Return to the Web Authoring Forum | Post a Follow-Up

CSS and browsers continued....

Posted by puggybw (My Page) on
Wed, Jan 7, 04 at 21:57

LazyGardens has some very valid points and it's simply a matter of how you write the HTML code. Different browsers and versions will display pages differently, but this is not what LazyGardens is referring to.

For example, the table on your index page is set to 792. This isn't even defining the unit of measurement, which I assume is pixels, so it should more aptly be 792px. This table size is just fine if you are going to assume ALL people are using 800x600 screen size, BUT..........anyone NOT using 800x600 will see your page totally different. Now instead of 792px, if you simply changed the table size to 100%, the size would ALWAYS be full screen for everyone no matter what their individual settings on their computer are.

When I look at your page, I see 3 columns, but when I look at your code, I see something like 10 columns, with everyone of them defined by a different absolute size. I'm not sure of the reason for this other than just complicating matters.

I would guess when you were setting this up, that your lines were breaking where you didn't want them, so you added "nowrap" to the <td>. Now you have a column with an absolute size, that is not allowed to line break - this is going to cause problems. If your table sizes were defined with % and you used only 3 columns, you would find that you probably didn't need to use "nowrap". "nowrap" is a deprecated tag as well.

Follow-Up Postings:

RE: CSS and browsers continued....

Here's a rough idea of your page minus about half of the coding that is totally un-necessary in the original.

If you compare the HTML between the 2, you'll see what I mean.

RE: CSS and browsers continued....

And with absolute pixel sizes, those with high-res monitors like the one I use at work see itty-bitty little tables because the browsre can't expand the number of pixels.

The problem with the WYSIWYG editors is that they give the illusion of control to the author, and the page will look great on the designer's system, they stuff things into the code behind the page that makes the page look bad on othre systems.

It's an eye-opener to go to a friend's house and see the page the way they do ... different system, different monitor, etc.

We used to keep an old system, a collectoin of diffreent browsers, and an AOL account, just to check out page design to make sure it wasn't breaking for the users.

RE: CSS and browsers continued....

We still keep an old Mac around for testing certain sites, as well as testing on representative versions of Netscape and IE on Linux, a Mac, and Win 95, ME, and 2000 Professional.

My wife and I still tangle about absolute table sizes in the sites we design. Its "easy" to do to get something looking good on a particular computer setup, but if you are designing a site where it doesn't look acceptable on yesterday's screen resolutions, it is probably designed so it won't look good on the screen sizes of tomorrow either (nevermind that 80% of web browser *are* using yesterday's screens).

RE: CSS and browsers continued....

Ray -
Keep chanting the web designer's mantra:

"Pixels are NOT ink, and CRTs aren't paper."

Expesting a page to look equally good for evreyone is like trhying to have something that looks eaually good in a 2-page spread and on a postcard. Ain't gonna happen.

RE: CSS and browsers continued....

I gave up on looking "equally good" years ago, my goal now is being readable and decent in any sane browser configuration, with it looking its best at 800x600 and larger. Formatting with CSS was the first big step in that direction, and relative sizes for everything else is the other. After that came judicious use of alt text and modularizing content and format elements as much as possible. The only things I have that are fixed sizes are images, since there is no getting around that simply.

RE: CSS and browsers continued....

"The only things I have that are fixed sizes are images, since there is no getting around that simply."

SVG for some things, but not all browsers can see them. For GIF, JPG an dPNg, you are stuck with one sive.

 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!

Return to the Web Authoring Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.

Learn more about in-text links on this page here