Ping Jonathan Little and others

[Jim S]

Not to butt into ARC's thread on centring..
I have posted here before about my use of tables to display photos on my
site.
Using recent advice you have posted here I have managed to change
http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_030_Mariners'_Homes.html
to
http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/Test_Mariners'_Homes.html
(Obviously I would have to go back and alter my original stylesheet)

However I would still have problems with a page like this:
http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_010_correction_house.html
Can you advise?
My self imposed rules are that the buttons should remain in the corners of
the screen. That is not negotiable <g>

 

[dorayme]

My self imposed rules are that the buttons should remain in the corners of
the screen. That is not negotiable <g>

Never mind those of us who have just shelled out dough for big screens
(and never mind that it is a tax deduction) where your buttons are
inconveniently $ apart? <g>

Seriously, whose convenience are you really worried about Jim? Or is it
just a personal look you want for your own viewing?

 

[Neredbojias]

Not to butt into ARC's thread on centring..
I have posted here before about my use of tables to display photos
on my
site.
Using recent advice you have posted here I have managed to change
http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_030_Mariners'_Homes.html
to
http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/Test_Mariners'_Homes.html
(Obviously I would have to go back and alter my original stylesheet)

However I would still have problems with a page like this:
http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_010_correction_house.html
Can you advise?
My self imposed rules are that the buttons should remain in the
corners of the screen. That is not negotiable <g>

Well, what are the problems? I didn't see anything that seemed "off"
on a casual browse. (Btw, you look like my grandfather.)

 

[Jim S]

Never mind those of us who have just shelled out dough for big screens
(and never mind that it is a tax deduction) where your buttons are
inconveniently $ apart? <g>

Seriously, whose convenience are you really worried about Jim? Or is it
just a personal look you want for your own viewing?

Hi again matey
We're in danger of getting into two discussions here.
This time I came to re-discuss moving from table layout to - well -
non-table layout, because the thread earlier encouraged me - and I have far
too much time on my hands <g>

The point you address is your dislike of my penchant for putting the
buttons in the corners.
Never having had an IMAC screen like yours I have not seen the aggravation
it causes you. I chose my own resolution of 1024 x 768 because that's what
I have. I also test each page at 800 x 600 and arrange the layout so that
the viewer NEVER has to scroll sideways to see all of the page.
Putting the buttons in the corners not only standardises the pages, but
means that if the user is moving from picture to picture in a series then
he/she does not have to move the mouse or go searching for the button.
If I knew how, I might limit the width to be the same as mine even if the
users screen is bigger.

 

[Jim S]

Well, what are the problems? I didn't see anything that seemed "off"
on a casual browse. (Btw, you look like my grandfather.)

There is no problem at my end, but I am mildly sensitive about the
criticism that 'I use tables as placeholders' in a multi photo layout. It
works for me, but offends the purists. If I could do-it-with-divs I might
change, but there are more than 500 pages and I would have to be convinced
that it is better before I set out.
Give my regards to your grandfather.

 

[Neredbojias]

There is no problem at my end, but I am mildly sensitive about the
criticism that 'I use tables as placeholders' in a multi photo
layout. It works for me, but offends the purists. If I could
do-it-with-divs I might change, but there are more than 500 pages and
I would have to be convinced that it is better before I set out.
Give my regards to your grandfather.

That it works and is valid are what is important. It's nice to adhere
to semantic coding as much as possible, but it isn't paramount.

Table-replacement can often be done with divs displayed as inline-block
or floated. I doubt that I would attempt a 500+ page upgrade, though,
but you could experiment on a page or 2 just to see.

My one grandfather was a real nice guy. However, you look like the
other one.

 

[dorayme]

I chose my own resolution of 1024 x 768 because that's what
I have.

This is usually a telltale sign of wrong thinking. I have set up a few
re-education camps (with global economic trading all the rage, I found
the best deals in China and Siberia). My men are on their way. Tell your
family you will be away "for a while".

Anyway, let's keep it simple. It is quite inconvenient for a person with
a very big screen to have to go way to the right to press a button or to
change her mind and go way to the left. It is also dead easy for an
author to avoid this necessity, examples galore have I shown you in the
past.

That should be a simple knock down argument against your practice. It is
a shame, frankly, because your pictures and text deserve not to be
accompanied by this poor practice of being over-impressed by what you
see on your monitor.

I have not commented on your original post because I did not understand
what your problem or question was. Your "My self imposed rules are that
the buttons should remain in the corners of the screen. That is not
negotiable <g>" simply acted like a red rag that was irresistable to me!
<g>

 

[Jim S]

This is usually a telltale sign of wrong thinking. I have set up a few
re-education camps (with global economic trading all the rage, I found
the best deals in China and Siberia). My men are on their way. Tell your
family you will be away "for a while".

Anyway, let's keep it simple. It is quite inconvenient for a person with
a very big screen to have to go way to the right to press a button or to
change her mind and go way to the left. It is also dead easy for an
author to avoid this necessity, examples galore have I shown you in the
past.

That should be a simple knock down argument against your practice. It is
a shame, frankly, because your pictures and text deserve not to be
accompanied by this poor practice of being over-impressed by what you
see on your monitor.

I have not commented on your original post because I did not understand
what your problem or question was. Your "My self imposed rules are that
the buttons should remain in the corners of the screen. That is not
negotiable <g>" simply acted like a red rag that was irresistable to me!
<g>

I'm sorry that I get you get involved in this debate at intervals.
I can see that I am not really creating a website, but more a picture book.
I like the way it looks on my screen and find myself unable to adapt the
pages to look as pleasing on yours. I thought that if I adapted to using
divs rather than tables I might become more skilled in the dark art of
markup which still eludes me.
I can produce a simple page with one picture, some text and a few buttons,
but once I get to several pictures placed in odd configuration then I'm up
the creek without a paddle (unless I revert to my tables).
As my site has grown so large, perhaps it has gone too far to change much.
I have lost the examples that you gave me, perhaps because I didn't like
the way they displayed or, more likely, that I was incapable of adapting
them beyond the simple case.
Finally (for now) would setting my default table width to say ABCD px
rather than 100% help with the large screen positioning? If so what number
is ABCD?
You probably suggested this in the past, but put me down as senile <g>

 

[dorayme]

....
....
Finally (for now) would setting my default table width to say ABCD px
rather than 100% help with the large screen positioning? If so what number
is ABCD?
You probably suggested this in the past, but put me down as senile <g>

If you are referring to

<http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_010_correction_house.html>

I guess, if you don't want to change anything but you want it to be more
sensible on varying screens, you might look to changing your

table.default {
...
width: 100%;
...
}

to


table.default {
...
max-width: 30em;
margin: auto;
...
}

or some other figure, even 1024px might be ok.

 

[Jim S]

I guess, if you don't want to change anything but you want it to be more

sensible on varying screens, you might look to changing your

table.default {
...
width: 100%;
...
}

to


table.default {
...
max-width: 30em;
margin: auto;
...
}

or some other figure, even 1024px might be ok.

Thanks
I am working with widt:h 1024px; and it seems fine. If I use max-width I
get some really skinny pages.

margin:auto; centres the page in every browser but IE.
How do I modify it for IE?

I know that I should get rid of the 'height: 100%" in my stylesheet, but if
I do some pages are all scrunched up at the top of the screen.
Can I centre the page in all resolutions and browsers?

 

[Jim S]

I guess, if you don't want to change anything but you want it to be more

sensible on varying screens, you might look to changing your

table.default {
...
width: 100%;
...
}

to


table.default {
...
max-width: 30em;
margin: auto;
...
}

or some other figure, even 1024px might be ok.

Thanks again.
I am working with max-width 1024px; and it seems fine, but I get some
really skinny pages.

margin:auto; centres the page in every browser but IE.
How do I modify it for IE ie do I have to add style="text-align:center" to
every page?

I gotd get rid of the 'height: 100%" in my stylesheet, but if
I do then some pages are all scrunched up at the top of the screen.
Can I centre the page in all resolutions and browsers?

 

[dorayme]

I guess, if you don't want to change anything but you want it to be more
sensible on varying screens, you might look to changing your

table.default {
...
width: 100%;
...
}

to


table.default {
...
max-width: 30em;
margin: auto;
...
}

or some other figure, even 1024px might be ok.

Thanks
I am working with widt:h 1024px; and it seems fine. If I use max-width I
get some really skinny pages.
[/QUOTE]

Well, you can also use min-width. But if someone has a small screen, do
you want to force them to scroll or let them see things a bit jammed up
but no need to scroll? that, you see is the beauty of some non table
layouts. Table cells cannot wrap. Floats and inline objects can. If you
learn to design with the latter more, you can have flexibility and good
looks. I know, it's not easy!

margin:auto; centres the page in every browser but IE.
How do I modify it for IE?

Which URL please. Please quote it constantly. I am not on Google and my
newsreader is an online one that forgets the past. It is a very *now*
kind of thing.

Usually with a proper *doctype*, margin: auto will work in IE when you
give a container a width.

I know that I should get rid of the 'height: 100%" in my stylesheet, but if
I do some pages are all scrunched up at the top of the screen.
Can I centre the page in all resolutions and browsers?

I have no idea which URLs you are referring to.

 

[Jim S]

Thanks
I am working with widt:h 1024px; and it seems fine. If I use max-width I
get some really skinny pages.

Well, you can also use min-width. But if someone has a small screen, do
you want to force them to scroll or let them see things a bit jammed up
but no need to scroll? that, you see is the beauty of some non table
layouts. Table cells cannot wrap. Floats and inline objects can. If you
learn to design with the latter more, you can have flexibility and good
looks. I know, it's not easy!

margin:auto; centres the page in every browser but IE.
How do I modify it for IE?

Which URL please. Please quote it constantly. I am not on Google and my
newsreader is an online one that forgets the past. It is a very *now*
kind of thing.

Usually with a proper *doctype*, margin: auto will work in IE when you
give a container a width.

I know that I should get rid of the 'height: 100%" in my stylesheet, but if
I do some pages are all scrunched up at the top of the screen.
Can I centre the page in all resolutions and browsers?

I have no idea which URLs you are referring to.[/QUOTE]

Sorry I had not uploaded.
BTW I had altered my reply so there may be a duplicate.
Uploading now so I'll get back.

 

[Jim S]

Well, you can also use min-width. But if someone has a small screen, do
you want to force them to scroll or let them see things a bit jammed up
but no need to scroll? that, you see is the beauty of some non table
layouts. Table cells cannot wrap. Floats and inline objects can. If you
learn to design with the latter more, you can have flexibility and good
looks. I know, it's not easy!


Which URL please. Please quote it constantly. I am not on Google and my
newsreader is an online one that forgets the past. It is a very *now*
kind of thing.

Usually with a proper *doctype*, margin: auto will work in IE when you
give a container a width.

OK now I have done away with 'height' I can use STRICT html and the
centring problem is solved.

I have no idea which URLs you are referring to.

Try http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_150_new_cliffords_fort.html

 

[Doug Miller]

margin:auto; centres the page in every browser but IE.
How do I modify it for IE ie do I have to add style="text-align:center" to
every page?

Good practice is to develop one style sheet, and reference it in all your
pages. Then when you want, or need, to make a change to the style, you change
only the style sheet file and it's automagically changed in all your pages.

I gotd get rid of the 'height: 100%" in my stylesheet, but if
I do then some pages are all scrunched up at the top of the screen.

Don't understand what you mean. Post a URL with an example, please.

Can I centre the page in all resolutions and browsers?

Certainly.

 

[Jim S]

Good practice is to develop one style sheet, and reference it in all your
pages. Then when you want, or need, to make a change to the style, you change
only the style sheet file and it's automagically changed in all your pages.

Have this, but solved that problem by changing doctype.

Don't understand what you mean. Post a URL with an example, please.


Certainly.

Try http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_150_new_cliffords_fort.html

BTW by centre I mean vertically

 

[Jim S]

Jim, your site seems to work fine the way it is. I just clicked through
several pages and had no problems.

The only thing that would be nice to change (and this applies to many
such "picture book" or slide-show sites I've seen) is to make the
buttons (next, previous, etc.) stay in the same place on the screen.

As the picture sizes change so do the locations of the buttons. So,
every time the page changes I have to re-position my mouse cursor to
click on to the next page. It's a little irritating.

There are some free slide show programs out there which make creating
such a thing fairly easy. I have used Jalbum for some simple slide
shows before: http://jalbum.net/

In the example below the nav bar is fixed at the top and the "next"
button stay put under my mouse cursor as I advance through each page.

http://edmullen.net/remodel/album/

FWIW, YMMV. ;-)

LOL
I have just changed from fixed button positions because of the way they sat
in the corners of huge screens (see long correspondence with Dorayme
earlier in the thread) The only thing left to me is to put the buttons
together, but I would rather they sat in the corners. The other option is
to have max-width and min width set to the same value (I think)
I went through the jalbum period, but didn't much fancy it.

 

[Doug Miller]

Have this, but solved that problem by changing doctype.

Try http://www.jimscot.myby.co.uk/Local/LH_150_new_cliffords_fort.html

BTW by centre I mean vertically

Aahh, I see. I had understood you to mean horizontally. I don't think that
will be possible without Javascript.

 

[Jim S]

That would suggest that you don't know all there is to know about how to
position things...

That's why I'm here <g>

 

[Doug Miller]

That's why I'm here <g>

Right, the point is that when something isn't working the way you want it to,
it's usually a better idea to find out why, and what can be done to fix it,
rather than abandoning that method in favor of something else. If you don't
know why "Method A" doesn't work for you, you have no way of evaluating
whether "Method B" or "Method C" will be any better.