stylesheet for screenplays - @page example ?

[Steve Pugh]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - @page example ?

wolfgangwildebl ood@yahoo.com.a u (Wolfgang Wildeblood) wrote:[color=blue]
>Neal <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote:[color=green]
>> On 20 Jun 2004 22:51:41 -0700, Wolfgang Wildeblood
>> <wolfgangwildeb lood@yahoo.com. au> wrote:
>>[color=darkred]
>> > But to get the same formatting on screen (i.e. line breaks in the same
>> > places), you simply specify directly that you want 60 characters per
>> > line.
>> >
>> > p {
>> > width: 60em !important;
>> > margin: auto;
>> > }[/color]
>>
>>
>> If only 1em = 1 character![/color]
>
>That's the whole point of using monospaced fonts, Neal.[/color]

But 1em is still the height of the font, not the width of a character.

Try it for yourself.
<div style="width: 10em; font-family: monospace; padding: 0; border:
1px solid red;">123456789 0</div>
See how much wider the div is than the text?
[color=blue]
>Just send your grovelling retraction on good quality paper suitable
>for framing, okay?[/color]

I'm sure Neal looks forward to receiving that from you.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <steve@pugh.net > <http://steve.pugh.net/>

[Tim]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - print vs. screen

Tim wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> Pt should be fine for printing, but not for the screen.[/color][/color]


David J Patrick <davidjpatrick@ sympatico.ca> posted:
[color=blue]
> would "in" be the most portable ? that's what the screenplay format is
> usually describe in, anyhow.[/color]
[color=blue][color=green]
>> You're probably best not to make font specifications in the screen
>> styling... remove all obstacles that make browser reading a pain).[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> It's important to mimic the look, and especially page count, of a script.
> I see the more rigid screen definition as a colaborative/ preview tool.
> A reader who can give your project the "green light" will be reading
> a printout, and it had better adhere to specs. I agree that there should
> be a style-free mode though. another CSS definition; media="screen-free" ?[/color]

The problems stems from 12 point text on paper having a defined meaning
(it'll be the same size, no matter who printed it), but 12 pt text on a
screen doesn't have any standard rendering: It'll be different sizes on
different screens, and rarely the same size as 12 pt printed on paper.

There's that (difference in size), plus that 12 pt text (for instance) may
well be a completely unsuitable size for on-screen reading (it certainly is
here, even 14 pt is just acceptable, yet that'd be huge on paper).

Hence, why I said don't specify a font on screen. It's dead easy for most
browsers to adjust the display of text to suit the person reading it,
providing you haven't fixed the text to a specific size. Some browsers
will allow you to modify fixed font sizes, but many don't.

For the screen styling, stick to *simplistic* indenting, centering,
bolding, etc., as required by their expectations, and little more.

You can't mimic the page count on screen, as you don't have pages on the
screen. You have something analagous to a continuous roll of paper.
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> -no automatic page breaks (with automatic numbering ?)[/color][/color][/color]
[color=blue]
> Any clues how to use @page, break rules and numbering ?[/color]

You'll have to wait for browsers to be improved. Few have any decent sort
of support for those things. It's generally only the experimental ones
(e.g. Mozilla) that have any support for page media effects.
[color=blue]
> Can you see a better way to define the ScreenplayCSS page ?[/color]

Only as I'd already said before: Very little style rules for the screen
media, no absolute sizes or dimensions for anything. Use appropriate
typing rules for the print media. Though you're still going to be facing a
battle to find a browser that will carve a long HTML file into pages as you
want when you print it. Even worse, is hoping that anything you publish
can be handled as you want by someone else's browser (most people are using
crap browsers - if you believe the stats about MSIE being predominant,
which are probably true).
[color=blue]
> That makes sense, I have noticed, however a distinct lack of "html2pdf"
> avalable for linux. If I can "force" a reliable printout, from html,
> that would be great.[/color]

You probably want to look into a program designed for text manipulation (a
real word processor, not a desk top publisher). Probably something like
Tex or Latex (note I've never used them, merely read about them). In the
past, I've written programs for custom handling of text. It was easier,
for me then, than trying to find something ready made, and I had my source
material in a manageable format too (that's important).

There's no ability to "force" anything in WWW authoring...

--
If you insist on e-mailing me, use the reply-to address (it's real but
temporary). But please reply to the group, like you're supposed to.

This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.

[Tim]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - @page example ?

Wolfgang Wildeblood <wolfgangwildeb lood@yahoo.com. au> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>>> But to get the same formatting on screen (i.e. line breaks in the same
>>>> places), you simply specify directly that you want 60 characters per
>>>> line.
>>>>
>>>> p {
>>>> width: 60em !important;
>>>> margin: auto;
>>>> }[/color][/color][/color]


Neal <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green][color=darkred]
>>> If only 1em = 1 character![/color][/color][/color]


Wolfgang Wildeblood wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> That's the whole point of using monospaced fonts, Neal.[/color][/color]


Steve Pugh <steve@pugh.net > posted:
[color=blue]
> But 1em is still the height of the font, not the width of a character.[/color]

And... It's only a *width*, it doesn't mean 60 characters across the page,
it means fill the page with text to the width of 60 ems. You could well
have 70 characters across the page. Even with a monospaced font, each
character is still smaller than the width of an em (which has various vague
and contradictory definitions).

--
If you insist on e-mailing me, use the reply-to address (it's real but
temporary). But please reply to the group, like you're supposed to.

This message was sent without a virus, please delete some files yourself.

[Alan J. Flavell]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - print vs. screen

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004, Tim wrote:
[color=blue]
> The problems stems from 12 point text on paper having a defined meaning[/color]

CSS-specified 12 point text has that "defined meaning" *everywhere*.
The fact is, though, that typical browsers don't implement it.
[color=blue]
> (it'll be the same size, no matter who printed it), but 12 pt text on a
> screen doesn't have any standard rendering: It'll be different sizes on
> different screens, and rarely the same size as 12 pt printed on paper.[/color]

That's no fault of the pt unit as such. But even if all computer
displays were properly calibrated, it *still* wouldn't be the best
choice in a WWW context for a screen display.

So, to summarise: it's inappropriate for two reasons: 1. it mostly
doesn't work to specification, and 2. even if it -did- work to
specification, it wouldn't be the best choice, as a means of
communicating content to web readers.

However, in this special case it seems the author is trying to
visually reproduce the appearance of a paper document. That's a
special (and in some sense perverse - no offence intended) way of
using HTML, with or without CSS. I'm not sure what to suggest - *any*
choice is going to be a compromise. Possibly a reasonable choice
would be to provide a visual-reproduction in PDF, and an alternative
HTML-based version designed for accessibility to the content.

cheers

[Neal]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - @page example ?

On 21 Jun 2004 02:12:17 -0700, Wolfgang Wildeblood
<wolfgangwildeb lood@yahoo.com. au> wrote:

[color=blue]
> Just send your grovelling retraction on good quality paper suitable
> for framing, okay?
>[/color]

Sorry it's been flushed ;)

[PeterMcC]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - @page example ?

David J Patrick wrote in
<pan.2004.06.19 .16.36.28.77981 8@sympatico.ca>
[color=blue]
> I'm trying to rewrite the CSS used in
> http://s92415866.onlinehome.us/files...playCSSv2.html.
> using the w3.org paged media standards as described at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/page.html
>
> The ScreenplayCSS is flawed, for several reasons;
> -overuse of <div id= tags
> -doesn't scale screen resolutions (convert from px to in, pt ?)
> -no media="print" (how much coule be shared between "screen" &
> "print")
> -no automatic page breaks (with automatic numbering ?)
>
> The "hollywood" screenplay format is well defined
> (http://www.online-communicator.com/faq20_5.html)
> Is it possible to drive a consistant printout, from html, with CSS ?
> Does anyone have suggestions for improvement of the above
> ScreenplayCSS ? How about an example of a page that uses the @page
> definition ? thanks ![/color]

Apologies if this is on the wrong track but Final Draft - which is pretty
much accepted in the industry - works to the "Hollywood" format and has a
"Save as html option" which I've never used until your post. So, I just
tried it - confidently expecting Word-style bloat. Because of the
constraints of the screenplay format, FD is able to simply output the entire
thing in <pre>. Perhaps that might point in a useful direction.

BTW, FD is available as a demo at http://www.finaldraft.com/

--
PeterMcC
If you feel that any of the above is incorrect,
inappropriate or offensive in any way,
please ignore it and accept my apologies.

[David J Patrick]

CSS for screenplays - perverse !

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 12:32:27 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
[color=blue]
> However, in this special case it seems the author is trying to
> visually reproduce the appearance of a paper document. That's a
> special (and in some sense perverse - no offence intended) way of
> using HTML, with or without CSS.[/color]

None taken ! Your absolutely right !
[color=blue]
> I'm not sure what to suggest - *any*
> choice is going to be a compromise.[/color]

Yeah, as I see it now (and it's a moving target) I'd like to create a CSS
with three profiles;

1. (media="screen" ) a smooth flowing, readable version, with light
formatting and the users choice of font/ size. This (least formal) could
also feature a pure CSS menu to navigate the script, etc. If possible,
page breaks will be indicated, but not forced, based on a rigid layout.

2. (media="screen-rigid") this layout gives a visual page field (like
ScreenplayCSSv2 ) and adheres strictly print formatting
conventions even so far as to put shadows where the tree-hole-punch goes.

3. (media="print") same as 2. .. only more so !

If this can only be done consistently using one browser (Mozilla) SO BE IT !
It's freely available for you platform!
I realize that a lot of this flies in the face of conventional web wisdom,
perhaps that's why it's never been done. That doesn't mean it CAN'T be
done !

I would also like to develop a reliable method of converting to PDF, but
that it outside of the CSS mission.

Thanks for your interest and insight,
djp

[Chris Morris]

Re: CSS for screenplays - perverse !

David J Patrick <davidjpatrick@ sympatico.ca> writes:[color=blue]
> On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 12:32:27 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:[color=green]
> > However, in this special case it seems the author is trying to
> > visually reproduce the appearance of a paper document. That's a
> > special (and in some sense perverse - no offence intended) way of
> > using HTML, with or without CSS.[/color]
>[color=green]
> > I'm not sure what to suggest - *any* choice is going to be a
> > compromise.[/color]
>
> Yeah, as I see it now (and it's a moving target) I'd like to create a CSS
> with three profiles;
>
> 1. (media="screen" ) a smooth flowing, readable version, with light
> formatting and the users choice of font/ size. This (least formal) could
> also feature a pure CSS menu to navigate the script, etc. If possible,
> page breaks will be indicated, but not forced, based on a rigid layout.[/color]

Okay.
[color=blue]
> 2. (media="screen-rigid") this layout gives a visual page field (like
> ScreenplayCSSv2 ) and adheres strictly print formatting
> conventions even so far as to put shadows where the tree-hole-punch goes.[/color]

"screen-rigid" isn't a recognised media type, though. So browser
support will be non-existent, I think.
[color=blue]
> 3. (media="print") same as 2. .. only more so ![/color]

Okay.
[color=blue]
> If this can only be done consistently using one browser (Mozilla) SO BE IT !
> It's freely available for you platform!
> I realize that a lot of this flies in the face of conventional web wisdom,
> perhaps that's why it's never been done. That doesn't mean it CAN'T be
> done ![/color]

Possibly what I'd suggest is:
Stylesheet 1: Media="screen"
Alternate Stylesheet 2: Media="screen"
Stylesheet 3: Media="print"

The alternate stylesheet implementation fails on page changes in every
browser I've seen that does it at all. But my impression of this is
that you intend it to be a single long file anyway, where that isn't a
problem.

Alternatively (and with more support in browsers) you could switch
between 1 and 2 using server-side scripting, which would be a better
solution, if you have server-side scripting available.

--
Chris

[David J Patrick]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - print vs. screen

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 20:34:51 +0930, Tim wrote:
[color=blue]
> Tim wrote:
>
> You can't mimic the page count on screen, as you don't have pages on the
> screen. You have something analagous to a continuous roll of paper.[/color]

Yet it should be possible to represent pages, one after another (as in
http://s92415866.onlinehome.us/files...playCSSv2.html) and if layout
and size were !important and imposed, break-before and break-after rules
could do a reasonable job, couldn't they ?[color=blue]
>[color=green]
>> Any clues how to use @page, break rules and numbering ?[/color]
>
> You'll have to wait for browsers to be improved. Few have any decent
> sort of support for those things. It's generally only the experimental
> ones (e.g. Mozilla) that have any support for page media effects.[/color]

Well then, for this application (and I can't believe I'm saying this)
perhaps a "best viewed with Mozilla" flag is in order.[color=blue]
>
> You probably want to look into a program designed for text manipulation
> (a real word processor, not a desk top publisher). Probably something
> like Tex or Latex[/color]

LyX is pretty good and has both existing screenplay templates and crisp
output. The challenge, in this case though, is to start with a
super lightweight txt markup, and click-click get a formally formatted
representation of that screenplay.
[color=blue]
> In the past, I've written programs for custom handling of text. It was
> easier, for me then, than trying to find something ready made, and I had
> my source material in a manageable format too (that's important).[/color]

So you know where I'm coming from ![color=blue]
>
> There's no ability to "force" anything in WWW authoring...[/color]

grrrrrr ... ;-)

thanks, Tim,
djp

[David J Patrick]

Re: CSS for screenplays - Alternates !

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:57:49 +0100, Chris Morris wrote:[color=blue]
>
> Possibly what I'd suggest is:
> Stylesheet 1: Media="screen"
> Alternate Stylesheet 2: Media="screen"
> Stylesheet 3: Media="print"[/color]

yeah, /that's/ what I meant !
What I don't know (yet) is the mechanism to call that Alternate Sheet.[color=blue]
>
> The alternate stylesheet implementation fails on page changes in every
> browser I've seen that does it at all. But my impression of this is
> that you intend it to be a single long file anyway, where that isn't a
> problem.[/color]

Your impression is correct. Perhaps Stylesheet2 is invoked from a CSSmenu
in Stylesheet1.
[color=blue]
> Alternatively (and with more support in browsers) you could switch
> between 1 and 2 using server-side scripting, which would be a better
> solution, if you have server-side scripting available.[/color]

I would avoid that, as there will be no host established, only the
wholesome goodness of CSS.
djp

[David J Patrick]

CSS for screenplays - Final Draft

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:31:52 +0100, PeterMcC wrote:
[color=blue]
> Apologies if this is on the wrong track but Final Draft - which is pretty
> much accepted in the industry - works to the "Hollywood" format and has a
> "Save as html option" which I've never used until your post.[/color]

No appology required and yes, you are on the wrong track ! ;-)
I've used FD, and it's the "standard for a good reason, but what I'm
trying to do is to bring it on home at a lower level. The spark that got
me going on this was a desire for the tools to create a screenplay
starting with a simple txt editor, (in my case SiEd, on the palm pilot)
and to allow portable acceptable formatting using tools that anyone can
use, at no cost.
Can FD import is's own html ? Could you email me a sample output ?
thanks !

[Darin McGrew]

Re: CSS for screenplays - perverse !

David J Patrick <davidjpatrick@ sympatico.ca> wrote:[color=blue]
> Yeah, as I see it now (and it's a moving target) I'd like to create a CSS
> with three profiles;
>
> 1. (media="screen" ) a smooth flowing, readable version, with light
> formatting and the users choice of font/ size. This (least formal) could
> also feature a pure CSS menu to navigate the script, etc. If possible,
> page breaks will be indicated, but not forced, based on a rigid layout.
>
> 2. (media="screen-rigid") this layout gives a visual page field (like
> ScreenplayCSSv2 ) and adheres strictly print formatting
> conventions even so far as to put shadows where the tree-hole-punch goes.
>
> 3. (media="print") same as 2. .. only more so ![/color]

It seems to me that the second case might just be an on-screen preview of
the third (media="print") case. If so, then current browsers can give you a
print preview, using the media="print" style sheet.
--
Darin McGrew, mcgrew@stanford alumni.org, http://www.rahul.net/mcgrew/
Web Design Group, darin@htmlhelp. com, http://www.HTMLHelp.com/

"Shin: a device for finding furniture in the dark." - Steven Wright

[David J Patrick]

Re: CSS for screenplays - perverse !

On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 17:57:59 +0000, Darin McGrew wrote:
[color=blue]
> It seems to me that the second case might just be an on-screen preview of
> the third (media="print") case. If so, then current browsers can give you a
> print preview, using the media="print" style sheet.[/color]

Almost the same thing, but the "browsing" in a print preview is invariably
clunkier. The two should ve very similar, though.

[John M. Gamble]

Re: CSS for screenplays - Alternates !

In article <pan.2004.06.21 .17.04.39.14107 5@sympatico.ca> ,
David J Patrick <davidjpatrick@ sympatico.ca> wrote:[color=blue]
>On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 16:57:49 +0100, Chris Morris wrote:[color=green]
>>
>> Possibly what I'd suggest is:
>> Stylesheet 1: Media="screen"
>> Alternate Stylesheet 2: Media="screen"
>> Stylesheet 3: Media="print"[/color]
>
>yeah, /that's/ what I meant !
>What I don't know (yet) is the mechanism to call that Alternate Sheet.[/color]

Doesn't the Css Zen Garden <http://www.csszengarde n.com> do that to
extreme? They may be using javascript to achieve that though (i
can't post and use WWW at the same time, or i'd *clickety* over
there and check for you).

--
-john

February 28 1997: Last day libraries could order catalogue cards
from the Library of Congress.

[BenOne©]

Re: stylesheet for screenplays - @page example ?

Neal wrote:
[color=blue]
> On 20 Jun 2004 22:51:41 -0700, Wolfgang Wildeblood
> <wolfgangwildeb lood@yahoo.com. au> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> But to get the same formatting on screen (i.e. line breaks in the same
>> places), you simply specify directly that you want 60 characters per
>> line.
>>
>> p {
>> width: 60em !important;
>> margin: auto;
>> }[/color]
>
>
>
> If only 1em = 1 character![/color]

I learned that the hard way. It's a pity there isn't a standard measurement for
a character.

Is it true that IE sets the height of a container based on the contents, when
you use em to specify the height, or is IE just confusing me by automatically
resizing the div even if I explictly set the height?

--
Ben Thomas
Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not
relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither
given nor endorsed by it.