Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

[Viken Karaguesian]

Re: Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

> Contrary to what you may[color=blue]
> believe (even I had a hard time believing it...) there are *many* people
> who do *not* have their resolution set at 1024x768 (even those using
> 17-inch
> monitors)...per haps as many as half the people. You will lose many of
> these
> people.[/color]

Right. And for that reason, I like to design the site so that it's flexible
and still viewable at the smaller resolutions. That's one major reason that
I'm moving away from the main table and am trying to incorporate this
"liquid layout", one that shrinks and grows with screen size. But the main
layout is designed to fit into a 1024x768 resolution.
[color=blue]
> Specifically stating the site is written for IE, also will repel people.
> Believe it or not (I was also surprised...) many entities, such as those
> in
> the public sector...do *not* use IE. For example, many terminals in my
> city's public library system run Windows 98, with Netscape as the browser
> (perhaps it is the city's method of "affirmativ e action", or "spreading
> the
> wealth" or "the quota system"?)[/color]

I have to change the fine print in the site :>) In the past, I'd have some
peculiarities with the site in Mozilla (and other browsers) and couldn't
figure out why. It was easier for me to declare that site was "best view
with IE" than to figure out the bugs. Now that I'm learning more about css
and HTML and getting more into manual coding I'm rooting out those bugs so
the site is more cross browser compatible.
[color=blue]
> Featuring links that require a .pdf viewer may also be counter-productive,
> for the above reason.[/color]

Sometimes, all I have is a PDF document.
[color=blue]
> Using "Click Here" as the text in your links, can get very repetitive, and
> can be annoying.[/color]

I've already started to move away from that.

Thanks for the advice. It's much better presented by people like you than
people like Spartanicus.

Viken K.

[Ian Rastall]

Re: Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 21:47:00 -0500, "Viken Karaguesian"
<vikenk@NOSPAMc omcast.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>I thought that by declaring those font types I was
>saying: "the first choice is Arial. If the system doesn't have Arial, switch
>to Times New Roman. If there's no Times New Roman, make the final switch to
>Verdana".[/color]

That's basically it. The last bit is, "If none of these fonts are
present, switch to the default font."

For a reason I've never fathomed, everyone sticks to either serif or
sans-serif fonts in their list. I do this too. You should end the list
with the generic font name, either "serif", "sans-serif", "monospace" ,
and, I think, "cursive" and "fantasy", in case none of your fonts are
present, but if you still don't want the page to use the default font.
It's also a good idea to put quotes around any font name that has
spaces in it, like "times new roman".

The font-family declaration I use on my main site is:

font-family: "berling antiqua", "times new roman", times, serif;

I started with the most obscure font (but the one I really want), then
went to a popular alternative, then to (what I believe is) the more
generic version of Times New Roman, and finally to whatever serif font
is the default.

That's at least how I do it. Like I said, the reasons for sticking to
either serif or sans-serif are a mystery to me. Others will have a
good answer, I'm sure.

Ian

[Leonard Blaisdell]

Re: Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

In article <fusko1515qamjg 2bnt7sjj53ojg1o d6r2s@4ax.com>,
Ian Rastall <idrastall@gmai l.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
> I started with the most obscure font (but the one I really want), then
> went to a popular alternative, then to (what I believe is) the more
> generic version of Times New Roman, and finally to whatever serif font
> is the default.
>
> That's at least how I do it. Like I said, the reasons for sticking to
> either serif or sans-serif are a mystery to me. Others will have a
> good answer, I'm sure.[/color]

If the browser doesn't have an inkling that the font you are trying to
portray is fantasy, and I doubt that it has a list of all possible fonts
and their families available to it, it will substitute the default font
which won't be fantasy. Best I can do and probably wrong :-)

leo

--
<http://web0.greatbasin .net/~leo/>

[Stephen Poley]

Re: Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 20:17:52 -0600, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Greg Heilers wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> body {... font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;}[/color]
>
>I'd drop Helvetica from that list. There are multiple versions out
>there, and no 2 are quite the same. One may be very readable at the
>default font size and another not.[/color]

That's a new one on me, and I find it very surprising - specifically the
last sentence. Do you have some documentation for it? From what (little)
I've heard from font buffs, Helvetica is one of the better sans-serif
fonts.
[color=blue]
>
>I'd drop Arial from the list, too, just because it's ugly. ;)[/color]

I suspect a majority of readers will get it anyway if you just specify
sans-serif.

--
Stephen Poley

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/

[kchayka]

Re: Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

Stephen Poley wrote:[color=blue]
> On Sun, 27 Nov 2005 20:17:52 -0600, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>Greg Heilers wrote:[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> body {... font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;}[/color]
>>
>>I'd drop Helvetica from that list. There are multiple versions out
>>there, and no 2 are quite the same. One may be very readable at the
>>default font size and another not.[/color]
>
> That's a new one on me, and I find it very surprising - specifically the
> last sentence. Do you have some documentation for it? From what (little)
> I've heard from font buffs, Helvetica is one of the better sans-serif
> fonts.[/color]

If you ran Linux, you might already have the answer. I haven't counted
pixels, but the URW version of Helvetica is probably about 80% the size
of Adobe Helvetica. Those aren't the only 2 makers, either.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

[Harlan Messinger]

Re: Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

Viken Karaguesian wrote:[color=blue]
> Oh.....I get it. You're the Enforcer. Your job is to cruise this and other
> newsgroups, look for newbies and people just trying to learn, and belittle
> them. Your job is not to answer questions and spread knowledge, but to drive
> away as many newbies and information seekers as possible. I forget that
> people like you never started out as newbies, but had an intricate knowledge
> of site scripting at birth. Was there ever a time that you didn't know
> everything there was to know, Mr. Supereme One?[/color]

Spartanicus' approach leaves much to be desired, but you should know
that a lot of good advice lies beneath his spleen.
[color=blue]
>
> I'm just *learning*. This is a *hobby*. I asked a simple question. If you
> don't want to provide me with an answer, that's fine. But if you just intend
> on critisizing, please just leave me alone and let someone else with a
> kinder
> heart answer my question.
>
>[color=green]
>>a) Viewport width centric design aimed at a stupidly large 1024px width.[/color]
>
> That's my choice to make.[/color]

True, but I do recommend making your choices such that you'll accomplish
the most possible with your site, taking into account such factors as
your users' screen resolution and how much the beauty of a
1024-pixel-wide is lost when a user has to scroll way to the right.
[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>>b) IE centric design.[/color]
>
>
> Site statistics show that 94.5% of the viewers of this site use IE[/color]

To some extent that's a circular justification. If your site only works
in IE, then obviously people using other browsers aren't going to use
your site. Your statistics only tell you about the people who do visit,
not about the people who don't nor about why they don't.
[color=blue][color=green]
>>f) Acrobat dependency.[/color]
>
> So what if I want to have a link to a pdf document? That's my choice to
> make![/color]

To reiterate my point under (a) and to make it a little stronger: You
can also choose to have no visitors to your site--that's your choice to
make! I'm exaggerating, but the point is that when people give you
advice, they're not questioning your right to do what you want, they're
telling you that you may be making life difficult for your users, and
even hurting yourself as a result.

Regarding PDFs, it is best if they are used as a means of conveying
electronically a document that already exists in print form, as a
substitute for having to mail it to them. They are especially useful
when the exact layout and typography of the document is genuinely
important. Beyond that, they are not the preferred form of communicating
information over the web, however--that's what HTML was developed for.

[Viken Karaguesian]

Re: Border not complete in IE6. Small 1px gap.

Harlan,

Spartanicus may be a genius for all I know, but I did not appreciate
the way he ripped me apart. Many of the things he critisized me on were
matters of taste. Too many text colors? Page width? Where are there any
rules that dictate how many text colors one can use?

Yes, the site homepage is designed around 1024x768, but did he bother
to see if it fits at 800x600? The answer is yes, it does. The whole
point of the re-design of the homepage is so that it fits better at
smaller resolutions.

The site is viewable with other browsers. In the past I've had certain
design bugs in other browsers that I couldn't figure out. So I just put
a note on the site saying that it looks best in IE. What's the big
deal? I'm trying to learn more so I can get those design bugs out.
Instead of helping me out, he tells me to scrap the whole thing and
start all over?! Why...because my text is too colorful and I have a
Javascript based menu? Gimme a break.

I don't flame anyone in any newsgroups, especially people looking for
help, and I expect to be treated the same way.

That's all.

Viken K.