«

Andy Dingley wrote:
> It was somewhere outside Barstow when New Conservative
> <> wrote:
>
>
>>However, it transpires that on many other people's browsers,
>>the pages don't display properly at all.
>
>
>>The site was created with Serif's PagePlus9, BTW.
>
>
> Well that's you problem. The whole site coding is complete crap and
> it looks like it's Serif's fault.
>
> I suggest an upgrade to FrontPage.
>

A better grade of crap?

[f-u's to alt.html only--this has nothing to do with accessibility]

Andy Dingley wrote:
> It was somewhere outside Barstow when New Conservative
> <> wrote:
>
>> The site was created with Serif's PagePlus9, BTW.
>
> I suggest an upgrade to FrontPage.

LOL

In this case, FrontPage might actually be an upgrade.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

wrote:
> Steve Sundberg wrote:
>> Here's one problem:
>>
>> line-height:1.29;
>
> In that particular case, the "1.29" actually has no unit shown, which
> is a standards violation in itself.

line-height is one case that doesn't require a unit:
<URL:http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/visudet.html#propdef-line-height>

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

wrote:
>Steve Sundberg wrote:
>> Here's one problem:
>>
>> .PPStyle0-P
>> {
>> margin:0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px; text-align:left;
>> line-height:1.29;
>> }
>>
>> You can't use fractions when determining dimensions in pixels. A
>> pixel is a pixel; there are no fractional pixels.

Not true for various reasons. Not least of which - the CSS spec allows
the px unit to be more than one display pixel (and whilst most
browser's blindly px to screen pixels they do scale the pixel when
printing, after all a 10 pixel length on a 100dpi screen is very
different to a 10 dot length on a 1200dpi printer. Whether the get the
scaling right is another matter).

Anyway, just because something doesn't make sense doesn't mean that
it's an error to specify it in the code. And at the end of the day any
browser that accepted opx but had problems with 0.0px as given here is
very broken.

>In that particular case, the "1.29" actually has no unit shown, which
>is a standards violation in itself.

No it's not. Look up line-height is the CSS spec and you'll see that
it can take either a number or a length as a value.

Steve

--
"My theories appal you, my heresies outrage you,
I never answer letters and you don't like my tie." - The Doctor

Steve Pugh <> <http://steve.pugh.net/>

dan wrote:
> Steve Sundberg wrote:
>
>> Here's one problem:
>> line-height:1.29;
>> You can't use fractions when determining dimensions in pixels. A
>> pixel is a pixel; there are no fractional pixels.
>
> In that particular case, the "1.29" actually has no unit shown, which
> is a standards violation in itself.

Egads! You're both way off! "line-height" can be specified without any
units (one of the few CSS numerical values that can!). The default unit is
a equal to "em", but has some slight differences from the usual "em"
behaviour when dealing nested elements of different font sizes -- see the
spec for details.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
Now Playing ~ ./ben_folds/super_d/04_rent_a_cop.ogg

On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 08:16:23 +0000, Toby Inkster
<> wrote:

>New Conservative wrote:
>
>> Here's the site: www.newconservativeparty.org
>
>I *would* help you, only you're a tory.

Er, we're certainly *not* tories, I can assure you. I could even
*prove* it if I could get these problems with the site sorted out!

--

"Suffer no one to tell you what to think."
Martin Smith, the New Conservative Party.

http://www.newconservativeparty.org

> From: New Conservative <78738@virgin_not_for_mail.net>
> Organization: The New Conservatives
> Reply-To: 78738@virgin_not_for_mail.net
> Newsgroups: alt.html.web-accessibility,alt.html
> Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 00:44:36 GMT
> Subject: Mysterious problem with pages not displaying properly.
>
> Hi all,
>
> A colleague of mine has put together a web site which shows up
> faultlessly on the browsers I use on two separate computers in my
> home. However, it transpires that on many other people's browsers,
> the pages don't display properly at all. Sometimes there's missing
> text formatting, sometimes the colors don't render properly and in one
> case, all someone could see was the original html source code! I'm
> baffled! Can anyone identify the problem?
>
> Here's the site: www.newconservativeparty.org
>
> As I say, it displays fine here, but probably not on a browser near
> you. The site was created with Serif's PagePlus9, BTW.



Well, it is truly dreadful even when it "shows up ok" as on my machines...
there is not much point in trying to sort out such a "generated" mess. Best
to get rid of the generator. It is hard to believe that for just what is
presented, the code should be so ... so... complex and inelegant. Use a
simple css external stylesheet and trust it (don't be throwing in tons of
css inline), a few divs in a simple html source page, bring the font size
down, line things up in a tidier way, don't say it is under construction.
Construct something that has some quality and as you improve it, improve it
without saying a word.

Sorry, it has put me in a bad mood...


dorayme