Here's the original page http://www.jameswmikesellphd.com/index-1.html. It's 
not terrible in IE6, at least at default size, but quickly breaks when text 
size is increased. It's worse in FF3, even at default, and breaks worse when 
scaled. The guy wants to keep the design and basic fixed-width centered 
content, but have it degrade gracefully when text-size is scaled. So, I said 
I would work on it.

Since he wants basically the same horizontal dimensions and layout, I 
decided to use ems for text sizes and for all vertical dimensions (except 
images, of course), and pixels for horizontal widths. In the end, I had to 
use a couple of pixel top/bottom margins and a conditional comment or two 
for tweaking to align the bottoms of the two columns. At present, I've got 
IE6 and FF3 giving pretty much the same presentation at default size, and 
the design degrading relatively gracefully with scaling. That is to say, the 
text maintains its relative size and positioning with respect to other text 
and to the images, and doesn't overwrite either other text or other 
elements. The bottom borders of the two side by side columns, of course, no 
longer match after scaling. Here's the result at present 
http://bytekrafterstech.com/index-1.html.

The first three selections on the menu work, but before I start on the next 
page, I thought that I would ask here if there were any way to provide this 
kind of vertical elasticity and maintain even bottom borders on the two 
columns. I think that it might be relatively trivial if all elements in each 
column scaled the same with text size changes, but, of course, images do 
not.

Then again, even without the images, varying text elements would also scale 
differentially. A heading at 1.4em will scale a different absolute amount 
than body text at, say, .8em, so if one column has no headings and the other 
has several there will be a difference in the vertical dimension of the 
columns after scaling. And the amount of text wrapping that occurs as text 
scales up also has to be considered. A short line might not cause a wrap for 
several increments, while a longer line might wrap on the first increment, 
and bingo, your column is one line longer right off the bat.

So, am I chasing a chimera? I can finish the other two pages the way I did 
the others, with even bottom borders at default and graceful degradation 
when scaled. But, if in fact there is a way to accomplish vertical 
elasticity and maintain relative size of the two columns, I'd like to try 
it. In looking around, I found that a whole bunch of very big time sites 
have designs that either don't scale at all, or that shyte the bed pretty 
messily when scaled.

I've done a lot of searching, and a LOT of experimentation using elements 
with colored backgrounds to observe results, but I'm damned if I can figure 
out a way to accomplish it. And logically it just seems that the factors 
mentioned above mitigate against the possibility. Still, there's a ton of 
CSS knowledge hanging around here, so I figure if anyone knows a way, 
someone here will. Thanks.

cheers,
scott 

______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/

Reply via email to