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 know.

What I see in Safari right now, is not normal, perhaps it's a Safari specific 
bug that you mentioned early, but I want to learn more before I decide to sign 
up an account to file a bug; or this maybe just how Safari handles a layout 
when the container width sets in EM and is a normal behavior; in 5 years I have 
only done less than 5 sites that used EM for width and I have never seen this 
until now. I am quite certain chances for any web developer to stumble on this 
'bug' or 'this behavior of Safari' is very rare because 1) EM layout is of 
minority; 2) it requires the browse font size be reduced or increased to 
trigger the behavior.

If this is how Safari has always been, then yes, I still think EM is not stable 
to use for layout width, precisely the reason that you raised a number of time, 
that some users do set their font sizes bigger/smaller.

http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/18px-fontsize.png

tee
On Jul 30, 2010, at 5:25 PM, Felix Miata wrote:

 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
 ***
 



***
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 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] 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. 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?

Thanks!

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?

2010-07-29 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 the same result.


http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.html



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

Can you confirm if you see the same?

Thanks!

tee

  








Mac OS X 10.4.11 [116.5dpi]

Safari, WebKit, Camino, FF approx 993 to 995px

Mac OS X 10.4.11 [116.5dpi] Parallels XP

Safari, FF, IE 6/7/8 approx 993 to 995px

Best,
~d


--
http://chelseacreekstudio.com/



***
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?

2010-07-29 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: 100% == 16px;

Set your font-size to 16px instead of 100.1% and the width will be fixed.
Modern browsers will still be able to resize the font, but for IE you may
want to have a conditional comment and change the font-size back to 100.1%.

Best regards,

Kepler Gelotte
Neighbor Webmaster, Inc.
156 Normandy Dr., Piscataway, NJ 08854
www.neighborwebmaster.com
phone/fax: (732) 302-0904




***
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?

2010-07-29 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 FF and Google Chrome unstable (which
uses same Webkit engine as Safari). If Safari isn't doing the same, it must
be a Safari-specific bug.

http://dowebsitesneedtolookexactlythesameineverybrowser.com/

I wonder for those who do see a difference if it is because on Safari an em
may not be generic, but rather specific to the actual font-family. Maybe FF
is measuring generically, while Safari is measuring based upon the
diminuitive Corbel. Do you see the same result if you remove 'Corbel,
Arial,' from the CSS?

 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: 100% == 16px;

If Safari's default has been adjusted to something other than 16px to
accommodate user requirements, or in any other browser, it shouldn't. There's
_no_ valid point in assuming any particular px size as a default size.

 Set your font-size to 16px instead of 100.1% and the width will be fixed.

1-it's rude
2-it defeats one major purpose of em sizing (to accommodate/honor visitor
requirements, while maintaining a design's proportions to whatever extent
viewport size permits)

 Modern browsers will still be able to resize the font, but for IE you may

I've resized in advance by setting my default to to something other than
16px meet my needs. I shouldn't have to do it again on every rude page I load.

True resize is a browser defense mechanism. It only need be applied on
encountering offensive CSS.
-- 
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
***



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 shouldn't. There's
 _no_ valid point in assuming any particular px size as a default size.

 All browsers in my machine use default font size, because  I find this is the 
 only way I could make websites render more consistently. Used to have 2px 
 extra large in all my browsers, it was very bad as I forgot about it, and a 
 number of sites I did, the font sizes turned out much smaller in clients' 
 machines.

If you don't either:

1-have multiple browsers and/or profiles each with a multiplicity of default
sizes set, or
2-constantly change the defaults in the only/few browser(s) you use,

then you're testing inadequately for the way browsers are built by their
developers and expected to be used by real users. Whether initial browser
defaults are adequate for any particular environment depends on too many
factors to expect no one to change them or need to change them. The web isn't
paper. Paper design paradigms (e.g. consistence of mere appearance) are
inappropriate for web design.

On 2010/07/29 16:35 (GMT-0400) tee composed:

 em only (width)- I forgot the correct link in my original post.
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width2.html

 It has nothing to do with Corbel font.

 font: normal 16px/1.5em Arial, sans-serif
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width3.html

 font: normal 100%/1.5em Arial, sans-serif
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width4.html

 font: normal 1em/1.5em Arial, sans-serif
 http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width5.html

 Anybody has a Safari 4 to test on?

I don't seen any difference on
http://greensho.nexcess.net/em-vs-px/em-width.html between Safari 4.0.3  FF
3.6.8, but I have my old G3 Tiger Mac on a big CRT display where 16px is
actually a big enough default to use.
-- 
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
***