Tim:
>> <style type="text/css">
>> p {margin-bottom: 0;
>> font-family: Times New Roman;
>> font-size: 12pt;}
>> </style>
Wolfgang S. Rupprecht:
> And even at that it is broken (although xhtml/css conformant). The
> xhtml author is assuming that the user's monitor is of a certain DPI.
> LCD's range from 70dpi for the cheap junk to 150dpi for smaller
> laptops with higher pixel-count displays. The font spec would be much
> more portable if the xhtml author left the base font size choice to
> the end user and simply specify font sizes as 50%, 70%, 140%, 200%
> etc.
I was avoiding getting, too much, into what's best, but merely
simplifying what the author had written. Giving them a working example
of what they were already trying to do, with a simpler structure and
*much* smaller HTML file size.
Yes, it's generaly best not to write absolute font sizes for screen
display, but then we don't know if he's just doing this for a specific
machine, or for printing it out. Points would, theoretically, be the
better way of doing fixed sizing, if you're going to do fixed sizing, as
it's *supposed* to be related to a real physical size (no matter what's
displaying it). Other schemes are relative to an unknown, and variable,
starting size.
If I were being really picky about authoring style, I might also have
said that none of those lines were really paragraphs, that using just
margin-bottom without a margin-top might produce variable results in
different browsers, and they really should have been div containers,
instead.
There's a fair chance that those styles were just set by the authoring
program, and the page would display fine with all defaults (no style
rules applied, at all).
--
(This box runs FC6, my others run FC4 & FC5, in case that's
important to the thread.)
Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
