![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
I have a large commercial site to rebuild, where the design has been produced by the pixel-counting method. It's also one of those sites where cramming every space full of content is seen as better than a more spread-out and usable design that uses some scrolling. Not surprisingly it's the work of paper-based magazine designers, not web designers. The real problem here is that IE blows the whole lot apart. With its well-known problems of an excessive default scaling for ems to pixels, I can produce a good implementation for the well-behaved browsers (even on the Mac) but any IE rendering of the page only works when the user's text size is reduced to "Smaller". This is particularly bad if I attempt to use <h*> markup, where the differences are particularly visible. Any suggestions ? Are there any "CSS hack" based techniques which will let me set a default size of 1em/100% for web browsers, then an 85% value for IE only, hidden by some parser hack ? (I am _not_ interested in a discussion of em vs. pixel sizing - that's a different issue) |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
body { font-size:85%; voice-family: "\"}\""; voice-family:inherit; font-size:medium; } |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 12:33:59 -0400, C A Upsdell ""cupsdellXXX\"@-@- (AT) XXXupsdell (DOT) com"> wrote: body { font-size:85%; voice-family: "\"}\""; voice-family:inherit; font-size:medium; } But isn't that (the Tantek Celik hack) just going to work on IE5 ? I need to make it work on IE6 |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
Andy Dingley <dingbat (AT) codesmiths (DOT) com> writes: On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 12:33:59 -0400, C A Upsdell ""cupsdellXXX\"@-@- (AT) XXXupsdell (DOT) com"> wrote: body { font-size:85%; voice-family: "\"}\""; voice-family:inherit; font-size:medium; } But isn't that (the Tantek Celik hack) just going to work on IE5 ? I need to make it work on IE6 Wouldn't it be easier to use a documented features of IE then: the conditional comments? Like this: !--[if IE] style type="text/css"/ ... your IE rules here ... /style>'); ![endif]-- I find this approach much better than relying on various parsing errors in IE to get things right. Using a comment which will be ignored by all browsers except IE is much cleaner. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
Martin Geisler wrote: Wouldn't it be easier to use a documented features of IE then: the conditional comments? Like this: !--[if IE] style type="text/css"/ ... your IE rules here ... /style>'); ![endif]-- This requires a separate stylesheet for IE. |
#8
| |||
| |||
|
|
On Sun, 18 Sep 2005 17:42:53 -0400, C A Upsdell ""cupsdellXXX\"@-@- (AT) XXXupsdell (DOT) com"> wrote: Wouldn't it be easier to use a documented features of IE then: the conditional comments? Like this: !--[if IE] style type="text/css"/ ... your IE rules here ... /style>'); ![endif]-- This requires a separate stylesheet for IE. Not necessarily - I could inline the stylesheet into the page HTML. All the pages are auto-generated by XSLT, so this would actually be quite easy to do (if <xsl:comment> can generate that fragment) As a performance issue I want to avoid the number of separate documents to be retrieved, but I can live with a few lines added to each HTML document. |
#9
| |||
| |||
|
|
!--[if IE] style type="text/css"/ ... your IE rules here ... /style>'); ![endif]-- - - We'll have to see what IE7 does with this. |
#10
| |||
| |||
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |