Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
At 8:35 Uhr +0100 16.01.2003, David wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 Hello guys. Inoticed that we use pt to determine which font size to display. That might be problematic on some operating systems since point size is not something that renders at the same resolution on all screens across all platforms. It would be better to use pica,ems or exs. Why don't you just do it? Note that the website uses a mix of CSS and old fashioned styles in order to render on more browsers similarly. We might decide to convert it to a pure CSS site one of these day (I'd be all for it). BTW, last time I checked pica was an absolute measure, too, and dependenent on the screen resolution just like cm, mm and pt. I know this is nit picking and therefore I am asking if we wish to pay attention to this at all. I could easily change that although we might see some very minor changes in the size of the rendering in the future then, since pica, ems or exs do not match up 100% to the pt rendering. Now when redefining pre we use px as a size denominator for padding and margin. That is something we really should consider changing. Pixel rendering is dependant on the screen resolution and the screen depth which can lead to bad inconsistencies. An absolute size adjustment like cm or mm might be a good choice here. Note that cm/mm/pica suffer from the same problem as pt. I don't think px sizing is that bad, in fact if you want a fixed layout, it's the only way to do it. The relative sizes (em/ex) should work better when the clients browsers substitutes different fonts, but this is not an automatic feature, it has to be carefully developed and tested, too. Max -- --- Max Horn Software Developer --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 snip Why don't you just do it? Because I really do not feel like triggering a flood of protest. Changing the site layout is considered a pretty big step by me and I really do not feel that settled within the project yet that people would simply accept my decision to do so. Note that the website uses a mix of CSS and old fashioned styles in order to render on more browsers similarly. Yes, I noticed that. As you might recall I fixed some issues in the xslt pertaining to that. We might decide to convert it to a pure CSS site one of these day (I'd be all for it). Well here is the famous me too I am just not sure which browsers wont like that BTW, last time I checked pica was an absolute measure, too, and dependenent on the screen resolution just like cm, mm and pt. as far as I recall pica is somehow calculated by aspect ratio and constraint size therefore the screen resolution wont break it that badly. But I am no expert at all. snip I don't think px sizing is that bad, in fact if you want a fixed layout, it's the only way to do it. The relative sizes (em/ex) should work better when the clients browsers substitutes different fonts, but this is not an automatic feature, it has to be carefully developed and tested, too. True. Thanks for the input, as always. - -d - - Face me and you shall surely perish. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQE+Jr96iW/Ta/pxHPQRA2McAKDUc90Dh9+tKl2zj8+0S19Z200mBQCgqiW3 ycC+mwBQIa/O7TN2DqPnhL4= =v/CY -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Max Horn wrote: At 8:35 Uhr +0100 16.01.2003, David wrote: Inoticed that we use pt to determine which font size to display. That might be problematic on some operating systems since point size is not something that renders at the same resolution on all screens across all platforms. It would be better to use pica,ems or exs. We might decide to convert it to a pure CSS site one of these day (I'd be all for it). BTW, last time I checked pica was an absolute measure, too, and dependenent on the screen resolution just like cm, mm and pt. In my immediate past life (i.e. I am still trying to get my last salary cheques) I worked on accessibility for W3C, and one of the basic things is to use %, ex or em for font sizes, and where possible images (this is harder). I would also be all for a CSS-only layout - I use lynx when I don't care about styling, and it handles clean HTML fine, and a modern browser when I do. Now when redefining pre we use px as a size denominator for padding and margin. That is something we really should consider changing. Pixel rendering is dependant on the screen resolution and the screen depth which can lead to bad inconsistencies. An absolute size adjustment like cm or mm might be a good choice here. px for margins is much less of an issue - although there are screen and font-size differences at work the amount of padding is generally not as critical, and cm/mm/pica don't solve the problem any better (since they still vary in effect according to the users font size). I don't think px sizing is that bad, in fact if you want a fixed layout, it's the only way to do it. If you want a fixed layout you should probably be using PDF - it isn't (IMHO) sensible to try and get exactly the same layout on my browser at 1200x800 as it is when I decide to shrink it to 600x800 or 900x300 or move to another machine at 600x400. But there is some value to consistency, and with the generally awful state of browsers there needs to be careful thought and testing to work out what the good trade-offs are... cheers Chaals --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 snip You are my man then. Would you accept looking over the Fink website, its css and layout concerning usability and accessibility as your task? I know you already offered yourself as a documentation writer but given your past you'd be pretty darn perfect for this task, so how do you feel about it? ;) - -d - - Face me and you shall surely perish. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Darwin) iD8DBQE+JsIciW/Ta/pxHPQRA1cvAJ9SXyRUkHnjlsyKGAZhnNwoSz/WwACfcwdi q5pRST5rN08CoeU83ViqO6M= =miW7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
At 9:25 Uhr -0500 16.01.2003, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Max Horn wrote: At 8:35 Uhr +0100 16.01.2003, David wrote: Inoticed that we use pt to determine which font size to display. That might be problematic on some operating systems since point size is not something that renders at the same resolution on all screens across all platforms. It would be better to use pica,ems or exs. We might decide to convert it to a pure CSS site one of these day (I'd be all for it). BTW, last time I checked pica was an absolute measure, too, and dependenent on the screen resolution just like cm, mm and pt. In my immediate past life (i.e. I am still trying to get my last salary cheques) I worked on accessibility for W3C, and one of the basic things is to use %, ex or em for font sizes, and where possible images (this is harder). I would also be all for a CSS-only layout - I use lynx when I don't care about styling, and it handles clean HTML fine, and a modern browser when I do. Yeah, I like those, too, but still the page has to render right on IE 5/Mac, Safari, and Chimera/Mozilla. Ideally, it should be usable from Opera/Mac, OmniWeb, iCab and Konquerer, too. (I am implicitly assuming Lynx/Links are supported, so I don't list them - but let's keep'em in mind anyway). And yeah it's OK for me to make the font sizes relative. Now when redefining pre we use px as a size denominator for padding and margin. That is something we really should consider changing. Pixel rendering is dependant on the screen resolution and the screen depth which can lead to bad inconsistencies. An absolute size adjustment like cm or mm might be a good choice here. px for margins is much less of an issue - although there are screen and font-size differences at work the amount of padding is generally not as critical, and cm/mm/pica don't solve the problem any better (since they still vary in effect according to the users font size). I don't think px sizing is that bad, in fact if you want a fixed layout, it's the only way to do it. If you want a fixed layout you should probably be using PDF I didn't say I want, I just said what you need if you want one :-) And fixed is not meant in the strict sense here, anyway, so the PDF remark is not really fitting. - it isn't (IMHO) sensible to try and get exactly the same layout on my browser at 1200x800 as it is when I decide to shrink it to 600x800 or 900x300 or move to another machine at 600x400. But there is some value to consistency, and with the generally awful state of browsers there needs to be careful thought and testing to work out what the good trade-offs are... Yup yup. Max -- --- Max Horn Software Developer --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, David wrote: snip Why don't you just do it? Because I really do not feel like triggering a flood of protest. Changing the site layout is considered a pretty big step by me and I really do not feel that settled within the project yet that people would simply accept my decision to do so. I think changing site layout is a big step. more so if it moves things around, less so if it just changes fonts and padding a bit... We might decide to convert it to a pure CSS site one of these day (I'd be all for it). Well here is the famous me too I am just not sure which browsers wont like that depends heavily on what you do. Netscape 4 and IE 3 have pretty sorry implementations of CSS so you have to do a bunch of hacking around them (this has been documented by all-CSS sites like http://www.alistapart.com when they switched) and implementation of the cooler features is still a bit patchy. But I wrote basic commercial sites in 1999 with all-CSS they were ok. (I am sympathetic to people who say I don't want to change from iCab to KDE, I will live with the lack of 'float', but I am also happier than many to say if you use foo3.5 when foo7.2 is available and doesn't have the bugs your old version does, upgrade or tell someone who cares...) cheers Chaals --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, David wrote: snip You are my man then. Would you accept looking over the Fink website, its css and layout concerning usability and accessibility as your task? I know you already offered yourself as a documentation writer but given your past you'd be pretty darn perfect for this task, so how do you feel about it? ;) Perishable... ;-) Yep, I'll have a look but it might take some days. I don't plan to suggest massive changes - consistency over time is helpful too, but I'll keep it in mind on an ongoing basis. - Face me and you shall surely perish. cheers chaals --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
At 9:38 Uhr -0500 16.01.2003, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, David wrote: snip Why don't you just do it? Because I really do not feel like triggering a flood of protest. Changing the site layout is considered a pretty big step by me and I really do not feel that settled within the project yet that people would simply accept my decision to do so. I think changing site layout is a big step. more so if it moves things around, less so if it just changes fonts and padding a bit... We might decide to convert it to a pure CSS site one of these day (I'd be all for it). Well here is the famous me too I am just not sure which browsers wont like that depends heavily on what you do. Netscape 4 and IE 3 have pretty sorry implementations of CSS so you have to do a bunch of hacking around them (this has been documented by all-CSS sites like http://www.alistapart.com when they switched) and implementation of the cooler features is still a bit patchy. But I wrote basic commercial sites in 1999 with all-CSS they were ok. I definitly do *not* want to support v3 or v4 browsers in the sense that I care whether the page looks good to them or not. Fifth generation it is. lynx/links will just not display the CSS, and only render the HTML, which is perfectly fine, too. (I am sympathetic to people who say I don't want to change from iCab to KDE, I will live with the lack of 'float', but I am also happier than many to say if you use foo3.5 when foo7.2 is available and doesn't have the bugs your old version does, upgrade or tell someone who cares...) Exactly. Max -- --- Max Horn Software Developer --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
Re: [Fink-devel] Concerning fink.css..
On Thursday, January 16, 2003, at 09:54 AM, Max Horn wrote: I definitly do *not* want to support v3 or v4 browsers in the sense that I care whether the page looks good to them or not. Fifth generation it is. lynx/links will just not display the CSS, and only render the HTML, which is perfectly fine, too. Links 2.0 has graphical support (I keep meaning to package it...), and I'm not sure how good the CSS support is. --- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: Thawte.com Understand how to protect your customers personal information by implementing SSL on your Apache Web Server. Click here to get our FREE Thawte Apache Guide: http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0029en ___ Fink-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
