On Sat, 7 May 2005, Kathy wrote: > Some use pixel size for text, others use em's, others use words like > small. Is there a best way or does it depend?
You might want to look at the specs and the wiki: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/syndata.html#values http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/fonts.html#propdef-font-size http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=FontSize > Similar question for colors, some use hex codes, some use words like > "navy", is there a best way? The named colors are SUPPOSED to correspond to predefined RGB triplets, but I avoid using them because I'm old-skool and remember when the only colors you could count on across browsers and platforms were primaries, secondaries, and three grayscales. Again, look at the spec, and do Google lookups on 'subtractive color' and 'color theory'. > Some people use linking to the stylesheet, some use importing. Then > there's putting the CSS in the header. I see the advantage of using a > separate stylesheet as opposed to in the header, but if you have a > small site, say 5 or 10 pages, is there ever an advantage to not using > a linked stylesheet? What about linking or importing? The wiki (referenced above) has a few things to say in response to your questions. In brief, a valid @import-ed stylesheet contains rules which will always be of lower precedence than equally weighted rules in an inline or linked stylesheet. Additionally, Netscape 4 ignores @import, and many old-timers continue to use it out of habit. The main reason to use inline (doc-head) styles is to improve their weighting, or if you can be certain that the rules at issue will ALWAYS be applicable SOLELY to the page on which they're used. Also, when producing a template some folks (such as myself) find it easier to implement changes if the stylesheet is in the same document with the markup, but will move that stylesheet to a linked file prior to push. > I see most people are doing their best to completely avoid using > tables, but then I've seen a tutorial recommending a simple table > layout as a foundation, then using CSS to define everything. Is there > a reason to avoid tables altogether other than "I want to"? ...Mainly, the fact that tables only rarely convey contextual meaning to content that itself was not produced for display within actual (data) tables. The effects that result (mostly to do with source order) can have unintended consequences that are odious for certain classes of users (especially mobile-device and functionally-impaired users). I ditched tables three years ago; I've worked on "prettier" source formatting since, and I find that my source markup is MUCH easier to read at those times when I need to look at it. YMMV on the last point, though. HTH -- Ben Henick "In the long run, men hit only what they aim Sitebuilder At-Large at. Therefore, though they should fail http://www.henick.net/ immediately, they had better aim high." [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Henry David Thoreau ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
