Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-31 Thread tee
Felix, FYI, I was not complaining and yes I do understand and constantly have to tell my print designer pixel-control -freak clients that websites cannot look the same, unable to look the same; I also understand how the EM works, perhaps not as precise as you do but I do know what I need to

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

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

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

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

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

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

[WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-29 Thread tee
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.

Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-29 Thread David Laakso
tee wrote: 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

RE: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-29 Thread Kepler Gelotte
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. I see the same problem you mentioned in both safari on windows as well as safari on the mac. It appears that safari does not equate font-size:

Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-29 Thread Felix Miata
On 2010/07/29 14:55 (GMT-0400) Kepler Gelotte composed: On 2010/07/29 10:29 (GMT-0700) tee composed: 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. Here on Linux, it's about 1500px wide in

Re: [WSG] EM bug in Safari 5?

2010-07-29 Thread Felix Miata
On 2010/07/29 13:42 (GMT-0700) tee composed: On Jul 29, 2010, at 12:55 PM, Felix Miata wrote: It appears that safari does not equate font-size: 100% == 16px; If Safari's default has been adjusted to something other than 16px to accommodate user requirements, or in any other browser, it