Can anything be done?

Quoth the raven named Bonnie Granat:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

Can anything be done?

Well, you seem to ignore advice I have posted for you in the
past, including all the repeated stuff in your CSS. So, I guess
I'm not going to bother to repeat that again.

Beauregard,

I have taken and followed the advice of many people here! It may
take a while sometimes for me to do so, but that is due to my
limited knowledge and understanding, not to any negative opinion of
the advice offered.

Why is it a big deal if there's extra stuff in the CSS? Bandwidth?

Bandwidth, to a degree. Ease of maintenance...

Is there an efficient way to check if styles are use in a document?
In other words, do I just search for the style in all the docs and
then delete what's not used in the CSS? That might be the quickest
way, I'd think. I can do that pretty quickly with TopStyle Pro 3, I
think. That would be my next project.

Why not just use a text editor to do your CSS work? I used the free
Topstyle 2.5 for awhile and found that it added things that I didn't
need.

What other housekeeping do I need to do?

For example, the:

font-family: Tahoma, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;

need only be in the body. Most all of your border styles can be
combined on a couple lines, like border: 1px 2px 3px 2px
The numbers are in the order of top, right, bottom, left - or
clockwise. It just looks to me as if you've made it more difficult for
yourself.

Does the site look OK? Good? Rotten? Passable? Barely readable?
Award-winning? (That's a joke). ; )

Mostly it is a good site....

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Bonnie Granat wrote:

Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:

But does that issue relate to the size issue?

Do you know what CSS do?


Yes. I'm using CSS, but the kind people here tell me not to use 90% for a
font size. One of the reasons I used 90% for a font size on my earlier pages
was so that when people using 800x600 resolution viewed my site, they would
NOT get HUGE type at the smallest IE setting.

Yes they are telling you to use 100%.

If the user thinks that is too large, they can make the size smaller
themselves.

It's fine as it is, it doesn't need tiny text


--
_______________________________________
/\ \
\_| Le Eagle Eyes Today |

http://www.norml.org |
|
| |
|.| |
web: http://www. |.| e-mail: weyoun@|
dancingborg |\./| dancingborg|
.co.uk |\./| .co.uk|
. |\./| .|
\^.\ |\\.//| /.^/ |
\--.|\ |\\.//| /|.--/ |
\--.| \ |\\.//| / |.--/ |
\---.|\ |\./| /|.---/ |
\--.|\ |\./| /|.--/ |
\ .\ |.| /. / |
_ -_^_^_^_- \ \\ // / -_^_^_^_- _ |
- -/_/_/- ^ ^ | ^ ^ -\_\_\- - |
__________________________________|__
\_/____________________________________/

"Bonnie Granat" <bgranat (AT) granatedit (DOT) com> wrote

Mark Parnell wrote:
On Mon, 16 Feb 2004 19:00:05 -0500, "Bonnie Granat"
bgranat (AT) granatedit (DOT) com> declared in alt.html.critique:

http://www.granatedit.com/800x600.html

Looking at that (and looking at the page here), the body text is only
slightly larger than the text in the address bar (which could just be
a different font). Given that it is a larger body of text, it probably
needs to be slightly larger if anything, anyway. I don't see a
problem.

I noticed the same thing about the size in relation to the browser type,
but
of course that is because EVERYTHING is large in 800x600. Yet there are
pages on the Web one can find with smaller type. They do it by using the
size tag in the HTML, which of course I cannot do. I'm sure there's some
code one could use that would determine the user's resolution and supply a
particular page, but I don't know JavaScript.

Bonnie, users who have a large screen set to 800x600 probably do so for a
reason. I can think of two:

1) They have poor eyesight and *like* the text that big. In this case you
should not worry about it. If you change it because *you* think their
settings are incorrect you will just make them cranky.

2) They don't know any better and just leave the screen at 800x600, just
like it came out of the box, and are quite used to viewing *everything* with
text that is in *your* opinion, too large. In this case you should not worry
about it. If you change it because *you* think their settings are incorrect
you might just confuse them enough that they think your site is broken and
go elsewhere.

The physical size of the screen and the number of pixels there are on it
(and indirectly the physical size of the text) is a *user* setting. You, a
web author, should not fiddle with user settings.

I'm sure there's some
code one could use that would determine the user's resolution and supply a

particular page, but I don't know JavaScript.

Do not go there. You will only be wasting your time and probably upset quite
a few users. Leave their settings alone.

Cheers
Richard.

Quoth the raven named Bonnie Granat:

I'm sure there's some code one could use that would determine
the user's resolution and supply a particular page, but I don't
know JavaScript.

Monitor resolution is not related to browser window size. Let's not
forget that... <g>

Resolution is also not related in any way to the font size a visitor
is using, not just in their browsers, but for all applications. Just
keep your font-size at 100% and all will be well, for /all/ your visitors.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:

Bonnie Granat wrote:
Weyoun the Dancing Borg wrote:

But does that issue relate to the size issue?

Do you know what CSS do?


Yes. I'm using CSS, but the kind people here tell me not to use 90%
for a font size. One of the reasons I used 90% for a font size on my
earlier pages was so that when people using 800x600 resolution
viewed my site, they would NOT get HUGE type at the smallest IE
setting.

Yes they are telling you to use 100%.

If the user thinks that is too large, they can make the size smaller
themselves.

No, they cannot. After a certain point, you can't make it smaller, and I am
saying that at 800x600, the smallest is still too large. ; )

It's fine as it is, it doesn't need tiny text

I guess there's nothing I can do for those folks. Thanks for writing.


--

Bonnie Granat
www.granatedit.com

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:

Quoth the raven named Bonnie Granat:

I'm sure there's some code one could use that would determine
the user's resolution and supply a particular page, but I don't
know JavaScript.

Monitor resolution is not related to browser window size. Let's not
forget that... <g

Right. I'm talking about resolution only here -- just the size of the
elements in the window, not the size of the window itself.

Resolution is also not related in any way to the font size a visitor
is using, not just in their browsers, but for all applications. Just
keep your font-size at 100% and all will be well, for /all/ your
visitors.

Right. But what I am saying is this:

- Given that in low resolution, elements on the screen look bigger than they
do in high resolution, and
- Given that 800 x 600 is low resolution,

- In the Internet Explorer browser, if onw is using low resolution, one
cannot reduce the size of the text on the screen enough to make the type
size comparable to what it is in high resolution.

It's a browser defect. If I were unfortunate enough to be using low
resolution, I would not use a computer, because the type is just too big.
Reading type that is too big can cause rapid fatigue. ; )


--

Bonnie Granat
www.granatedit.com

While sitting in a puddle Bonnie Granat scribbled in the mud:

It's a browser defect.
No it isn't.

If I were unfortunate enough to be using low
resolution,
You would be using it because with poor vision at higher resolutions the

text would be to small to read.

I would not use a computer, because the type is just too big.
Reading type that is too big can cause rapid fatigue. ; )

Not as rapid as trying to read text that is to small.

--
Duende
Recommended hosting
www.hostingforabuck.net
www.affordablehost.com

No, they cannot. After a certain point, you can't make it smaller, and I am
saying that at 800x600, the smallest is still too large. ; )

then do as I do and type <font size="2">



solves a LOT of problems hehe

--
_______________________________________
/\ \
\_| Le Eagle Eyes Today |

http://www.norml.org |
|
| |
|.| |
web: http://www. |.| e-mail: weyoun@|
dancingborg |\./| dancingborg|
.co.uk |\./| .co.uk|
. |\./| .|
\^.\ |\\.//| /.^/ |
\--.|\ |\\.//| /|.--/ |
\--.| \ |\\.//| / |.--/ |
\---.|\ |\./| /|.---/ |
\--.|\ |\./| /|.--/ |
\ .\ |.| /. / |
_ -_^_^_^_- \ \\ // / -_^_^_^_- _ |
- -/_/_/- ^ ^ | ^ ^ -\_\_\- - |
__________________________________|__
\_/____________________________________/

"Bonnie Granat" <bgranat (AT) granatedit (DOT) com> wrote

Reading type that is too big can cause rapid fatigue. ; )

Where do you get your information?
Usability studies show that text is read fastest and understood better when
left to default size.


--

Karl Core

"Weyoun the Dancing Borg" <blah (AT) blah (DOT) blah> wrote

No, they cannot. After a certain point, you can't make it smaller, and I
am
saying that at 800x600, the smallest is still too large. ; )

then do as I do and type <font size="2"

Sure. Nothing wrong with deprecated elements/ code bloat, right?


--

Karl Core