



Bravo, well said, Daniel.

I would direct all of these newbie Web page devs to go to these groups, 
read a year or two of posts, and then contemplate their navels for a 
month or two before touching a keyboard and a Web page.


alt.html
comp.infosystems.authoring.html
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylsheets
comp.infosytstems.www.authoring

I would also direct them to validate their pages at:

http://validator.w3.org/

and

http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

Once they tackle all that, THEN they can come here and complain about a 
Mozilla product not rendering their page "properly."


Until then?  Sorry.  No time for cluelessness.

One final note.  The Web was not created to enable everyone to do 
anything.  It doesn't exist under any rules that there should be some 
mechanism by which everyone can make a Web page that works, easily, all 
the time, everywhere, using free tools.  The closest thing to rules 
about the Web that exists can be found at http://www.w3.org/


No one made any promises about the Web.  The OP is sort of going:

"Well, cars exist and I wanna build my own.  But, well, crap!  I got 
this 3D printer and software and, but, the doors keep falling off!!!"


"Oh!  And, well, it won't run using standard unleaded fuel!!!"

Cripes.  Gimme a break.

We all tried to help him but his answers were:

-  I don't want to learn anything
-  I don't want spend any money or time
-  I want perfection without knowledge

Well, Toto, you ain't in Kansas anymore.

Get real or just shut up

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
When it rains, why don't sheep shrink?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Ray_Net pounded out :

Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!


I agree, there is nothing in that statement that seems likely.


A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.


From your statement, I doubt you or your friend have a clue about Web 
page development.



--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
When it rains, why don't sheep shrink?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Ray_Net pounded out :

Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 10:57:

Patrick Turner wrote:


The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to allow SIMPLE
minded ppl like myself to make a SIMPLE website

The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to save you having to think.  Fine, if that
is what you want, then go with it.  For myself, if there is no
intellectual value in an exercise, then it is pointless.  Each to his
own.

Philip Taylor

If I had the time to become an expert at typing up html BY HAND, ie,
write te text, then add all the stuff you don't see behind the text,
then I'd agree there would be some value. But just what Intellectual
Value? I don't see this being the case because the intellectual value
is in the text, about the subject you wish to involve your mind, and
applying html coding is mere donkey work which has been successfully
computerized since the Internet began, so much so that I do not have
to apply html to all my emails and since 2001 when I bought a PV and
learnt to type, not one email was Pharqued Up by some mistake in html.
Of all the wonders, automatic html ranks amoung the greats.

It is because I never stop thinking about 1,001 things with so many
questions I ask of my mind that I don't have time to be a html donkey.

I found out yesterday that if I type up a webpage in MS Word, I can
save it as a web page and that seems to so a better job than
SeaMonkey, although MS Nerdarians have made it difficult to suit
bloaks like me who LIKE SIMPLE STUFF and who merely want a website
page to be like a page in a well produced text book of 1960, often
written by much finer minds than your OR mine.



So stay with MS Word and Internet Explorer ... Because they are well
suited - Don't waste your time with SeaMonkey and Compose a Site
"Perfect with Internet Explorer ONLY"  don't try to compose a Site
well suited for ALL browsers.


NO!!!  You didn't just tell someone to compose Web pages using MS Word, 
did you???!!! Jesus!


Oh, wait ... maybe you were being facetious?

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Why are builders afraid to have a 13th floor but book publishers aren't 
afraid to have Chapter 11?

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Rick Merrill]

On 8/21/2014 10:21 PM, Asbestos wrote:

  FrontPage. Which even
Microsoft gave up on -- it was discontinued about eight years ago, and
even back then it was widely considered to produce terrible code.


Glad to hear it!


___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ray_Net]

Patrick Turner wrote, On 23/08/2014 07:39:

Ray_Net 
07:59 (7 hours ago)
Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.

I think you misunderstand me, and like so many ppl on chat groups, become 
easily made angry or offended when none is intended, and when my intention is 
to make sure other ppl see my site without needing to uses zoom in or out 
because when THEIR default 100% setting is used, it looks like it does on my 
2003 old machine with XP, using Chrome or Firefox, to name two browsers I have.


What i am sure, is that you misunderstand me  You think wrongly that 
if it's OK on your pc, by miracle, it should be OK on my pc ... that's a 
false assumption !

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Daniel]

On 23/08/14 15:39, Patrick Turner wrote:

Ray_Net 
07:59 (7 hours ago)
Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.

I think you misunderstand me, and like so many ppl on chat groups, become 
easily made angry or offended when none is intended, and when my intention is 
to make sure other ppl see my site without needing to uses zoom in or out 
because when THEIR default 100% setting is used, it looks like it does on my 
2003 old machine with XP, using Chrome or Firefox, to name two browsers I have.

Patrick Turner.


Patrick, if I have my screen set up at 600 x 480 (o.k., so I'm virtually 
blind but refuse to admit it!!) how is that going to look on your 40inch 
screen??  because you "see" it just the way I "see" it??


You have no control how I see your website, unless, of course, *I* 
select to allow you to determine how I see it!! Check out the bottom of 
the Edit->Preferences->Appearance->Fonts screen


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140415200419

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140408191805

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

WaltS48 so kindly suggested..

Perhaps a screen shot of what you see in SeaMonkey so we know what your
issues are.

Another item to look at in your SeaMonkey, is your Appearance settings
in Preferences.

Do you have Appearance > Fonts set to "Allow documents to use other fonts"?

Yes.

What are your default font settings? Mine is set to 16 pixels in SeaMonkey.

I tried up to 16, and font then looked far too big in any browser. 
I have found 13 is best for least zooming in or out with other browsers when 
set for 100%, where their calibration should automatically show images like I 
want them too, neither too large, or too small, ie, just as I see them when I 
use MS Paint to produce them and sized OK so many easily fit into A4 page if 
printed and at the same size as on the screen. 

Do you have Appearance > Colors set to "Always use the colors and
background specified by the web page"? I do have that enabled.

Yes, is enabled.

We really need to know what "images always too big" looks like to you.

Consider me trying to use SeaMonkey and insert a schematic. I open the folder 
and select the image, name it, and PC puts it automatically on the page to 
right of cursor which I had idling at far left under last line of text. BUT, 
the darn schematic appears too big, even for my 41cm wide screen, and fiddling 
around to make "fit image into screen" doesn't work. Unlike old Netscape and 
other composers like Microsoft Word, image size in SeaMonkey does not seem to 
be variable while composing.
THEN, if I use Firefox or SeaMonkey to browse what I just composed, I have to 
zoom out, reducing everything on page and there's usually ONE setting, 80%, 
when images appear perfect because the PC hasn't had to increase or decrease 
the image size. BUT, then text goes too small, and ppl wouldn't like that.

Yet in Chrome my page looks fine. Seems like Firefox and SeaMonkey have very 
basic problems.
 
This is what your index page looks like to me in my SeaMonkey.
 Click the image twice to see the full size image.

Yes, thank you for looking at my index page. What I see here from the URL above 
looks remarkably like how I see my page when I use Chrome to browse my site.
But notice your SeaMonkey has got background page color and text color correct. 
But I cannot get BG page color or different text colors to appear with Firefox 
or or SeaMonkey, only Chrome does the best browse job.

Patrick Turner.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Ray_Net 
07:59 (7 hours ago)
Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:
> If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
> without changing zoom settings.
FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great
screen resolution.
My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site. 

I think you misunderstand me, and like so many ppl on chat groups, become 
easily made angry or offended when none is intended, and when my intention is 
to make sure other ppl see my site without needing to uses zoom in or out 
because when THEIR default 100% setting is used, it looks like it does on my 
2003 old machine with XP, using Chrome or Firefox, to name two browsers I have.

Patrick Turner.




___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ray_Net]

Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 12:12:

If I get it right on my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well
without changing zoom settings.

FALSE !!!

A friend who is webmaster - creates a Site on his PC who have a great 
screen resolution.

My pc did not have such a resolution. His Site is a bullshit on my pc.
I told him that, because of this result, i will never surf on his site.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ray_Net]

Patrick Turner wrote, On 22/08/2014 10:57:

Patrick Turner wrote:


The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to allow SIMPLE
minded ppl like myself to make a SIMPLE website

The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to save you having to think.  Fine, if that
is what you want, then go with it.  For myself, if there is no
intellectual value in an exercise, then it is pointless.  Each to his own.

Philip Taylor

If I had the time to become an expert at typing up html BY HAND, ie, write te 
text, then add all the stuff you don't see behind the text, then I'd agree 
there would be some value. But just what Intellectual Value? I don't see this 
being the case because the intellectual value is in the text, about the subject 
you wish to involve your mind, and applying html coding is mere donkey work 
which has been successfully computerized since the Internet began, so much so 
that I do not have to apply html to all my emails and since 2001 when I bought 
a PV and learnt to type, not one email was Pharqued Up by some mistake in html.
Of all the wonders, automatic html ranks amoung the greats.

It is because I never stop thinking about 1,001 things with so many questions I 
ask of my mind that I don't have time to be a html donkey.

I found out yesterday that if I type up a webpage in MS Word, I can save it as 
a web page and that seems to so a better job than SeaMonkey, although MS 
Nerdarians have made it difficult to suit bloaks like me who LIKE SIMPLE STUFF 
and who merely want a website page to be like a page in a well produced text 
book of 1960, often written by much finer minds than your OR mine.



So stay with MS Word and Internet Explorer ... Because they are well 
suited - Don't waste your time with SeaMonkey and Compose a Site 
"Perfect with Internet Explorer ONLY"  don't try to compose a Site 
well suited for ALL browsers.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[WaltS48]

On 08/18/2014 05:02 AM, Patrick Turner wrote:


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers like Chrome 
"got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle with sizes so this 
occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer 
programs. None worked properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front 
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always enlarges them and no amount of 
trying to control image size by zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" 
makes any difference. In Firefox, images appear the same, too big.
But in Chrome, images are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the 
images when I saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also 
correct.

So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have enough settable settings 
which are then recognized by SM and derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose 
"left hand doesn't know what the right hand does  does"

Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background colors.

The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe my images 
at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over text. I don't want to do 
that, and I don't wan the text to extend right across wide screen before it 
line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide screen x 25.5cm high.

Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which instructed different 
browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me the "view source" gave me what 
looked like enormously complex html and I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it 
work AS I DAMN WELL WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey 
nerd@somewhere.

Trying to find help anywhere left me feeling I needed help.

Gregariously, Patrick Turner.




As has been pointed out in numerous replies, your site looks okay in all 
browsers we have used to test it. The exception for me being Chromium, 
where the heading "TURNER AUDIO" is smaller.


Perhaps a screen shot of what you see in SeaMonkey so we know what your 
issues are.


Another item to look at in your SeaMonkey, is your Appearance settings 
in Preferences.


Do you have Appearance > Fonts set to "Allow documents to use other fonts"?

What are your default font settings? Mine is set to 16 pixels in SeaMonkey.

Do you have Appearance > Colors set to "Always use the colors and 
background specified by the web page"? I do have that enabled.


We really need to know what "images always too big" looks like to you.

This is what your index page looks like to me in my SeaMonkey.

 Click the image twice to see the full size image.

--
P&G Gymnastics Championships
August 21-24, 2014

GO Bucs! GO Steelers!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Dennis]

Patrick Turner wrote:
[...]
> 
> Best question in last 24hrs, IMHO = "What's better than SeaMonkey?"
> 
[...]
> 
> So, what's best html composer for humble simple pages like mine?
> 
> Patrick Turner.
> 

I don't know about "better than" or "best" but I do know that
OpenOffice.org Writer or Libre Office Writer will generate an html
version of their 'Writer' documents. (A simple "Save As" with an .html
extension) You can set background color, insert & resize pictures and
write text with formatting of font, style, size and color.

OpenOffice.org and LIbreOffice are based on the same open source code so
behave almost identical. The GUI may look different though functionally
is almost the same. Either "may" work for your purposes. They generate
fairly clean and simple html for simple pages. They do not add a lot of
propitiatory code like the Microsoft products. Both are fairly large
downloads and they have Windows, Mac, and Linux versions. You can try
either or both. You can read and edit your Microsoft Word documents.

OpenOffice.org:  http://www.openoffice.org/
LibreOffice: https://www.libreoffice.org/

I've looked at a couple of your pages and in order to get the single
line spacing like you have, you will need to use a [SHIFT][ENTER] at the
end of your text lines. That generates an html  (line break) instead
of a  (paragraph). Paragraph leaves a blank line between lines.

If you don't like them for your purposes, no need to rant and rage about
it, they are not primarily designed to write html. That is just an added
bonus.

If you do try them and can see potential for your needs feel free to ask
questions either here, the online communities (both have communities) or
email me (I use a valid email address). Once you learn how to use it, I
think it will give you cleaner more uniform html.

Dennis

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Daniel pounded out :




Hey, Patrick (or some other interested party), just to prove us wrong,
could you try the following.
1.download one of the web page files from your website and save it
to your hard disk somewhere,
2.check out the file size in your Windows Explorer,
3.open that file in MS Word
4,make one, very simple, change (maybe change the word "and" to "ad")
5.save that file
6.check out the file size in your Windows Explorer
7.make one, very simple, change (maybe change the word "and" to "ad")
8.save that file
9.open that file in SM Composer
10.make one, very simple, change (maybe change the word "and" to "ad")
11.save that file
12.check out the file size in your Windows Explorer

Is there much difference between to two saved file sizes??

(I don't have MS Word!!  I wonder if OpenOffice/LibreOffice are as
sloppy as MS Word?? I'm guessing not!!)



I posted this up-thread a day or two ago ...

"Just for yucks I took the index.php page from one of my sites which is 
4.5Kb, opened it in Word, made one line bold, saved it.  It is now 
22.5Kb.  The original file has 81 lines.  The new one is 653 lines!"



--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
"You've broken the speed of the sound of loneliness ..." - John Prine
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Daniel]

On 22/08/14 19:57, Patrick Turner wrote:



Einstein said good design requires simplicity, but not too simple. The vast 
bulk of Hugh Manity, and Hew Womanity want SIMPLE.


Patrick, if humanity wants simple, why, when you reply to posts here, do 
you copy and paste into MS Word, "And I put all their comments in 
italics", and "I convert to plain text then back to html and I then can 
type in my reply within their text using a nice font."??


Why not just hit "Reply", add your comments and then just hit "Send"?? 
That's simple, isn't it??


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140415200419

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140408191805

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Patrick Turner wrote:

> If I set text size at 13 for Arial in SeaMonkey composer, it is about
> right for Firefox and Chrome.

If you set text size, you ignore the preferences of your reader who is
the only person who cares about such things; your job as author is to
communicate content; you should leave it entirely to your readers to
decide at what size that content is to be displayed, since they (and
only they) know what size works best for their eyes, their monitor,
and their environment.

Philip Taylor

Hmm, sure, but I expect that others would not want to see my pages how I might 
see them when I test how they look in different browsers. If I get it right on 
my PC, its far more likely they'll see it well without changing zoom settings. 
Or accusing me of ruining their eyes because size is too small. I had a guy 
complain about that, and so I told him my settings and how big it appeared on 
my screen in millimetres, and I told him my settings and I said that font size 
is easily changed with zoom but it all was too much for the bloke to 
understand. He expected me to use very different text size to that which 
everyone else including me thought was fine. He'd held a public service job for 
30 years, and to me he looked far dumber than I know I could be. I Can't please 
everyone Philip.

Best question in last 24hrs, IMHO = "What's better than SeaMonkey?"

I find that I understand the world mainly because I compare so many things to 
so many other things. This can be frightfully anti-social, but others have 
valued my perceptions, when I was right, and we all laughed when I was wrong. 

So, what's best html composer for humble simple pages like mine?

Patrick Turner.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Daniel]

On 22/08/14 19:25, Patrick Turner wrote:

It seems like many say here that MS Word and Front Page are poor html coders, 
and that the coded page has huge size compared to say SeaMonkey.
I just looked at 'properties' of 6 of my webpages I have listed in my local 
turneraudio.com.au folder, and 5 were between 32kB and 64kB, all done in SeaMonkey. ONE 
was created with MS Word, maybe 5 years old on my XP PC, and its 100kB, so its got more 
stuff which must be html because the text isn't much different in quantity to other 
pages. So, it seems to me the MS Word is NOT bloating up the content to a huge amount. If 
I did use Front Page, maybe it would be the case, but after reading 10 pages of 46 listed 
on how to use Front Page I saw SFA about disadvantages and nothing about comparisons to 
other composers. I saw a lot about how to make a website which makes money, but I don't 
want that, and I don't want the Front Page "themes" or styles and piles of 
other junk which is all nice and pretty to some, but ugly to me, and all done to con ppl 
into paying for something rather than teaching a craft.

My pages have many schematics which are mostly .gif, monochrome, ie, just plain 
black and white, No Frills, Bells, Whistles. ( NFBW ) The size of images is 
additional to what I say above because they are kept in separate folders.
Total website is 58.3MB, 965 Files, 105 Folders.
Don't ask me what average file or average folder size is. I'm a PC dummy right?

Somebody once said 10 years ago my website would be Hugh Mungouslee Huge if it 
was in FP. Someone else even prepared a FP version and gave me a copy on CD and 
I had to be polite because I hated everything I saw, and then my site was only 
20MB in Netscape. I didn't even bother to find how big it was.

Patrick Turner.

Hey, Patrick (or some other interested party), just to prove us wrong, 
could you try the following.
1.	download one of the web page files from your website and save it to 
your hard disk somewhere,

2.  check out the file size in your Windows Explorer,
3.  open that file in MS Word
4,  make one, very simple, change (maybe change the word "and" to "ad")
5.  save that file
6.  check out the file size in your Windows Explorer
7.  make one, very simple, change (maybe change the word "and" to "ad")
8.  save that file
9.  open that file in SM Composer
10. make one, very simple, change (maybe change the word "and" to "ad")
11. save that file
12. check out the file size in your Windows Explorer

Is there much difference between to two saved file sizes??

(I don't have MS Word!!  I wonder if OpenOffice/LibreOffice are as 
sloppy as MS Word?? I'm guessing not!!)


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140415200419

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140408191805

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Daniel Concluded.
"""O.K., so the consensus is that MS Word produces garbage'ish code.

Is there a utility that Patrick can fed his MS Word code to which might
clean it up, so producing similar results in various browsers??""" 

Just what is so Gar Berish about MS Word?

I reply to many emails using html or "rich text". I don't like plain text 
because ppl send me lots of emails which look horrible, bad selections of text 
size and font, hard to read, etc, so if the message is html or plain and looks 
crook, I convert to plain text then back to html and I then can type in my 
reply within their text using a nice font. 

And I put all their comments in italics, and it looks to them I really take 
them seriously, and consider, and listen, and I edit a few times until my reply 
which usually is 5 times the size of theirs looks well, and is good prose, etc. 
I like emails because its a chance to write a good letter to someone.

Its amazing how many ppl hate emailing, because it sucks their time, and they 
are natural dumbos with very low quotient for inter-personal communications. 
The world has been full of such ppl since we evolved from monkeys, they avoid 
the reply to messages with ignorant gusto, they know all about the FU2 
principle in life.

I just went to my OE emailer and I can't see how to view html used in their 
post, or in what I have composed. But it is damned wonderful to be able to use 
something that's so automatic.
 
So many ppl don't delete past messages so that an email exchange starts small 
but after 5 emails the size goes HUGE and it all goes back and forth for no 
reason.
But, so what? there's a torrent of spam, and a huge amount of traffic from 
robots, and an immense amount of bums, tits, cocks, fannies whizzing down wires 
and fibres in porno, plus huge amounts of second rate entertainment produced by 
Hollywood or maybe Bollywood et all, all of Farcepuke, Twatter. So, what's all 
the fuss about html junk?

Einstein said good design requires simplicity, but not too simple. The vast 
bulk of Hugh Manity, and Hew Womanity want SIMPLE. This is a desirable want but 
not if everyone presents to others as being a simpleton. Fude for thort, no?

Anyway, just what is really better, simpler, than SeaMonkey?

Patrick Turner. 
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Philip Taylor]

Patrick Turner wrote:


If I set text size at 13 for Arial in SeaMonkey composer, it is about
right for Firefox and Chrome.


If you set text size, you ignore the preferences of your reader who is 
the only person who cares about such things; your job as author is to 
communicate content; you should leave it entirely to your readers to 
decide at what size that content is to be displayed, since they (and

only they) know what size works best for their eyes, their monitor,
and their environment.

Philip Taylor
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

It seems like many say here that MS Word and Front Page are poor html coders, 
and that the coded page has huge size compared to say SeaMonkey.
I just looked at 'properties' of 6 of my webpages I have listed in my local 
turneraudio.com.au folder, and 5 were between 32kB and 64kB, all done in 
SeaMonkey. ONE was created with MS Word, maybe 5 years old on my XP PC, and its 
100kB, so its got more stuff which must be html because the text isn't much 
different in quantity to other pages. So, it seems to me the MS Word is NOT 
bloating up the content to a huge amount. If I did use Front Page, maybe it 
would be the case, but after reading 10 pages of 46 listed on how to use Front 
Page I saw SFA about disadvantages and nothing about comparisons to other 
composers. I saw a lot about how to make a website which makes money, but I 
don't want that, and I don't want the Front Page "themes" or styles and piles 
of other junk which is all nice and pretty to some, but ugly to me, and all 
done to con ppl into paying for something rather than teaching a craft.

My pages have many schematics which are mostly .gif, monochrome, ie, just plain 
black and white, No Frills, Bells, Whistles. ( NFBW ) The size of images is 
additional to what I say above because they are kept in separate folders. 
Total website is 58.3MB, 965 Files, 105 Folders.
Don't ask me what average file or average folder size is. I'm a PC dummy right?

Somebody once said 10 years ago my website would be Hugh Mungouslee Huge if it 
was in FP. Someone else even prepared a FP version and gave me a copy on CD and 
I had to be polite because I hated everything I saw, and then my site was only 
20MB in Netscape. I didn't even bother to find how big it was. 

Patrick Turner. 

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Daniel]

On 22/08/14 12:21, MCBastos wrote:

Interviewed by CNN on 21/08/2014 08:30, Daniel told the world:


Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or, to put
it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??


Not very much. It's ridiculously verbose, it doesn't use styles
efficiently, it uses lots of presentational tags and styles, it doesn't
even manage to be consistent in the way it applies all the
presentational crap... and if you save as "web page" instead of "web
page, filtered" it manages to be even WORSE, spreading all sorts of
proprietary crap around.

But recent versions at least commit relatively few validation errors.
Making a page generated by Word 2003 validate was a job to be done only
by fully certified masochists.

And, by the way... the other tool mentioned was FrontPage. Which even
Microsoft gave up on -- it was discontinued about eight years ago, and
even back then it was widely considered to produce terrible code.


O.K., so the consensus is that MS Word produces garbage'ish code.

Is there a utility that Patrick can fed his MS Word code to which might 
clean it up, so producing similar results in various browsers??


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140415200419

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140408191805

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Patrick Turner wrote:

> The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to allow SIMPLE
> minded ppl like myself to make a SIMPLE website

The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to save you having to think.  Fine, if that
is what you want, then go with it.  For myself, if there is no
intellectual value in an exercise, then it is pointless.  Each to his own.

Philip Taylor

If I had the time to become an expert at typing up html BY HAND, ie, write te 
text, then add all the stuff you don't see behind the text, then I'd agree 
there would be some value. But just what Intellectual Value? I don't see this 
being the case because the intellectual value is in the text, about the subject 
you wish to involve your mind, and applying html coding is mere donkey work 
which has been successfully computerized since the Internet began, so much so 
that I do not have to apply html to all my emails and since 2001 when I bought 
a PV and learnt to type, not one email was Pharqued Up by some mistake in html.
Of all the wonders, automatic html ranks amoung the greats. 

It is because I never stop thinking about 1,001 things with so many questions I 
ask of my mind that I don't have time to be a html donkey. 

I found out yesterday that if I type up a webpage in MS Word, I can save it as 
a web page and that seems to so a better job than SeaMonkey, although MS 
Nerdarians have made it difficult to suit bloaks like me who LIKE SIMPLE STUFF 
and who merely want a website page to be like a page in a well produced text 
book of 1960, often written by much finer minds than your OR mine.
Im into INFORMATION, and I don't need web stuff sexed up, acting on minds of 
others like a con artiste, treating real info with disdain, and so on, which 
seems to be what Front page is all about - MONEY. Phark money, I have plenty, 
I'm getting old, and I want to share my interest in electronics even though so 
many would condemn for being primitive, regressive, idiotic, 
technologically-incorrect, etc, like someone who'd like life to go back to 
1950s with steam trains, AM radio, no internet, etc, etc, etc, etc.

The use of MS Word allows me to change size of images as inserted into page 
being composed. The text size can also be changed so that the combination of 
text size and image size is a delight to read without scrolling horizontally. 
Of course I like my pages to have text extending only 1/2 way across a screen 
before starting a new line and I've never been able to work out line wrapping 
to suit ME. If I do get auto line wrapping, when I reduce the window size the 
text lines become way too short, so I manually line wrap, and when making 
window 1/2 size the text lines stay same length. Nothing worse than text going 
all the way across a 41cm screen. 
If ppl save my images, they are mostly all made to fill and A4 page if printed 
without having to change image size and ruin clarity of image.

Computers are supposed to all this basic stuff to suit US. 

If I set text size at 13 for Arial in SeaMonkey composer, it is about right for 
Firefox and Chrome. But SM and FF both display images too large relative to 
text size on MY PC, and so far nobody is able to really say why. But I don't 
roll up into a little ball of depressed misery, I try to figure out a solution 
anyway. 

Patrick Turner.



___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[MCBastos]

Interviewed by CNN on 21/08/2014 08:30, Daniel told the world:

> Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or, to put 
> it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??

Not very much. It's ridiculously verbose, it doesn't use styles
efficiently, it uses lots of presentational tags and styles, it doesn't
even manage to be consistent in the way it applies all the
presentational crap... and if you save as "web page" instead of "web
page, filtered" it manages to be even WORSE, spreading all sorts of
proprietary crap around.

But recent versions at least commit relatively few validation errors.
Making a page generated by Word 2003 validate was a job to be done only
by fully certified masochists.

And, by the way... the other tool mentioned was FrontPage. Which even
Microsoft gave up on -- it was discontinued about eight years ago, and
even back then it was widely considered to produce terrible code.

-- 
MCBastos

This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized
use will be prosecuted under the DMCA.

-=-=-
... Sent from my IBM PCjr.
* Added by TagZilla 0.7a1 running on Seamonkey *
Get it at http://xsidebar.mozdev.org/modifiedmailnews.html#tagzilla
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Ray_Net pounded out :

Ed Mullen wrote, On 21/08/2014 19:52:

NFN Smith pounded out :

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

Daniel wrote:


Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or,
to put
it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??


Back in the day, MS Word was always listed as a terrible web page
generator, coming in behind only MS Publisher and MS Excel for the
honors
of "worst possible tool." I doubt it has improved. All those MS
products
fill the HTML with bloated proprietary junk so they can "restore" the
document to their native format.

In other words, use something else.



Still is.

One of the effects of this is that if you copy content from something
produced in Word, and paste into anything else that supports HTML
content, then you get all the useless Microsoft HTML code (including
unused style and font definitions) in the target document.

This is especially noticeable if somebody copies content from a Word
document into an email message that has HTML formatting enabled.  I've
seen one paragraph messages that are nearly 20K.

Microsoft's intent is that you can use Word as web content editor,
publish to the web, and then be able to copy from the web and edit again
in Word with no loss of fidelity or content.  It's one of the things
that works reasonably well in a Microsoft-centric corporate environment
(including Microsoft servers and users using Internet Explorer -- e.g.,
a corporate Intranet), but is considerably less effective for the
general public, especially when a lot of the tools used don't have a
Microsoft logo in the startup splash screen.

Smith



Just for yucks I took the index.php page from one of my sites which is
4.5Kb, opened it in Word, made one line bold, saved it. It is now
22.5Kb.  The original file has 81 lines.  The new one is 653 lines!


If you are paid by the number of lines of code, you will be rich now :-)


Damn!  Never thought of that.  Perhaps that's Microsoft's plot?

For such a successful and smart company they do keep doing incredibly 
dumb stuff.  And it's not like no has ever noticed, eh?


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
"Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few people are interested 
and the frog dies of it." - E. B. White

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ray_Net]

Ed Mullen wrote, On 21/08/2014 19:52:

NFN Smith pounded out :

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

Daniel wrote:

Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or, 
to put

it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??


Back in the day, MS Word was always listed as a terrible web page
generator, coming in behind only MS Publisher and MS Excel for the 
honors
of "worst possible tool." I doubt it has improved. All those MS 
products

fill the HTML with bloated proprietary junk so they can "restore" the
document to their native format.

In other words, use something else.



Still is.

One of the effects of this is that if you copy content from something
produced in Word, and paste into anything else that supports HTML
content, then you get all the useless Microsoft HTML code (including
unused style and font definitions) in the target document.

This is especially noticeable if somebody copies content from a Word
document into an email message that has HTML formatting enabled.  I've
seen one paragraph messages that are nearly 20K.

Microsoft's intent is that you can use Word as web content editor,
publish to the web, and then be able to copy from the web and edit again
in Word with no loss of fidelity or content.  It's one of the things
that works reasonably well in a Microsoft-centric corporate environment
(including Microsoft servers and users using Internet Explorer -- e.g.,
a corporate Intranet), but is considerably less effective for the
general public, especially when a lot of the tools used don't have a
Microsoft logo in the startup splash screen.

Smith



Just for yucks I took the index.php page from one of my sites which is 
4.5Kb, opened it in Word, made one line bold, saved it. It is now 
22.5Kb.  The original file has 81 lines.  The new one is 653 lines!



If you are paid by the number of lines of code, you will be rich now :-)
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

NFN Smith pounded out :

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

Daniel wrote:


Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or, to put
it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??


Back in the day, MS Word was always listed as a terrible web page
generator, coming in behind only MS Publisher and MS Excel for the honors
of "worst possible tool." I doubt it has improved. All those MS products
fill the HTML with bloated proprietary junk so they can "restore" the
document to their native format.

In other words, use something else.



Still is.

One of the effects of this is that if you copy content from something
produced in Word, and paste into anything else that supports HTML
content, then you get all the useless Microsoft HTML code (including
unused style and font definitions) in the target document.

This is especially noticeable if somebody copies content from a Word
document into an email message that has HTML formatting enabled.  I've
seen one paragraph messages that are nearly 20K.

Microsoft's intent is that you can use Word as web content editor,
publish to the web, and then be able to copy from the web and edit again
in Word with no loss of fidelity or content.  It's one of the things
that works reasonably well in a Microsoft-centric corporate environment
(including Microsoft servers and users using Internet Explorer -- e.g.,
a corporate Intranet), but is considerably less effective for the
general public, especially when a lot of the tools used don't have a
Microsoft logo in the startup splash screen.

Smith



Just for yucks I took the index.php page from one of my sites which is 
4.5Kb, opened it in Word, made one line bold, saved it.  It is now 
22.5Kb.  The original file has 81 lines.  The new one is 653 lines!


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Ever wonder what the speed of lightning would be if it didn't zigzag?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[NFN Smith]

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

Daniel wrote:


Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or, to put
it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??


Back in the day, MS Word was always listed as a terrible web page
generator, coming in behind only MS Publisher and MS Excel for the honors
of "worst possible tool." I doubt it has improved. All those MS products
fill the HTML with bloated proprietary junk so they can "restore" the
document to their native format.

In other words, use something else.



Still is.

One of the effects of this is that if you copy content from something 
produced in Word, and paste into anything else that supports HTML 
content, then you get all the useless Microsoft HTML code (including 
unused style and font definitions) in the target document.


This is especially noticeable if somebody copies content from a Word 
document into an email message that has HTML formatting enabled.  I've 
seen one paragraph messages that are nearly 20K.


Microsoft's intent is that you can use Word as web content editor, 
publish to the web, and then be able to copy from the web and edit again 
in Word with no loss of fidelity or content.  It's one of the things 
that works reasonably well in a Microsoft-centric corporate environment 
(including Microsoft servers and users using Internet Explorer -- e.g., 
a corporate Intranet), but is considerably less effective for the 
general public, especially when a lot of the tools used don't have a 
Microsoft logo in the startup splash screen.


Smith

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Beauregard T. Shagnasty]

Daniel wrote:

> Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or, to put
> it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??

Back in the day, MS Word was always listed as a terrible web page 
generator, coming in behind only MS Publisher and MS Excel for the honors 
of "worst possible tool." I doubt it has improved. All those MS products 
fill the HTML with bloated proprietary junk so they can "restore" the 
document to their native format. 

In other words, use something else.

-- 
   -bts
   -This space for rent, but the price is high
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Daniel]

On 21/08/14 20:45, Trane Francks wrote:

On 8/21/14 5:01 PM, Patrick Turner wrote:

On Monday, 18 August 2014 19:02:08 UTC+10, Patrick Turner  wrote:

I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.


Originally, I asked for a simple fix because of suspected SM problems.
I suspected my monitor and card had a problem, but I think Ive ruled
this out today.

I cannot get my SM version 2.26 to work very well.

So, I learnt more how to use Front Page and then figured I didn't need
that because I could simply type up a page in Microsoft Word, and save
the page as a web page just as I always have. I can more easily adjust
sizes of images AND text so that when viewed in Firefox it looks OK
using zoom at 100%. In Chrome text and pics look small but adjusting
zoom to +110% makes it look right, about same as Firefox. Its a vast
improvement on SeaMonkey.

Much that Front Page offers is explained in a 46 page how-to-do about
websites which it is presumed that the webmaster wants to generate
income from a website. I know that no matter how good a website is
about tube based audio, there's no money to be made unless you sell
amps cheaper than made in China.

OK, I just want a website to contain a vast amount of info on how to
use vacuum tubes. Its an intellectual persuit, not commercial. So,
turns out MS word is fine.

There's only one thing I cannot find how-to-do in MS word and that
change the page background colour from glary WHITE to a parchment shade.

Thanks for all your input. I am not a man to stop trying to teach
myself stuff while waiting for simply understood doable help. I might
wait ages.

Someone emailed me to say I couldn't ever get different browsers to
display my pages identically unless I had far more knowledge about
html coding. Yeah sure, I'm one of the dumbest dumbos who's ever
lived. But since 2001, my webpages have looked virtually identical in
Netscape, SeaMonkey, Firefox and Chrome. Difficulties have only been
with recent SeaMonkey. The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to allow SIMPLE
minded ppl like myself to make a SIMPLE website containing far more
useful info about tube amps than the many slick commercial websites
which seem to me to leave out all useful info and all they want is
your money after conning you with good looking web graphics.

Keep well, and if that's impossible, try at least to stay sane,
Patrick Turner.


While fonts and the like will always be somewhat different from browser
to browser, plain ol' HTML code displays images _identically_ in all
browsers. I repeat (for the 3rd time at least): If you're having issues
with browsers displaying images at different sizes, it's a byproduct of
your browser settings, _not_ of your Composer/Front Page/Dreamweaver,
etc. settings.

Somehow, however, I suspect this will fail to compute.

Your site images all look the same in SeaMonkey, Safari and Firefox. All
of them. On every page I dared to open. Not a single, solitary image
looked even remotely different in any of the three browsers. NOT A
SINGLE ONE.

This is not an HTML, CSS, Composer or other design issue. It simply
isn't. The problem you keep describing is not the problem you're
experiencing. Honest.

Your browser DISPLAY settings are the problem. My last comment on the
matter.


I can't say I noticed, previously, where Patrick might have given us the 
clue 


Quote
 So, turns out MS word is fine.
End Quote.

Does anyone know how well MS Word might compose an HTML file, or, to put 
it another way, how clean is a HTML file written in MS Word??


--
Daniel

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
Firefox/29.0 SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140415200419

or
User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:29.0) Gecko/20100101 
SeaMonkey/2.26 Build identifier: 20140408191805

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Trane Francks]

On 8/21/14 5:01 PM, Patrick Turner wrote:

On Monday, 18 August 2014 19:02:08 UTC+10, Patrick Turner  wrote:

I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers like Chrome 
"got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle with sizes so this 
occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer 
programs. None worked properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front 
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.


Originally, I asked for a simple fix because of suspected SM problems. I 
suspected my monitor and card had a problem, but I think Ive ruled this out 
today.

I cannot get my SM version 2.26 to work very well.

So, I learnt more how to use Front Page and then figured I didn't need that 
because I could simply type up a page in Microsoft Word, and save the page as a 
web page just as I always have. I can more easily adjust sizes of images AND 
text so that when viewed in Firefox it looks OK using zoom at 100%. In Chrome 
text and pics look small but adjusting zoom to +110% makes it look right, about 
same as Firefox. Its a vast improvement on SeaMonkey.

Much that Front Page offers is explained in a 46 page how-to-do about websites 
which it is presumed that the webmaster wants to generate income from a 
website. I know that no matter how good a website is about tube based audio, 
there's no money to be made unless you sell amps cheaper than made in China.

OK, I just want a website to contain a vast amount of info on how to use vacuum 
tubes. Its an intellectual persuit, not commercial. So, turns out MS word is 
fine.

There's only one thing I cannot find how-to-do in MS word and that change the 
page background colour from glary WHITE to a parchment shade.

Thanks for all your input. I am not a man to stop trying to teach myself stuff 
while waiting for simply understood doable help. I might wait ages.

Someone emailed me to say I couldn't ever get different browsers to display my 
pages identically unless I had far more knowledge about html coding. Yeah sure, 
I'm one of the dumbest dumbos who's ever lived. But since 2001, my webpages 
have looked virtually identical in Netscape, SeaMonkey, Firefox and Chrome. 
Difficulties have only been with recent SeaMonkey. The whole idea of WYSIWYG is 
to allow SIMPLE minded ppl like myself to make a SIMPLE website containing far 
more useful info about tube amps than the many slick commercial websites which 
seem to me to leave out all useful info and all they want is your money after 
conning you with good looking web graphics.

Keep well, and if that's impossible, try at least to stay sane,
Patrick Turner.

While fonts and the like will always be somewhat different from browser 
to browser, plain ol' HTML code displays images _identically_ in all 
browsers. I repeat (for the 3rd time at least): If you're having issues 
with browsers displaying images at different sizes, it's a byproduct of 
your browser settings, _not_ of your Composer/Front Page/Dreamweaver, 
etc. settings.


Somehow, however, I suspect this will fail to compute.

Your site images all look the same in SeaMonkey, Safari and Firefox. All 
of them. On every page I dared to open. Not a single, solitary image 
looked even remotely different in any of the three browsers. NOT A 
SINGLE ONE.


This is not an HTML, CSS, Composer or other design issue. It simply 
isn't. The problem you keep describing is not the problem you're 
experiencing. Honest.


Your browser DISPLAY settings are the problem. My last comment on the 
matter.

--
/
// Trane Francks   tr...@tranefrancks.com   Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Philip Taylor]

Patrick Turner wrote:


The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to allow SIMPLE
minded ppl like myself to make a SIMPLE website


The whole idea of WYSIWYG is to save you having to think.  Fine, if that 
is what you want, then go with it.  For myself, if there is no 
intellectual value in an exercise, then it is pointless.  Each to his own.


Philip Taylor
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

On Monday, 18 August 2014 19:02:08 UTC+10, Patrick Turner  wrote:
> I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers like 
> Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle with sizes so 
> this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and suggested I used other 
> WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked properly, and had bigger bothers than 
> SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT 
> IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Originally, I asked for a simple fix because of suspected SM problems. I 
suspected my monitor and card had a problem, but I think Ive ruled this out 
today. 

I cannot get my SM version 2.26 to work very well.

So, I learnt more how to use Front Page and then figured I didn't need that 
because I could simply type up a page in Microsoft Word, and save the page as a 
web page just as I always have. I can more easily adjust sizes of images AND 
text so that when viewed in Firefox it looks OK using zoom at 100%. In Chrome 
text and pics look small but adjusting zoom to +110% makes it look right, about 
same as Firefox. Its a vast improvement on SeaMonkey.

Much that Front Page offers is explained in a 46 page how-to-do about websites 
which it is presumed that the webmaster wants to generate income from a 
website. I know that no matter how good a website is about tube based audio, 
there's no money to be made unless you sell amps cheaper than made in China. 

OK, I just want a website to contain a vast amount of info on how to use vacuum 
tubes. Its an intellectual persuit, not commercial. So, turns out MS word is 
fine. 

There's only one thing I cannot find how-to-do in MS word and that change the 
page background colour from glary WHITE to a parchment shade. 

Thanks for all your input. I am not a man to stop trying to teach myself stuff 
while waiting for simply understood doable help. I might wait ages. 

Someone emailed me to say I couldn't ever get different browsers to display my 
pages identically unless I had far more knowledge about html coding. Yeah sure, 
I'm one of the dumbest dumbos who's ever lived. But since 2001, my webpages 
have looked virtually identical in Netscape, SeaMonkey, Firefox and Chrome. 
Difficulties have only been with recent SeaMonkey. The whole idea of WYSIWYG is 
to allow SIMPLE minded ppl like myself to make a SIMPLE website containing far 
more useful info about tube amps than the many slick commercial websites which 
seem to me to leave out all useful info and all they want is your money after 
conning you with good looking web graphics. 

Keep well, and if that's impossible, try at least to stay sane,
Patrick Turner.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Ed Mullen pounded out :

Philip Taylor pounded out :



Ed Mullen wrote:


Educate yourself and then come back if you have meaningful questions.


There is no such thing as a stupid question; there are only stupid
answers.  Your answer does not qualify as "stupid", but it is highly
offensive and could (and should) have been cast in an infinitely
more friendly manner.  I agree with your analysis that Patrick's
problems are, in the main, caused by a lack of knowledge/understanding,
but naive as his questions may be, they deserve to be answered with
respect, not with arrogance.

Philip Taylor


I did not use the word "stupid" in my one-sentence post which you
correctly quoted above.

Further, this entire thread, once unraveled, demonstrated that the OP is
woefully ignorant of any knowledge of HTML or CSS and refuses to try to
learn, depending on a horribly inadequate and antiquated WYSIWYG program
that he, apparently, recently discovered, much to all of our
consternation. And, he has never, despite requests, properly and clearly
framed his questions and issues.  Hence, my frustrations in trying to
help him and, because of his omissions of detail, my inability, despite
my efforts, to accomplish that.

I do not apologize.  I do not consider my comments offensive in any way.

This is a "help" forum.  If one who queries won't listen, he opens
himself up to honest criticism.  Which is what I gave.

When I built my first crude Web site in about 1995 I knew nothing and it
looked like it.  But most sites did.  I set out to learn.  It's a hobby
and I enjoy it.  And I'm pretty good at it.  Hardly perfect, but pretty
damned good within my skill set.

Someone who expects ANY WYSIWYG program to produce a reliable,
cross-browser page that will validate is dreaming.



The OP should either set out to acquire the skill set or hire someone to
create for him a viable and validating site.



And, by the way, this is a forum for SeaMonkey support, which has 
nothing to do with this discussion since the OP's issues have nothing to 
do with SeaMonkey programatic shortcomings:  They have to do with his 
lack of knowledge.


It more properly should be in one of these forums:

comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html
comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
comp.infosystems.www.authoring


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Where do forest rangers go to get away from it all?
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Philip Taylor pounded out :



Ed Mullen wrote:


Educate yourself and then come back if you have meaningful questions.


There is no such thing as a stupid question; there are only stupid
answers.  Your answer does not qualify as "stupid", but it is highly
offensive and could (and should) have been cast in an infinitely
more friendly manner.  I agree with your analysis that Patrick's
problems are, in the main, caused by a lack of knowledge/understanding,
but naive as his questions may be, they deserve to be answered with
respect, not with arrogance.

Philip Taylor


I did not use the word "stupid" in my one-sentence post which you 
correctly quoted above.


Further, this entire thread, once unraveled, demonstrated that the OP is 
woefully ignorant of any knowledge of HTML or CSS and refuses to try to 
learn, depending on a horribly inadequate and antiquated WYSIWYG program 
that he, apparently, recently discovered, much to all of our 
consternation. And, he has never, despite requests, properly and clearly 
framed his questions and issues.  Hence, my frustrations in trying to 
help him and, because of his omissions of detail, my inability, despite 
my efforts, to accomplish that.


I do not apologize.  I do not consider my comments offensive in any way.

This is a "help" forum.  If one who queries won't listen, he opens 
himself up to honest criticism.  Which is what I gave.


When I built my first crude Web site in about 1995 I knew nothing and it 
looked like it.  But most sites did.  I set out to learn.  It's a hobby 
and I enjoy it.  And I'm pretty good at it.  Hardly perfect, but pretty 
damned good within my skill set.


Someone who expects ANY WYSIWYG program to produce a reliable, 
cross-browser page that will validate is dreaming.




The OP should either set out to acquire the skill set or hire someone to 
create for him a viable and validating site.


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
UnHallmark Card: Happy birthday! You look great for your age. Almost 
Lifelike!

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Geoff Welsh]

WaltS48 wrote:

On 08/19/2014 09:31 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers
like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle
with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by zooming
out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference. In
Firefox, images appear the same, too big.
But in Chrome, images are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I
made the images when I saved them from an image program. The relative
text size is also correct.

So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have
enough settable settings which are then recognized by SM and
derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose "left hand doesn't
know what the right hand does  does"

Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background colors.

The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe
my images at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over text.
I don't want to do that, and I don't wan the text to extend right
across wide screen before it line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide screen x
25.5cm high.

Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which
instructed different browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me
the "view source" gave me what looked like enormously complex html and
I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it work AS I DAMN WELL
WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey
nerd@somewhere.

Trying to find help anywhere left me feeling I needed help.

Gregariously, Patrick Turner.



After reviewing this entire thread my best advice is this.

1.  Get a good tutorial/book on HTML/CSS
2.  Stop posting your issues here, it's got nothing to do with any
Mozilla product
3.  Subscribe to the following groups and be prepared for the "advice"

-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html
-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring

The "problems" you are having aren't caused by SeaMonkey, they are
caused by your total lack of knowledge of HTML/CSS.  SeaMonkey's
Composer component (or other such programs) are not a panacea for
ignorance.  Nor were they meant to be.

Educate yourself and then come back if you have meaningful questions.




Any money to be made on redoing old sites in HTML5 and CSS3?

I'm having fun redoing Patrick's index page for my own education.



it's definitely a fun hobby, not a good job.
GW
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Philip Taylor]

Ed Mullen wrote:


Educate yourself and then come back if you have meaningful questions.


There is no such thing as a stupid question; there are only stupid
answers.  Your answer does not qualify as "stupid", but it is highly
offensive and could (and should) have been cast in an infinitely
more friendly manner.  I agree with your analysis that Patrick's
problems are, in the main, caused by a lack of knowledge/understanding,
but naive as his questions may be, they deserve to be answered with
respect, not with arrogance.

Philip Taylor
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[WaltS48]

On 08/19/2014 09:31 PM, Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers
like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle
with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by zooming
out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference. In
Firefox, images appear the same, too big.
But in Chrome, images are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I
made the images when I saved them from an image program. The relative
text size is also correct.

So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have
enough settable settings which are then recognized by SM and
derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose "left hand doesn't
know what the right hand does  does"

Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background colors.

The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe
my images at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over text.
I don't want to do that, and I don't wan the text to extend right
across wide screen before it line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide screen x
25.5cm high.

Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which
instructed different browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me
the "view source" gave me what looked like enormously complex html and
I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it work AS I DAMN WELL
WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey
nerd@somewhere.

Trying to find help anywhere left me feeling I needed help.

Gregariously, Patrick Turner.



After reviewing this entire thread my best advice is this.

1.  Get a good tutorial/book on HTML/CSS
2.  Stop posting your issues here, it's got nothing to do with any
Mozilla product
3.  Subscribe to the following groups and be prepared for the "advice"

-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html
-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring

The "problems" you are having aren't caused by SeaMonkey, they are
caused by your total lack of knowledge of HTML/CSS.  SeaMonkey's
Composer component (or other such programs) are not a panacea for
ignorance.  Nor were they meant to be.

Educate yourself and then come back if you have meaningful questions.




Any money to be made on redoing old sites in HTML5 and CSS3?

I'm having fun redoing Patrick's index page for my own education.

--
P&G Gymnastics Championships
August 21-24, 2014

GO Bucs! GO Steelers!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers like Chrome 
"got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle with sizes so this 
occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer 
programs. None worked properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front 
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always enlarges them and no amount of 
trying to control image size by zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" 
makes any difference. In Firefox, images appear the same, too big.
But in Chrome, images are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the 
images when I saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also 
correct.

So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have enough settable settings 
which are then recognized by SM and derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose 
"left hand doesn't know what the right hand does  does"

Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background colors.

The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe my images 
at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over text. I don't want to do 
that, and I don't wan the text to extend right across wide screen before it 
line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide screen x 25.5cm high.

Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which instructed different 
browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me the "view source" gave me what 
looked like enormously complex html and I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it 
work AS I DAMN WELL WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey 
nerd@somewhere.

Trying to find help anywhere left me feeling I needed help.

Gregariously, Patrick Turner.



After reviewing this entire thread my best advice is this.

1.  Get a good tutorial/book on HTML/CSS
2.  Stop posting your issues here, it's got nothing to do with any 
Mozilla product

3.  Subscribe to the following groups and be prepared for the "advice"

-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring.html
-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets
-  comp.infosystems.www.authoring

The "problems" you are having aren't caused by SeaMonkey, they are 
caused by your total lack of knowledge of HTML/CSS.  SeaMonkey's 
Composer component (or other such programs) are not a panacea for 
ignorance.  Nor were they meant to be.


Educate yourself and then come back if you have meaningful questions.

--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
The good old days: When sex was dirty & Michael Jackson was black.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Trane Francks]

On 8/19/14 9:31 AM, Patrick Turner wrote:

Gee, Thanks for large response to my post.
It seems most of you can read my site OK and don't have problems with images 
appearing at different sizes relative to text size in many different browsers 
including Sea Monkey, and page colors are OK. But I gave up on Internet 
Explorer because search programs kept stealing my settings. IE let so much crap 
in, and on my XP machine it just freezes up if I try to start it. I have no 
clue what to do about IE, I tried upgrading it to later versions, NOTHING 
worked. I now know to never use the shit.

Mr Smith seemed he might have summed it up, and suggested I try screen 
resolution change and or zoom change and others said I ought to try altering 
pixel sizes in advanced edit. All far easier said than done.
Advanced edit in SM didn't change any image sizes while editing! I cannot stop 
SM making images look too big, enlarging by about 1.5x, and DUMB SM doesn't 
allow both text size AND image sizes to be altered during composing and done so 
it still all looks well on other browsers - on MY PC anyway.

Possibly my flat screen PC monitor is the problem and the plug in card is crap, because 3 
years ago when I was on my first and then second 17" CRO monitor I never had this bother. 
I dare not touch ANYTHING in how the monitor is set up now because it was sold to me by an 
"expert" who went to some trouble to get the right card after struggling over 3 
visits with terrible picture quality compared to the old CRO. Finally the expert got the 
flatty to give a good clear picture. BUT, no colors in page with SM, Firefox, and wrong image 
sizes, BUT Chrome is just fine, and all other general PC uses and image prep is fine.

So thanks for the input, but I remain quite ignorant on why SM and Firefox 
display my own pages so badly while its perfectly OK on Chrome

Smith said"For that, please give Safe Mode a try:  Help -> Restart with 
Add-ons disabled. Besides temporarily disabling your add-ons,it will allow you
to see how things behave with mostly default settings for personal
preferences.
I may be wrong, but I think chances are significant that you're bumping
into an obscure preferences setting that may be causing your problems.
Smith

The trouble with PCs is that whenever I try something someone recommends, it 
never works out, and I waste time. There was only ever a remote chance someone 
might know something here, because of COWPAT theorem.

COWPAT = Chance Of Working Perfectly Any Time = 1 / N squared, where N is the 
number of things about which blokes disagree with at forums or things I feel 
vague about, or things I forgot, or things Bill Gates didn't tell everyone 
about, or things SM blokes didn't think would ever happen. And it is then so 
easy for N = 20, so Cowpat = 1/400 = 0.0025, = so there's SFA chance to fix 
anything, except get a new PC and hope it works better.

Well, I did get a "better" PC 2 years ago, with Windows 7, but I found MSPaint 
had been dumbed down even worse than it was in XP' It was best in W98. And because I draw 
so many schematics with MSPaint, I kept going with XP and the imported flat screen 
because if it ain't broke completely, I must keep usin' it.

Of course expert could have sold me dud he didn't know was so duddy. Duddies 
dud out bad when used beyond a narrow range of compatibles. Every possible way 
of start up with flat screen was tried while trying to get it to work. Hoo Noze 
what's really wrong? But only $100 involved, not a grand, phew.

Patrick Turner.




Patrick,

Since several of us are able to view your site in different browsers 
with virtually identical results, it indicates that this is _not_ a 
Composer issue. This is happening on the browser side in your profile. 
In other words, it's a display problem specific to your browser 
settings, not a web-development issue specific to the Composer component 
itself.


--
/
// Trane Francks   tr...@tranefrancks.com   Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Rick Merrill]

On 8/18/2014 6:38 PM, chicagofan wrote:

Paul B. Gallagher wrote:

chicagofan wrote:


All I am doing is copying an I-phone picture from an e-mail sent to me
... and pasting it into another e-mail ... and it changes size from what
I was sent.   Why?


Look at the source code (CTRL-U) of the incoming message and see if it 
specifies a size for the image. If the original
specified 50% and you paste the image without specifying its size, you'll get 
100% by default. Here's one example of how
HTML tells the browser to use an image:




Thanks, Paul.  I'll look into this, and come back when I can ask intelligent 
questions.   I'm pretty sure I will have
more.;)
bj


If you use windows, right click on the image and choose 'send to   email recipient' and you should be asked if you want to 
downsize the image.   That is what I do for resending high res images.



___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[MCBastos]

Interviewed by CNN on 18/08/2014 22:21, Ed Mullen told the world:

> Scaling an inmage via HTML is horrid practice.  The image file still 
> needs to be downloaded in its full size, wasting bandwidth.
> 
> The proper practice is to use an image program to re-size the original 
> to an appropriate Web size.
> 
> For instance, an original image of 2592 x 1944 and 1.24 Mb can be 
> reduced to something like 800 x 500 and 118 Kb.  A much more manageable 
> Web scenario.
> 
> If you use the HTML of:
> 
> 
> 
> and pic.jpg is actually 2592 x 1944 and 1.24 Mb, that is what the server 
> sends.  Re-scale it using something like IrfanView.  It's free.
> 
> Some people are still on slower connections with data caps.  I'm not but 
> that doesn't mean I ignore that fact for people who visit my sites.
> 
> I scale my photos/images accordingly.

It's a matter of tradeoffs.

Of course, if you are going to make a thumbnail gallery of
high-resolution, high-quality photos, there's no question that creating
the thumbnails as separate, tiny files is the better route --
particularly because it's likely that the visitor will only want to see
the full-size version of a few of those images. On the more extreme
examples, the gains can be huge -- like saving 99% on the downloads.

OTOH, if there are few images, the original image is not that much
larger than the reduced-size one, an you want to make the full-size one
available to the visitor, using HTML resizing can even give the visitor
a net gain by not downloading two different versions of the same image.
It also allows you to dynamically resize the image to the viewport.

-- 
MCBastos

This message has been protected with the 2ROT13 algorithm. Unauthorized
use will be prosecuted under the DMCA.

-=-=-
... Sent from my Intellivision.
* Added by TagZilla 0.7a1 running on Seamonkey *
Get it at http://xsidebar.mozdev.org/modifiedmailnews.html#tagzilla
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[WaltS48]

On 08/18/2014 05:21 AM, Trane Francks wrote:

On 8/18/14 6:02 PM, Patrick Turner wrote:


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers
like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle
with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by zooming
out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference. In
Firefox, images appear the same, too big.
But in Chrome, images are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I
made the images when I saved them from an image program. The relative
text size is also correct.

So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have
enough settable settings which are then recognized by SM and
derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose "left hand doesn't
know what the right hand does  does"

Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background colors.

The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe
my images at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over text.
I don't want to do that, and I don't wan the text to extend right
across wide screen before it line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide screen x
25.5cm high.

Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which
instructed different browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me
the "view source" gave me what looked like enormously complex html and
I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it work AS I DAMN WELL
WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey
nerd@somewhere.

Trying to find help anywhere left me feeling I needed help.

Gregariously, Patrick Turner.


You've made this claim of SM and FF sizing your images incorrectly
before. I _cannot_ reproduce your claim. Your site looks virtually the
same in each of Safari, SeaMonkey and Firefox.

I suspect you have somehow changed settings locally for the SeaMonkey
and Firefox browsers, which is causing the display to be nonstandard in
some way.




Index page and the other page I checked appear the same to me in 
SeaMonkey and Firefox.


Turner Audio on the index page in my Chromium is smaller. I did not 
check other pages with Chromium.


Patrick posting some screenshots of what he sees would be helpful, but 
it appears he doesn't want to do anything suggested to solve his problem.


--
P&G Gymnastics Championships
August 21-24, 2014

GO Bucs! GO Steelers!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[NFN Smith]

Patrick Turner wrote:



Smith said


"For that, please give Safe Mode a try:  Help -> Restart with
Add-ons disabled. Besides temporarily disabling your add-ons,it
will allow you to see how things behave with mostly default
settings for personal preferences. I may be wrong, but I think
chances are significant that you're bumping into an obscure
preferences setting that may be causing your problems. Smith




The trouble with PCs is that whenever I try something someone
recommends, it never works out, and I waste time. There was only ever
a remote chance someone might know something here, because of COWPAT
theorem.


What I suggested wasn't necessarily to your problem, so much as a way of 
trying to find out what the problem is.  As noted previously, others 
contributing to this thread haven't been able to reproduce your problem.


What you get by starting in Safe Mode is seeing what happens if you run 
Seamonkey with default settings.  If the problem goes away, then it's 
something in your user profile that needs to be adjusted (or if you 
don't have a lot of stuff in your user profile that you care about, move 
to a new profile).


If you still have the same symptoms in Safe Mode, then the problem is 
probably something outside of Seamonkey, and how Seamonkey interacts 
with other parts of your computer, most likely the video hardware.


So Chrome doesn't show the same kind of problems. That's fine, but it's 
a completely different piece of software -- different developers, 
different design expectations.  A better point of comparison would be 
Firefox, as both Firefox and Seamonkey use the same Gecko rendering 
engine, even if the user interfaces between the two, are different.  If 
you're seeing the same kind of problems with Firefox, then the problem 
seems likely to be related to Gecko.


I suggested changing your display resolution, because I run mine as high 
as my hardware will handle, and your hardware may behave differently. 
Changing resolution is easy enough to do in Windows 7: Right-click on 
the desktop and select Screen Resolution.  Will that solve your problem? 
 Who knows, but it's something to check, and it's easy enough to do.



The other thing you might want to try is checking Seamonkey's 
appearances settings (Edit -> Preferences - Appearance -> Content), and 
seeing which settings there may be affecting.  (This is one of the 
places where a start in Safe mode will help, as if you're running 
non-defaults with any of these, Safe Mode will reset to defaults).


I won't try to analyze all the settings, but I will note that on my own 
machine, I have hardware acceleration disabled.  I found that some time 
ago, I was having some display problems (resolution of fonts, I think), 
and when I disabled hardware acceleration, that problem went away.


One other note -- if you're using the Composer, you do know that it's no 
longer supported or developed, don't you?  I do use the composer but 
only for maintaining a couple of HTML documents.  For any serious work 
for doing a web page, you probably should be using a different tool. NVU 
and Kompozer are also both based on Mozilla code -- they're newer than 
the Seamonkey composer, but also abandoned/unsupported.  If you want to 
stay with a Mozilla-based tool, the one that's supported is Blue 
Griffon, although there are some changes in the user interface that you 
have to get used to.


I'm not sure why the Seamonkey developers continue to include the 
Composer, if it's no longer supported, but I do appreciate having it 
there, for what it can do.


Smith





___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Larry S.]

Patrick Turner wrote:

Gee, Thanks for large response to my post.
It seems most of you can read my site OK and don't have problems with images 
appearing at different sizes relative to text size in many different browsers 
including Sea Monkey, and page colors are OK. But I gave up on Internet 
Explorer because search programs kept stealing my settings. IE let so much crap 
in, and on my XP machine it just freezes up if I try to start it. I have no 
clue what to do about IE, I tried upgrading it to later versions, NOTHING 
worked. I now know to never use the shit.

Mr Smith seemed he might have summed it up, and suggested I try screen 
resolution change and or zoom change and others said I ought to try altering 
pixel sizes in advanced edit. All far easier said than done.
Advanced edit in SM didn't change any image sizes while editing! I cannot stop 
SM making images look too big, enlarging by about 1.5x, and DUMB SM doesn't 
allow both text size AND image sizes to be altered during composing and done so 
it still all looks well on other browsers - on MY PC anyway.

Possibly my flat screen PC monitor is the problem and the plug in card is crap, because 3 
years ago when I was on my first and then second 17" CRO monitor I never had this bother. 
I dare not touch ANYTHING in how the monitor is set up now because it was sold to me by an 
"expert" who went to some trouble to get the right card after struggling over 3 
visits with terrible picture quality compared to the old CRO. Finally the expert got the 
flatty to give a good clear picture. BUT, no colors in page with SM, Firefox, and wrong image 
sizes, BUT Chrome is just fine, and all other general PC uses and image prep is fine.

So thanks for the input, but I remain quite ignorant on why SM and Firefox 
display my own pages so badly while its perfectly OK on Chrome

Smith said"For that, please give Safe Mode a try:  Help -> Restart with 
Add-ons disabled. Besides temporarily disabling your add-ons,it will allow you
to see how things behave with mostly default settings for personal
preferences.
I may be wrong, but I think chances are significant that you're bumping
into an obscure preferences setting that may be causing your problems.
Smith

The trouble with PCs is that whenever I try something someone recommends, it 
never works out, and I waste time. There was only ever a remote chance someone 
might know something here, because of COWPAT theorem.

COWPAT = Chance Of Working Perfectly Any Time = 1 / N squared, where N is the 
number of things about which blokes disagree with at forums or things I feel 
vague about, or things I forgot, or things Bill Gates didn't tell everyone 
about, or things SM blokes didn't think would ever happen. And it is then so 
easy for N = 20, so Cowpat = 1/400 = 0.0025, = so there's SFA chance to fix 
anything, except get a new PC and hope it works better.

Well, I did get a "better" PC 2 years ago, with Windows 7, but I found MSPaint 
had been dumbed down even worse than it was in XP' It was best in W98. And because I draw 
so many schematics with MSPaint, I kept going with XP and the imported flat screen 
because if it ain't broke completely, I must keep usin' it.

Of course expert could have sold me dud he didn't know was so duddy. Duddies 
dud out bad when used beyond a narrow range of compatibles. Every possible way 
of start up with flat screen was tried while trying to get it to work. Hoo Noze 
what's really wrong? But only $100 involved, not a grand, phew.

Patrick Turner.



Probably way off base here, and note that I have never used Composer 
(not a Web designer). My comment comes solely from your statement above, 
which can be read to mean that you are trying some of the suggestions 
when in Composer mode. The suggestion to try safe mode assumed, I 
believe, that you'd be looking at your site through the SM browser.


Just a thought. If I read it wrong, I apologize for taking your time.

Larry S.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[WaltS48]

On 08/18/2014 10:55 AM, Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by
zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference.
In Firefox, images appear the same, too big. But in Chrome, images
are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the images when I
saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also
correct.


Composer inserts an image at its original size.  To do anything else
would be bad practice.  And you really shouldn't "resize" an image using
HTML.



So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have
enough settable settings which are then recognized by SM and
derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose "left hand
doesn't know what the right hand does  does"


What settings specifically are you talking about?


Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background
colors.


Of course they do.  Post a URL of a page exhibiting what you're describing.



The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe
my images at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over
text. I don't want to do that, and I don't wan the text to extend
right across wide screen before it line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide
screen x 25.5cm high.


You have no idea what screen size the visitors to your site will have.
Stop designing to your screen size.

As for wrapping, HTML text will, if necessary, use the entire width of a
user's viewport before wrapping.  Unless you tell is to do something
else as in:


Put a whole bunch of text here ...
...




Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which
instructed different browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me
the "view source" gave me what looked like enormously complex html
and I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it work AS I DAMN
WELL WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey
nerd@somewhere.


Well, if you'd adequately describe exactly /what/ your problem is AND
post a URL we could look at it and help.

Additionally, as I mentioned up-thread, from a peek at your source code
it appears that you used Microsoft Word to edit that URL above.  You
didn't mention that.  Also, I see:

http://www.fg-a.com";>

which is indicative of heaven knows what since the reference is to a
free image site.




Looking at the source code of that site and some pages makes me want to 
play with redoing it in HTML5 and CSS, but all those (s) give 
me a headache.


Site and pages look good to me in both Firefox 31.0 and SeaMonkey 
2.26.1. Very easy to read, even at a 67% zoom setting.


--
P&G Gymnastics Championships
August 21-24, 2014

GO Bucs! GO Steelers!
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Ed Mullen wrote:

Paul B. Gallagher pounded out :

chicagofan wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by
zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference.
In Firefox, images appear the same, too big. But in Chrome, images
are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the images when I
saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also
correct.


Composer inserts an image at its original size.  To do anything else
would be bad practice.  And you really shouldn't "resize" an image
using HTML.


My comment may be off topic, because this thread seems to be about a web
site, but I just want to comment that when composing e-mails in HTML, if
I include an I-phone image, for some reason it is always blown up in
size and I've never understood why.  I don't mess with anything related
to pictures/images because I don't even have a camera, and just forward
other people's pictures occasionally.  [My font size has been increased
to 16, but nothing else.]   Would love to stop this if anyone has any
suggestions.


That's the size it's always been. The iphone silently scales it to fit;
SeaMonkey will do so if you click it in a web page or instruct SM to do
so in composition.

To scale it during composition, choose the "Dimensions" tab when
inserting it, or do Format | Image properties to return to that same
dialog. Note that if you use the Advanced Edit dialog to specify one or
the other of height and width but not both, only that parameter will
change -- the image won't retain its original aspect ratio, so you'll
get a distortion of the shape. So for example, if you specify width =
25% (of the visitor's window size), the height will remain unchanged.


Scaling an inmage via HTML is horrid practice.  The image file still
needs to be downloaded in its full size, wasting bandwidth.

The proper practice is to use an image program to re-size the original
to an appropriate Web size.

For instance, an original image of 2592 x 1944 and 1.24 Mb can be
reduced to something like 800 x 500 and 118 Kb.  A much more manageable
Web scenario.

If you use the HTML of:



and pic.jpg is actually 2592 x 1944 and 1.24 Mb, that is what the server
sends.  Re-scale it using something like IrfanView.  It's free.

Some people are still on slower connections with data caps.  I'm not but
that doesn't mean I ignore that fact for people who visit my sites.

I scale my photos/images accordingly.


This is true, but only to a limited extent.

Let's say you resize to 800x500 using a graphics program (I'm fine with 
that). But you can't predict the visitor's display size or parameters, 
nor his font settings. So on some screens, the image may dominate the 
view, while on others it may look puny. If you want it to be half the 
column width for design reasons, you can still do that without forcing 
the viewer to download 1.24 MB. Win-win.


--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Paul B. Gallagher pounded out :

chicagofan wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by
zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference.
In Firefox, images appear the same, too big. But in Chrome, images
are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the images when I
saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also
correct.


Composer inserts an image at its original size.  To do anything else
would be bad practice.  And you really shouldn't "resize" an image
using HTML.


My comment may be off topic, because this thread seems to be about a web
site, but I just want to comment that when composing e-mails in HTML, if
I include an I-phone image, for some reason it is always blown up in
size and I've never understood why.  I don't mess with anything related
to pictures/images because I don't even have a camera, and just forward
other people's pictures occasionally.  [My font size has been increased
to 16, but nothing else.]   Would love to stop this if anyone has any
suggestions.


That's the size it's always been. The iphone silently scales it to fit;
SeaMonkey will do so if you click it in a web page or instruct SM to do
so in composition.

To scale it during composition, choose the "Dimensions" tab when
inserting it, or do Format | Image properties to return to that same
dialog. Note that if you use the Advanced Edit dialog to specify one or
the other of height and width but not both, only that parameter will
change -- the image won't retain its original aspect ratio, so you'll
get a distortion of the shape. So for example, if you specify width =
25% (of the visitor's window size), the height will remain unchanged.


Scaling an inmage via HTML is horrid practice.  The image file still 
needs to be downloaded in its full size, wasting bandwidth.


The proper practice is to use an image program to re-size the original 
to an appropriate Web size.


For instance, an original image of 2592 x 1944 and 1.24 Mb can be 
reduced to something like 800 x 500 and 118 Kb.  A much more manageable 
Web scenario.


If you use the HTML of:



and pic.jpg is actually 2592 x 1944 and 1.24 Mb, that is what the server 
sends.  Re-scale it using something like IrfanView.  It's free.


Some people are still on slower connections with data caps.  I'm not but 
that doesn't mean I ignore that fact for people who visit my sites.


I scale my photos/images accordingly.





--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
Law of Probability Dispersal: Whatever it is that hits the fan will not 
be evenly distributed.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

Gee, Thanks for large response to my post.
It seems most of you can read my site OK and don't have problems with images 
appearing at different sizes relative to text size in many different browsers 
including Sea Monkey, and page colors are OK. But I gave up on Internet 
Explorer because search programs kept stealing my settings. IE let so much crap 
in, and on my XP machine it just freezes up if I try to start it. I have no 
clue what to do about IE, I tried upgrading it to later versions, NOTHING 
worked. I now know to never use the shit. 

Mr Smith seemed he might have summed it up, and suggested I try screen 
resolution change and or zoom change and others said I ought to try altering 
pixel sizes in advanced edit. All far easier said than done.
Advanced edit in SM didn't change any image sizes while editing! I cannot stop 
SM making images look too big, enlarging by about 1.5x, and DUMB SM doesn't 
allow both text size AND image sizes to be altered during composing and done so 
it still all looks well on other browsers - on MY PC anyway. 

Possibly my flat screen PC monitor is the problem and the plug in card is crap, 
because 3 years ago when I was on my first and then second 17" CRO monitor I 
never had this bother. I dare not touch ANYTHING in how the monitor is set up 
now because it was sold to me by an "expert" who went to some trouble to get 
the right card after struggling over 3 visits with terrible picture quality 
compared to the old CRO. Finally the expert got the flatty to give a good clear 
picture. BUT, no colors in page with SM, Firefox, and wrong image sizes, BUT 
Chrome is just fine, and all other general PC uses and image prep is fine. 

So thanks for the input, but I remain quite ignorant on why SM and Firefox 
display my own pages so badly while its perfectly OK on Chrome

Smith said"For that, please give Safe Mode a try:  Help -> Restart with 
Add-ons disabled. Besides temporarily disabling your add-ons,it will allow you
to see how things behave with mostly default settings for personal
preferences.
I may be wrong, but I think chances are significant that you're bumping
into an obscure preferences setting that may be causing your problems.
Smith

The trouble with PCs is that whenever I try something someone recommends, it 
never works out, and I waste time. There was only ever a remote chance someone 
might know something here, because of COWPAT theorem.

COWPAT = Chance Of Working Perfectly Any Time = 1 / N squared, where N is the 
number of things about which blokes disagree with at forums or things I feel 
vague about, or things I forgot, or things Bill Gates didn't tell everyone 
about, or things SM blokes didn't think would ever happen. And it is then so 
easy for N = 20, so Cowpat = 1/400 = 0.0025, = so there's SFA chance to fix 
anything, except get a new PC and hope it works better. 

Well, I did get a "better" PC 2 years ago, with Windows 7, but I found MSPaint 
had been dumbed down even worse than it was in XP' It was best in W98. And 
because I draw so many schematics with MSPaint, I kept going with XP and the 
imported flat screen because if it ain't broke completely, I must keep usin' it.

Of course expert could have sold me dud he didn't know was so duddy. Duddies 
dud out bad when used beyond a narrow range of compatibles. Every possible way 
of start up with flat screen was tried while trying to get it to work. Hoo Noze 
what's really wrong? But only $100 involved, not a grand, phew.   

Patrick Turner.



___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[NFN Smith]

Patrick Turner wrote:

Example pages of my site are athttp://www.turneraudio.com.au


I'm reading in Seamonkey, and having no problems with size on either 
photos or text rendition.


I will note that I often resize font displays (using ctrl and the mouse 
scroll wheel), and I also have the Image Zoom extension, which allows me 
to resize image displays, as needed.  On this particular page, 
everything looks correct, and I don't see any need to do any resizing.


Maybe there's something related to screen resolution -- I normally run 
1600x1200.


If you're consistently having size problems in Seamonkey, where others 
responding to you are reporting that they can't reproduce your 
experience, my guess is that there's something tweaked with your user 
profile.


For that, please give Safe Mode a try:  Help -> Restart with Add-ons 
disabled.  Besides temporarily disabling your add-ons, it will allow you 
to see how things behave with mostly default settings for personal 
preferences.


I may be wrong, but I think chances are significant that you're bumping 
into an obscure preferences setting that may be causing your problems.


Smith
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[chicagofan]

Paul B. Gallagher wrote:

chicagofan wrote:


All I am doing is copying an I-phone picture from an e-mail sent to me
... and pasting it into another e-mail ... and it changes size from what
I was sent.   Why?


Look at the source code (CTRL-U) of the incoming message and see if it 
specifies a size for the image. If the original specified 50% and you 
paste the image without specifying its size, you'll get 100% by 
default. Here's one example of how HTML tells the browser to use an 
image:




Thanks, Paul.  I'll look into this, and come back when I can ask 
intelligent questions.   I'm pretty sure I will have more.;)

bj
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Paul B. Gallagher]

chicagofan wrote:


All I am doing is copying an I-phone picture from an e-mail sent to me
... and pasting it into another e-mail ... and it changes size from what
I was sent.   Why?


Look at the source code (CTRL-U) of the incoming message and see if it 
specifies a size for the image. If the original specified 50% and you 
paste the image without specifying its size, you'll get 100% by default. 
Here's one example of how HTML tells the browser to use an image:




--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[chicagofan]

Paul B. Gallagher wrote:

chicagofan wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by
zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference.
In Firefox, images appear the same, too big. But in Chrome, images
are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the images when I
saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also
correct.


Composer inserts an image at its original size.  To do anything else
would be bad practice.  And you really shouldn't "resize" an image
using HTML.


My comment may be off topic, because this thread seems to be about a web
site, but I just want to comment that when composing e-mails in HTML, if
I include an I-phone image, for some reason it is always blown up in
size and I've never understood why.  I don't mess with anything related
to pictures/images because I don't even have a camera, and just forward
other people's pictures occasionally.  [My font size has been increased
to 16, but nothing else.]   Would love to stop this if anyone has any
suggestions.


That's the size it's always been. The iphone silently scales it to 
fit; SeaMonkey will do so if you click it in a web page or instruct SM 
to do so in composition.


I don't think so ... the camera isn't involved in what I'm doing, or 
maybe I just don't understand what you are saying.   :)


To scale it during composition, choose the "Dimensions" tab when 
inserting it, or do Format | Image properties to return to that same 
dialog. Note that if you use the Advanced Edit dialog to specify one 
or the other of height and width but not both, only that parameter 
will change -- the image won't retain its original aspect ratio, so 
you'll get a distortion of the shape. So for example, if you specify 
width = 25% (of the visitor's window size), the height will remain 
unchanged.


If you find all this inconvenient, just attach the image instead of 
inserting it in the body of your message.




All I am doing is copying an I-phone picture from an e-mail sent to me 
... and pasting it into another e-mail ... and it changes size from what 
I was sent.   Why?

bj
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Paul B. Gallagher]

chicagofan wrote:

Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by
zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference.
In Firefox, images appear the same, too big. But in Chrome, images
are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the images when I
saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also
correct.


Composer inserts an image at its original size.  To do anything else
would be bad practice.  And you really shouldn't "resize" an image
using HTML.


My comment may be off topic, because this thread seems to be about a web
site, but I just want to comment that when composing e-mails in HTML, if
I include an I-phone image, for some reason it is always blown up in
size and I've never understood why.  I don't mess with anything related
to pictures/images because I don't even have a camera, and just forward
other people's pictures occasionally.  [My font size has been increased
to 16, but nothing else.]   Would love to stop this if anyone has any
suggestions.


That's the size it's always been. The iphone silently scales it to fit; 
SeaMonkey will do so if you click it in a web page or instruct SM to do 
so in composition.


To scale it during composition, choose the "Dimensions" tab when 
inserting it, or do Format | Image properties to return to that same 
dialog. Note that if you use the Advanced Edit dialog to specify one or 
the other of height and width but not both, only that parameter will 
change -- the image won't retain its original aspect ratio, so you'll 
get a distortion of the shape. So for example, if you specify width = 
25% (of the visitor's window size), the height will remain unchanged.


If you find all this inconvenient, just attach the image instead of 
inserting it in the body of your message.


--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[chicagofan]

Ed Mullen wrote:

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by
zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference.
In Firefox, images appear the same, too big. But in Chrome, images
are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the images when I
saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also
correct.


Composer inserts an image at its original size.  To do anything else 
would be bad practice.  And you really shouldn't "resize" an image 
using HTML.


My comment may be off topic, because this thread seems to be about a web 
site, but I just want to comment that when composing e-mails in HTML, if 
I include an I-phone image, for some reason it is always blown up in 
size and I've never understood why.  I don't mess with anything related 
to pictures/images because I don't even have a camera, and just forward 
other people's pictures occasionally.  [My font size has been increased 
to 16, but nothing else.]   Would love to stop this if anyone has any 
suggestions.

bj
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Ed Mullen]

Patrick Turner pounded out :


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other
browsers like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to
fiddle with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always
enlarges them and no amount of trying to control image size by
zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" makes any difference.
In Firefox, images appear the same, too big. But in Chrome, images
are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the images when I
saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also
correct.


Composer inserts an image at its original size.  To do anything else 
would be bad practice.  And you really shouldn't "resize" an image using 
HTML.




So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have
enough settable settings which are then recognized by SM and
derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose "left hand
doesn't know what the right hand does  does"


What settings specifically are you talking about?


Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background
colors.


Of course they do.  Post a URL of a page exhibiting what you're describing.



The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe
my images at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over
text. I don't want to do that, and I don't wan the text to extend
right across wide screen before it line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide
screen x 25.5cm high.


You have no idea what screen size the visitors to your site will have. 
Stop designing to your screen size.


As for wrapping, HTML text will, if necessary, use the entire width of a 
user's viewport before wrapping.  Unless you tell is to do something 
else as in:



Put a whole bunch of text here ...
...




Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which
instructed different browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me
the "view source" gave me what looked like enormously complex html
and I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it work AS I DAMN
WELL WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey
nerd@somewhere.


Well, if you'd adequately describe exactly /what/ your problem is AND 
post a URL we could look at it and help.


Additionally, as I mentioned up-thread, from a peek at your source code 
it appears that you used Microsoft Word to edit that URL above.  You 
didn't mention that.  Also, I see:


http://www.fg-a.com";>

which is indicative of heaven knows what since the reference is to a 
free image site.


--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net/
As the shopper placed her groceries on the checkout stand, the bagger
asked her paper or plastic? Doesn't matter, she replied, I'm bisackual.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Paul B. Gallagher]

Trane Francks wrote:


On 8/18/14 6:02 PM, Patrick Turner wrote:


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers
like Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle
with sizes so this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and
suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer programs. None worked
properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.
 ...


You've made this claim of SM and FF sizing your images incorrectly
before. I _cannot_ reproduce your claim. Your site looks virtually the
same in each of Safari, SeaMonkey and Firefox.

I suspect you have somehow changed settings locally for the SeaMonkey
and Firefox browsers, which is causing the display to be nonstandard in
some way.


Ditto here. Tried with Internet Exploiter 11, the image sizing seems 
appropriate there as well as in my SeaMonkey. I don't see the problem.


How about a screen cap?

--
War doesn't determine who's right, just who's left.
--
Paul B. Gallagher

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Re: Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Trane Francks]

On 8/18/14 6:02 PM, Patrick Turner wrote:


I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers like Chrome 
"got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle with sizes so this 
occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and suggested I used other WYSIWYG composer 
programs. None worked properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks anyway.Even Front 
Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE PLEASE.

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always enlarges them and no amount of 
trying to control image size by zooming out in "compose page" or "browse page" 
makes any difference. In Firefox, images appear the same, too big.
But in Chrome, images are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the 
images when I saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also 
correct.

So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have enough settable settings 
which are then recognized by SM and derivatives. In other words, SM is like a man whose 
"left hand doesn't know what the right hand does  does"

Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background colors.

The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe my images 
at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over text. I don't want to do 
that, and I don't wan the text to extend right across wide screen before it 
line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide screen x 25.5cm high.

Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which instructed different 
browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me the "view source" gave me what 
looked like enormously complex html and I didn't know what to add or subtract to make it 
work AS I DAMN WELL WANT IT TO and not to some vague recipe thought up by some dopey 
nerd@somewhere.

Trying to find help anywhere left me feeling I needed help.

Gregariously, Patrick Turner.

You've made this claim of SM and FF sizing your images incorrectly 
before. I _cannot_ reproduce your claim. Your site looks virtually the 
same in each of Safari, SeaMonkey and Firefox.


I suspect you have somehow changed settings locally for the SeaMonkey 
and Firefox browsers, which is causing the display to be nonstandard in 
some way.


--
/
// Trane Francks   tr...@tranefrancks.com   Tokyo, Japan
// Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey

Images in SeaMonkey makes images always too big.

[Patrick Turner]

I did post recently about how to set text size in SM so other browsers like 
Chrome "got it right". By trial and error I managed to fiddle with sizes so 
this occurs. Thanks to those who commented, and suggested I used other WYSIWYG 
composer programs. None worked properly, and had bigger bothers than SM. Thanks 
anyway.Even Front Page is more awkward to use than SM. AL I WANT IS SIMPLE 
PLEASE. 

Sea Monkey always inserts images where I want them but it always enlarges them 
and no amount of trying to control image size by zooming out in "compose page" 
or "browse page" makes any difference. In Firefox, images appear the same, too 
big.
But in Chrome, images are exactly as I meant them to be, same as I made the 
images when I saved them from an image program. The relative text size is also 
correct.

So it seems like SM and derivative stuff from Mozilla don't have enough 
settable settings which are then recognized by SM and derivatives. In other 
words, SM is like a man whose "left hand doesn't know what the right hand does  
does"  

Also, SM or FireFox does not display text colors or background colors.

The other trouble is with line wrapping while typing text to describe my images 
at my pages. I have to do it manually after going over text. I don't want to do 
that, and I don't wan the text to extend right across wide screen before it 
line wraps, its a 41.5cm wide screen x 25.5cm high.

Example pages of my site are at http://www.turneraudio.com.au

I tried to see if there were major differences in html source which instructed 
different browsers in different ways. But it seemed to me the "view source" 
gave me what looked like enormously complex html and I didn't know what to add 
or subtract to make it work AS I DAMN WELL WANT IT TO and not to some vague 
recipe thought up by some dopey nerd@somewhere. 

Trying to find help anywhere left me feeling I needed help.

Gregariously, Patrick Turner.

___
support-seamonkey mailing list
support-seamonkey@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/support-seamonkey