Prev: iPod touch and large .flv files
Next: What in the world just happened?
From: Andy Dingley on 11 May 2010 09:10
On 11 May, 02:55, Phillip Jones <pjon...(a)kimbanet.com> wrote:

> I use the WYSIWYG mode of DreamWeaver.

Yes, it shows

> As to content and backgrounds that up to personal taste. I even make
> light use of CSS.
>
> http://www.phillipmjones.net.

That's the problem, "light use of CSS". You've built a site that's
basically HTML 3.2 markup, dressed up with a pointless XHTML doctype.
It's layout-table markup, and it's non-fluid. As all HTML 3.2 layouts
tend to be, it's based on pixel sizing, not text unit sizing.

Dreamweaver has given you valid code, but it hasn't given you good
code.

There's little point in "light use" of CSS. background-color isn't
really much better than a BGCOLOR attribute. Where CSS scores is in
its flow model, sizing behaviour and length dimensions. Useful CSS
gives you a _differerent_ site that you can't achieve by other means.
This difference (i.e. fluidity) is valuable.
From: Andy Dingley on 11 May 2010 09:11
On 11 May, 02:23, Glen Labah <gl4...(a)yahoo.com> wrote:

> The more complicated the formatting, the fewer web browsers will handle
> the page in the "correct" way.  

That hasn't been true for a few years now.
From: Andy Dingley on 11 May 2010 09:49
On 11 May, 03:51, Michelle Steiner <miche...(a)michelle.org> wrote:

> > PDF should only be used if the content is intended to be printed rather
> > than viewed on screen.
>
> Why?

Because most PDF screen readers are so insufferably awful at
scrolling? 8-)


(FoxIt being one notable exception. Coupled with my new Logitech
darkfield mouse, it's almost bearable. The mouse has a scrollwheel
with _both_ smooth and clicky scrolling. Just press it (like a
ballpoint pen) to switch modes.)
From: dorayme on 11 May 2010 12:58
In article
<michelle-A5BD4B.06544411052010(a)62-183-169-81.bb.dnainternet.fi>,
Michelle Steiner <michelle(a)michelle.org> wrote:

> In article
> <34e0a75e-c53c-46e6-b242-caca4bc52343(a)r34g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>,
> Andy Dingley <dingbat(a)codesmiths.com> wrote:
>
> > > > PDF should only be used if the content is intended to be printed rather
> > > > than viewed on screen.
> > >
> > > Why?
> >
> > Because most PDF screen readers are so insufferably awful at
> > scrolling? 8-)
>
> I have no problem scrolling PDFs in Preview, and usually don't have any in
> Safari either.

And nor in my Schubert plugin for browsers. Andy, do yourself a
favour, get a Mac.

--
dorayme
From: Mike Rosenberg on 11 May 2010 13:51
Wes Groleau <Groleau+news(a)FreeShell.org> wrote:

> > That you have said you don't want to do the above does not change the
> > necessity to do so.
>
> Good grief, is this guy a reincarnation of Mark Conrad ?!?

I see some surface similarities, but deep down they're two quite
different people. Anyway, I've known John from Usenet going back as
least as far as 1998.

--
Mac and geek T-shirts & gifts <http://designsbymike.net/shop/mac.cgi>
Prius shirts/bumper stickers <http://designsbymike.net/shop/prius.cgi>

Make money while saving money <http://www.bign.com/mrosenberg>
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Prev: iPod touch and large .flv files
Next: What in the world just happened?