FORUMS: list search recent posts

A better way to do this?

COW Forums : Web Design

<< PREVIOUS   •   FAQ   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bret WilliamsA better way to do this?
by on Mar 6, 2006 at 3:22:21 pm

I'm working on a site with expanding tables to keep it liquid. The annoying problem is that firefox, IE, and Safari all seem to differ on what size certain percentages are.

For example, the table is 3 cells wide, with the left and right being 65% and 33% wide, and the middle cell being 2%. The whole table itself is 100% wide. The middle is forced to expand to fit the content of the page, and the sides keep it to the right. Supposedly. Each broswer differs on where to locate the middle.

The same holds true for the vertical. I've left it more to chance, with just a 100% high table, and everything set to default height. Settings percentages on height was a disaster as IE would ignore the bottom cells as would firefox. Pushing everything to the bottom. So, even with default heights, IE (mac version) still placs the content too far to the bottom, and firefox less so (acceptable). Safari is just right.

None of them match the wysiwyg in Dreamweaver of course. Here's the site... http://www.wedgephoto.com/landscapes/

I'm hoping there's some way to poll the actual browser height and width, and then do some basic math to determine what the left and top cell's true width and height should be, instead of letting a browser do it's funky math.


Return to posts index

Curtis ThompsonRe: A better way to do this?
by on Mar 6, 2006 at 3:31:09 pm

hello...

ya - these are tricky ones. i will sometimes do my fixed width stuff left to right and top to bottom and let one cell eat up the rest of the space...then i can control things a bit better. but that might not work here...

this looks relatively close on both xp and mac - what is the perfect scenario layout wise? i sorta follow what you're saying but i can't see what the most desired case is...

you can find out the width of the current document area, but of course it varies by browser as to how to do it - here's a start:

http://www.javascriptkit.com/javatutors/static2.shtml

if you have a "perfect" mockup as a jpg or something i could try and see if anything stuck out in the tables!

sitruc


Return to posts index

Bret WilliamsRe: A better way to do this?
by on Mar 6, 2006 at 4:19:55 pm

Safari is pretty much the look I want. It feels right no matter what the scaling of the browser window.

I was kinda hoping IE windows looked at least like Firefox mac. The one I find the least acceptable is IE Mac. I don't have windows system here. What does IE XP look most like on the mac side?


Return to posts index


Curtis ThompsonRe: A better way to do this?
by on Mar 6, 2006 at 4:41:42 pm

hello...

here's a windows screen grab:

http://sitruc.com/cow/wp.jpg

sitruc


Return to posts index

Bret WilliamsRe: A better way to do this?
by on Mar 6, 2006 at 6:14:01 pm

What is the deal with windows and text smoothing or does Mac just have an amazing advantage? The fonts are right, but it doesn't look like there's any smoothing going on at all on the screen grab. I see the same thing on friends pc computers. All the mac broswers smooth the text beautifully. Strange.

Also, it looks like the volcano image is repeating. I thought I had the cell bgrnd css right. It shouldn't repeat. Is that what I'm seeing? There's a small thin blue line below the volcano image that looks like it's repeating. Hmmm. No repeat on any mac browsers.

Unfortunately, the majority of folks aren't on mac browsers. But your screen shot looks like it'll do for the most part. This is a pro bono site for a friend that helped photograph our wedding.

Further pages have more thumbnails I'm discovering, so I think this may be a better use of space... http://www.wedgephoto.com/concepts/indextabbed.html - (got a new stylesheet so you might have to refresh a few times). Whatca think?


Return to posts index

Curtis ThompsonRe: A better way to do this?
by on Mar 6, 2006 at 6:19:33 pm

hello...

[Bret Williams] "does Mac just have an amazing advantage?"

nah - mac just turns it on by default...you can do it in xp as well...

wrt to the layout - ya - there is a size issue with the little blue line but i like the other browser option better (the tabbed one), although for some reason i like clicking on them instead of just a mouseover to get the image - but that's probably just me...although maybe if you did the mousever, it would be nicer if you left it on the mouseover image when they moused out instead of going back to the first one...

sitruc





Return to posts index


Bret WilliamsRe: A better way to do this?
by on Mar 6, 2006 at 6:40:16 pm

Sounds complex. I don't think I can do that with the plugin I'm using.

What I'm doing is not the standard swap image / restore with preloaded images. I'm actually loading all the images, but hiding and showing them with DIV visibility. On mouse over it shows, on out it hides. So if I showed it with a click, then I'd have a problem. I'd need to hide it when someone clicks on another image. But how would I know which one to hide? That would take some custom code I'm sure.

But heck, this way is a nice deterrent to right clicking on an image and saving it. People can't right click on them if they're not there! But you can always do a screen shot.


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]