Re: [WSG] Lines on top - anyone see why?
G'day, it looks fine to me. FF0.8, Win98SE, 1280x1024. Something I found (not related to this problem) is with the vertical menu on the products page. The text needs i little more padding on the left as it's overlapping the grey bullets, no biggy. Site displayed fine apart from that. I haven't tested in IE (I suspect that's were the problems emerge?) Darian Michael Kear wrote: Second try – I didn’t see anyone post about this yesterday – everyone was too busy debating PHP and javascript instead. Perhaps today then ….. I’ve added a ‘specials’ box to my auslegs site using that cute round-corner technique we read about on this list a few days ago. (Mountaintop Corners : http://www.alistapart.com/articles/mountaintop/) I’m really pleased with how it works and how good it looks. Except for one page. Can anyone see why the grey horizontal borders on the news page at http://auslegs.com.au/news/index.cfm are going on top of the specials box instead of underneath or stopping to the left? The CSS is at http://auslegs.com.au/styles/Auslegs.css Cheers Mike Kear AFP Webworks Windsor, NSW, Australia http://afpwebworks.com * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Tables are dead?
Did you try something along the lines of this?:
+---+
|rowdiv |
| +---+ +---+ +---+ |
| |celldiv| |celldiv| |celldiv| |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| +---+ +---+ +---+ |
+---+
+---+
|rowdiv |
| +---+ +---+ +---+ |
| |celldiv| |celldiv| |celldiv| |
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
| +---+ +---+ +---+ |
+---+
give each celldiv a percent value of rowdiv.
for example:
celldiv{
position: relative;
width: 33%;
padding: 5px;
}
rowdiv{
width: 100%;
}
I haven't played around with that. It's just a suggestion (^_^) Hope I
haven't missed something obvious as to why this method won't work.
Good luck,
Darian
Mike Pepper wrote:
It's the height aspect that's the bugger. One way to achieve this may be to
use a CSS background image to force a minimum height. Make if a few bytes
2-colour (transparent) gif. Then explain to the client that Tolstoy is a
great read if you've got the time and impose a maximum character limit which
will likely not exceed box height. This way you can retain control of a max
box height. If you can do that, you're home and dry.
Alternatively, it may be possible to use a bit of back-end sniffing before
the page proper is served if, as you say, you're going for a database driven
site. I use ASP (simply because I've got years of VBA under my belt) but you
can use PHP (or another) to deliver the pages. The idea being you parse the
associated product description string character length then base the size on
a look-up table that describes a minimum height (and width if you're going
fully elastic -- which I'd advise against, unless it be to permit variable
product columns whilst maintaining strict box width) requirement. It'll
still be a best guess because there's no accounting for word length or wrap.
I was trying to figure a dynamic solution which displayed a dummy or hidden
page that would permit interrogation of the DOM tree, find the max height of
the various product boxes then go back and serve up the page proper to that
height, knowing each product box will be of identical height.
Then I re-entered normal space and though How?
The trouble, I believe, is there are too many unknowns which creep in when
you let those horrible client-type-things free to muck up the design ;o).
There has to be a simple solution and I'm convinced it's along the lines of
determining the max box height then serving all to suit by adjusting the
vertical image height of a bg gif.
Mike Pepper
Accessible Web Developer
www.seowebsitepromotion.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Bert Doorn
Sent: 18 May 2004 15:07
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: [WSG] Tables are dead?
Thanks for all the help, people.
Unfortunately none of the examples given solve the basic problem, which is
that with anything other than tables, I cannot get multiple boxes across the
screen that have the same height on every row, without specifying a fixed
height.
Mike's example
(http://www.english-sofas.co.uk/contemporary_leather_sofas_0.htm) is nice
and clean but it won't work in my case - the boxes do not have a predictable
amount of text (can be one, two or many lines).
Patrick's example that basically turns the table on its side
(http://www.splintered.co.uk/experiments/details?id=36) is clever, but has
the same problem (and will only work for a small portion of visitors). (But
thanks for the tip - when viewed this way, it's quite obvious that I am in
fact dealing with tabular data)
I'll stick with a table but will try to cut out the empty "spacer" cells.
Hmmm
--
Bert Doorn, Better Web Design
www.betterwebdesign.com.au
Fast-loading, user-friendly websites
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] [OT] UniversalHead blog (Out of office)
so how'd you get this thread? hehe sorry. thanks for the tip, I'm setting it up now (so I won't hear your reply to my smart-ass comment I guess) ;) Neerav wrote: Making a mail filter similar to this: IF Subject contains : out of office AND Subject contains : [WSG] MOVE TO Trash Works fine for me * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] What is the Web?
I've never seen a discussion quite like this... I'm sorry is this OT? Just a sec, I'll check my dictionary (-_-; ) For all you avid dictionary readers out there - "A reference book containing an alphabetical list of words, with information given for each word, usually including meaning, pronunciation, and etymology." (source: dictionary.com) Must we be so politically correct? I mean following guidelines is one thing... this is... interesting (>_<) Mordechai Peller wrote: theGrafixGuy wrote: (the web is not the (Internet) You are CORRECT in that, the Internet is a part of the web. No, the Web is part of the Internet. RESPECTFULLY, you sir are completely INCORRECT in the claim that SPAM is NOT on topic. Spam IS off topic (not that I mind, but that's a different issue). The "Internet" is the largest internet and is composed of backbone networks, mid-level networks and stub networks. (source: dictionary.com) A poor definition. There is only one Internet, which is made up of many interconnected networks. The World Wide Web, commonly referred to as the "web", primarily in the form of html and http is the most commonly known aspect of the Internet. However, the World Wide Web consists of a wide array of protocols and communications standards that range far beyond http and include EVERYTHING from internet to FTP, Gopher, Telnet, news as well as via the http protocol to transfer hypertext documents. (source: dictionary.com ) An incorrect definition. First of all, it's commonly referred to as the "Web", not "web" since it is a proper noun; the is only one Web, which can be said to be composed of smaller, local webs, which are usually referred to as a Web site, which in turn is composed of Web pages. A Web page is a hypertext document which usually refers to other hypertext document, as well as other resources (text documents, images, PDF documents, programs via CGI, etc.) located via a Universal Resource Locater (URL) and transfered via HyperText Transfer Protocol (http). Just because a Web browser is able to access a file via File Transfer Protocol (ftp), doesn't make the file part of the Web. Http, ftp, e-mail, and other protocols are used for information transfer across the Internet or an intranet. The group is the WEB Standards Group - correct? "Web" equals WORLD WIDE WEB. And the definitions are above - The group is NOT called the Internet Standards Group, nor is it called the http standards group,By the Group's own name, it leads itself to a broad category covering accessibility and many many other issues regarding use and design of the So far, so good... Internet You blew it! Understandable, though, since you were using an incorrect definition. Just because someone claims to be an authority doesn't make them one. In this case I'm correct and dictionary.com is wrong; while I'm sure there may be many time when the reverse is true. A person has to use common sense. The bottom line is that just because Spam is off topic, doesn't make it irrelevant. IMHO, off topic discussions--especially when relevant--should be allowed so long as people use discretion and keep their inclusion to a minimum. * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Compliant tree menu
Well I have very little js experience also... I do know that and "id" is meant to be used only once in a html document. Does the code still work with the repeated ids converted to class? I guess that's worth a try anyways if you haven't already ;) btw... It's Darian, not Damien (>_<) I get that a lot (-_-; ) Cheers, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Hi Damien.. yes it is js.. > > the thing that seems to cause the problemo is that the scripts i have used > use an "id" that repeats throughout the script eg and > this is the bit that wont validate... > (http://www.dynamicdrive.com/dynamicindex1/navigate1.htm) this is the one > i > really want to use as it has a memory. > > Maybe just me not implementing it properly as i am a total js > ignoramous... > :( > > Jackie Reid > Mock Orange Web Site Development > 1st Floor > 92 Victoria Street > MACKAY Q 4740 > Ph: 07 4953 4035 > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > - Original Message - > From: "Darian Cabot" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2004 12:20 PM > Subject: Re: [WSG] Compliant tree menu > > >> I'm guessing the solutions you've tried have been js? >> >> How have you tried to validate it? As long as the js is correctly >> implemented in the html (xhtml?) using the script tags it should >> validate. >> >> Maybe I've missed the point (>_<; ) >> Regards, >> >> Darian Cabot >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >> Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd >> Software Engineer / Website Design >> http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >> >> >> > Hi everyone... >> > >> > in dire straits here... >> > >> > I am desperately looking for an exploding/folding tree menu that > remembers >> > the last state of the menu when you refresh or go back to a page. Have >> > tried all the ones that seem to be available on line but they either > dont >> > do what i want, or do what i want and wont validate. Is there anything > out >> > there or should i be looking for a java script writer of my own? >> > >> > Is this OT.. if it is ...sorry... maybe you could just email me direct > if >> > you have an answer. >> > >> > >> > Jackie Reid >> > >> > >> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> >> * >> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ >> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm >> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help >> * >> >> > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] my second simple css question
Off the top of my head, here's an example...
*** In your CSS: ***
#sidebar {
position: relative;
top: 5em;
float: right;
width: 200px;
padding: 10px;
}
*** HTML: ***
Side bar stuff
Blah blah blah...
This might not work (>_<) hehe sorry... I'm in my lunch break and can't
test now. Maybe it'll help you find the solution though.
Goodluck ^^
Darian Cabot
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd
Software Engineer / Website Design
http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> I guess I probably should have just done that in the first place.
>
> Here's how it looks now, to help with the grokking...
>
> http://www.vancouvermassage.ca/screenshot.jpg
>
> Unfortunately, I have no picture of how I want it. :-) But it's very
> simple. I just want to move the sidebar down, so that some of the large
> paragraph flows above as well as beside it. Should be easy, I'd think.
>
> I tried changing the top margin, of course, but that just pushes it
> downwards without the adjacent paragraph flowing into the space above the
> sidebar.
>
> Paul
>
>
>> Do you have a picture or URL? Then we can grok it in fullness.
>>
>> Cheers
>> James
>>
>> Paul Ingraham wrote:
>>
>>> Okay, you guys made good short work of my first simple css question,
>>> and it
>>> was a great introduction to this list. Thank you all. Now it's time
>>> for
>>> another!
>>>
>>> I want a sidebar, and I've created one. Looks lovely. A couple
>>> paragraphs
>>> inside a div, floated off to the right and breaking the right margin.
>>> Little background, little border, and so far so good. Looks like this:
>>>
>>>
>>> main content main content main content
>>> main content main content main content
>>>
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>>
>>> main content main content main content
>>> main content main content main content
>>>
>>>
>>> Just one problem. The top of the sidebar is always on the same line as
>>> the
>>> adjacent paragraph. I'd rather have this:
>>>
>>>
>>> main content main content main content
>>> main content main content main content
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main sidebar sidebar sidebar sidebar
>>> main content main content main content
>>> main content main content main content
>>>
>>>
>>> Just like wrapping text around an inline image. Like so:
>>>
>>> Blah blah for a couple lines >> class="rightfloatedsidebar">rhubarb
>>> rhubarb rhubarb and the some more blah blah blah.
>>>
>>> Which obviously doesn't work, because you can't put divs inside a
>>> paragraph,
>>> but I don't know what else to do. I did try to declare div.sidebar
>>> {display:inline}, thinking that might magically make my div into an
>>> inline
>>> object, but that caused chaos.
>>>
>>> Am I making any sense? Does anyone know what I'm after... and how to
>>> do it?
>>>
>>> Thanks in advance.
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>>
>>> *
>>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>>> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> *
>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>> *
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] Compliant tree menu
I'm guessing the solutions you've tried have been js? How have you tried to validate it? As long as the js is correctly implemented in the html (xhtml?) using the script tags it should validate. Maybe I've missed the point (>_<; ) Regards, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Hi everyone... > > in dire straits here... > > I am desperately looking for an exploding/folding tree menu that remembers > the last state of the menu when you refresh or go back to a page. Have > tried all the ones that seem to be available on line but they either dont > do what i want, or do what i want and wont validate. Is there anything out > there or should i be looking for a java script writer of my own? > > Is this OT.. if it is ...sorry... maybe you could just email me direct if > you have an answer. > > > Jackie Reid > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Your opinion and feedback requested
Just checked you website. I'm using IE6SP1 on WIN98SE. All's well except for one issue. As other's mentioned the text-size is a problem at large sizes in Safari. I didn't really have a problem with large text sizes (it all seems to look ok on 'biggest' except the header breaks a bit.) My problem is at small sizes. I usually view the internet at 'smaller' in IE. The text on your page is fine on 'Medium' but the jump to 'Smaller' was huge. I'm not sure why (>_<) it goes from a good medium size at 'Medium' to tiny at 'Smaller'. 'Smallest' is microscopic. I guess this isn't a big problem at all (^_^) But it would be a bit easier for the viewer if the text sized better. Congradulations on the new site! Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- >> the >> sentinare.com layout falls apart pretty badly on my screen with just a >> single increase in text size. > > > This is true, but it's mainly the way the 30-day free trial link is > marked up with all those spans that goes kablooey and pushes the > heading below it over. It may end up being easier to make an image link > with alt text in a span to replace that. The heading div (metal) could > stand to be scaleable as well. Apart from that the layout seems to hold > together and the text flows as it should (in safari). > > Hey Paul: greetings from Mount Pleasant! > > Nelson > --- > Vancouver, BC > www.nelsonford.net > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
RE: [WSG] print headers/footers
I'm fairly sure the page-break-after won't help here.
That doesn't add some thing after a page break. E.g. it can't be used to
stick a logo after every page break (to show on the top of each new page).
page-break-after tells the browser to break the page after the element.
For example...
p {page-break-after: always;}
or...
h2 {page-break-after: avoid;}
That last one's handy ;)
You shouldn't use the page break thing often though. Oh also, if you try
and guess where the page should break... Remember people use different
paper size, margins, font size, etc, etc.
If you *need* your logo on the top of every page, pdf is really the
easiest and safest way. In saying that, that doesn't stop most people
printing straight from the webpage (>_<)
Goodluck,
Darian Cabot
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd
Software Engineer / Website Design
http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>> From: Barbara Dozetos [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [snip]
>> but
>> because we
>> can't reliably control page breaks,
>
> Page-break-after should be supported since IE4.0 (not tested
> it though) http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/page.html#page-break-props
>
> P
>
> Patrick H. Lauke
> Webmaster / University of Salford
> http://www.salford.ac.uk
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] advice re min-height
G'day Min-height and max-height are used for constraining an element. If an object in the element is smaller than min-height, then the element's height will be min-height. On the other hand, if the object is bigger than the element, the max-height will determine the element's height. That's what should happen, where the browsers actually do this is another story. My understand is that 'min-height' isn't really supported by most browsers. Or only partially supported. I could be wrong because I haven't checked this on one of those browser compatibility charts, but I've never been able to get IE to work with it. Personally I steer clear of it for the time being. Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > I'm not sure if my understanding of min-height is correct. What I want > to do is set a min-height on a div and then when there is too much info > it will automatically expand itself. > > Apparently, I need to use height as well for M$ browsers but what I > don't quite understand is how do the other browsers properly interpret > that when you have both a height and a min-height...? > > Wouldn't it possibly be easier to just use height and then > overflow:visible to achieve the same effect? > > I can test around with this but I'm curious if there is a best-practice > for this kind of thing... > > Thanks for any thoughts...v > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
RE: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute
I agree. My intention for opening links in new windows was for a very few links. Only the feature website of the month as a sample to vistors. Oh, and I will be giving the viewer the option to open the link in a new window or in the current window, so no suprises there. Thanks for all the help! > You're right, Patrick, but life is a series of compromises. I spend a lot > of effort in getting users to my site, and I don't want to go sending them > away again with a link on my site. If they want to click on a link > external to my site, they get a new window so their existing window stays > in > my site. > > It's not accessible, that's true, but if they stay inside my site, no new > windows open. And I'm not going to go sending 97% of users out of my site > with a link, just so 3% can have an accessible access to that one or two > links. > > We're talking about a minority of links on the site that lead outside the > site, and a minority of users who are affected. So I think it's a fair > compromise, to make external links less accessible. > > One of the most important aspects of a site's success is getting traffic > and > keeping it in the site, and we ought not to lose sight of that in our > pursuit of accessibility. What use is a fully accessible site that gets > pulled down because it's a failure on economic or other grounds? > > > Cheers > Mike Kear > Windsor, NSW, Australia > AFP Webworks > http://afpwebworks.com > > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Patrick Griffiths > Sent: Sunday, 18 April 2004 7:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] target="_blank" substitute > >> This is both an accessible and valid method: > > Valid yes, but accessible? > I click on a link. I look at the page. I try to click on the back > button. "What? Why doesn't this work? Oh. Because it's opened in a new > window". Close window. Return to the site (and page) I want to be on. > This whole malarkey makes the site less accessible for me, let alone for > a person who can't actually see what's going on. > > [snip] > > > Patrick Griffiths (PTG) > http://www.htmldog.com/ptg/ > http://www.htmldog.com > > > > ***** > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
[WSG] target="_blank" substitute
This is probably obvious... I would like to open a link in a new window. I used to use target="_blank" attribute, but that isn't xhtml strict. Can anyone enlighten me on a xhtml strict method? as I'd like my pages to verify ^^ Cheers, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Looking for a little peer review
Oops! Just tried it with largest text in IE 6.0 SP1 on Win98SE, I got the same problem, the right sidebar spills into the center. Different text sizes seemed fine in firfox 0.8 and netscape 7.1 (and of course Opera). Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > > -Original Message- > From: Nelson Ford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 10:24 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [WSG] Looking for a little peer review > > Hi all, this will be my first time posting to this group. > Someone just told me that my ever-in-progress personal site is > looking > strange on their screen using IE6/Win. I have tested it using > IE5.0/Win > and IE6/Win on VirtualPC, as well as with various Mac browsers, > and > have not come across any major layout issues (except for the > occasional > pixel imperfection). Apparently for this person on IE6/Win the > text in > the white main column is overlapping the right sidebar. I'm > wondering > if it may be an issue relating to a minor update of IE6/Win? > Anyway, > I'd appreciate a quick check with as many browsers as possible > just to > ensure I haven't missed anything. The central column has a > right-margin > equal to the width of the right sidebar, and the right sidebar is > absolutely positioned. > http://www.nelsonford.net/ > Thank you! > Nelson > > Nelson, > > Content of the right sidebar spills over into the center obscuring > part of the text. > MS internet explorer 6. on Win98SE with text set to "largest". > > AuntySpam, SLP Coordinator, pspug.org > > http://www.pspug.org/edu/edu.shtml > http://www.pspug.org/edu/slp/assign.shtml > http://www.pspug.org/edu/slp/slpparticipants.htm > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
RE: [WSG] Looking for a little peer review
No problems on Win98SE with... IE 6.0 SP1 FireFox 0.8 Opera 7.23 Netscape 7.1 Tested with 1024x768 and 800x600 res. Nice looking site btw :) Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Looks fine on Server 2k3 and IE6 > > Brian > > -Original Message- > From: Nelson Ford [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, April 16, 2004 10:24 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [WSG] Looking for a little peer review > > Hi all, this will be my first time posting to this group. > Someone just told me that my ever-in-progress personal site is looking > strange on their screen using IE6/Win. I have tested it using IE5.0/Win > and IE6/Win on VirtualPC, as well as with various Mac browsers, and > have not come across any major layout issues (except for the occasional > pixel imperfection). Apparently for this person on IE6/Win the text in > the white main column is overlapping the right sidebar. I'm wondering > if it may be an issue relating to a minor update of IE6/Win? Anyway, > I'd appreciate a quick check with as many browsers as possible just to > ensure I haven't missed anything. The central column has a right-margin > equal to the width of the right sidebar, and the right sidebar is > absolutely positioned. > http://www.nelsonford.net/ > Thank you! > Nelson > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
[WSG] Impressive CSS Example
The power of CSS!! hehehe (This dude has way too much time) (>_<) I didn't check it's validity :P Check it out... http://www.designdetector.com/tips/3DBorderDemo2.html Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
RE: [WSG] hiring a standards-savvy designer
Crazy... that's really not good... (._.) I'm using pair networks (http://www.pair.com) as a host and email service for my website. I don't use IMAP or POP anything, just their webmail powered by SquirrelMail. These delays can't be good for business, or this discussion forum (>_<) Sorry and I'll look into it. I had no ideas my posts were so late until recently. Regards, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > I think there must be something wrong with your email service Darian > because > I haven't seen it yet. And it's the day AFTER tomorrow already. > > Cheers > Mike Kear > > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Darian Cabot > Sent: Saturday, 3 April 2004 9:39 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] hiring a standards-savvy designer > > Sorry. Everytime I reply it takes a long time to appear in the thread. I > dunno if it's my mail service or what, but that message I wrote didn't > appear for ages. (>_<) > > > ...you might see this one by tomorrow?? :P and by that time maybe it's > also on the discussion board (-_-; ) > > > Darian Cabot > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] hiring a standards-savvy designer
Sorry. Everytime I reply it takes a long time to appear in the thread. I dunno if it's my mail service or what, but that message I wrote didn't appear for ages. (>_<) ...you might see this one by tomorrow?? :P and by that time maybe it's also on the discussion board (-_-; ) Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > This thread has already been moved offlist to the discussion room: > http://discuss.webstandardsgroup.org/archives/09.htm > > Please do not continue this thread onlist > Russ > > >> I agree Leo, programming takes a logical mind. Art takes a creative >> mind. >> However there is a grey area, and I believe that is left to the gifted >> :P >> >> A graphical designer or artist that can come up with a fresh stylish >> design AND have all the features of accessability and standards is a >> rare >> thing, I guess that's what a lot of us would love to be able to do. >> >> That's why I'm here, I would love to find the perfect balance, however i >> know it's impossible for all to agree on where that balance is. I guess >> it's more pracitical for me to try and find the majorly accepted balance >> (^_^) Did I make sence? >> >> Ok ok... BASICALLY I wanna rock at this stuff :P hehe >> > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] hiring a standards-savvy designer
> My reply didn't show the full quote... so here it is for those who will > accuse me of taking it out of context. > >>> Art is best left >>> to people that have a knack for it. But again, anyone can learn to >>> program. > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > I agree Leo, programming takes a logical mind. Art takes a creative mind. However there is a grey area, and I believe that is left to the gifted :P A graphical designer or artist that can come up with a fresh stylish design AND have all the features of accessability and standards is a rare thing, I guess that's what a lot of us would love to be able to do. That's why I'm here, I would love to find the perfect balance, however i know it's impossible for all to agree on where that balance is. I guess it's more pracitical for me to try and find the majorly accepted balance (^_^) Did I make sence? Ok ok... BASICALLY I wanna rock at this stuff :P hehe Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] My first CSS project---correction
Hi! I tested your website and it's looking nice ;) One problem though, I viewed the "about us" in 1024 X 768 resolution and it looked fine, however, in anything less (e.g. 800 X 600) the padding was a bit overwhelming! (>_<) The paragraph became a bit to skinny. Apart from that it was clear and concise. I like it (^_^) Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > hello again! > > > I have recently redesigned my business web site using CSS. I was > looking for some feedback. http://www.virtualtasks.com > > The biggest obstacle I ran into was on the "about us " Page. I am > wondering if I over used the "padding" command. > > When responding to use this e-mail address also! I am on the daily > digest for this newsgroup. so there's always a delay when reading > others responses. Thanks a bunch! > > all my best, > Teresa > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Javascript and Strict Doctype
Well... this isn't any help but, I had the same problem. I just stripped the page of JS (>_<) haha sorry I can't help, I'm interested in the solution too. Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > I am trying to validate a file, using XHTML Strict Doctype, and the only > hold up is the following which appears just before : > > src="menu.js"> > > could someone tell me the correct syntax please. > > Regards > Maureen Beattie > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] 100% height div
You have the leftDiv inside MainDiv. leftDiv is 100% height... Just... 100% height of mainDiv (it's parent). You'll need to set mainDiv to 100%, whatever height mainDiv is, leftDiv will follow in your setup. Hope that helps! Oh by-the-way, you have an awesome name ;) Regards, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Cabot Consultants Pty Ltd Software Engineer / Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Hello. > http://razvan.cpea.ro/v3/ > Please take a look at my site. I'm trying to set the left div (pink one) > to height 100%. I've been doing this for 2 hours and i'm getting mad. :) > You can see the CSS file at http://razvan.cpea.ro/v3/style/v3.css > > Thanks you. > > -- > *Kindest Regards, > Razvan Pop > Web Designer and Developer* > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] New User
People of brissy and nearby... we've seriously got enough for some kinda gathering of some sort. It's a definate possibility in the pipeline. Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, G A R Y C R O U C H [ A I T ] wrote: > > >> Are there any members in Brisbane? > > Ipswich is close. > > -- > Regards, > Rob Unsworth > Ipswich, Australia > > > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] New User
G'day Gary Toowoomba, I think it's about the same distance as Brizzy from Gold coast.(>_<) Anyways, nice to know of someone in my area! Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Hi all, > > Been refereed here by a member Mark Stanton in Sydney. > > Are there any members in Brisbane? > > Gary Crouch. > Gold Coast > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
[WSG] Browser restrictions
Hi all I don't know if this question gets recycled often here, I'm very new... What I'd like to know is if there's a good resource that shows browser restrictions as far as CSS compatability goes. When writing my CSSs I'd like to know which attributes *won't* work in which browsers. I have the latest versions of the more popular browsers, but I'm concerned about how my CSSs hold up against the earlier browsers (IE4, NN4, NN5, IE5Mac - I've noticed these are mentioned a lot). Are there any attributes to be careful of as a rule of thumb? Thanks, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Navigation menu working in all but IE
I just had a play with it and found this... the CSS is fine. If you delete all the spaces and line brakes between the list items like this item1item2 it fixes the probelm. Hope that helps, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Working on a navigation menu and it works great in everything BUT IE. > http://www.purplecart.com/main.php - any help would be appreciated! I know > it is likely staring me in the face but I am blind to it. > > Thanks > > Brian > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Browser Stats - What a shock!
Ah, ok I understand. Actually NN4 and IE4 have been concerning me, I'm gonna have to download them for testing sometimes soon. Thanks Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 14:34:55 +1000 (EST), Darian Cabot wrote: >> Those weren't my website stats (>_<) My aim is to support all major >> browsers be it ie, nn, moz, or anything. I just stated that if moz is >> more >> popular than nn then I'm better off prioritizing that first :) > > I think the point is that if you are going to worry about NN (ie *your* > stats show visitors using it) then you need to be able to distinguish > between NN3/4 and NN6/7 usage in those stats. > Completely different animals; NN6/7 will mostly be covered by Mozilla > testing (ie it is worth checking, but most times it'll pass if Moz > did), whereas your CSS most likely *wont* work as expected in NN3/4, > and hopefully your visitor numbers are low enough that you dont need to > care. > The two browsers have completely different code bases. > > HIH > Lea > -- > Lea de Groot > Elysian Systems - http://elysiansystems.com/ > Brisbane, Australia > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Trimming the fat
Great point Brian. There are a lot of web viewer still using dial-up (like me *sob sob*). Broadband STILL isn't available in my area! Simply getting my pages to validate cut down a hell of a lot of needless code, as did converting to CSS. Also valid code processes a lot faster than choked up falty code. I'm all for streamlining websites Regards, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Trimming excess fat off of the code does add up over time - both in > storage > and in transfer/bandwidth - granted, I'll admit whether your CSS > stylesheet > can be transferred in a single packet or if it is 4kb in size is not going > to make much of a difference; but sitewide - getting rid of the extra > comments (if you know your code), removing extra spaces and getting rid of > redundant code can save a lot of bandwidth and make for an overall faster > running site. With a site file getting 2500 hits a day and trimming off > even > 100bytes in excess size, that is a savings of 250k for the day, add that > up > over the course of a month and you saved 7.5MB! > > Now think sitewide and if you could apply the same average across the site > (very easy to do) if you have 100 files on the site total the savings in > bandwidth add up and so does the decvrease in the amount of space needed. > > As a broadband user, I'll be the first to admit I forgot what it is like > for > 56k and less until I visited a client who dialed up my site (I've been > spoiled by the Broadband and the fact the site is cached nicely in my > system) it took almost a minute for the site to completely download!) > > Well that ws the big incentive there to get rid of some Java that was > clogging the pipe. > > Now, my site is better, but still not where I want it, CSS will definitely > bring it more inline but alas, I need to find a good lightweight, > customizable and powerful shopping cart program to replace the VERY VERY > tables heavy OSCommerce. > > Alas the troubles we put ourselves into! > > Brian > > -Original Message- > From: Leo J. O'Campo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 8:23 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: [WSG] Font Styles: > > >> I can see one can shave some bytes of of their CSS stylesheet > > Brian > > Bytes??? This type of savings aren't even noticeable on any system. > Even if you defined that rule in every handler, you'll never notice the > difference in bytes or page-loading speed. I can't notice the speed > difference between a nanosecond and 100 nanoseconds. ;-) > > Leo > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See > http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Browser Stats - What a shock!
Those weren't my website stats (>_<) My aim is to support all major browsers be it ie, nn, moz, or anything. I just stated that if moz is more popular than nn then I'm better off prioritizing that first :) Regards, Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > Brian > > I can tell you what accounts for the low market share stats. It's > confounding variables. If you look for apples in a peach tree you'd > get low market share. Now survey major corporations and NN's market > share will rise up the bell curve. No offense to Darian, but his > website isn't representative of browser market share. > > Leo > > On Wednesday, March 24, 2004, at 07:32 PM, theGrafixGuy wrote: > >> I just downloaded the latest NS 7.01 and it is nothing more than >> Mozilla >> with NS's skin on it, even my installed Mozilla plug-ins are present >> in NS. >> But that doesn't explain the complete loss of market share! >> >> Brian >> >> -Original Message- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 3:41 PM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: [WSG] Browser Stats - What a shock! >> >> Wow what the hell happened to NS??!! Going by those figures I should be >> focassing my attention to Mozilla compatability. Thanks for the stats. >> >> >> Darian >> >> >>> I actually decided to look in detail at my logs over the past month >>> after people brought up the Browser compatibility issues: >>> >>> This is what I have for my site www.thegrafixguy.com and I get an >>> average of 1 unique visitors a month. >>> >>> MSIE all versions 74.9% >>> >>> Netscape 1.8% (Man they Seriously lost the Browser War) >>> >>> Mozilla 11.7% >>> >>> Safari 4.4% >>> >>> Opera 0.4% >>> >>> FireBird 0.2% >>> >>> Konqueror 0.1% >>> >>> Multizilla (1 visit) >>> >>> Lynx (1 Visit) >>> >>> Two things here surprised me here - the death of Netscape in regards >>> to popularity - last year, atleast Netscape was in the double digits, >>> and also a few hits with MSIE 7.01 which I have not been able to find >>> myself >>> >>> Though I must say for the heck of it, I downloaded Lynx and Installed >>> it and took a look at my own site - It was suprising to see what was >>> not there despite the lack of images and on the same hand surprising >>> as to what is there. I can see that I have some work to do in that >>> regard! >>> >>> Anyway, cheers, hope someone find the figures above interesting as I >>> did. >>> >>> Brian >>> >>> >>> * >>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See >>> http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm >>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help >>> * >>> >>> >> >> * >> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See >> http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm >> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help >> * >> >> >> >> * >> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ >> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm >> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help >> * >> > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
I've looked at these links earlier and my point was *phew* here we go
AGAIN...
Verdana is POPULAR! Most people have that. Arial is probably more popular,
so that is next in line as a backup. I understand that they are different
fonts, and I also understand that there are fonts that closer resemble
verdana, but are they as popular as verdana? I dare to say that if the
viewer doesn't have verdana, they won't have these other similar fonts
either... Maybe they do? But I'm gonna live life on the 'typography' edge,
so don't try this at home kids :P
Afterall they are only fonts. I know that comment may offend you but I
have been careful to selelct legible and clear fonts.
Thanks for your concern, but I'm quite happy how the wesite functions.
Regards,
Darian Cabot
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Software Engineer - Website Design
http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
PS: Ok that was the last post on that thread. I promise! (>_<)
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> www.cabotconsultants.com.au is fine as a web addy I think. If there is
>> not 'http://', 'ftp://', or whatever one usually assumes http but you
>> don't need to type it.
>
> The small attachment should show the difference. You come here asking
> for help. Don't make it harder than necessary for those who wish to help
> you. Most of the time, when someone posting here can't be bothered to
> make the link clickable, I can't be bothered to cut and paste in order
> to visit that URL.
>
> If for some reason you don't get the attachment, here is the U R L :
> http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/images/URLorNOT.png
>
>> Now I get to the point. VERDANA is my preferred font for the website!!!
>> Ok shoot me, flame me, or suggest a million other sites to dissagree but
>> I've tested my site fairly well and even *without* verdana supported.
>> Everything was fine, so I'm using it. I understand that you've
>> obviously
>> visited one too many font offending sites Felix, but as far as I can
>> tell,
>> I'm not an offender.
>
>> > http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/fonts-face-index.html
>> > http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/font-comps-pt.html
>> > http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/font-comps-px.html
>
> The U R L s above were intended in part to show that
>
> body {font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;}
>
> falls short of getting you the you the imposing results you're after.
> Assuming you are compelled to impose on any visitor some font other than
> the default the visitor has selected for himself, you might as well do a
> good job of it and make the fallback font one the CLOSELY RESEMBLES your
> primary font. Arial and Helvetica AIN'T that font. There's a font in
> those URL's that is practically a twin to Verdana that is popular on
> systems that don't have Verdana. Can you see which one that is?
> --
> "Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only
> a day! No, no, man was made for immortality."
> President Abraham Lincoln
>
> Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] URLs - CSS Validator
Thanks fo the tip Brian, I'll update the W3C CSS Button by this arvo. I was wondering about that, thanks for pointing it out Cheers Darian Cabot -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Software Engineer - Website Design http://www.cabotconsultants.com.au -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > www.google.com is just as valid in e-mail as http://www.google.com or even > http://google.com. > > In fact I'd be surprised to find a web browser or e-mail program that does > not support it. > > I guess it is like the word "ain't." Remember "ain't ain't a word cause it > ain't in the dictionary." Well sorry to say, but it is and it is > recognized > and accepted slang by all but the purists. > > Darian, BTW, (and I am updating all of my pages to reflect this as well) > your W3C CSS button would be better served if it pointed to the following > URL - http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/check/referer - as it shows the > validation results rather than having to figure out where to go after you > get to the default page as your current link > http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ does. > > Granted us "pros" know what to do, but that "computer-ignorant" user out > there that may actually be impressed and won over as a client with such > validation may get lost on the page. Remember keep it simple because there > is always a better idiot out there to break the idiot proof system! > > Brian > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Browser Stats - What a shock!
Wow what the hell happened to NS??!! Going by those figures I should be focassing my attention to Mozilla compatability. Thanks for the stats. Darian > I actually decided to look in detail at my logs over the past month after > people brought up the Browser compatibility issues: > > This is what I have for my site www.thegrafixguy.com and I get an average > of > 1 unique visitors a month. > > MSIE all versions 74.9% > > Netscape 1.8% (Man they Seriously lost the Browser War) > > Mozilla 11.7% > > Safari 4.4% > > Opera 0.4% > > FireBird 0.2% > > Konqueror 0.1% > > Multizilla (1 visit) > > Lynx (1 Visit) > > Two things here surprised me here - the death of Netscape in regards to > popularity - last year, atleast Netscape was in the double digits, and > also > a few hits with MSIE 7.01 which I have not been able to find myself > > Though I must say for the heck of it, I downloaded Lynx and Installed it > and > took a look at my own site - It was suprising to see what was not there > despite the lack of images and on the same hand surprising as to what is > there. I can see that I have some work to do in that regard! > > Anyway, cheers, hope someone find the figures above interesting as I did. > > Brian > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Firstly, sorry about this, I know this thread was meant to close yesterday... I promise this is my LAST post in this thread (^_^; ) www.cabotconsultants.com.au is fine as a web addy I think. If there is not 'http://', 'ftp://', or whatever one usually assumes http but you don't need to type it. Anyways I'm sick of politically (w3c??) correct people, what ever happened to practicality?? I've passed the XHTML1.1 validator and that didn't complain about verdana btw :P lol That wasn't the issue though so I'll move on... Now I get to the point. VERDANA is my preferred font for the website!!! Ok shoot me, flame me, or suggest a million other sites to dissagree but I've tested my site fairly well and even *without* verdana supported. Everything was fine, so I'm using it. I understand that you've obviously visited one too many font offending sites Felix, but as far as I can tell, I'm not an offender. Anyways lets talk about more constructive stuff. This thread really is getting on a bit, sorry but I couldn't resist a final post. Take it easy ;) Darian > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I've decided to stick with Verdana (>_<) > > The world shall have Verdana. Heaven forbid any mere mortal user gets to > see the default he selected. > >> If you visit www.cabotconsultants.com.au > > It'd be nice if people would provided a URL, something *everyone* could > click on to reach your page. www.blablabla.com is NOT a URL. URLs begin > ftp:// or http:// or irc:// or any of a few other prefixes ending in > ://. > > If you select the contents of the urlbar and copy its contents into your > email, you are pretty well guaranteed against typos as well. ;-) > >> I've also been sure not to use any pt or px font sizes so if need be, >> the >> viewer can change the font size with the browser setting. > >> Anyways, please give me feedback if you find my font/size/css to cause >> you >> any problems. > > This thread has caused me to do some updates and additions to my site that > at > least in part amount to additional feedback: > http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/defaultsize.html > http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/fonts-face-index.html > http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/font-comps-pt.html > http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/font-comps-px.html > -- > "Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only > a day! No, no, man was made for immortality." > President Abraham Lincoln > > Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 > > Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
I've decided to stick with Verdana (>_<) If you visit www.cabotconsultants.com.au you can see that I haven't miniturised the font, it's a nice readable size, plus I edited the CSS for a test to show only arial, and the size wasn't a problem. I can understand that it would be if the CSS told the font to be small, but I've tested and checked in IE 6, NS 7.1, Opera 7.23, FireFox 0.8 and all look uniform and fine in both verdana and the arial backup test. I've also been sure not to use any pt or px font sizes so if need be, the viewer can change the font size with the browser setting. Anyways, please give me feedback if you find my font/size/css to cause you any problems. Cheers Darian > Peter Firminger wrote: > >> > [verdana] > >> It won't ever bother the users that hate the font so much they remove it >> from their system. That's their choice. > > On the contrary. Because authors using Verdana as primary size according > to their own taste for the giant font, when people without it see the > fallback, whatever that may be, it is a virtual certainty that whatever > replaces it will be smaller. Have you not read > http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html? > -- > "Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only > a day! No, no, man was made for immortality." > President Abraham Lincoln > > Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 > > Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Scrollbars in IE6 (PC)
ahhh ok ok I got ya hmmm... I noticed you haven't included any height attributes in the CSS. Maybe if you put "height: 100%;" then that would restrict the div and stop it from going larger than the window. Anyways, you may have noticed I'm fairly new to this too :P I used to do all this stuff with tables apon tables, divs save a ton of code and time but they take time to get used to. Darian > Yes, but it's not the overflow of the div, it's the frame itself. The > page is going larger than the frame window - meaning, the divs aren't > respecting the size of the window. Sorry if my explanation was > confusing on that point. > > ;) > > On 24 Mar 2004, at 09:40, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I'm not quite sure what you mean... maybe this will help. >> >> if content of a div is larger than the space provided (eg screen size >> restriction, or width, height, settings) there is an "overflow" css >> attribute to handle it. For example "overflow: hidden;" hides any >> thing >> that doesn't fix, "overflow: scroll;" will give the div scroll bars, >> and >> "overflow: visible;" will show it usually by stretching the height of >> the >> div. >> >> Maybe that was completely useless, hope it helps though. >> >> Darian > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Scrollbars in IE6 (PC)
I'm not quite sure what you mean... maybe this will help.
if content of a div is larger than the space provided (eg screen size
restriction, or width, height, settings) there is an "overflow" css
attribute to handle it. For example "overflow: hidden;" hides any thing
that doesn't fix, "overflow: scroll;" will give the div scroll bars, and
"overflow: visible;" will show it usually by stretching the height of the
div.
Maybe that was completely useless, hope it helps though.
Darian
> Hi everybody...
>
> I'm having a terrible time trying to figure out just why IE6 (Windows
> XP) is throwing scrollbars at me when I view a page in a frame - I'm
> really not sure what the trick is to this (if there is one). I hate to
> ask dumb or redundant questions, but this one is really nagging.
>
> Thanks for any advice on this...v
>
> Once again, this is being view in a frame...here is the gist of the CSS:
>
> body {
> margin: 0px;
> }
> .container {
> margin: 0px;
> padding: 0px;
> width: 100%;
> }
> .subhead1 {
> margin: 0px;
> padding: 6px 0px 0px 12px;
> }
> .subhead2 {
> margin: 0px;
> padding: 3px 12px 1px;
> height: 30px;
> border-bottom: 1px solid #99;
> }
> .content {
> margin: 0px;
> padding: 0px;
> width: 100%;
> }
> .content-pad {
> padding: 0px;
> margin: 12px;
> }
> etc...
>
> The makeup of the file...
>
>
>
> Just some title text
>
>
> A at width='100%'...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Lots of things go in here, it varies. Some times a table at
> width='100%'
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
*phew* ain't that true!! I'm considering changing the fonts for my website's CSS to arial... maybe. I still like verdana, I'm so stubborn (>_<) I don't think either of these font are really offending to anyone. Maybe if I was considering some crazy artistic font it could annoy some viewers. I dunno. Like you said, can't please everyone but we can hope to please the majority. > At this point, in regards to CSS - and the world in general - I feel > like interjecting the old chestnut "you can't please all of the people > all of the time ..." > > > On 24/03/2004, at 4:31 PM, Mark Stanton wrote: > >>> When the page specifies 'verdana, arial, helvetica, >>> sans-serif', such people almost never get to see their preference. >> >> ...unless they are using user style sheets, then they get to see >> whatever >> they want... > > Universal Head > Design That Works. > > 7/43 Bridge Rd Stanmore > NSW 2048 Australia > T (+612) 9517 1466 > F (+612) 9565 4747 > E [EMAIL PROTECTED] > W www.universalhead.com > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Wow I wasn't aware of this! thanks for the link. Just out of curiosity... would you know the percentage of pcs without verdana? I mean, is it on mac etc? I like the font so much(>_<) would it be worth converting to arial? for the sake of i dunno 5%??? and even if they don;t have verdana, although the backup font will be arial, all they'll need to do is change their browser font size the next setting up. What are your thoughts? Darian > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> I've tested the webpage on 3 differnet monitor on anything from 800X600 >> up. >> I've also tested it in Netscape, IE, Opera and FireFox. I noticed the >> Gecko browsers did display the font fairly small. > > If you are on windoze and seeing Gecko at default 16px rendering these > sizes smaller than IE, then you are using either IE5 or IE4, or you are > using IE6 in quirks mode, which renders the same as IE4 & IE5 (these > only have quirks mode regardless of doctype). > > In standards mode, IE6 matches Gecko, as long as you are using the > standard 96 DPI windoze "small fonts" system setting. Gecko is not > impacted by changing the windoze system font size/DPI, while IE is, > which makes everything in relative sizes larger, as that's why one > chooses something other than "small fonts" as the system setting. > >> I chose Verdana as it is >> very clean for both print and display. > > More about Verdana: > http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html > -- > "Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only > a day! No, no, man was made for immortality." > President Abraham Lincoln > > Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 > > Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
I find the font size nice. I can imagine some older people having difficulties though. Maybe you'll consider line spacing a bit more? Just a personal opinion (^_^) Darian > I tend to agree with such suggestion: applying a percentage in the body > and > then work with the remaining sizes in ems. > > I have done that in here: > > http://www.excellentsite.org/ > > Do you think font size is to small? > > Carlos > > > - Original Message - > From: "russ weakley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 12:15 AM > Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough? > > > The x-small and others are refered to as "absolute-size keywords" > http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-size-props > > However, x-small will vary from browser to browser (sometimes quite > different) as you can see here: > http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=53764 > > This may not be an issue. But in my opinion, if you must reduce font > sizes, > applying a percentage on the body will achieve a far more consistent > result > across browsers. > > Again, it should be stressed that this is just my opinion. There are lots > of > differing opinions out there! > > Russ > > > > > > $0 Bannerless Web Hosting, 10 POP and Web Email Accounts, & more > Get It Now At www.doteasy.com > > > > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Thanks! I used this method and have uploaded the new style sheets to
www.cabotconsultants.com.au The new CSSs should make the font size nice
(^_^) I used percentages so they size well and easily on all browsers.
Thanks for all the help and if you find something else wrong don;t
hesitate to tell me :P
Darian
> You could also use css to generate specific qualities for say print using
> the @media
>
> This allows for you to target say the printer and specify a formatting for
> printing your pages instead of relying on browsers default settings which
> may not be printer friendly. You can set margins, specific printing fonts
> and so forth with this.
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_mediatypes.asp
>
> I hope this link to w3schools is of help.
>
> Steven Clark
>
>
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
>>Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 19:36:13 -0500 (EST)
>>
>>Thanks for the feed back!
>>
>>I've tested the webpage on 3 differnet monitor on anything from 800X600
>> up.
>>I've also tested it in Netscape, IE, Opera and FireFox. I noticed the
>>Gecko browsers did display the font fairly small. I chose Verdana as it
>> is
>>very clean for both print and display. I also included it in a font
>>family, so if a viewer hasn't got verdana installed, they will display
>>arial (PC), hevetica(Apple?), or finally san-serif(Lowest common
>>denominator :P). (^_^)
>>
>>As I am rewriting the CSS for the website, my main focas is font size.
>> I'm
>>currently reading suggested articles and as soon as I have a remedied CSS
>>I'll be sure to let you know (^^
>>
>>Thanks again, this feedback is very helpful
>>
>>Darian
>>
>>
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> >
>> >> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
>> >> opted
>> >> for this...
>> >
>> >> p.body {
>> >>font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>> >>font-size: x-small;
>> >>line-height: 2;
>> >> }
>> >
>> >> I found it's clean and clear.
>> >
>> > Is your monitor huge, or your resolution very low? The most common
>> > meaning of x-small is 10px
>> > <http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/absolute-sizes-MvE.html>. That's
>> > much too small for average or worse eyes for normal body/paragraph
>> text
>> > on normal or higher resolution on common display sizes. It's only 1px
>> > above the minimum size a full font set can be rendered, at regardless
>> > how good your eyes or what your own settings are. The problem is even
>> > worse for those who don't have Verdana installed, as it's the second
>> > largest common font size around (AFAKI, only Bitstream Vera Sans is
>> > larger, and it isn't all that commonly installed yet), designed
>> > precisely to look good at small sizes.
>> >
>> >> Just wondering... What is the difference of
>> >> using the percentage font-size as opposed to the preset "medium,
>> small,
>> >> x-small, etc" sizes? Are these 'preset' sizes still relative to the
>>body
>> >> user defined font size?
>> >
>> > Once difference is that the keywords are not subject to inheritance
>> > cascade, but at least they can be resized by the user even in IE. The
>> > wiki has more to say:
>> http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingFontSize
>> > --
>> > "Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only
>> > a day! No, no, man was made for immortality."
>> > President Abraham Lincoln
>> >
>> > Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>> >
>> > Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
>> >
>> > *
>> > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>> > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>> > *
>> >
>> >
>>
>>*
>>The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>>See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>>for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>>*
>>
>
> _
> Find love today with ninemsn personals. Click here:
> http://ninemsn.match.com
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Thanks for the feed back!
I've tested the webpage on 3 differnet monitor on anything from 800X600 up.
I've also tested it in Netscape, IE, Opera and FireFox. I noticed the
Gecko browsers did display the font fairly small. I chose Verdana as it is
very clean for both print and display. I also included it in a font
family, so if a viewer hasn't got verdana installed, they will display
arial (PC), hevetica(Apple?), or finally san-serif(Lowest common
denominator :P). (^_^)
As I am rewriting the CSS for the website, my main focas is font size. I'm
currently reading suggested articles and as soon as I have a remedied CSS
I'll be sure to let you know (^^
Thanks again, this feedback is very helpful
Darian
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
>> opted
>> for this...
>
>> p.body {
>>font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>>font-size: x-small;
>>line-height: 2;
>> }
>
>> I found it's clean and clear.
>
> Is your monitor huge, or your resolution very low? The most common
> meaning of x-small is 10px
> <http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/absolute-sizes-MvE.html>. That's
> much too small for average or worse eyes for normal body/paragraph text
> on normal or higher resolution on common display sizes. It's only 1px
> above the minimum size a full font set can be rendered, at regardless
> how good your eyes or what your own settings are. The problem is even
> worse for those who don't have Verdana installed, as it's the second
> largest common font size around (AFAKI, only Bitstream Vera Sans is
> larger, and it isn't all that commonly installed yet), designed
> precisely to look good at small sizes.
>
>> Just wondering... What is the difference of
>> using the percentage font-size as opposed to the preset "medium, small,
>> x-small, etc" sizes? Are these 'preset' sizes still relative to the body
>> user defined font size?
>
> Once difference is that the keywords are not subject to inheritance
> cascade, but at least they can be resized by the user even in IE. The
> wiki has more to say: http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingFontSize
> --
> "Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only
> a day! No, no, man was made for immortality."
> President Abraham Lincoln
>
> Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
RE: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Wow thanks!
My printer is now working overtime with these articles :P
I can't believe the great response I've got from WSG! I found it last
night, and so far it's helped me more than anything.
- Darian
> Hi Darian
>
> This article might answer your questions
> http://www.alistapart.com/articles/sizematters/
>
> Cheers
>
> Jeff Lowder
> Accessibility 1st
> Website: www.accessibility1st.com.au
> Blog: www.accessibility1st.com.au/journal/
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 10:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
>
> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
> opted
> for this...
>
> p.body {
>font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>font-size: x-small;
>color: #036;
>margin-left: 18px;
>margin-right: 18px;
>line-height: 2;
> }
>
> I found it's clean and clear. Just wondering... What is the difference
> of
> using the percentage font-size as opposed to the preset "medium, small,
> x-small, etc" sizes? Are these 'preset' sizes still relative to the body
> user defined font size?
>
>
> Cheers
> Darian
>
>
>> On Tuesday 23 March 2004 15:55, Lorenzo Gabba | Quirk wrote:
>>> I tend to agree - I'm a fan of the
>>>
>>> p, .etc
>>> {
>>> font-size: 0.75em;
>>> line-height 1.5;
>>> }
>>>
>>
>> I forgot to mention that it's probably a good idea (from a usability
> POV)
>> to
>> declare:
>>
>> body {font-size: 100%;} /* user defined default size */
>>
>> ... and relate the rest from there.
>>
>> - Lorenzo
>>
>> --
>>
>> _/\/¯¯\/\_.
>> (w) www.quirk.co.za
>> (e) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> (h) +27 (0)86 11 021 33
>> (t) +27 (0)21 462 7353
>> (f) +27 (0)21 462 7354
>> *
>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>> *
>>
>>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
RE: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Thanks for the tip! I'm actually rewriting the CSS now (^_^; I'll keep
that in mind when classing.
I drew the images in Paint Shop Pro 7. I used a couple of light base
colours and a darker line tool. Then I saved them as gif (5 colour
palette?) so they are a nice small size.
Thanks for the suggestions
Darian
> Should you have classes with the same name as html tags? ie class body?
>
> How I see it being a problem for a coder, is if you have; body { blah blah
> } and then .body { blah blah } it could get confusing.
>
> You may not need the body class, because you could assume all p tags
> follow the same rules within body-content
>
> So you could have a rule in the css saying .body-content p { blah blah }
> Then you could save having to add the extra class='body' to each p tag
> within that section.
> The same would go with images, if they are all going to behave the same
> way within the body-content section.
>
> Zeldman calls this 'classitis', he makes the point that you should let CSS
> do the work without having all the extra classes.
>
> Cool sketch idea for the images, I like that effect. Did you scan them in?
>
>
> Tim Hill
> Computer Associates
> Graphic Artist
> tel: +612 9937 0792
> fax: +612 9937 0546
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 10:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
>
> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I opted
> for this...
>
> p.body {
>font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>font-size: x-small;
>color: #036;
>margin-left: 18px;
>margin-right: 18px;
>line-height: 2;
> }
>
> I found it's clean and clear. Just wondering... What is the difference of
> using the percentage font-size as opposed to the preset "medium, small,
> x-small, etc" sizes? Are these 'preset' sizes still relative to the body
> user defined font size?
>
>
> Cheers
> Darian
>
>
>> On Tuesday 23 March 2004 15:55, Lorenzo Gabba | Quirk wrote:
>>> I tend to agree - I'm a fan of the
>>>
>>> p, .etc
>>> {
>>> font-size: 0.75em;
>>> line-height 1.5;
>>> }
>>>
>>
>> I forgot to mention that it's probably a good idea (from a usability
>> POV) to
>> declare:
>>
>> body {font-size: 100%;} /* user defined default size */
>>
>> ... and relate the rest from there.
>>
>> - Lorenzo
>>
>> --
>>
>> _/\/¯¯\/\_.
>> (w) www.quirk.co.za
>> (e) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> (h) +27 (0)86 11 021 33
>> (t) +27 (0)21 462 7353
>> (f) +27 (0)21 462 7354
>> *
>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See
>> http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>> *
>>
>>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See
> http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Well... I'm new to this and it took me a long time to get that website w3c
xhmtl strict compliant!!! *phew*
I know the CSS leaves a lot to be desired. I'm in the process now of
rewriting it. I'll use a percentage on the body as suggested... and...
then I use percentage on p and h1, h2, etc? OR if I then leave it as
medium, x-small, etc, will these be reduced by by the body font percentage
also?
I think the general idea is %s. Just, so many ways to do it (>_<)
Thanks,
Darian...newby (>_<)
> The x-small and others are refered to as "absolute-size keywords"
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-size-props
>
> However, x-small will vary from browser to browser (sometimes quite
> different) as you can see here:
> http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=53764
>
> This may not be an issue. But in my opinion, if you must reduce font
> sizes,
> applying a percentage on the body will achieve a far more consistent
> result
> across browsers.
>
> Again, it should be stressed that this is just my opinion. There are lots
> of
> differing opinions out there!
>
> Russ
>
>
>
>
>> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
>> opted
>> for this...
>>
>> p.body {
>> font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>> font-size: x-small;
>> color: #036;
>> margin-left: 18px;
>> margin-right: 18px;
>> line-height: 2;
>> }
>>
>> I found it's clean and clear. Just wondering... What is the difference
>> of
>> using the percentage font-size as opposed to the preset "medium, small,
>> x-small, etc" sizes? Are these 'preset' sizes still relative to the body
>> user defined font size?
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Darian
>>
>>
>>> On Tuesday 23 March 2004 15:55, Lorenzo Gabba | Quirk wrote:
>>>> I tend to agree - I'm a fan of the
>>>>
>>>> p, .etc
>>>> {
>>>> font-size: 0.75em;
>>>> line-height 1.5;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>
>>> I forgot to mention that it's probably a good idea (from a usability
>>> POV)
>>> to
>>> declare:
>>>
>>> body {font-size: 100%;} /* user defined default size */
>>>
>>> ... and relate the rest from there.
>>>
>>> - Lorenzo
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> _/\/¯¯\/\_.
>>> (w) www.quirk.co.za
>>> (e) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> (h) +27 (0)86 11 021 33
>>> (t) +27 (0)21 462 7353
>>> (f) +27 (0)21 462 7354
>>> *
>>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>>> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>>> *
>>>
>>>
>>
>> *
>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>> *
>
> Thanks
> Russ
>
> ---
> Russ Weakley
> Max Design
> Phone: (02) 9410 2521
> Mobile: 0403 433 980
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.maxdesign.com.au
> ---
>
>
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] Ot kinda ...CSS tags and Safari Bookmarks?
http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_reference.asp This one comes in handy personally. Or try Google for any specific CSS tgs or attributes. - Darian > Anyone know where I can find a *definition style* listing of CSS > tags/attributes etc and what they do? > > Also anyone know where I can find a tool to convert my Safari > bookmarks to html, (I like to store them elsewhere for easy access in > classes at the several schools I teach etc) Version tracker.com > doesn't seem to have much? > * > The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ > See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > for some hints on posting to the list & getting help > * > > * The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help *
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
a!! thank you, didn't see this article
> as always when in doubt ask Russ :-)
>
> http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/relative/
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
>> opted
>> for this...
>>
>> p.body {
>>font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>>font-size: x-small;
>>color: #036;
>>margin-left: 18px;
>>margin-right: 18px;
>>line-height: 2;
>> }
>>
>> I found it's clean and clear. Just wondering... What is the difference
>> of
>> using the percentage font-size as opposed to the preset "medium, small,
>> x-small, etc" sizes? Are these 'preset' sizes still relative to the body
>> user defined font size?
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>> Darian
>>
>>
>>
>>>On Tuesday 23 March 2004 15:55, Lorenzo Gabba | Quirk wrote:
>>>
>>>>I tend to agree - I'm a fan of the
>>>>
>>>>p, .etc
>>>>{
>>>>font-size: 0.75em;
>>>>line-height 1.5;
>>>>}
>>>>
>>>
>>>I forgot to mention that it's probably a good idea (from a usability
>>> POV)
>>>to
>>>declare:
>>>
>>>body {font-size: 100%;} /* user defined default size */
>>>
>>>... and relate the rest from there.
>>>
>>>- Lorenzo
>>>
>>>--
>>>
>>>_/\/¯¯\/\_.
>>>(w) www.quirk.co.za
>>>(e) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>(h) +27 (0)86 11 021 33
>>>(t) +27 (0)21 462 7353
>>>(f) +27 (0)21 462 7354
>>>*
>>>The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>>>See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>>>for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>>>*
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> *
>> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
>> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
>> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
>> *
>
> --
> Neerav Bhatt
> http://www.bhatt.id.au
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I opted
for this...
p.body {
font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: x-small;
color: #036;
margin-left: 18px;
margin-right: 18px;
line-height: 2;
}
I found it's clean and clear. Just wondering... What is the difference of
using the percentage font-size as opposed to the preset "medium, small,
x-small, etc" sizes? Are these 'preset' sizes still relative to the body
user defined font size?
Cheers
Darian
> On Tuesday 23 March 2004 15:55, Lorenzo Gabba | Quirk wrote:
>> I tend to agree - I'm a fan of the
>>
>> p, .etc
>> {
>> font-size: 0.75em;
>> line-height 1.5;
>> }
>>
>
> I forgot to mention that it's probably a good idea (from a usability POV)
> to
> declare:
>
> body {font-size: 100%;} /* user defined default size */
>
> ... and relate the rest from there.
>
> - Lorenzo
>
> --
>
> _/\/¯¯\/\_.
> (w) www.quirk.co.za
> (e) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (h) +27 (0)86 11 021 33
> (t) +27 (0)21 462 7353
> (f) +27 (0)21 462 7354
> *
> The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
> See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
> for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
> *
>
>
*
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
*
