Webmaster forum - Expression Web Preview in Browser Feature

Author

Expression Web Preview in Browser Feature

Sue

2007-11-18, 10:17 pm

I am using Microsoft Expression Web.....I have spent hours learning CSS
techniques. I've built a very small section of a web page. What I've done
so far looks great in all resolutions of Internet Explorer, but just a
jumbled mess in all resolutions of Mozilla FireFox. All my div style call
for relative positioning. I am not using any absolute positioning code.
I went to Microsoft.com to find a solution. And what did I find but an
article stating that the workaround is to build the site using tables.
TABLES - can you believe it?

Anyway, please, if anyone out there is using Expression and can help me I
would really appreciate it

Jerry Stuckle

2007-11-18, 10:17 pm

Sue

2007-11-18, 10:17 pm

I have not published the web, well really only page, so right now there is
not URL.
What information can I give you that you would get from a published web
site.

"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:wb2dnY3PDp44Ut3anZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Sue wrote:
>
> A url would help.
>
> --
> ==================
> Remove the "x" from my email address
> Jerry Stuckle
> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> jstucklex@attglobal.net
> ==================
>

Jerry Stuckle

2007-11-18, 10:17 pm

Sue wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:wb2dnY3PDp44Ut3anZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> I have not published the web, well really only page, so right now
> there is not URL.
> What information can I give you that you would get from a published
> web site.
>

The CSS and html you're using, for two things. My crystal ball is
broken, so I have no idea what your problem might be.

P.S. Please don't top post. Thanks.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
=================

1001 Webs

2007-11-18, 10:17 pm

On Nov 19, 12:51 am, "Sue" <smonta...@mcgoldrick.net> wrote:
> I am using Microsoft Expression Web.....I have spent hours learning CSS
> techniques. I've built a very small section of a web page. What I've done
> so far looks great in all resolutions of Internet Explorer, but just a
> jumbled mess in all resolutions of Mozilla FireFox. All my div style call
> for relative positioning. I am not using any absolute positioning code.
> I went to Microsoft.com to find a solution. And what did I find but an
> article stating that the workaround is to build the site using tables.
> TABLES - can you believe it?
>
> Anyway, please, if anyone out there is using Expression and can help me I
> would really appreciate it

I wouldn't use Microsoft products for serious Web development.
They are geared towards IE and Microsoft servers.
Front Page was a nightmare, for example.

Never tried Microsoft Expression Web, but my advice is to avoid it by
all means.
As I read,
"To run Expression Web, you need to have Windows XP SP2 or Windows
Server 2003 SP1 as a minimum, along with .NET Framework 2 if it's not
already installed"
and
"The final sticking point is that Web Designer only supports ASP.NET
2.0 for the server tools. Sorry, no PHP or JSP support here."

Flunk it, I'd say ...

Sue

2007-11-18, 10:17 pm

"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:KuudnRdqHNksRd3anZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Sue wrote:
>
> The CSS and html you're using, for two things. My crystal ball is broken,
> so I have no idea what your problem might be.
>
> P.S. Please don't top post. Thanks.

Ok, I published the code......www.shopmaggiesworld.com/index2a.htm
>
>
> --
> ==================
> Remove the "x" from my email address
> Jerry Stuckle
> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> jstucklex@attglobal.net
> =================

Jerry Stuckle

2007-11-18, 10:17 pm

Sue wrote:[color=darkred]
> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:KuudnRdqHNksRd3anZ2dnUVZ_gmdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> Ok, I published the code......www.shopmaggiesworld.com/index2a.htm

OK, well, other than the fact I think you should use html 4.01 strict
instead of xhtml 1.0 transitional, I really don't see a problem. They
look the same to me in both Firefox and IE.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

Chaddy2222

2007-11-19, 3:17 am

On Nov 19, 11:35 am, 1001 Webs <1001w...@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 12:51 am, "Sue" <smonta...@mcgoldrick.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> I wouldn't use Microsoft products for serious Web development.
> They are geared towards IE and Microsoft servers.
> Front Page was a nightmare, for example.
>
Not wrong.

> Never tried Microsoft Expression Web, but my advice is to avoid it by
> all means.
Hmmm, well from what I have read, it's better then DW.

> As I read,
> "To run Expression Web, you need to have Windows XP SP2 or Windows
> Server 2003 SP1 as a minimum, along with .NET Framework 2 if it's not
> already installed"
> and
> "The final sticking point is that Web Designer only supports ASP.NET
> 2.0 for the server tools. Sorry, no PHP or JSP support here."
>
> Flunk it, I'd say ...
Well yes, but KompoZer my web design software of choice only really
supports PHP, so you can't really pick on MS for supporting their own
products.
Although I generally agree that MS products are pritty useless for
any sirious web development.
--
Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org

Sue

2007-11-19, 3:17 am

"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:i5OdnQBmw9d5YN3anZ2dnUVZ_tvinZ2d@comcast.com...
> Sue wrote:
>
> OK, well, other than the fact I think you should use html 4.01 strict
> instead of xhtml 1.0 transitional, I really don't see a problem. They
> look the same to me in both Firefox and IE.

Firefox is not as jumbled published as it was in 'Preview' from within
Expression! I agree they look very similar, however, Firefox has the tag
line, "A world of Perks for your Pet" on 2 lines whereas IE shows it all on
one line as I coded it!
If continue to code a whole web site and Firefox is going to make those
kind of decisions I'm not going to have a very nice looking web site. The
full site is currently built in Front Page and I had no problems like this
with that software. I'm going to check and see if I can code in html 4.01,
but I think Expression chose xhtml 1.0 transitional. I'm very disappointed
with Expression so far!

Anymore thoughts on the subject?
>
> --
> ==================
> Remove the "x" from my email address
> Jerry Stuckle
> JDS Computer Training Corp.
> jstucklex@attglobal.net
> ==================
>

Sue

2007-11-19, 3:17 am

"Chaddy2222" <spamlovermailbox-sicurity@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:9958bbf7-84d4-4374-bb4b-5bfff0b10f8f@e25g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 19, 11:35 am, 1001 Webs <1001w...@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
> Not wrong.
>
> Hmmm, well from what I have read, it's better then DW.
>
> Well yes, but KompoZer my web design software of choice only really
> supports PHP, so you can't really pick on MS for supporting their own
> products.
> Although I generally agree that MS products are pritty useless for
> any sirious web development.
> --
> Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org
>
And I'm beginning to agree with both of you! Thanks for your feedback!

Scott Bryce

2007-11-19, 3:17 am

Sue wrote:
> Firefox is not as jumbled published as it was in 'Preview' from within
> Expression! I agree they look very similar, however, Firefox has the tag
> line, "A world of Perks for your Pet" on 2 lines whereas IE shows it all on
> one line as I coded it!

Because Firefox renders the font slightly larger than IE, so the text
does not fit on one line.

This isn't something you have control over. It is just the way that HTML
and web browsers work. You need to design around it.

Dylan Parry

2007-11-19, 6:16 am

Sue wrote:

> Anyway, please, if anyone out there is using Expression and can help me I
> would really appreciate it

Are you using Code View or Design view to write your pages? If the
latter; Stop. There's little point in using the Design view in any
software and expecting it to work in all browsers without flaw.

If the former, then it certainly isn't the fault of Expression Web is
it? You wrote the bad code, therefore you are to blame[1] for it not
working. A bit harsh perhaps.

I would recommend that when designing pages in any program, that you
constantly preview in a variety of browsers as you go along, and at the
very least a more-compliant browser like Firefox or Opera; fixing the
problems for IE afterwards.

_____
[1] Well, sort of. It's not your fault that browsers have differences in
the way they render things. Expression Web doesn't actually utilise any
of the common browsers in its preview -- it has its own rendering engine.

--
Dylan Parry
http://electricfreedom.org | http://webpageworkshop.co.uk

The opinions stated above are not necessarily representative of
those of my cats. All opinions expressed are entirely your own.

1001 Webs

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

On Nov 19, 5:29 am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
sicur...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 11:35 am, 1001 Webs <1001w...@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Not wrong.
Let alone Word.
I have had to deal with output generated from Word documents in both
print and web environments, and I mean, someone should have been shot
for allowing it to produce that kind of code.
Have you ever had to clean up HTML code generated by Word?
It's a real pain in the arse, just ridiculous.
In print is no better. I have received entire books created with Word
that simply refused to print correctly, sometimes due to the fonts,
other due to images and a fair share, for no fathomable reason.

>
> Hmmm, well from what I have read, it's better then DW.
Yes, I have read lots of positive reviews too, but don't forget we're
talking about Microsoft, which is known for granting incentives
(bribes, some call them) to bloggers and technical writers to get them
to write those kinds of sponsored reviews.
When Vista finally was launched, they started out a campaign by which
they gave away computers as gifts instead of lending them to the
bloggers for review as it is the norm:
"...Edelman, is handling the launch of the new Microsoft Vista OS, and
they're running, and probably also conceived, a campaign to give a
group of bloggers free Acer Ferrari 1000 and 5000 notebooks loaded
with Microsoft's new Vista. Retail value - $1899.99 - $2,299.99 for
the computer, plus the cost of the software.
A group of high-profile bloggers started getting the gifts several
days ago. Robert Scoble quipped, "Talk about Pay Per Post."
The reason is simple. If you've ever tried to add a new Microsoft
OS to an existing computer, you know you can't do that without totally
XXXXing up your computer. The only way to switch to a new Microsoft OS
is to start with a new computer. And, of course, to wait a year or two
while they get the kinks out.
Microsoft wouldn't chance having dozens of bloggers writing about
how VISTA screwed up their computers, so they installed the system on
brand new computers. They gave the computers as gifts instead of
lending them to the bloggers for review, which is the norm when
dealing with traditional journalists. "

http://www.istartedsomething.com/20...t-free-ferrari/

>
>
> Well yes, but KompoZer my web design software of choice only really
> supports PHP, so you can't really pick on MS for supporting their own
> products.
But Kompozer is free and so is PHP. So there you go.
I think it is completely legitimate for Microsoft to try to push their
products.
But I also think there's a big difference between suggesting and
actually forcing their commercial products on people, as they do.
If you don't offer support for PHP, you're ignoring a large portion of
your potential customers.
I don't even think it's a good marketing strategy, neither an ethical
one.

> Although I generally agree that MS products are pritty useless for
> any sirious web development.
> --
> Regards Chad.http://freewebdesignonline.org

Cheers.

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

"1001 Webs" <1001webs@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message
news:3245e301-6be1-4c7d-98e8-9f8079e66a18@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Nov 19, 5:29 am, Chaddy2222 <spamlovermailbox-
> sicur...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

> Let alone Word.

Word is concise when compared to Excel.

--
Richard.

Jerry Stuckle

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

Sue wrote:
> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:i5OdnQBmw9d5YN3anZ2dnUVZ_tvinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> Firefox is not as jumbled published as it was in 'Preview' from within
> Expression! I agree they look very similar, however, Firefox has the tag
> line, "A world of Perks for your Pet" on 2 lines whereas IE shows it all on
> one line as I coded it!
> If continue to code a whole web site and Firefox is going to make those
> kind of decisions I'm not going to have a very nice looking web site. The
> full site is currently built in Front Page and I had no problems like this
> with that software. I'm going to check and see if I can code in html 4.01,
> but I think Expression chose xhtml 1.0 transitional. I'm very disappointed
> with Expression so far!
>
> Anymore thoughts on the subject?

It didn't on my system because of the default size I'm using. However,
if I increase the default font size on either IE or Firefox enough, it
goes to two lines.

As Scott said - this isn't something you can control, nor should you.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

Andy Dingley

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

On 19 Nov, 00:18, "Sue" <smonta...@mcgoldrick.net> wrote:
> I have not published the web, well really only page, so right now there is
> not URL.
> What information can I give you that you would get from a published web
> site.

Again, the URL.

Andy Dingley

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

On 19 Nov, 00:49, "Sue" <smonta...@mcgoldrick.net> wrote:

> Ok, I published the code......
> http://www.shopmaggiesworld.com/index2a.htm

Thanks for that.

You're trying to over-control things. You're using pixel sizes that
hurt you, and position:relative that you rarely need. If you relax a
bit, specify less, let the client-side browser work a few more things
out for itself, then you'll get better results.

It's characteristic of WYSIWYG web tools that they deliver sites that
look _less_ consistent than coding at the source code level. Typically
they have a far-too-simple internal model of a page, so that when you
"plonk" a "box" somewhere, they do no more than that. They plonk boxes
around, often using absolute pixel dimensions to do so. There's no
distinction drawn between whether the gap between two boxes is a
characteristic of one box's left margin, the other box's right margin,
or some sort of page-level attempt to distribute them evenly.

Expert web design is about understanding this, and about choosing the
appropriate way of expressing it accordingly. You can place it
"perfectly" by using absolute pixels, but only for one particular set
of circumstances. The code is "brittle".

There's a lot you can do without pushing things as far as the "expert"
levels. Choosing the right dimensions to express sizes in is one of
them: (as a starting point) use ems for everything, except image-
related widths in pixels. Practice fluid design and don't assume
anything about client-side text sizes in pizzels.

I'd avoid M$ web tools in general. They've never got it right so far,
they show no signs of doing so in the future. Although I don't like
WYSIWYG in general, Nvu is less broken than M$.

Jeff

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

Sue wrote:
> I am using Microsoft Expression Web.....I have spent hours learning CSS
> techniques. I've built a very small section of a web page. What I've done
> so far looks great in all resolutions of Internet Explorer, but just a
> jumbled mess in all resolutions of Mozilla FireFox.

> All my div style call
> for relative positioning.

There's a tendency amoung newbies to over specify and have too many divs
and classes and especially tables.

And to use relative positioning (or absolute). Use neither, use margins
and padding.

And stop thinking of this as one page. Think of it as a template for
many of the pages of your site. Set up content and navigation areas and
just use regular old p's and h's and ul's. Style those as descendants of
that area and use margins and padding to set negative space, not
relative positioning.

I don't know about Expression Web, but I used to use Front Page. And
I liked it because I didn't know much about html at the time. Then
Microsoft bought it and where as before IE looked worse in Front Page,
now Netscape looked much worse! (That was before Opera and Safari and
FireFox). MS does things like that! They really only care about MS
products. Ask a Lotus 123 user about that.

Jeff

I am not using any absolute positioning code.
> I went to Microsoft.com to find a solution. And what did I find but an
> article stating that the workaround is to build the site using tables.
> TABLES - can you believe it?
>
> Anyway, please, if anyone out there is using Expression and can help me I
> would really appreciate it
>
>

Jeff

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

rf wrote:

> "1001 Webs" <1001webs@XXXXXXXXXX> wrote in message
> news:3245e301-6be1-4c7d-98e8-9f8079e66a18@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> Word is concise when compared to Excel.
>
Yes. Hard to believe, but true!

I had to convert some stuff not long ago and had a choice of either word
or excell html. The Excell stuff was just unbelievable and that's going
against the Word baseline. You even get javascript!

What most do is copy and paste it out of the word document (not the
source). I run a series of Reg Exes to delete all the bonus markup. It
takes about 6.

Jeff

Sue

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

"Andy Dingley" <dingbat@codesmiths.com> wrote in message
news:aa1592c4-35f3-4e8b-850e-3d2364a92864@w28g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On 19 Nov, 00:18, "Sue" <smonta...@mcgoldrick.net> wrote:
>
> Again, the URL.
www.shopmaggiesworld.com/index2a.htm

Sue

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

"Jeff" <dont_bug_me@all.uk> wrote in message
news:13k3khkdgrlpr24@corp.supernews.com...
> rf wrote:
>
> Yes. Hard to believe, but true!
>
> I had to convert some stuff not long ago and had a choice of either word
> or excell html. The Excell stuff was just unbelievable and that's going
> against the Word baseline. You even get javascript!
>
> What most do is copy and paste it out of the word document (not the
> source). I run a series of Reg Exes to delete all the bonus markup. It
> takes about 6.
>
> Jeff

Parden my ignorance, but are speaking of Microsoft Word like in the Office
Suite? How does that work?
Sue

Sue

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

"Jeff" <dont_bug_me@all.uk> wrote in message
news:13k3jq04tdj7l6e@corp.supernews.com...[color=darkred]
> Sue wrote:
>
>
>
> There's a tendency amoung newbies to over specify and have too many divs
> and classes and especially tables.
>
> And to use relative positioning (or absolute). Use neither, use margins
> and padding.
>
> And stop thinking of this as one page. Think of it as a template for many
> of the pages of your site. Set up content and navigation areas and just
> use regular old p's and h's and ul's. Style those as descendants of that
> area and use margins and padding to set negative space, not relative
> positioning.
>
> I don't know about Expression Web, but I used to use Front Page. And I
> liked it because I didn't know much about html at the time. Then Microsoft
> bought it and where as before IE looked worse in Front Page, now Netscape
> looked much worse! (That was before Opera and Safari and FireFox). MS does
> things like that! They really only care about MS products. Ask a Lotus 123
> user about that.
>
> Jeff
>
> I am not using any absolute positioning code.

Thanks, sounds like good sage advice!
Sue[color=darkred]

Blinky the Shark

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

Sue wrote:
>
> "Jeff" <dont_bug_me@all.uk> wrote in message
> news:13k3khkdgrlpr24@corp.supernews.com...
>
> Parden my ignorance, but are speaking of Microsoft Word like in the Office
> Suite? How does that work?

Very poorly for making HTML.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Blinky the Shark

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

Sue wrote:

<snip>

> Thanks, sounds like good sage advice!

So I sense you're using a pretty large monitor and assuming everyone
else is, too -- and they they also run their browsers full-screen:

http://www.shopmaggiesworld.com/

They won't be, and they won't be.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

1001 Webs

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

On Nov 19, 8:57 pm, Blinky the Shark <no.s...@box.invalid> wrote:
> Sue wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Very poorly for making HTML.

You don't want to know, really.
Don't even try.
Do yourself (and your printer-webmaster) a big favor and forget about
it, Sue.

Jeff

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

Blinky the Shark wrote:

Note to Blink, check the html it looks just like word doc.

> Sue wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> So I sense you're using a pretty large monitor and assuming everyone
> else is, too -- and they they also run their browsers full-screen:
>
> http://www.shopmaggiesworld.com/
>
> They won't be, and they won't be.
>
>
She's actually working on an index2.html, but I must admit that I was
startled by the size of the index page!

Sue, people will tell you to work on a fluid design, which is good,
but there are lots of fixed width designs out there. Just don't design
it at 1600! Your site is so simple there really isn't a reason not to
use fluid (no fixed width) design.

Crank your monitor down to 1024 wide (this used to be 800) and don't do
anything that requires a scrollbar at that resolution.

I tend not to care if you set a font-size, but in your case, take out
your font sizes, the default will serve you much better. It'll certainly
be smaller!

And, ditch most of the center aligned text, that went out years ago.
And don't think so in your face, it's a bit hard to look at! (And I am
*not* subtle!)

Jeff

1001 Webs

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

On Nov 19, 10:18 pm, Jeff <dont_bug...@all.uk> wrote:
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
> Note to Blink, check the html it looks just like word doc.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> She's actually working on an index2.html, but I must admit that I was
> startled by the size of the index page!
>
> Sue, people will tell you to work on a fluid design, which is good,
> but there are lots of fixed width designs out there. Just don't design
> it at 1600! Your site is so simple there really isn't a reason not to
> use fluid (no fixed width) design.
>
> Crank your monitor down to 1024 wide (this used to be 800) and don't do
> anything that requires a scrollbar at that resolution.
>
> I tend not to care if you set a font-size, but in your case, take out
> your font sizes, the default will serve you much better. It'll certainly
> be smaller!
>
> And, ditch most of the center aligned text, that went out years ago.

What did go out years ago?
Center-aligned text?
Didn't know about it ...
See, this happens to me because I never follow the latest fashion
trends ...

Jeff

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

Sue wrote:

> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:i5OdnQBmw9d5YN3anZ2dnUVZ_tvinZ2d@comcast.com...
>
>
>
> Firefox is not as jumbled published as it was in 'Preview' from within
> Expression! I agree they look very similar, however, Firefox has the tag
> line, "A world of Perks for your Pet" on 2 lines whereas IE shows it all on
> one line as I coded it!
> If continue to code a whole web site and Firefox is going to make those
> kind of decisions I'm not going to have a very nice looking web site. The
> full site is currently built in Front Page and I had no problems like this
> with that software. I'm going to check and see if I can code in html 4.01,
> but I think Expression chose xhtml 1.0 transitional.

Sue, the doctype has absolutely nothing to do with your page. Stop
wasting your time expecting a miracle cure.

You have fundamental design problems.

Let's look at this little bit of HTML:

<p align="center" style="margin-top: -10; " class="aworldofperks"><font
face="Comic Sans MS" color="#0000CC"
size="5">
                                          &nb
sp;
                                     &n
bsp;
;                                          &n
bsp;
;                                     &n
bsp;
;                                          &n
bsp;
;                                     &n
bsp;
;                                          &n
bsp;
;                                     &n
bsp;
;                                          &n
bsp;
;                                     &n
bsp;
;                                          &n
bsp;
;                                     &n
bsp;
;                                          &n
bsp;
;                                     &n
bsp;
;                                          &n
bsp;
;                                     &n
bsp;
;
A
WORLD OF PERKS FOR YOUR PET</font></td>

1) Don't style by adding non breaking spaces!
2) Don't embed a style on each and every snippit. You have actually
three styles for one line. You have an inline style in the paragraph.
Then you have a class in the paragraph and to top all that you have a
font tag. All of which are working at cross purposes
3) There is no closing tag on that paragraph. That is broken html.

4) Just don't. You've massaged this into an unholy mess. It's amazing it
renders at all. It's completely over manipulated.

Here is all you would have needed:

<h1>WORLD OF PERKS FOR YOUR PET</h1>

and then in your stylesheet:

h1{font-family: "Comic Sans MS", Verdana; color: #0000CC;margin: some
margins here }

You've said "This site is dynamic". You are making a site that is
unmaintainable! Stop now, and start from scratch. Think of the simplest
design and then add styles.

Learn enough basic html so that you know when you are making a mess.

I'm very disappointed
> with Expression so far!
>
> Anymore thoughts on the subject?

I'm very disapointed myself!

Jeff
>
>
>
>

Jeff

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

1001 Webs wrote:

> On Nov 19, 10:18 pm, Jeff <dont_bug...@all.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> What did go out years ago?
> Center-aligned text?

Yep back in the 90's!

> Didn't know about it ...
> See, this happens to me because I never follow the latest fashion
> trends ...

People read left to right. Center aligned headings or tag lines (or
even some navigation) are fine, but once you have a lot of content it
becomes wearying to follow. I think a good rule might be to just have
single lines center aligned.

Think about it. You really don't want to make it tiring to read
content, but a single center aligned heading will catch your attention.

Jeff

1001 Webs

2007-11-19, 6:19 pm

On Nov 19, 10:58 pm, Jeff <dont_bug...@all.uk> wrote:
> 1001 Webs wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yep back in the 90's!
Oh well, you know how these trends work, it'll probably the hottest
thing next year ...

>
> People read left to right.
Actually, about a quarter of the population of the Planet read right
to left:
Arabic, Azeri/Azerbaijani1, Bakhtiari, Balochi, Farsi/Persian, Gilaki,
Javanese3, Kashmiri, Kazakh3, Kurdish (Sorani), Malay3, Malayalam3,
Pashto, Punjabi, Qashqai, Sindhi, Somali2, Sulu, Takestani, Turkmen,
Uighur, Western Cham, Urdu
Hebrew, Ladino/Judezmo2, Yiddish
Assyrian, Modern Aramaic Koine, Syriac
Dhivehi/Maldivian
Tamashek

Chinese, Japanese and Korean are written right-to-left some times, and
even top-to-bottom (rarely nowadays)

Being ours a multi-language portal, it seems sensible to use center-
aligned text, or at least justified, so it is as consistent as
possible across versions.

> Center aligned headings or tag lines (or
> even some navigation) are fine, but once you have a lot of content it
> becomes wearying to follow. I think a good rule might be to just have
> single lines center aligned.
"once you have a lot of content",
if you don't have that much, I think it's perfectly acceptable.

> Think about it. You really don't want to make it tiring to read
> content, but a single center aligned heading will catch your attention.
Yep.
I wouldn't use center alignment for a book, that's for sure.

Blinky the Shark

2007-11-19, 10:15 pm

Jeff wrote:
> Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
> Note to Blink, check the html it looks just like word doc.
>
> She's actually working on an index2.html, but I must admit that I was
> startled by the size of the index page!

I think it's a worthwhile indication of where she's probably going with
this new mini-page with which she's testing the water, so I think a look
is constructive.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org