From: Rene Rivera (grafik.list_at_[hidden])
Date: 2004-12-14 16:27:33
David Abrahams wrote:
> Rene Rivera wrote:
>>Note, I did not originally go this way because I know how much of
>>"traditional" group Boost is ;-) So I tried not to stray too far from
>>the current layout.
> I think you should try it. As you might guess from
> http://www.boost-consulting.com I am not averse to it.
I will... I just have to grapple with my own fears of copying myself as
it will look like the design I'm doing for Spirit :-\
>>The margins are already font proportional. I think you meant inversely
>>proportional? Which is not possible.
> No, I mean proportional.
> That is, I would like to have a maximum width
> into which all of the page text will flow.
Possible, but has its own set of problems..
> I'd like that width to
> normally be considerably less than that of my screen,
Not possible.. The problem is defining "my screen". Since that changes
for everyone one can never have a measure that includes everyone. Of
course it is theoretically possible to dynamically find that size using
> and I'd like it to
> change proportionally to the font size. If that's what you've got, it's
> not showing up on IE6 or Firefox.
What I currently have is that all measurements are specified in em's
(the width of 'M' for the untrained), unless it's something that is
specifying the size of a bitmap image. This means that the margins will
be larger when you make the font larger, and inversely smaller font,
I alluded to problems.. One is that the 'max-width' CSS property, which
is what you are wanting, is only available in CSS2. So browsers like IE
don't support it.
-- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com - 102708583/icq
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk