comp.lang.javascript FAQ - Quick Answers 2008-11-17

comp.lang.javascript FAQ - Quick Answers 2008-11-17

Post by Dr J R Sto » Thu, 20 Nov 2008 02:46:49


In comp.lang.javascript message <49213296$0$90268$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM .
dk>, Mon, 17 Nov 2008 09:00:02, FAQ server < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
posted:


It is not. But I think I now know what Garrett was doing at about 17:35
GMT today.

The FAQ still has the ordinary writing set by a CSS file to a font
which I don't like and a size smaller than my chosen setting. If that
CSS is disabled, the FAQ is much more readable, though it would be worth
using on-page CSS to set padding and background and/or border for <pre>.

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London UK. replyYYWW merlyn demon co uk Turnpike 6.05.
Web <URL: http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ~ts/http/tsfaq.html> -> Timo Salmi: Usenet Q&A.
Web <URL: http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ; : about usage of News.
No Encoding. Quotes precede replies. Snip well. Write clearly. Mail no News.
 
 
 

comp.lang.javascript FAQ - Quick Answers 2008-11-17

Post by David Mar » Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:10:06


Well, Christ. We can't have *that*. Granted, I haven't looked at the
CSS. Just what font do you like? Is the body not 100%?

f that

So disable CSS when you read it.


Well, yes.

 
 
 

comp.lang.javascript FAQ - Quick Answers 2008-11-17

Post by Thomas 'Po » Thu, 20 Nov 2008 19:41:02


Fortunately, the layout and contents of the FAQ of this newsgroup is not
defined by the likes or dislikes of John Stockton (or anyone else), but by
practical reasons.

No default font size is set, and that is good so. The default font family
is sans-serif, which is reasonable enough; however, that declaration could
be omitted, too. And I wonder why it would be necessary to define it for
the `html' element instead of the `body' element.


He may also employ a user stylesheet to make the FAQ layout fit his needs.
In any reasonable user agent, that is one that implements CSS2 rules,
!important rules in user stylesheets take precedence over any other rules.


ACK


PointedEars
--
realism: HTML 4.01 Strict
evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
madness: XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
-- Bjoern Hoehrmann
 
 
 

comp.lang.javascript FAQ - Quick Answers 2008-11-17

Post by Thomas 'Po » Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:01:42


D'oh. There's

html {
...
font-size: 90%;
...
}

...

#faqList {
font-size:120%;
...
}

...

#faqList ul {
...
font-size:83%;
...
}

May I ask why?


PointedEars
--
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
-- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$ XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
 
 
 

comp.lang.javascript FAQ - Quick Answers 2008-11-17

Post by David Mar » Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:16:03

On Nov 19, 6:01m, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >




> font-size: 9>%;
> > ... >> > }
>
>
> #f>qList {
> font->ize:120%>
> gt;>..
> gt;} >>
> ...
>
> > #faqLis> ul {
> ...
>>font>size:83%;
> ...
> }

Clearly there are some issues with the style sheet(s). I don't
understand the use of the loose doctype either. I think the style>is> more important. >
>
> May I ask why?

Don't ask me.
 
 
 

comp.lang.javascript FAQ - Quick Answers 2008-11-17

Post by Dr J R Sto » Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:38:42

In comp.lang.javascript message < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >, Wed,
19 Nov 2008 11:41:02, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn < XXXX@XXXXX.COM >
posted:



No; someone in the past wanted to add superfluous decoration. That is
what should be removed. The code sent should reflect the semantics of
the document (in which respect it is considerably better than it was),
and should say almost nothing about the visual appearance in a browser
of the ordinary text and headers.



I see that. as is common, you answered too hastily.



Should be omitted. Once upon a time, before GUI displays, when
characters were simple bit maps of about ten pixels each way, it was
said that sans-serif was more legible than serif. No doubt, for such
characters, it was and is. But a modern GUI display is not like that;
it is more like a newspaper, where seriffed fonts are rightly generally
used for ordinary text.


A reader should not need to do that. My browsers are set for what I
want to use when reading and writing - there should be no need for me to
use any other settings for particular sites.

All that is justifiable is to have a background slightly different from
white (it aids recognition in a heap of windows) and the boxing of code
and links lists. And a small top (?) and bottom border on the body does
no harm.

--
(c) John Stockton, Surrey, UK. ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk Turnpike v6.05 MIME.
Web <URL: http://www.yqcomputer.com/ ; - FAQish topics, acronyms, & links.
Proper <= 4-line sig. separator as above, a line exactly "-- " (SonOfRFC1036)
Do not Mail News to me. Before a reply, quote with ">" or "> " (SonOfRFC1036)