Re: [css-d] Fancybox modal window location in iPhone
I'm still experiencing the problem. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 10, 2014, at 9:37 PM, Debbie Campbell wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Debbie Campbell >> wrote: >>> Works fine in Android both portrait and landscape (centered on the screen), >>> and fine in iPhone portrait view, but in landscape view on an iPhone the >>> modal window is off to the lower right. >>> >>> I tried making an adjustment to the CSS but don't have an iPhone to test; in >>> the online emulators I tried, the modal windows filled 100% of the screen so >>> I can't see the problem. > >> Tom Livingstone wrote: >> >> It seems you may be suffering from this: >> >> http://filamentgroup.com/lab/a_fix_for_the_ios_orientationchange_zoom_bug/ >> >> When I changed orientation, the whole page was zoomed in so when you >> click a photo, the modal is acting accordingly. If I zoom out first, >> the modal works as desired. > > I've included the script to fix the iOS orientationchange issue - I'd be > grateful if someone can take a look again in portrait and landscape view in > an iPhone - this is the temporary URL: > >> http://www.redkitecreative.com/dev/aemb/class-photos/ > > -- > Debbie __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Fancybox modal window location in iPhone
Works fine on my iPhone 5. Ken On Thursday, April 10, 2014, Debbie Campbell wrote: > On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Debbie Campbell >> wrote: >> >>> Works fine in Android both portrait and landscape (centered on the >>> screen), >>> and fine in iPhone portrait view, but in landscape view on an iPhone the >>> modal window is off to the lower right. >>> >>> I tried making an adjustment to the CSS but don't have an iPhone to >>> test; in >>> the online emulators I tried, the modal windows filled 100% of the >>> screen so >>> I can't see the problem. >>> >>> > Tom Livingstone wrote: >> >> It seems you may be suffering from this: >> >> http://filamentgroup.com/lab/a_fix_for_the_ios_ >> orientationchange_zoom_bug/ >> >> When I changed orientation, the whole page was zoomed in so when you >> click a photo, the modal is acting accordingly. If I zoom out first, >> the modal works as desired. >> >> > I've included the script to fix the iOS orientationchange issue - I'd be > grateful if someone can take a look again in portrait and landscape view in > an iPhone - this is the temporary URL: > > http://www.redkitecreative.com/dev/aemb/class-photos/ >> > > -- > Debbie > __ > css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] > 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/ > -- Sent from Gmail Mobile __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Fancybox modal window location in iPhone
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Debbie Campbell wrote: Works fine in Android both portrait and landscape (centered on the screen), and fine in iPhone portrait view, but in landscape view on an iPhone the modal window is off to the lower right. I tried making an adjustment to the CSS but don't have an iPhone to test; in the online emulators I tried, the modal windows filled 100% of the screen so I can't see the problem. Tom Livingstone wrote: It seems you may be suffering from this: http://filamentgroup.com/lab/a_fix_for_the_ios_orientationchange_zoom_bug/ When I changed orientation, the whole page was zoomed in so when you click a photo, the modal is acting accordingly. If I zoom out first, the modal works as desired. I've included the script to fix the iOS orientationchange issue - I'd be grateful if someone can take a look again in portrait and landscape view in an iPhone - this is the temporary URL: http://www.redkitecreative.com/dev/aemb/class-photos/ -- Debbie __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
apr 10 2014 18:50 Tom Livingston : > it's still useable. He's not leaving mobile users *completely* out in the > cold. That it is so is still quite a bit beside the point I think. The users only have to get used to sites that cater for them, their use cases and their devices, to do feel left out in the cold with just ”still usable”. In my world that can far too often mean that the user closes the window and doesn’t return. That’s what I do and I only had a smart phone for 2-3 years now. Of course each site is often different. Anyway, to get back to CSS I find ”Mobile First” very helpful for designing already at the content level and focusing on what’s really important and that going from small size screens in my media queries and source media to larger simplifies my CSS design development considerably. That said I have already lost customers that don’t ”get” the need to design at the content level, at least not when they are doing the content. It’s possible I need to find people to work with that can do content so I can focus on server-side and interface design. /MiB __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
apr 10 2014 16:19 Davies, Elizabeth : > the Mobile First philosophy brought many "wins" with it. Perhaps the name is > misleading and it should be "Simplicity First" or "Basics First" ;D I liked that one. __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
Also, we're drifting away from list appropriate topics... Sent from my iPhone > On Apr 10, 2014, at 12:32 PM, Chris Williams wrote: > > Philip, as I described in the message I just sent, I too am developing a > very complex and detailed application where I was convinced that one > needed a huge screen to appreciate it. After many discussions with my > contract designer she was able to convince me that the mobile user was > worth pursuing. > > I wasn't initially convinced, so I approached several users and discussed > the idea of using a phone or a tablet. They hadn't even imagined such a > use case. With one, I started brainstorming and we realized that being > able to walk around with the application, on a phone or tablet, was in > fact a game-changer for the industry (I'll leave the specific industry out > of it). After discussing it with other users, they (to my surprise) > started to become huge advocates for it. > > Now, the mobile use case has become a cornerstone of the new product, a > true differentiator from the competition. And not only has thinking about > mobile changed our market strategy, it has, I believe, made a better > product for the full screen user (see my other message). > > In short, I think people who ignore mobile do so at their own peril, or at > least to their own market detriment. > > Chris > >> On 4/10/14 9:18 AM, "Philip Taylor" wrote: >> >> >> I develop two sorts of site -- those that convey information, >> and those that set out to exploit web functionality to the full >> in order to achieve on-screen something that might otherwise >> require using a full GUI toolkit in order to accomplish. >> >> The first are pure text. They say what needs to be said >> and no more. I imagine that they will render satisfactorily >> on any tablet or mobile device, but lacking both I have >> never tested them against such a benchmark. >> >> The second (of which an example can be seen at the link below) >> typically require a screen resolution of at least 1152 x 864 >> in order to display satisfactorily (unless the visitor has good >> eyesight and can use negative page zoom in order to see more). >> They are not intended to be usable on tablets or similar, neither >> can I envisage any satisfactory way of making them render satisfactorily >> on such devices (nor can I envisage how to make the manuscript content >> accessible to blind and partially sighted users, which I regard as >> a far more important issue, and one that I would dearly love to be >> able to address). >> >> Since I don't create sites that seek to merge these two (in other >> words, my sites are quite unlike the vast majority of sites that >> one experiences today), I am not convinced that the first need >> to be made more mobile-friendly or that it would be possible >> to make the second more mobile-friendly. > > __ > css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] > 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/ __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
> > Typical text site : http://marden-prg.org.uk/ > Typical graphic-dependent high-resolution site : > http://www.royalholloway.ac.uk/Hellenic-Institute/Research/Etheridge/ > > For what it's worth, a smart enough phone - like my iPhone - can render the "high resolution" site mentioned above with only minor Issues. I could even view the manuscript with little problem (minor button display issue), which seems to be the most complex area. I have to 'pinch and zoom' but it works. I'm not saying mobile optimized sites aren't giving a better experience. They do. But in case Philip hasn't looked (as he states he doesn't have a mobile) it's still useable. He's not leaving mobile users *completely* out in the cold. I'm a huge proponent of responsive sites, but you need to know your user base. There are still cases for not doing responsive. __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
Philip, as I described in the message I just sent, I too am developing a very complex and detailed application where I was convinced that one needed a huge screen to appreciate it. After many discussions with my contract designer she was able to convince me that the mobile user was worth pursuing. I wasn't initially convinced, so I approached several users and discussed the idea of using a phone or a tablet. They hadn't even imagined such a use case. With one, I started brainstorming and we realized that being able to walk around with the application, on a phone or tablet, was in fact a game-changer for the industry (I'll leave the specific industry out of it). After discussing it with other users, they (to my surprise) started to become huge advocates for it. Now, the mobile use case has become a cornerstone of the new product, a true differentiator from the competition. And not only has thinking about mobile changed our market strategy, it has, I believe, made a better product for the full screen user (see my other message). In short, I think people who ignore mobile do so at their own peril, or at least to their own market detriment. Chris On 4/10/14 9:18 AM, "Philip Taylor" wrote: > >I develop two sorts of site -- those that convey information, >and those that set out to exploit web functionality to the full >in order to achieve on-screen something that might otherwise >require using a full GUI toolkit in order to accomplish. > >The first are pure text. They say what needs to be said >and no more. I imagine that they will render satisfactorily >on any tablet or mobile device, but lacking both I have >never tested them against such a benchmark. > >The second (of which an example can be seen at the link below) >typically require a screen resolution of at least 1152 x 864 >in order to display satisfactorily (unless the visitor has good >eyesight and can use negative page zoom in order to see more). >They are not intended to be usable on tablets or similar, neither >can I envisage any satisfactory way of making them render satisfactorily >on such devices (nor can I envisage how to make the manuscript content >accessible to blind and partially sighted users, which I regard as >a far more important issue, and one that I would dearly love to be >able to address). > >Since I don't create sites that seek to merge these two (in other >words, my sites are quite unlike the vast majority of sites that >one experiences today), I am not convinced that the first need >to be made more mobile-friendly or that it would be possible >to make the second more mobile-friendly. __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
This, too, is a place where we "engineers" try to pretend we are like our users and, in doing so, often fail them. We all are comfortable with technology, and feel that "sure, let's let them customize the heck out of this thing, give them a ton of options". Because we are comfortable with lots of options and think that's a good thing. But lots of options confuse many people. Or often they don't use them. So you need to be a good designer and make good choices -- even if those choices are only the defaults, because so many people will leave the defaults forever. In short, you can't get away with sloppy design and toss a band-aid on it that says "that's OK, they can turn it on or off". You need to really think the design through so that it's useful to the largest number of users, and provide options only for those skilled or ambitious enough to play with them. My current application is extremely technical, with screens full of data and information and tables and graphs galore. Thinking this very complex app through from a mobile-first perspective, at the insistence of my design consultant, has been really thought-proking. I'm working through the user scenarios time and again to insure that the mobile user has a great experience, and am finding this is giving the full screen user an amazing one. It's challenging and fun all at once. On 4/10/14 8:55 AM, "Del Wegener" wrote: > >Do you anticipate giving your user more options to select bits and >pieces of content? __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
Thank you for your comments, Chris, which clearly contain a great
deal of sense. Let me, if I may, address just one part of what
you say, in terms of what I create ("create", in terms of "create
web sites", that is) --
The problem that "mobile-first" is trying to solve is an issue not simply
one of making content "flow" properly. Mobile devices have so much less
screen space as to force a complete re-think of what the content is.
Simply re-flowing vast amounts of content onto a small space makes for a
terrible user experience. You need to re-design so that you provide only
the essential content on a mobile device, and as you scale up, you add
optional content.
I develop two sorts of site -- those that convey information,
and those that set out to exploit web functionality to the full
in order to achieve on-screen something that might otherwise
require using a full GUI toolkit in order to accomplish.
The first are pure text. They say what needs to be said
and no more. I imagine that they will render satisfactorily
on any tablet or mobile device, but lacking both I have
never tested them against such a benchmark.
The second (of which an example can be seen at the link below)
typically require a screen resolution of at least 1152 x 864
in order to display satisfactorily (unless the visitor has good
eyesight and can use negative page zoom in order to see more).
They are not intended to be usable on tablets or similar, neither
can I envisage any satisfactory way of making them render satisfactorily
on such devices (nor can I envisage how to make the manuscript content
accessible to blind and partially sighted users, which I regard as
a far more important issue, and one that I would dearly love to be
able to address).
Since I don't create sites that seek to merge these two (in other
words, my sites are quite unlike the vast majority of sites that
one experiences today), I am not convinced that the first need
to be made more mobile-friendly or that it would be possible
to make the second more mobile-friendly.
Typical text site : http://marden-prg.org.uk/
Typical graphic-dependent high-resolution site :
http://www.royalholloway.ac.uk/Hellenic-Institute/Research/Etheridge/
Philip Taylor
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
On 4/10/2014 10:33 AM, Chris Williams wrote: Then you all can be happy carrying your pagers and listening to the latest hit from Abba as well. Mobile use is not a fad. It's not just something those whippersnappers are doing, even if you're not. It is, for many, the first and sometimes only web device they use. And it's use is growing exponentially. The problem that "mobile-first" is trying to solve is an issue not simply one of making content "flow" properly. Mobile devices have so much less screen space as to force a complete re-think of what the content is. Simply re-flowing vast amounts of content onto a small space makes for a terrible user experience. You need to re-design so that you provide only the essential content on a mobile device, and as you scale up, you add optional content. The solution that mobile-first presents is rather than taking a full-scale site and trying to decide what to throw out, you start with the essentials and scale up. It's as much a thought exercise as it is a design strategy. It's not about writing to specific mobile-device browsers, it's about designing a site and its content so that it makes sense on mobile, and then adding all the great "extras" when you have the luxury of screen space. Chris On 4/10/14 3:24 AM, "Philip Taylor" wrote: Chris These are excellent points. I deal with two different audiences. One group consists of quite conservative engineers and technicians the other consists of community college students. I have used websites to present math to my students in the classroom and have in the past expected them to access those websites at home for study. I notice that each semester more students rely strictly on their cell phone and do not have a desktop. I have been trying to figure out how I can connect more favorably with them and your comments about "essential content" may have set me in a productive direction. I have decided to do some things (flash cards) with some kind of app so I can push certain information out to them in a manner which is convenient for them. Do you anticipate giving your user more options to select bits and pieces of content? Now I anticipate using your ideas to completely redesign my sites. Thanks. This has been an interesting and useful thread. Del __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
Then you all can be happy carrying your pagers and listening to the latest hit from Abba as well. Mobile use is not a fad. It's not just something those whippersnappers are doing, even if you're not. It is, for many, the first and sometimes only web device they use. And it's use is growing exponentially. The problem that "mobile-first" is trying to solve is an issue not simply one of making content "flow" properly. Mobile devices have so much less screen space as to force a complete re-think of what the content is. Simply re-flowing vast amounts of content onto a small space makes for a terrible user experience. You need to re-design so that you provide only the essential content on a mobile device, and as you scale up, you add optional content. The solution that mobile-first presents is rather than taking a full-scale site and trying to decide what to throw out, you start with the essentials and scale up. It's as much a thought exercise as it is a design strategy. It's not about writing to specific mobile-device browsers, it's about designing a site and its content so that it makes sense on mobile, and then adding all the great "extras" when you have the luxury of screen space. I find it an incredibly useful way to think about things. I don't always complete the design a the mobile level first, but keeping it in the front of mind helps keep the "KISS" (keep it simple, stupid) at the forefront as well. And that's a good thing. Chris On 4/10/14 3:24 AM, "Philip Taylor" wrote: >Someone wrote: > >>> I would like to hear your thoughts/recommendations on Mobile >>> devices for clarification and advice? >>> >> I consider them for the most part more toys than tools. I own no >> mobile device, and do not anticipate ever owning one. I leave here >> infrequently. I've been fueling my car about 3-4 times per year for >> the past several years. Cell service here is non-existent for any >> but Verizon users. Hand held devices I'm familiar with are hard for >> those with big fingers and tired old eyes to use. Mobile devices >> are a scourge on traffic safety. I don't anticipate doing anything >> to promote or facilitate their use. > >Although I don't go along 100% with whoever wrote the immediately >preceding paragraph (it is variously attributed to Ted Sperling >and Felix Miata, but I cannot trace the original), I nonetheless >have considerable sympathy with the ideas expressed. Like the >author, I too own no mobile device other than a couple of >15-year-old mobile 'phones (monochrome) and although I /may/ >purchase a Chromebook at some point, I believe that such devices >emulate conventional desktop/notebook computers rather than >tablets and their ilk. > >My thoughts regarding "Mobile-first design" is that it is putting >the cart before the horse -- we should (IMHO) (a) be designing to >W3C standards (and not designing to accommodate browser deficiencies), >and (b) be designing to be flexible (so that no matter how big or how >small the target device is, our content will reflow to fill it to >maximum advantage). If those two desiderata are met, then it becomes >the responsibility of tablet (etc) designers to accommodate such >material; it is not our job to spoon-feed them and make their lives >easier. > >Philip Taylor >__ >css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] >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/ __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
As with the previous authors, I also do not own/carry a mobile device. However, our site visitors do. While I'm neutral overall on Mobile First vs. Desktop First, I can say that going to a "Mobile First" style sheet reduced our overall CSS by more than half. About 25% of our visitors are coming to us with some type of mobile device, so they get even smaller impact from CSS and image weight. It has simply made more sense to go from the simple to the complex layout within the CSS. Other wins include greater attention to natural syntax layout which in turn falls naturally into line with WCAG guidelines and compliance. In short, the Mobile First philosophy brought many "wins" with it. Perhaps the name is misleading and it should be "Simplicity First" or "Basics First" ELIZABETH DAVIES Input | Intellection | Learner | Achiever | Belief -Original Message- From: css-d-boun...@lists.css-discuss.org [mailto:css-d-boun...@lists.css-discuss.org] On Behalf Of Philip Taylor Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2014 5:24 AM To: CSS-Discuss Cc: Felix Miata; Tedd Sperling Subject: Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation Someone wrote: >> I would like to hear your thoughts/recommendations on Mobile devices >> for clarification and advice? >> > I consider them for the most part more toys than tools. I own no > mobile device, and do not anticipate ever owning one. I leave here > infrequently. I've been fueling my car about 3-4 times per year for > the past several years. Cell service here is non-existent for any but > Verizon users. Hand held devices I'm familiar with are hard for those > with big fingers and tired old eyes to use. Mobile devices are a > scourge on traffic safety. I don't anticipate doing anything to > promote or facilitate their use. Although I don't go along 100% with whoever wrote the immediately preceding paragraph (it is variously attributed to Ted Sperling and Felix Miata, but I cannot trace the original), I nonetheless have considerable sympathy with the ideas expressed. Like the author, I too own no mobile device other than a couple of 15-year-old mobile 'phones (monochrome) and although I /may/ purchase a Chromebook™ at some point, I believe that such devices emulate conventional desktop/notebook computers rather than tablets and their ilk. My thoughts regarding "Mobile-first design" is that it is putting the cart before the horse -- we should (IMHO) (a) be designing to W3C standards (and not designing to accommodate browser deficiencies), and (b) be designing to be flexible (so that no matter how big or how small the target device is, our content will reflow to fill it to maximum advantage). If those two desiderata are met, then it becomes the responsibility of tablet (etc) designers to accommodate such material; it is not our job to spoon-feed them and make their lives easier. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/ All information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. Only intended recipients are authorized to use it. __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] [admin/OT] was: Firefox and page inflation
On 2014-04-10 11:24 (GMT+0100) Philip Taylor composed: I cannot trace the original That's one of the hazards of mailing lists that do not munge. The habit of needing to reply specially instead of with a normal reply button can induce someone receiving a private reply to a list post to believe, in spite of mention within the private reply that it is in fact a private reply, that it was meant to be sent to the whole list, and thus the follow-up reply gets sent back to the list instead of only to the sender who sent it privately. -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Fancybox modal window location in iPhone
Thank you - I'll give that a try. -- Debbie On 4/10/2014 7:18 AM, Tom Livingston wrote: On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Debbie Campbell wrote: >Works fine in Android both portrait and landscape (centered on the screen), >and fine in iPhone portrait view, but in landscape view on an iPhone the >modal window is off to the lower right. > >http://www.artofequinemassage.com/class-photos/ > >I tried making an adjustment to the CSS but don't have an iPhone to test; in >the online emulators I tried, the modal windows filled 100% of the screen so >I can't see the problem. > It seems you may be suffering from this: http://filamentgroup.com/lab/a_fix_for_the_ios_orientationchange_zoom_bug/ When I changed orientation, the whole page was zoomed in so when you click a photo, the modal is acting accordingly. If I zoom out first, the modal works as desired. HTH __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Fancybox modal window location in iPhone
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Debbie Campbell wrote: > Works fine in Android both portrait and landscape (centered on the screen), > and fine in iPhone portrait view, but in landscape view on an iPhone the > modal window is off to the lower right. > > http://www.artofequinemassage.com/class-photos/ > > I tried making an adjustment to the CSS but don't have an iPhone to test; in > the online emulators I tried, the modal windows filled 100% of the screen so > I can't see the problem. > It seems you may be suffering from this: http://filamentgroup.com/lab/a_fix_for_the_ios_orientationchange_zoom_bug/ When I changed orientation, the whole page was zoomed in so when you click a photo, the modal is acting accordingly. If I zoom out first, the modal works as desired. HTH -- Tom Livingston | Senior Front-End Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
[css-d] Fancybox modal window location in iPhone
Works fine in Android both portrait and landscape (centered on the screen), and fine in iPhone portrait view, but in landscape view on an iPhone the modal window is off to the lower right. http://www.artofequinemassage.com/class-photos/ I tried making an adjustment to the CSS but don't have an iPhone to test; in the online emulators I tried, the modal windows filled 100% of the screen so I can't see the problem. -- Debbie Campbell __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
Den 10.04.2014 12:59, skrev MiB: What mobile first does is focusing on the content and the essential presentation of it. Something all web design should be doing already. That they should, regardless of how they approach visual design. regards Georg __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
apr 102014 12:36 Georg : > I agree in principle, but guess how much you "play by the market", or not, > depends on whether you are trying to sell something, or not. :-) > > FWIW, I have no "first" in mind when designing, only "all"... > http://www.gunlaug.com/contents/design/mobile-first.html Mobile first doesn’t imply ”not all", but is rather named after breaking with the tradition of adding mobile suport after having developed a normal ”computer” browser design. That’s what used to happen and still happens too often. What mobile first does is focusing on the content and the essential presentation of it. Something all web design should be doing already. __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
Den 10.04.2014 12:24, skrev Philip Taylor: My thoughts regarding "Mobile-first design" is that it is putting the cart before the horse -- we should (IMHO) (a) be designing to W3C standards (and not designing to accommodate browser deficiencies), and (b) be designing to be flexible (so that no matter how big or how small the target device is, our content will reflow to fill it to maximum advantage). If those two desiderata are met, then it becomes the responsibility of tablet (etc) designers to accommodate such material; it is not our job to spoon-feed them and make their lives easier. I agree in principle, but guess how much you "play by the market", or not, depends on whether you are trying to sell something, or not. :-) FWIW, I have no "first" in mind when designing, only "all"... http://www.gunlaug.com/contents/design/mobile-first.html regards Georg __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
Someone wrote: I would like to hear your thoughts/recommendations on Mobile devices for clarification and advice? I consider them for the most part more toys than tools. I own no mobile device, and do not anticipate ever owning one. I leave here infrequently. I've been fueling my car about 3-4 times per year for the past several years. Cell service here is non-existent for any but Verizon users. Hand held devices I'm familiar with are hard for those with big fingers and tired old eyes to use. Mobile devices are a scourge on traffic safety. I don't anticipate doing anything to promote or facilitate their use. Although I don't go along 100% with whoever wrote the immediately preceding paragraph (it is variously attributed to Ted Sperling and Felix Miata, but I cannot trace the original), I nonetheless have considerable sympathy with the ideas expressed. Like the author, I too own no mobile device other than a couple of 15-year-old mobile 'phones (monochrome) and although I /may/ purchase a Chromebook™ at some point, I believe that such devices emulate conventional desktop/notebook computers rather than tablets and their ilk. My thoughts regarding "Mobile-first design" is that it is putting the cart before the horse -- we should (IMHO) (a) be designing to W3C standards (and not designing to accommodate browser deficiencies), and (b) be designing to be flexible (so that no matter how big or how small the target device is, our content will reflow to fill it to maximum advantage). If those two desiderata are met, then it becomes the responsibility of tablet (etc) designers to accommodate such material; it is not our job to spoon-feed them and make their lives easier. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
