bare bones <div> demo online

B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

Richard pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:
For those learning style sheets and use of the <div> I have put up this no
thrills page purely as a demo.
Sorry, no ads, no images. Just makin it as simple as they come.

www.1-large-world.com/div2.html

Please, no. At 1024x768, it occupies the left half or so of my monitor.
At 800x600 it has a horizontal scrollbar. (Firebird)

There's <br>'s in the <body> and obsolete <center> elements. Drop the use
of px; switch to em or %.

New documents should be at least 4.01 Strict.
 
R

Richard

Beauregard said:
Richard pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:
Please, no. At 1024x768, it occupies the left half or so of my
monitor.
At 800x600 it has a horizontal scrollbar. (Firebird)

Tough. It's only a demo site.

There's <br>'s in the <body> and obsolete <center> elements. Drop the
use
of px; switch to em or %.

Demo site. You do with the basics as you desire.
New documents should be at least 4.01 Strict.

What flavor cheese you want with that whhhhiiinnnneee sir?


 
B

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

Michael Wilcox pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:

Just what I saw with several browsers.
BTW, [No Title] defeats the purpose of a title element.

I guess we feel a demo should at least be well-formed and display good
authoring habits.

Michael, would you join me for some New York Extra-Sharp Cheddar and a
nice chianti. Richard is buying. <g>
 
R

rf

For those learning style sheets and use of the <div> I have put up this no
thrills page purely as a demo.
Sorry, no ads, no images. Just makin it as simple as they come.

www.1-large-world.com/div2.html

Newbies beware: This site should better be labeled as a demo of what *not*
to do with CSS. There are at least half a dozen things that IMHO simply
should not be done, the most glaring being specifying the size of everything
in pixels.

Cheers
Richard.
 
R

Richard

rf wrote:

Newbies beware: This site should better be labeled as a demo of what
*not*
to do with CSS. There are at least half a dozen things that IMHO
simply
should not be done, the most glaring being specifying the size of
everything
in pixels.
Cheers
Richard.


A pixel is a defined element of every monitor. An "em" is based on the width
of the letter "m" which varies in accordance to the font being used. People
who are new to CSS should use pixels until they are more familiar with what
each of the possibilities do to a layout.
I personally prefer using "mm" as it is more defined and is the same
measurement on every machine regardless of resolution used.
We all have to start learning somewhere, and what I put up is the primary
basic building block of learning.

When you teach a child to read, is he reading "War and peace" by the end of
the day?
Were you such an expert the very first page you designed?
 
D

David Dorward

Richard said:
A pixel is a defined element of every monitor.

Not in CSS terms, even if browsers get it wrong.
An "em" is based on the width of the letter "m" which varies in accordance
to the font being used.

This is a good thing
People who are new to CSS should use pixels until they are more familiar
with what each of the possibilities do to a layout.
Why?

I personally prefer using "mm" as it is more defined and is the same
measurement on every machine regardless of resolution used.

What are you smoking? Even if "looking the same" was a good thing (which it
isn't since one of the biggest benefits of the medium is that it can be
adapted to the users preferences), most PCs are not correctly configured so
the browser can't translate to physical units accurately.
We all have to start learning somewhere, and what I put up is the primary
basic building block of learning.
When you teach a child to read, is he reading "War and peace" by the end
of the day?

War & Peace is a lot more complicated the Spot The Dog.
Relative units are not a lot more complicated then physical units - and
don't introduce a host of accessibility problems.
Were you such an expert the very first page you designed?

Expert enough to use sensible units? No... because I didn't have good
tutorials!
 
D

David Dorward

Tough. It's only a demo site.

Its targeted at people learning and packed with things that newbies should
avoid. Therefore it isn't a good resource to learn from, and people will
learn bad habits.
 
R

rf

Richard said:
rf wrote:






A pixel is a defined element of every monitor. An "em" is based on the width
of the letter "m" which varies in accordance to the font being used. People
who are new to CSS should use pixels until they are more familiar with what
each of the possibilities do to a layout.
I personally prefer using "mm" as it is more defined and is the same
measurement on every machine regardless of resolution used.
We all have to start learning somewhere, and what I put up is the primary
basic building block of learning.

When you teach a child to read, is he reading "War and peace" by the end of
the day?
Were you such an expert the very first page you designed?

The only response I could possibly make to this entire post is: Wrong.

Cheers
Richard.
 
I

informant

Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:
Richard pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:

Please, no. At 1024x768, it occupies the left half or so of my monitor.
At 800x600 it has a horizontal scrollbar. (Firebird)

There's <br>'s in the <body> and obsolete <center> elements. Drop the use
of px; switch to em or %.

New documents should be at least 4.01 Strict.

You can see the kind of k00k you are dealing with here. Bullis is ignorant,
obnoxious and confrontational.
 
I

informant

David Dorward said:
Its targeted at people learning and packed with things that newbies should
avoid. Therefore it isn't a good resource to learn from, and people will
learn bad habits.

Bullis epitomizes the wisdom that some people only serve as bad examples.
 
I

informant

Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:
Michael Wilcox pounced upon this pigeonhole and pronounced:

Just what I saw with several browsers.
BTW, [No Title] defeats the purpose of a title element.

I guess we feel a demo should at least be well-formed and display good
authoring habits.

Well, I doubt you will ever get that with Bullis. He is infamous for giving
bad advice and turning beligerent when corrected.
Michael, would you join me for some New York Extra-Sharp Cheddar and a
nice chianti. Richard is buying. <g>

I doubt St00pid will be buying anything, considering he lost his last
truckdriving job over 5 months ago and survives on handouts from his brother
Larry. I doubt he can afford to keep the trailer warm.
 
I

informant

Michael Wilcox said:
Now, why would a person wish to use your code if you've just demonstrated
that it fails miserably with certain browsers?

Sometimes, there's no explaining Bullis other than to say, he's a k00k. It's
what k00ks do.

--
Photos of Bullis
http://www.lart.com/stupidrichard/
http://convict.iwarp.com/bullis-single.jpg
Richard Bullis FAQ 5.0
http://www.lart.com/rtsfaq/

The S.P.U.T.U.M. Lamers Gallery
http://www.sputum.com/shame.html
CENKOC Richard S. Bullis,
Clueless Eternal Newbie Kook of the Century (Jan, 1901-Jan, 2001)
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,766
Messages
2,569,569
Members
45,044
Latest member
RonaldNen

Latest Threads

Top