Thanks for your comments. I updated the webpage so that no font tags are used and replaced them with <small> tags. I also validated it against w3c.org's HTML validator resulting in no errors found (as of this version). However, I hope to make a good case for keeping the width requirement of 600 pixels. One obvious reason is that is guarantees a consistent look for the main manual page. Furthermore, it maintains a clean readable layout of the sections and it contents. Using this width satisfies the lowest resolution of 800X600, higher resolutions (i think) get a better display. My monitor resoultion is set to 1152X864 and it's still very readable.
The main goal i would like to achieve is to provide a well organized and pleasent looking main manual page, where it's easy to find stuff, without having to scrool too much (at least fr the intro page). And of course using bare bones HTML tags with a mix of HTML techniques to maintain a good layout. http://www.quantumfx.com/apachedocs/ -Carlos Joshua Slive wrote: > > On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, Carlos Ramirez wrote: > > > I posted an updated version that shows how new sections can be added. I > > added "Configuration Topics" and "Another Topic Goes Here" sections. It > > still provides a clean layout... > > > > I like it. > > I think that some people are going to consider it a little too flashy. > People with that opinion should speak up soon. > > Here's a couple questions/suggestions: > - Can you do it without restricting the table width to 600dpi (or whatever > it is). I know, you will probably wind up with uneven column widths, but > I think I prefer that to hard-coded 600dpi. > - I think some people would have a heart attack if we committed something > with all those <font> tags. Perhaps a small style-sheet in the <head> > could be used. We probably shouldn't be changing the fonts at all > if we are going to be using the browser-default fonts on all the other > doc pages. > > Joshua. -- RTFM: Not just an acronym, it's the LAW!
