J
Joel Shepherd
Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:I use mustard on my doughnuts, and dip my cheeseburgers in *Pepsi*!
Okay: now _that_ is _weird_.
That's it! I'm moving to Canada!
Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:I use mustard on my doughnuts, and dip my cheeseburgers in *Pepsi*!
Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:Sounds like a good reason to dump it.
I always use 100% and have no problems at all. You must be doing something
else wrong. Or, rather of course, FrontPage is doing something else wrong.
Have we mentioned that IE users will not be able to resize your fonts if
they have vision problems?
A graphic image of text? Why not just use text? Unless you're showing
mathematical formulae, or need a particular emphasized header, there is
little reason to use a graphic of text.
Screen size is unimportant. Browser window size is. My 1024 monitor
usually has a browser window around 750-850px wide.
Again, screen resolution is not important.
The page still has the complete doctype. In fact, I think I recall that an
incomplete doctype will still toss browsers into quirks mode.
..and there are still no units on your paragraph margin.
Still 15 cheeseburgers.
Buttons, for one thing.Beauregard T. Shagnasty said:Sounds like a good reason to dump it.
I always use 100% and have no problems at all. You must be doing something
else wrong. Or, rather of course, FrontPage is doing something else wrong.
Have we mentioned that IE users will not be able to resize your fonts if
they have vision problems?
A graphic image of text? Why not just use text? Unless you're showing
mathematical formulae, or need a particular emphasized header, there is
little reason to use a graphic of text.
I build all my screens using 1024 and the text looks fine. As I mentioned,Screen size is unimportant. Browser window size is. My 1024 monitor
usually has a browser window around 750-850px wide.
Again, screen resolution is not important.
The page still has the complete doctype. In fact, I think I recall that an
incomplete doctype will still toss browsers into quirks mode.
..and there are still no units on your paragraph margin.
Still 15 cheeseburgers.
tshad said:We have enough problems getting
the text and boxes to look right is all browsers using a fixed font. If you
make the fonts bigger, the whole page will look wrong.
when we tried using relative sizing, it would look great in one browser and
a mess in others.
kchayka said:Are you saying it doesn't matter whether the visitor can read it or not,
as long as it looks OK (to you, not necessarily the visitor)?
Then your design is broken.
tshad said:
I can always make it only one column long and make a real long form. Of
course, it won't look like the original form we were trying to replicate.
My design is wrong?
Name: Address: Business name:
Phone:
Type of Degree/Diploma Received? xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx
This is off a form and just fits the screen when set to 10px.
But if you are limited to making the Form look like the original,
I'm not sure how you can free form the size of the
text and make it fit in a limited space.
kchayka said:If it is so important to have an exact, particular layout, HTML is a
poor choice. PDF is much better suited to that task. Regardless, a web
version of a paper form does not have to look identical to the original.
Whoever said it does is lying, or maybe just uneducated regarding how
the web works.
kchayka said:Hmmm... I don't see where you've indicated that readability has any
importance at all, only that you maintain a particular layout.
Perhaps you haven't heard... web != paper
If it is so important to have an exact, particular layout, HTML is a
poor choice. PDF is much better suited to that task.
Regardless, a web version of a paper form does not have to look identical
to the original.
Whoever said it does is lying, or maybe just uneducated regarding how the
web works.
Previously in alt.html said:Actually, that is the point. I am trying to make as readable to as many
people as possible.
If this works for 90% of the people, I am not going to
try to make it work for the other 10%.
Would be counter productive.
Just as many people don't try to build their sites to handle every possible
version of every possible web Browser.
No.
I use the Web as another way to accommodate my clients. It is another tool
to allow people better access to our services. The fact that is NOT paper,
doesn't mean I can't make it as pallatable as well as interesting to my
clients as possible.
You obviously haven't dealt with PDF for forms on the Web much. I can tell
you from many that I have talked to, it is very frustrating. It is fine if
you are just trying to print some forms. But it is quite a different matter
if you are trying to set up an interactive page using PDF.
It does, if the client wants it that way.
Mark Parnell said:As many people as possible = 100%
Then you are not achieving your aim as stated above.
How so?
Learn from the lemmings. ;-)
No one is saying that at all. What kchayka *is* saying is that trying to
impose the limits of one medium (paper) onto another completely
different medium (the web) is doomed to failure.
kchayka is talking about reproducing a paper layout in HTML. It simply
cannot be done. So you can either use PDF to recreate that layout, or
you can use HTML and it will look however it looks according to the
settings on your visitor's browser. You can't have it both ways.
Then PDF is the best tool for the job. If it needs to be done in HTML,
it is your job to explain to the client that it won't look identical to
the paper version.
Previously in alt.html said:So you program for Netscape 1 or 2 or 3 and IE 2 or 3 and all the Javascript
and Jscript differences?
I guess not. Possible is defined as reasonable, in my perception (obviously
not yours)
As I mentioned above, trying to get every possible Browser (and versions),
scripts (and versions) - would be difficult. Even trying to get it right
for all the variations between just the current Browsers with the different
Doctypes (strict, Transitional, loose etc). When, as people have pointed
here, browsers tend to follow some standards but not others, etc.
I agree. But that doesn't mean you have to toss it out altogether.
If you don't have the interactive version of adobe, as most people don't (at
least not that I know of), how do you do interactive forms in PDF?
tshad said:It does, if the client wants it that way.
Mark said:What kchayka *is* saying is that trying to
impose the limits of one medium (paper) onto another completely
different medium (the web) is doomed to failure.
tshad said:So you program for Netscape 1 or 2 or 3 and IE 2 or 3 and all the Javascript
and Jscript differences?
Toby Inkster said:Last time I checked, my website was usable in Netscape 1 and IE 2.
tshad said:But there are things you cannot do in Netscape 1 and IE 2.
Otherwise, you wouldn't have sites tell you that you need to use
this version or that version or later.
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.