I recall seeing this come through, but anyway, I'd like to say that I wasn't
defending *not* using RWD, I'm a big proponent of it, but IIRC there were some
replies that eluded to non-responsive sites being broken or preventative of
users using the site on phones or tablets. I was just saying
29 apr 2014 kl. 18:35 skrev Tom Livingston tom_livings...@ymail.com:
I recall seeing this come through,
I thought so to but couldn’t find it my mailbox nor in the online archive.
but anyway, I'd like to say that I wasn't defending *not* using RWD, I'm a
big proponent of it, but IIRC there
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
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
apr 102014 12:36 Georg ge...@gunlaug.com:
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...
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
...@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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Also, we're drifting away from list appropriate topics...
Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 10, 2014, at 12:32 PM, Chris Williams ch...@clwill.com 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
apr 10 2014 16:19 Davies, Elizabeth elizabeth_dav...@gallup.com:
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.
apr 10 2014 18:50 Tom Livingston tom...@gmail.com:
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,
Phillipe found the same notes I did. I didn't have a machine in the lab with
the requisite resolution and FF version, so my browser version was off. The
first bug report I had listed version 28. I did some installs and narrowed it
to the '21 good', '22 inflated'. Its not just my site, its
On Apr 7, 2014, at 3:28 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote:
I suggest to start thinking like a puter instead of a human. By that I mean
the decimal system is fine for common measurements by ordinary humans. But,
puters use binary, and its octal and hexidecimal extensions, which
] On Behalf Of Felix Miata
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 5:38 PM
To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org
Subject: Re: [css-d] Firefox and page inflation
On 2014-04-04 22:01 (GMT) Davies, Elizabeth composed:
Looking for insight into (and potential correction to) the latest
Firefox browsers inflating
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:30 AM, Davies, Elizabeth
elizabeth_dav...@gallup.com wrote:
I've not used PX sizing for well over a decade. We did recently change to
using REM's off of a % on the HTML.
The site in question uses a % on the HTML and REM's on the typography with PX
in a legacy
Correct that example URL to https://www.gallupstrengthscenter.com/ ... The same
inflation occurs on the GSC site. And it happens whether I put everything to
em's, strip out the IE cascade, put all the media queries to em's or rem's.
The design stays proportional and does not break, it just
Not sure, but I have a feeling the answer to what is happening can be
found here...
http://www.gunlaug.no/contents/wd_1_03_04.html
If so, it is an old problem that reappears in a new form, caused by the
fact that you start small on font-size and then size up further in.
regards
Georg
Tom,
Setting the root element's font-size to 62.5% results in a REM unit being equal
to 10px assuming that the users UAr default font-size is set to 16px which what
overwhelming majority of browsers in the wild are set to. Some folks prefer to
do it this way because it's easy to think in base 10.
On 2014-04-07 16:59 (GMT+0200) Georg composed:
Davies, Elizabeth composed:
Correct that example URL to https://www.gallupstrengthscenter.com/ ...
The same inflation occurs on the GSC site. And it happens whether I put
everything to em's, strip out the IE cascade, put all the media queries
to
Please forgive the impertinent lurker here, but could somebody weigh in
with why relative measures are necessary when the desired outcome is
pixel-level accuracy?
--
Regards,
Barney Carroll
barney.carr...@gmail.com
+44 7429 177278
barneycarroll.com
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote:
As for the OP's question. I don't see what Elizabeth describes in Mozilla
Nightly (still need to try in on FF). The diffs I did see between Nightly and
Chrome are minor and appear to be due to the usual diffs in UA font rendering
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Barney Carroll barney.carr...@gmail.com wrote:
Please forgive the impertinent lurker here, but could somebody weigh in with
why relative measures are necessary when the desired outcome is pixel-level
accuracy?
While feeling a little 'holy war', I'll bite...
Tom sent me some screenshots and is also not seeing the effect on a Mac. I
checked around on our in house Macs, and this appears to be a Windows OS with
Firefox effect. What we're seeing is an overall inflation of the entire page
(not just font size). Where on a 1920 resolution screen, Firefox
On 2014-04-07 15:51 (GMT-0400) Tom Livingston composed:
Barney Carroll wrote:
Please forgive the impertinent lurker here, but could somebody weigh in with
why relative measures are necessary when the desired outcome is pixel-level
accuracy?
While feeling a little 'holy war', I'll bite...
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:10 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 2014-04-07 15:51 (GMT-0400) Tom Livingston composed:
Barney Carroll wrote:
Please forgive the impertinent lurker here, but could somebody weigh in
with
why relative measures are necessary when the desired outcome
Le 5 avr. 2014 à 07:01, Davies, Elizabeth elizabeth_dav...@gallup.com a écrit
:
Looking for insight into (and potential correction to) the latest Firefox
browsers inflating the overall size/resolution of webpages. We use a mobile
first responsive upwards, and in the newest Firefox
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Davies, Elizabeth
elizabeth_dav...@gallup.com wrote:
Tom sent me some screenshots and is also not seeing the effect on a Mac. I
checked around on our in house Macs, and this appears to be a Windows OS with
Firefox effect. What we're seeing is an overall
Hello Elizabeth,
I tested again this time using FF28 latest Chrome, Canary and IE10 (will boot
Win7 later to check IE11). The results are the same - the only diffs I see are
due to font rendering as far as I can tell.
Based on the material the Philippe posted there may be an issue when using a
Mickey,
I've tested on Win8 and reported my findings. I'll test later on Win7, but I
seriously doubt there will be a diff. Especially on my standard density
1920x1080 screen.
Eric
On April 7, 2014 at 8:59 PM Micky Hulse mickyhulse.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:41 PM,
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote:
I've tested on Win8 and reported my findings. I'll test later on Win7, but I
seriously doubt there will be a diff. Especially on my standard density
1920x1080 screen.
Ah, so it's all based on one having a high PPI monitor?
I'm
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:25 PM, Micky Hulse mickyhulse.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Ah, so it's all based on one having a high PPI monitor?
Probably not helpful due to lack of PPI setting/option, but here's a
batch of Browserstack automated screens:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Micky Hulse mickyhulse.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Looks like no difference between shots.
Of course, they don't offer Firefox 28 for the screen shots, so I
guess those screens are of no help anyway.
Crawling back into my hole now. :D
(would still love to see a
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:32 PM, Micky Hulse mickyhulse.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Crawling back into my hole now. :D
There's an interesting thread here:
How to disable system DPI detection on FireFox 22
https://support.mozilla.org/en-US/questions/962945
Found when searching for firefox high dpi
Le 8 avr. 2014 à 10:25, Micky Hulse mickyhulse.li...@gmail.com a écrit :
So, dumb question, but has anyone answered the question as to why
Firefox zooms the page when viewing her page on a high resolution
monitor?
I answered that about 40 minutes before you sent this email…
Would be
On Apr 7, 2014, at 8:25 PM, Micky Hulse mickyhulse.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:06 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote:
I've tested on Win8 and reported my findings. I'll test later on Win7, but I
seriously doubt there will be a diff. Especially on my standard density
On Apr 4, 2014, at 6:38 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote:
On 2014-04-04 22:01 (GMT) Davies, Elizabeth composed:
Looking for insight into (and potential correction to) the latest Firefox
browsers inflating the overall size/resolution of webpages. We use a
mobile first responsive
Looking for insight into (and potential correction to) the latest Firefox
browsers inflating the overall size/resolution of webpages. We use a mobile
first responsive upwards, and in the newest Firefox browsers, what is a
reasonable font size in every other browser becomes ludicrously large in
Could you please post a URL to an example?
Thanks
On April 4, 2014 at 6:01 PM Davies, Elizabeth elizabeth_dav...@gallup.com
wrote:
Looking for insight into (and potential correction to) the latest Firefox
browsers inflating the overall size/resolution of webpages. We use a mobile
first
On 2014-04-04 22:01 (GMT) Davies, Elizabeth composed:
Looking for insight into (and potential correction to) the latest Firefox
browsers inflating the overall size/resolution of webpages. We use a
mobile first responsive upwards, and in the newest Firefox browsers, what
is a reasonable font
44 matches
Mail list logo
