perl-docs-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stas Bekman <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: modperl-docs/src style.css
Date Mon, 25 Feb 2002 05:17:12 GMT
allan wrote:
> Stas Bekman wrote:
>>allan wrote:
>>>Stas Bekman wrote:
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>stas        02/02/22 00:24:03
>>>>> Modified:    src      style.css
>>>>> Log:
>>>>> - no need for using huge letters and bold weight for the title, it's
>>>>> already standing out by using opposite to the rest of the page colors
>>>>anybody thinks it's a bad patch? The title in mozilla was simply huge!
>>>please tell us your browser prefs for font-sizes.
>>proportional 16px, the rest 12px adobe-* fonts. But it's the 16px that
>>makes the fonts big. I suppose that most sites tend to use <font =-1>
>>equivalent. :(
> what is equivalent to <font =-1>, i dont understand? are you
> saying that most other sites looks from ok to good in
> mozilla using a certain font-spec?

I think so, but I can be wrong.

>>>>now it's bearable.
>>>before it was a title now its, well ... just text (any
>>>browser i test).
>>what do you mean just text, what about the box with the contrasting color?
> the title doesn't currently look like a title, it just look
> like some ordinary text in a box. the contrasting  colour is
> there of course.
> the breadcrumb and title must share the same font-styles
> otherwise it just looks bad seen from a typesetters or
> desingers view.
> IMO the breadcrumb currently has never been better, so i
> think we should make the title-fonts the same properties
> (apart from size), meaning bold and verdana.
> if you do this you also gain the sub-advantage that the
> title-text inside the colured box will look more evenly
> padded. at the moment it more or less top-aligned

well if you check the change, I didn't change the style:

    .headline {
        color: #ffffff;
        font-family: helvetica, arial, verdana, sans-serif;
   -    font-size:1.5em;
   -    font-weight: bold;
   +    font-size: 1.2em;

I simply made it smaller em-wise and removed the bold-ness. Is putting 
the bold back good enough? You also want verdana to be first?

>>>my set up:
>>>(mac os9, netscape6.2, font-size 14pt, monospace 13pt)
>>Not much different from mine
> true, but mine doesnt look bad with a 16pt setting ;-)

but your are on a different platform with a different font set.

> since thomas complained about this too, are there really
> that much difference between mozilla and ns6+ ? i thought
> they were more or less the same.
> can you post a screenshot of the good and the bad?

posting only the 'bad', you can see that it's too big with 1.5em + bold.
BTW, anybody knows what's the definition of H1? Is it 1.2em, 1.4em or 

Stas Bekman             JAm_pH      --   Just Another mod_perl Hacker      mod_perl Guide

View raw message