Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-30 Thread Jason Arnold
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 12:29 PM, tee weblis...@gmail.com wrote:
 It's been quite a while I have to do a site using EM unit for the layout 
 width (with max/min-widths treatment), I am getting a shrunk page in Safari.

 In these two examples, the width is 62em which is around 992px according to 
 pxtoem dot com, but in Safari 5 it's around 871px in actual size. First I 
 thought maybe it's because I mixed the EM and % (for left/content columns), 
 so I did another test page using EM only, still getting the same result.

 EM and %
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.html
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.png

 EM only
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.html
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/safari-ss.png

 My monitor is 27 2560x1440 resolution, but I don't think this is the reason.

 Can you confirm if you see the same?


I had this issue to then I checked safari's default font size and it
was set to 12px instead of 16px like the other browsers.  Once I
changed that setting to 16px then they all looked the same.  I would
suggest verifying in your browsers that they all have the same px size
set for their default font size before testing.

-- 

Jason Arnold
http://www.jasonarnold.net



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-30 Thread David Hucklesby

On 7/29/10 10:29 AM, tee wrote:

It's been quite a while I have to do a site using EM unit for the
layout width (with max/min-widths treatment), I am getting a shrunk
page in Safari.

In these two examples, the width is 62em which is around 992px
according to pxtoem dot com, but in Safari 5 it's around 871px in
actual size. First I thought maybe it's because I mixed the EM and %
(for left/content columns), so I did another test page using EM
only, still getting the same result.

EM and % http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.html
http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.png

EM only http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.html
http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/safari-ss.png

My monitor is 27 2560x1440 resolution, but I don't think this is
the reason.

Can you confirm if you see the same?



FWIW - My laptop came set to 120 DPI. While Gecko renders 100% as 16px,
Opera and IE translate 1em as 20px.

I don't think there is any strict correlation between pixels and EMs.
There are just too many settings, OS and browser, that change the
relationship.

(aside) I recently tried to use @media queries to alter a layout. I used
EMs to control the tipping points. This works in conforming browsers,
but I notice that IE 9 preview ignores EMs - it only seems to work with
pixels. Hmm.

Cordially,
David
--



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-30 Thread tee
 
 
 
 I had this issue to then I checked safari's default font size and it
 was set to 12px instead of 16px like the other browsers.  Once I
 changed that setting to 16px then they all looked the same.  I would
 suggest verifying in your browsers that they all have the same px size
 set for their default font size before testing.

Thanks for bringing this up. I changed it and now Safari renders the width 
similar to others.

This is very strange! The font size in my Safari is 14px. I'd just had this 
computer about 6 months ago, and have no memory I altered the font size for the 
reason I did in previous machine (mentioned in my previous email).

Other browsers have default 16px. 

Do you have idea how Safari makes the calculation that resulted 121px 
differences with 14px font size setting when width is set to 62em.

tee

***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-30 Thread Jody Tate
If this helps: my MacBook Pro is about 2 months old and Safari's default is 
16px. 

-jody


On Jul 30, 2010, at 11:38 AM, tee wrote:

 
 
 
 I had this issue to then I checked safari's default font size and it
 was set to 12px instead of 16px like the other browsers.  Once I
 changed that setting to 16px then they all looked the same.  I would
 suggest verifying in your browsers that they all have the same px size
 set for their default font size before testing.
 
 Thanks for bringing this up. I changed it and now Safari renders the width 
 similar to others.
 
 This is very strange! The font size in my Safari is 14px. I'd just had this 
 computer about 6 months ago, and have no memory I altered the font size for 
 the reason I did in previous machine (mentioned in my previous email).
 
 Other browsers have default 16px. 
 
 Do you have idea how Safari makes the calculation that resulted 121px 
 differences with 14px font size setting when width is set to 62em.
 
 tee
 
 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***
 
 
 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-30 Thread tee
THanks Jody.

I did another test by increasing Safari's font size to 18px, and the layout 
expanded. This makes the EM not stable to use for layout. I wonder if it has 
always like this for Safari or is a new bug.

tee
On Jul 30, 2010, at 11:47 AM, Jody Tate wrote:

 If this helps: my MacBook Pro is about 2 months old and Safari's default is 
 16px. 
 
 -jody
 
 
 On Jul 30, 2010, at 11:38 AM, tee wrote:
 
 
 
 
 I had this issue to then I checked safari's default font size and it
 was set to 12px instead of 16px like the other browsers.  Once I
 changed that setting to 16px then they all looked the same.  I would
 suggest verifying in your browsers that they all have the same px size
 set for their default font size before testing.
 
 Thanks for bringing this up. I changed it and now Safari renders the width 
 similar to others.
 
 This is very strange! The font size in my Safari is 14px. I'd just had this 
 computer about 6 months ago, and have no memory I altered the font size for 
 the reason I did in previous machine (mentioned in my previous email).
 
 Other browsers have default 16px. 
 
 Do you have idea how Safari makes the calculation that resulted 121px 
 differences with 14px font size setting when width is set to 62em.
 
 tee
 
 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ***
 List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
 Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
 Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
 ***
 



***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-30 Thread Felix Miata
On 2010/07/30 14:05 (GMT-0700) tee composed:

 I did another test by increasing Safari's font size to 18px, and the
 layout expanded. This makes the EM not stable to use for layout. I wonder
 if it has always like this for Safari or is a new bug.

I'm having a hard time understanding what seems to be your complaint, which
is that the size of an em can vary. Variation in size of an em is WAD. Are
you sure you understand the definition? It might help to read it in context
of all its modern relatives: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-values/

It may be that your meaning of stable will be addressed through appropriate
use of rem instead of em as browser support for that new unit becomes the norm.

In the mean time remember the web is not paper. Flexibility and absence of
rigid sameness is the web's inherent advantage.
http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/
-- 
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

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



[WSG] Re: WSG Digest

2010-07-30 Thread john
Hello

I am on holiday until Monday 9th August.  If you need to speak to someone in 
the team before then please contact Richard Garbutt for operational issues and 
Dr Andy Jupe for financial or contractual matters.

Best wishes

John Cowles




***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***



[WSG] Out of Office AutoReply: WSG Digest

2010-07-30 Thread Nancy Howard (Scotia Capital)
ABSENCE ALERT!  

I am currently out of the office, returning Wednesday, July 14th.

If necessary, please contact jim_kapsa...@scotiacapital.com, 416-866-2811.

Thank you, Nancy

---
The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which 
it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any 
review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action 
in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the 
intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this email in error, please 
contact the sender immediately by return electronic transmission and then 
immediately delete this transmission, including all attachments, without 
copying, distributing or disclosing same. No member of the Scotiabank Group is 
liable for any errors or omissions in the content or transmission of this email 
or accepts any responsibility or liability for loss or damage arising from the 
receipt or use of this transmission. Scotiabank Group may monitor, retain 
and/or review email. Trading instructions received by e-mail or voicemail will 
not be accepted or acted upon. Unless indicated in writing, opinions contained 
in this email are those of the author and are not endorsed by any member of the 
Scotiabank Group. 

For information on some members of the Scotiabank Group: 
http://www.scotiacapital.com/EmailDisclaimer/English_entities.htm
For authorized users of the Scotia Capital trademark: 
http://www.scotiacapital.com/EmailDisclaimer/English_trademark.htm

Pour obtenir la traduction en français: 
http://www.scotiacapital.com/EmailDisclaimer/French.htm
Traducción en español: http://www.scotiacapital.com/EmailDisclaimer/Spanish.htm


***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***