On Sep 20, 2014, at 8:49 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote:
I know it's old, but the point is it's insane that one user stylesheet
applicable to just one site would have reason to be so big.
--
Felix:
As usual, you're right.
I think the problem is laziness and ignorance. They (the
Tom Livingston wrote on 2014-09-19 16:19 (GMT-0400):
Felix Miata wrote:
I doubt
many practitioners using them have tested against user CSS to see how a UA
deals with the multiplied conflicts
[1]
What I do see is failure to
accommodate larger font sizes in the layout and therefore
sep 18 2014 22:47 Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net:
The natural talent of every modern web browser to adapt content to the user's
environment is usurped by CSS attempting to make every page look like
Photoshopped image, and at an arbitrary size bearing no predictable
relationship to the
On 2014-09-19, at 1:40 PM, MiB wrote:
sep 18 2014 22:47 Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net:
The natural talent of every modern web browser to adapt content to the user's
environment is usurped by CSS attempting to make every page look like
Photoshopped image, and at an arbitrary size
MiB wrote on 2014-09-19 21:40 (GMT+0200):
Felix Miata composed:
The natural talent of every modern web browser to adapt content to the user's
environment is usurped by CSS attempting to make every page look like
Photoshopped image, and at an arbitrary size bearing no predictable
Norman Fournier wrote on 2014-09-19 13:46 (GMT-0600):
the problem stated in the post is solved by CSS and media queries, not
created by it.
Actually, media queries have compounded the problems of CSS overuse. I doubt
many practitioners using them have tested against user CSS to see how a UA
On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 4:12 PM, Felix Miata mrma...@earthlink.net wrote:
Norman Fournier wrote on 2014-09-19 13:46 (GMT-0600):
the problem stated in the post is solved by CSS and media queries, not
created by it.
Actually, media queries have compounded the problems of CSS overuse. I doubt
2014-09-18 1:44, Felix Miata wrote:
One of the rem unit's important features, if not its most important, is that
size cascade is ignored.
Indeed the very point of the rem unit is to set the size of something
using Cascading Style Sheets so that the cascade is avoided. Opinions
disagree on
On Wed, Sep 17, 2014 at 3:49 PM, John j...@coffeeonmars.com wrote:
On Sep 16, 2014, at 7:35 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote:
Did you read on this list that the REM unit is only for type? - It's a
relative unit like any other relative unit. I use it for everything except
element widths
On Sep 18, 2014, at 5:47 AM, Tom Livingston tom...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't heard any arguments about not using rem for anything but
font-size until this thread. I've only heard that it's no different
than using em, except for the lack of the compounding issue associated
with em. And
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:53 AM, John j...@coffeeonmars.com wrote:
On Sep 18, 2014, at 5:47 AM, Tom Livingston tom...@gmail.com wrote:
I haven't heard any arguments about not using rem for anything but
font-size until this thread. I've only heard that it's no different
than using em, except
Jukka K. Korpela wrote on 2014-09-18 09:06 (GMT+0300):
Felix Miata wrote:
When you set a width in rem, the ratio between base font size and the
container's design width remains constant no matter how many layers deep that
container lives, and no matter what the base font size is.
Normally
On Sep 16, 2014, at 7:35 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote:
Did you read on this list that the REM unit is only for type? - It's a
relative unit like any other relative unit. I use it for everything except
element widths (they get %s) and line-height that should be unitless.
No, I mean
John wrote on 2014-09-17 12:49 (GMT-0700):
I mean that in my gathering information about proper use of rems, Im
looking far and wide (online, people I know) and there is a disagreement
as to how rem units should be used.
One of the rem unit's important features, if not its most important, is
There needs to be a guideline on EM's REM's what about using them for
positioning. I was helped from someone on this list with that a few
weeks ago regarding using them as positioning.
This topic re-surfaces quite frequently, there should be some
guidelines, then if the developer wants to
If rem units are for font size and margins and padding get % values, does it
get fairly hairy knowing what % you need for your margin/padding? Always of
the parent, of course, but what if you have an ul in your sidebar and another
in a main content div, which is much wider than the sidebar..
2014-09-17 0:11, John wrote:
If rem units are for font size and margins and padding get % values,
does it get fairly hairy knowing what % you need for your
margin/padding?
Yes. Or, rather, impossible. You would need to make a guess and go wrong
often.
I guess through the use of descendent
On Sep 16, 2014, at 2:29 PM, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi wrote:
Percentages have their use, but for margin and padding, they are mostly
unsuitable. The padding between text and the edge of an element should relate
to the font size, not the total width of something.
Thank you,
On Tuesday, September 16, 2014, John j...@coffeeonmars.com wrote:
On Sep 16, 2014, at 2:29 PM, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi
javascript:; wrote:
Percentages have their use, but for margin and padding, they are mostly
unsuitable. The padding between text and the edge of an element
so, if rem units are specifically for type and not for positioning, then what
about things like line-height? Should line-height be expressed in rems if the
font-size is expressed in rems?
I would think so, since line-height acts on the type, rather than on the type’s
container..but I am not
On Tuesday, September 16, 2014, John j...@coffeeonmars.com wrote:
so, if rem units are specifically for type and not for positioning, then
what about things like line-height? Should line-height be expressed in rems
if the font-size is expressed in rems?
I would think so, since line-height
Le 17 sept. 2014 à 10:30, John j...@coffeeonmars.com a écrit :
so, if rem units are specifically for type
They are not…
and not for positioning,
Rem can be used for positioning, why wouldn’t it? I frequently specify padding
/ margin in rem
then what about things like line-height?
On Sep 16, 2014, at 6:36 PM, Philippe Wittenbergh e...@l-c-n.com wrote:
Le 17 sept. 2014 à 10:30, John j...@coffeeonmars.com a écrit :
so, if rem units are specifically for type
They are not…
and not for positioning,
Rem can be used for positioning, why wouldn’t it? I frequently
Did you read on this list that the REM unit is only for type? - It's a relative
unit like any other relative unit. I use it for everything except element widths
(they get %s) and line-height that should be unitless.
There are some strange rules of thumb floating around out thereTake a look
at
2013-01-14 23:18, Tom Livingston wrote:
I've been
looking into rem units and noticed that the only fallback i've seen written
about is px. Can you not fallback to em? The fallback is generally going to
be for IE 9, and they can't resize things set in px, if need be, so will
em work instead?
On 1/14/13 1:46 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2013-01-14 23:18, Tom Livingston wrote:
I've been looking into rem units and noticed that the only fallback
i've seen written about is px. Can you not fallback to em? The fallback
is generally going to be for IE 9, and they can't resize things set
26 matches
Mail list logo
