More help with PHP menus? 2nd level ideas. (OT to some).

[Ed Mullen]

No room I am afraid, I am Bob and Ted and Carol and Alice. That
is a handful enough for any one being to be.

And dating yourself with that reference! ;-)

 

[dorayme]

And dating yourself with that reference! ;-)

Let's talk about dating instead:

When I go out on a date, that is when the 4 of us go out on a
date, we are very lonely together.

 

[Ed Mullen]

Let's talk about dating instead:

When I go out on a date, that is when the 4 of us go out on a
date, we are very lonely together.

Figuring out Martians is really hard work! And, frankly, I'm not
getting any *%#$@%$ better at it!

 

[dorayme]

Figuring out Martians is really hard work! And, frankly, I'm not
getting any *%#$@%$ better at it!

Please, Ed, there is no need to try. I like it that there is this
mysterious gulf between us.

Have to rush... Bob needs a hug... and Carol too ... o no ... all
4 of us are clamouring for affirmation. This will be a major
group therapy session I can see.

Just go see the film, its easier.

Talk to you later.

 

[Mike Barnard]

If you are learning how to get a page out that is respectable,
you should be talking a simple template that works, not a fancy
one that is very hard for you.

http://members.optusnet.com.au/debramcalister/alt/mikeB/firefox.png

Debra. Nice name. I hade hidebehinds.

This picture shows the search bar stretching waaaay beyond the width I
have it showing here.

http://members.optusnet.com.au/debramcalister/alt/mikeB/andthisinfirefoxtoo.png

This shows the section that shall hold the logo (I've had confirmation
I'll have the finalised version soon) dropping down when the page is
scrunched up.

http://members.optusnet.com.au/debramcalister/alt/mikeB/well.png

And this says I'm not valid.



Well, in reverse order, it was valid a few days ago. <Checks again>.

2 css errors from the cut n paste stuff from the menu example site...
http://www.tanfa.co.uk/css/examples/menu/tutorial-h.asp.

"body {behavior: url(csshover.htc);} " Property behaviour doesn't
exist.

Well it's correct, it doesn't exist, yet. But including the .htc file
creates the behaviour in IE to allow older IE's to do a hover.
Apparently. Therefore this is a css error that can't be removed? Ed,
do you get this?

And a comment or two it didn't like, removed.

The 'logo' bit dropping means the divs in the header aren't changing
size. I've changed them by adding % widths. One had no width and the
other was fiixed at 400px.

And the search bar? I have looked at the site both online and from the
WAMP5 server in Firefox, IE and Opera. (Safari still won't load for
some unknown reason). I cannot reproduce that effect. I will reduce
the width of the search box though, to try to mitigate this. Can you
tell me how you get this to happen? Looking at the text that has
linefed in the "guides" menu item it looks as though that browser is
showing that left column narrower than expected.

Multilevel menus for a small site like yours is a waste of your
time when there is more fundamental work to be done. Is there
something about this that you are not understanding? (I know, you
want a multi-level menu. You want it. I know).

Need, not so much want. I have needs you know! But I have it sorted
now, assuming you / someone doesn't find a glitch I am unaware of.

You understand that they are tricky technical beasts, but not
that they have other problems (google, look up the archives of
this group) or that there are more important important things to
concentrate on in your site.

Is it ok to be Frank with you?

I thought you were Debra? Heh, after over 25 years in the Fire Service
I have a very thick skin and now I know you are not a troll (sorry
again!) and nothing is being said maliciously... be as frank as you
like. I know I NEED the constructive criticism.

Cya tomorrow.

Mike.

 

[Mike Barnard]

Mike, it should work fine in IE7 and all current Mozilla-based browsers.
There is a hack to handle IE6 which is detailed on the tanfa Web site.
I load the iehtc file via PHP include thusly:

<?php include("./styles/iehtc.txt"); ?>

That comes before the include statement for the menu.txt file.

If you want to see the raw file code prior to when the PHP includes load:

http://edmullen.net/index.html.txt

I know it handles IE6 fine. Can't speak to IE5 and below but, frankly,
I don't care. Yes, I know there are people out there browsing with
ten-year-old software. Sorry, I have to draw the line somewhere.

I've sured a validation error, but otherwise it all seems fine.

As for your state of bliss, well, anything I can do to help! ;-)

Heh, today is my 3rd wedding anniversary, 2nd wife. You work out my
state of mind!

 

[dorayme]

This picture shows the search bar stretching waaaay beyond the width I
have it showing here.

Why did you think I made this screenshot for you? Is it not
obvious that I showed it to you because I knew that was not what
you were seeing?

You are seeing it one way because of your particular font and
screen settings. Take a good look at your browsers and their
control functions and just pretend that you are someone else with
different eyesight. Change the text size view. In FF it is
probably Alt + "+", on a Mac it is Command and "+".

These are the basics. This is what you needs your time and
attention. Not nth level menus! Not while businesses are in
danger of burning down because they lack your professional advice
- because you are chasing and rummaging down menu lanes instead
of helping your community and enjoying the Euros streaming into
your bank account!

While others will be concerned with this and that technicality, I
am your html/css pastor. Concentrate on the important things,
young man.

And the search bar? I have looked at the site both online and from the
WAMP5 server in Firefox, IE and Opera. (Safari still won't load for
some unknown reason). I cannot reproduce that effect. I will reduce
the width of the search box though, to try to mitigate this. Can you
tell me how you get this to happen? Looking at the text that has
linefed in the "guides" menu item it looks as though that browser is
showing that left column narrower than expected.

I have a very strong feeling that I have addressed this before
with you with remarks about em sizing your left navigation panel.
Can you look at all the advice given to you and see if I or
others have mentioned that you can em width boxes so that they
grow with font-size adjustment. You need to understand the
strategy rather seeking this and that tactic.

Need, not so much want. I have needs you know!

You are highly unlikely to need such a thing on such a small
site. I have no doubt you just want it.

 

[Ed Mullen]

I've sured a validation error, but otherwise it all seems fine.

Thanks. All fixed up.

Heh, today is my 3rd wedding anniversary, 2nd wife. You work out my
state of mind!

Congrats!

 

[Mike Barnard]

Why did you think I made this screenshot for you? Is it not
obvious that I showed it to you because I knew that was not what
you were seeing?

Yes it was, and I thank you for your time.

You are seeing it one way because of your particular font and
screen settings. Take a good look at your browsers and their
control functions and just pretend that you are someone else with
different eyesight.

I don't have to pretend, my glasses are becoming a normal part of my
dress nowdays!

Change the text size view. In FF it is
probably Alt + "+", on a Mac it is Command and "+".

ctrl + / - on windows FF. I do change the size, up and down. I
squeeeeeze the text into the smallest resolution, and stretch it full
screen. It must be bruised and bloody by now. However, the search bar
didn't poke out at me that I noticed!

These are the basics. This is what you needs your time and
attention. Not nth level menus! Not while businesses are in
danger of burning down because they lack your professional advice

It's fun to wander around someone business after a fire. All the
stuff they though no one else would ever see.

- because you are chasing and rummaging down menu lanes instead
of helping your community and enjoying the Euros streaming into
your bank account!

This IS what I need to get going.

While others will be concerned with this and that technicality, I
am your html/css pastor.

Concentrate on the important things,
young man.

Splutter... young? Things are looking up. I know 51 isn't *old*
but it ain't young according to the aches in my knees.

I have a very strong feeling that I have addressed this before
with you with remarks about em sizing your left navigation panel.
Can you look at all the advice given to you

That will take some time, I can't believe how helpful you all have
been.

and see if I or
others have mentioned that you can em width boxes so that they
grow with font-size adjustment. You need to understand the
strategy rather seeking this and that tactic.

I'll post this first, then read.

So I can set the size of the searchbox to ems too? I thought the width
was just characters, and if you have smaller charcters then the box
gets smaller.

Just tested it. The search box gets smaller with the smaller text
because it is set to 20 chars, it doesn't stick out as in your picture
no matter what I do. Is there a Mac difference?

You are highly unlikely to need such a thing on such a small
site. I have no doubt you just want it.

No arguments from me. It's done now. Until I find its broken!

 

[BootNic]

[snip]

I don't understand the difference between an expanding menu and an
expanding directory. A google search for both shows that I understand
(and want, ideally) expanding menus but makes no sense of expanding
directories.

I did not say expandING directory.

An example http://snurl.com/224pz

The above example as far as the menu goes, is 100% generated by PHP. PHP
goes through the directories collects PHP pages then builds a menu.

If I were to add a page to a directory that contains an index.php then
the list will not need any adjustment at all, it will be automatically
added to the menu.

At any rate, click on each link and you will surely find two that will
expand for their directories.
[snip]

 

[dorayme]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:01:55 +1100, dorayme


Just tested it. The search box gets smaller with the smaller text
because it is set to 20 chars, it doesn't stick out as in your picture
no matter what I do. Is there a Mac difference?

OK, Perhaps what I was seeing was more extreme in font size
testing than your tests.

I notice your #left-column has a 12em width but a 300px max
width. Considering that the #menu in it is also 12em, you might
perhaps get more graceful variation if you alter the former to
14em (especially since you sticking in a picture of yourself in
theat col. And give the #menu something like .7em left margin to
lift it off the edge. Probably best to decrease the size of that
picture of you.

And, a small point, the br to make the search button wrap might
not be needed now. It looks too close to the input field to my
eye when it does wrap. You can widen this gap with a more
generous line height to the default on the div that contains the
form there. The text input field is always mingy in these things,
you might as well go back to 15 from 20! What I sometimes do,
with Atomz too as it happens, is have a search link which goes to
another altogether more generously proportioned input field. You
can have it on a site map page or on a page of its very own.

Just some thoughts for you.

 

[Mike Barnard]

Mike Barnard <[email protected]> wrote:

I'm off to bed soon so I haven't uploaded recent changes. It's
different here than there! I just wanted to reply.

OK, Perhaps what I was seeing was more extreme in font size
testing than your tests.

No matter how extreme I couldn't make it pop out and I had the text
down to a razor edge. Never mind. Going on about the same problem
gets boring!. BTW, how did you take the screen caps?

I notice your #left-column has a 12em width but a 300px max
width. Considering that the #menu in it is also 12em, you might

When the text expands three clicks in FF the columns get so wide from
each side that there is no room left for the content in the middle. So
they need limiting in width. The menu isn't limited yet though, so
thats to be done. Whats the best measurement to limit with? This time
em's are no good as the max width would change too. Gotta be px's, no?

perhaps get more graceful variation if you alter the former to
14em (especially since you sticking in a picture of yourself in
theat col. And give the #menu something like .7em left margin to
lift it off the edge. Probably best to decrease the size of that
picture of you.

I have made the images resize with the columns so they no longer cause
a breakup. And 14em, when the browser is small like 800x600, leaves
little room for the content. If there was only one column (and there
may be on some pages) I would agree.

You are suggesting that the menu should lie within the column, not be
part of it? I'll try it and see what it looks like.

I have been going through the css and altered a lot of stuff to em's
as it should have been. Better. But I haven't finished going through
it yet. That and breadcrumbs tomorrow. And more content, the really
boring bit. And a better photo, (any pose you recommend? ) and
hopefully I'll have the logo files and... and...

And, a small point, the br to make the search button wrap might
not be needed now.

It looks too close to the input field to my
eye when it does wrap. You can widen this gap with a more
generous line height to the default on the div that contains the
form there.

I'm keeping the <br> because I want the searchbox to be as wide as
possible. See link below. I've increased the line-height to 2em in the
search div. It does look better. Nice.

The text input field is always mingy in these things,
you might as well go back to 15 from 20!

"The search input field should be wide enough to contain the typical
query; if the box is too small, the query will scroll and diminish
usability." From the link below. I was originally set to 27, but after
seeing your picture I reduced it to 20. I may make it wider again if
it produces no other problems.

What I sometimes do,
with Atomz too as it happens, is have a search link which goes to
another altogether more generously proportioned input field. You
can have it on a site map page or on a page of its very own.

http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20010513.html He seems to know what he's
saying. I don't. I suppose it depends on the look of the page. One
like mine, which is supposed to be 'working' rather than 'designer'
can get away with a search box, but it might break up the look of
something else.

Just some thoughts for you.

Please, keep em coming, if you want to. I'm sure you have better
things to spend your time on such as sun and surf! Your ideas have
really improved my site and my knowledge. Thank you.

I'm off to bed. It's 11.40 pm here. G'night.

Mike.

 

[Ed Mullen]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 03:01:55 +1100, dorayme

ctrl + / - on windows FF. I do change the size, up and down. I
squeeeeeze the text into the smallest resolution, and stretch it full
screen. It must be bruised and bloody by now. However, the search bar
didn't poke out at me that I noticed!

I have to admit, on SeaMonkey only, increasing the text size to an
extraordinary level did not lengthen the "search" input bar for me. And
I went to about 250%.

Can't comment why, just an observation.

 

[dorayme]

I'm off to bed soon so I haven't uploaded recent changes. It's
different here than there! I just wanted to reply.


No matter how extreme I couldn't make it pop out and I had the text
down to a razor edge. Never mind. Going on about the same problem
gets boring!. BTW, how did you take the screen caps?

On the Mac, it has been for years and years you can choose the
area you want to snap and Command + Shift + 4 and you get a
'cropping cursor' (a rectangular selector tool) which you drag
over the area you want and it goes click and the file appears on
the desktop (as I have it set). I have no trouble in Safari or FF
making your input area break out as described. Some browsers have
options where you might be able to limit these things.

iCab is the purest of the pure where there are no limits, it
seems to go smaller or larger for ever! Safari, is much more
limited.

When the text expands three clicks in FF the columns get so wide from
each side that there is no room left for the content in the middle. So
they need limiting in width. The menu isn't limited yet though, so
thats to be done. Whats the best measurement to limit with? This time
em's are no good as the max width would change too. Gotta be px's, no?

Yes, it is the downside of em widthing. Requires judgement. You
are not too far out, don't worry. And the max width is a pretty
good idea. In px too. Remember that IE 6 does not recognise max
width though.

 

[dorayme]

I have to admit, on SeaMonkey only, increasing the text size to an
extraordinary level did not lengthen the "search" input bar for me. And
I went to about 250%.

Can't comment why, just an observation.

It does not do it in all of my browsers either. Try small as you
can in Firefox.

 

[Ed Mullen]

It does not do it in all of my browsers either. Try small as you
can in Firefox.

Maybe I'm not understanding the issue. I have tried it in Firefox,
SeaMonkey, Opera, Safari and IE7. Enlarging and reducing the text size.
The Search box scales as well (or poorly) as everything else. What's
the point here?

 

[dorayme]

Maybe I'm not understanding the issue. I have tried it in Firefox,
SeaMonkey, Opera, Safari and IE7. Enlarging and reducing the text size.
The Search box scales as well (or poorly) as everything else. What's
the point here?

It was just something I observed earlier and provided a
screenshot for in the thread. I think you will agree that if it
can be helped, best not to make things look broken when enlarged
a few clicks. I do agree in this case, the clicks might be more
than three so a bit unusual.

It is often said that many sites will break at extreme options.
That is fair enough. It is a matter of judgement as to when an
author should say, enough is enough. I like that a site should
look fine over a big range. That's all. And, as you know, what I
like, everyone should like. Right Ed?

 

[Ed Mullen]

It was just something I observed earlier and provided a
screenshot for in the thread. I think you will agree that if it
can be helped, best not to make things look broken when enlarged
a few clicks. I do agree in this case, the clicks might be more
than three so a bit unusual.

It is often said that many sites will break at extreme options.

EVERY site will break at extreme options.

That is fair enough. It is a matter of judgement as to when an
author should say, enough is enough. I like that a site should
look fine over a big range. That's all. And, as you know, what I
like, everyone should like. Right Ed?

Good! Reason is good!

Yes, it is about choices and decisions. I look at my site and start
amping up the text sizing. When I get up to 300% it looks nothing like
I intended. Will it still work, for some horribly visually impaired
person? Maybe. It's a hobby site. I've done my best to make it
transportable, transferable, transliteral, etc. Beyond that? Sorry.
If you're particular need or handicap or whatever is outside those
parameters? So sorry.

You know, if I were publishing a book the printer/publisher would say:

Ok! Great book! We're gonna print it! In 12 point Fuddy-duddy. And
I'd go: Ok! Just send me money!

So. The argument about Web vs. print is fine up to a point. The Web
isn't designed to scale "without concern." That's just silly. So.
Everyone who builds a page reaches some point where they must say: "Ok,
how much more of this BS am I going to dick around with?"

(ok, excuse me, either a tornado is coming by the house or an F16 is
attempting to land on my roof ...)

 

[dorayme]

dorayme wrote:

EVERY site will break at extreme options.

Sure, if you want to go down Travis Lane, we can define extreme
as the breaking point and Bob and Ted and Carol and Alice will be
our uncles and aunts.

Good! Reason is good!

Yes, it is about choices and decisions. I look at my site and start
amping up the text sizing. When I get up to 300% it looks nothing like
I intended.

300% eh. OK let me try that with one or two of mine.

First one I tried, it looked fine on a 20inch 1200 high by 1600px
wide monitor.

Lemme try my latest site. It is just fine.

And another. Fine again.

Perhaps because I don't do fancy dandy? I try to make it good
over a big range.

So. The argument about Web vs. print is fine up to a point. The Web
isn't designed to scale "without concern." That's just silly. So.
Everyone who builds a page reaches some point where they must say: "Ok,
how much more of this BS am I going to dick around with?"

There are two issues here Ed. One is about web v. print and I see
no reason to compare them too much. The other is whether it is BS
to make for as many people as you can. I don't think it is. I
would drop fancy dandy like a hot potato for greater
accessibility. If I was more skilful, I would do even more than I
have in this direction.

But I am telling you straight and I am looking directly at you
here Ed, 300% does not bother me too much. I get a bit nervous at
any higher figure, ok... but that is understandable, after all,
I'm only martian, we have feelings too, you know.

 

[dorayme]

I

would drop fancy dandy like a hot potato for greater
accessibility. If I was more skilful, I would do even more than I
have in this direction.

But I am telling you straight and I am looking directly at you
here Ed, 300% does not bother me too much. I get a bit nervous at
any higher figure, ok... but that is understandable, after all,
I'm only martian, we have feelings too, you know.

I should really add that I have always liked your site from the
first time I saw it and it is fine and none of what I said was
intended as any criticism. I was just commenting on the sort of
range of text size increases and decreases some of us might want.
There is obviously a bit of leeway on these things. OK?