Beefy Boxes and Bandwidth Generously Provided by pair Networks
There's more than one way to do things

Re^4: Page rendering bugs (haznav)

by jdporter (Canon)
on Jul 14, 2012 at 21:20 UTC ( #981856=note: print w/replies, xml ) Need Help??

in reply to Re^3: Page rendering bugs (haznav)
in thread Page rendering bugs

I complained to the author about how horrible the table in Inner Scriptorium was...

You said the text in the header row was "huge". I simply used <th><c>. It looks fine for me, in both Firefox and Chrome, as both myself and as Anonymous Monk. So if it looks "horrible" to you, I have to conclude that it's due to something unusual in your setup.

I should put a 'readmore' around the table, though.

I should have done that. I have done. Of course, that only removes the "problem" on the section page. I don't know how it affects viewing the node directly, as I have yet to actually see a problem.

If the "problem" is simply that the table is wide... well, what would anyone do about that? It's a wide table. It has a lot of columns.

I reckon we are the only monastery ever to have a dungeon stuffed with 16,000 zombies.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Page rendering bugs (wide table)
by tye (Sage) on Jul 15, 2012 at 00:02 UTC
    It looks fine for me, in both Firefox and Chrome, as both myself and as Anonymous Monk.

    That's different than the response I got when I brought it to your attention, which was very close to "It looks fine for me (but I do significant re-styling)". So I stopped worrying about it for the time having been.

    If the "problem" is simply that the table is wide...

    I think one of the expectations is to be able to read the text of the thread. And I usually will just skip reading if it means I have to scroll a window left and then right for each line of text.

    It has a lot of columns.

    My complaint was about the headings being huge. The table is significantly wider due to that. It stretches beyond the width of my entire screen, which makes the thread too obnoxious to read.

    Even as Anonymous Monk, much of the width of the table is just a waste for the sake of too-wide headings. So, there is much to "do about that" (have wide headings in a row above/below, spanning adjacent columns; split heading into parts so it can wrap; etc.).

    well, what would anyone do about that? It's a wide table.

    Personally, I'd put the table in a reply inside of a readmore tag. In some ways, 'spoiler' would be even better, except that some people choose 'spoiler' to render as "set text color the same as the background". We should probably add a version of 'spoiler' that forces "click to reload w/ content not missing". BrowserUk would appreciate such (I would think). Maybe call that one "showmore"?

    But even with the table columns shrunk down, the table is wide enough that it should be isolated from forcing the whole thread to its width. It would be nice to be able to read the thread even on a somewhat small screen or from a somewhat small windows.

    - tye        

      I do significant restyling as myself, but not as Anonymous Monk, obviously, and afaict it looks fine as Anonymous Monk for me. Does it not for you? I have an alter ego which does not have any custom css. With this user, I cycled through the themes and never saw any problem with the headers being huge.

      My complaint was about the headings being huge. The table is significantly wider due to that.

      I don't know why you are getting that. I have to suppose you have some kind of unfortunate combination of styling that makes it come out that way.

      Oh, wait. Do you have "Large Code Font" enabled? :-)

        Sorry. Distractions abound today. I meant to note that I have the huge headings both for tye and for tye&nbsp; and the latter has very few non-default settings (and one CSS bit that wouldn't apply). Yes, I have "large code" enabled. I wouldn't be surprised if tye&nbsp; does as well. I suspected that might be part of it. But the headings look like they are in H2 tags.

        Note that I'm tempted to make "large code" the default, including it being in effect for Anonymous Monk. BTW, the real effect is that "large code" just means "don't make the code font smaller". And the only reason for making the code font smaller is because a fixed-width font looks slightly larger beside other fonts of the same height. I don't mind having the code appear to matter slightly more than the text (by default). In most environments, I find the difference isn't a big deal. But in some environments, the attempt to make the code slightly smaller really makes it enough smaller that it gets hard to read.

        afaict it looks fine as Anonymous Monk

        It looks okay as Anonymous Monk on a maximized browser window on a desktop monitor. It still makes the thread obnoxious to try to read on anything even a little smaller.

        With auto code wrap and the top nav disabled, most of the site will shrink down significantly in width and be readable even on my narrow, ancient, low-res Zaurus screen. So it is polite if things that can't wrap down to a narrow width be optional to show within a thread.

        Of course, your table, even as Anonymous Monk, prevents me from reading the thread unless I disrupt my entire desktop by maximizing the browser window. So I still haven't read it yet.

        Ah, you've moved it to a reply in a readmore. Thanks!

        - tye        

Log In?

What's my password?
Create A New User
Node Status?
node history
Node Type: note [id://981856]
and the shadows deepen...

How do I use this? | Other CB clients
Other Users?
Others about the Monastery: (5)
As of 2018-06-20 23:43 GMT
Find Nodes?
    Voting Booth?
    Should cpanminus be part of the standard Perl release?

    Results (117 votes). Check out past polls.