|
Subject:
|
Styles problem
|
|
Posted By:
|
tsimsha
|
Post Date:
|
11/16/2004 1:56:01 AM
|
Hello,
I designed pages in dreamweaver mx 2004. I used template. In my win 2000 server/prof, XP its displaying well. But in win me its displaying in large fonts. Why it is happening like this.
I checked the resolution also. Its 800x600 in all the systems.
can u suggest me the sollution?
|
|
Reply By:
|
meow
|
Reply Date:
|
11/16/2004 2:19:41 AM
|
Because the dpi is different on the two machines or because you have set the font-size differently in the two browsers?
(o<
//\ =^..^=
|
|
Reply By:
|
tsimsha
|
Reply Date:
|
11/16/2004 8:40:13 PM
|
Hello,
I checked the font size and dpi. Both are same with small fonts and normal(96 dpi). But output is different.
What could be the problem?
|
|
Reply By:
|
Snib
|
Reply Date:
|
11/16/2004 9:14:08 PM
|
Can you please provide a link to this page, that we might suggest a more cross-platform or cross-browser way to code it?
-Snib
Where will you be in 100 years?
Try new FreshView 0.2!
|
|
Reply By:
|
tsimsha
|
Reply Date:
|
11/16/2004 11:46:08 PM
|
Hello,
This is the link
http://m.1asphost.com/tsimsha/montex/default.htm
|
|
Reply By:
|
richard.york
|
Reply Date:
|
11/17/2004 7:15:10 AM
|
I beleive it is your use of the small keyword for the font-size property. I know for certain that there are inconsistencies with the absolute font size keywords between browsers, and between browser versions.
To correct most of the inconsistency you could specify a base font size on the <body> element. For instance,
body {
font-size: 16px;
}
And this will give IE, Gecko, Opera, etc, some common starting ground. 16px is the default size in Gecko, BTW, whereas in IE I think its 12pt.
HTH!
Regards,
Rich
--
[http://www.smilingsouls.net]
Mail_IMAP: A PHP/C-Client/PEAR solution for webmail
Author: Beginning CSS: Cascading Style Sheets For Web Design
|
|
Reply By:
|
richard.york
|
Reply Date:
|
11/17/2004 7:16:19 AM
|
That base size corrects inconsistency for the use of percentage measuments, BTW, there's nothing to be done about absolute keywords. (Sorry typing in a hurry).
Regards,
Rich
--
[http://www.smilingsouls.net]
Mail_IMAP: A PHP/C-Client/PEAR solution for webmail
Author: Beginning CSS: Cascading Style Sheets For Web Design
|
|
Reply By:
|
meow
|
Reply Date:
|
11/17/2004 7:28:52 AM
|
I think you mean em. 
A font-size for body corrects IE's resizing problem with em. It doesn't have to be an absolute size either. That kind of kills the usefulness of relative sizes.
% doesn't have any bugs (well, maybe in IE3 or other ancient browsers).
(o<
//\ =^..^=
|
|
Reply By:
|
richard.york
|
Reply Date:
|
11/17/2004 8:30:37 AM
|
> I think you mean em.
> A font-size for body corrects IE's resizing problem with em. It
> doesn't have to be an absolute size either. That kind of kills the
> usefulness of relative sizes.
No, I meant percentages, I didn't see any ems in the source. Percentage sizes don't have any bugs that I know of, per say. But when using percentage sizing you need a common starting point, since each percentage size is based on the font size of the parent/containing block. If there is no font size specified for the <body> or <html> elements, and all the children use percentage sizing, then it goes to the UAs default and those percentages are based on that, thus creating some inconsistency. When I loaded up this page there was a noticeable size difference between Firefox and IE which led me to that conclusion.
Personally I wouldn't worry that much about it, a good design should scale with the user's font preferences, IMHO (using percentage/em fonts and em measurements for everything else will create this type of design). But if it is bothersome specifying a font size on the <body> or <html> elements should fix it, e.g. a pixel font size (I'd avoid points, and other absolute units all together).
Absolute keyword sizing, OTOH, which I noticed at least once in the source of this project changed at some point in IE's evolution but I can't remember between which versions, and there's a new sizing algorithm for that in CSS 2.1. So CSS 1, 2 and 2.1 each specify different scaling factors for absolute font size keywords, so there's sure to be some inconsitency with older browsers there as well. (Just assuming it's an older IE on Win ME).
I saw one error in the CSS as well:
font-family: 'arial,verdana,helvetica sans-serif';
This isn't valid, no quotes are required and you're missing a comma.
Sorry for the confusion I was typing in a hurry!
Regards,
Rich
--
[http://www.smilingsouls.net]
Mail_IMAP: A PHP/C-Client/PEAR solution for webmail
Author: Beginning CSS: Cascading Style Sheets For Web Design
|
|
Reply By:
|
meow
|
Reply Date:
|
11/17/2004 8:58:04 AM
|
Oh,I misunderstood you then. Sorry. 
Still, the beauty of % and em is that they ultimately respect the user-chosen size. What's the point of using them at if one "pixelizes" them?
I assumed tsimsha used the same browser on both machines and that all the text was differently sized. Maybe time to tell us the whole story, eh?
(o<
//\ =^..^=
|
