Possible fix?

Post #90,046 by ChrisR 3/21/03 12:27:35 PM Reply	Possible fix? Not that I don't agree, but a possible fix would be adding the following to the stylesheet: LI { MARGIN-LEFT: 0.1cm } Doesn't effect Mozilla too much, but helps on IE.
Post #90,050 by admin 3/21/03 12:37:31 PM Reply	I'll give it a try. We already have: \nUL {\n LIST-STYLE-TYPE: disc;\n MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5cm;\n}\nOL {\n MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5cm;\n}\n Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #90,053 by deSitter 3/21/03 12:42:19 PM Reply	That works Maybe IE uses decimals, Mozilla integers. -drl
Post #90,055 by ChrisR 3/21/03 12:45:22 PM Reply	Think we discussed it previously... ...but the problem seems to be that IE uses as offset of 1.0cm as the base reference offset. Means when you put 0.5, you are effectively to the left of the reference (-0.5cm) causing your setting to actually shift the stuff left. OTOH, Mozilla seems to use 0.0cm as the base reference, so using 0.5cm shifts things right. The Mozilla behavior would seem much more logical - 0 is a much more logical starting point. The addition of the .li tag just is meant to compensate for this - without being too noticeable on Mozilla.
Post #90,095 by tseliot 3/21/03 2:42:43 PM 3/21/03 2:55:50 PM Reply	What's a "cm"? I thought for sure we were talking about variable-size displays, here. Is that your stylesheet for paper? <ideologue mode off> Edit: typo Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10 Edited by tseliot March 21, 2003, 02:55:50 PM EST Expand All History
Post #90,097 by admin 3/21/03 2:58:26 PM Reply	Open to suggestions... Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #90,100 by ChrisR 3/21/03 3:16:14 PM Reply	Another way You could restrict the style change to a certain known nesting level: \nBODY TABLE TR TD UL {\n LIST-STYLE-TYPE: disc;\n MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5cm;\n}\nBODY TABLE TR TD OL {\n MARGIN-LEFT: 0.5cm;\n} I'll look and see if I can find a more palatable solution.
Post #90,105 by tseliot 3/21/03 3:23:10 PM Reply	Sorry, I have this conversation with my graphic artist a lot He's stuck in the print world: hard-codes page widths on web pages, etc. My standards, in order of preference: 1) Use percents or ratios. Print layout people are trained very well to override this with a ruler, but it is the natural layout vocabulary. If you look at a newspaper, most people immediately recognize that it has two, three, or four columns, or that the ads are 1/4 page. They don't know (and don't care) that 1/2 of the page equals 6.32 inches. Since we have techniques built into CSS to do this math automatically, use them. 2) Use relative length units. To quote CSS2: There are two types of length units: relative and absolute. Relative length units specify a length relative to another length property. Style sheets that use relative units will more easily scale from one medium to another (e.g., from a computer display to a laser printer). Relative units are: em: the 'font-size' of the relevant font ex: the 'x-height' of the relevant font px: pixels, relative to the viewing device These are to be preferred when the primary content is textual, the most common case for Web documents. Since you are already defining your font size, whether in relative or absolute units (and I prefer em's), you chain the rest of your display (which usually bounds that textual content) to those sizes by keeping things relative. 3) Absolute units: again a quote from CSS2: Absolute length units are only useful when the physical properties of the output medium are known. The absolute units are: in: inches -- 1 inch is equal to 2.54 centimeters. cm: centimeters mm: millimeters pt: points -- the points used by CSS2 are equal to 1/72th of an inch. pc: picas -- 1 pica is equal to 12 points. 'Nuff said. I only use absolute units on "@media print" sections. Not only does the above prioritization allow you to scale better on a vast range of clients, but it allows the user to make small changes (like enlarging the font size using a browser preference) with global, yet unconflicting effects. Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #90,116 by admin 3/21/03 3:30:13 PM Reply	Again, open to suggestions... By which I mean, if you have some specific text for me to try out, I'll stick it in and try it out. As it is, I know very little about CSS and don't really have the time right now to research it. :-) Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #90,118 by tseliot 3/21/03 3:31:58 PM Reply	Ah. Will do. And test. And provide. Gimme a minute Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #90,120 by admin 3/21/03 3:32:45 PM Reply	Thankee sai. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #90,126 by tseliot 3/21/03 3:46:38 PM Reply	Quick fix. Seems to provide identical behavior on Moz 1.3 and IE 5.0 to what we already have (give or take a pixel). Difference being that Moz adds margins and IE doesn't. But that's how it was anyway. <style type="text/css">\n<!--\nbody { font-size: 100%; font-family: verdana; }\ntd { font-size: 90%; font-family: verdana; }\nh4 { font-size: 80%; font-weight: bold; }\nUL {\n LIST-STYLE-TYPE: disc;\n MARGIN-LEFT: 1em;\n}\nOL {\n MARGIN-LEFT: 1em;\n}\nLI { MARGIN-LEFT: 1em }\n\ni { font-style : italic; }\n.m { font-size: 80%; }\n.odd { background-color: #E6E8fA; }\n.even { background-color: #ffffff; }\n--> </style> Many fears are born of stupidity and ignorance - Which you should be feeding with rumour and generalisation. BOfH, 2002 "Episode" 10
Post #90,128 by admin 3/21/03 3:49:29 PM Reply	Modified, and thanks. How does it look? Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #90,121 by ChrisR 3/21/03 3:38:59 PM Reply	1.4em appoximates 0.5cm The percentages would be nicer, but they don't work for the indentation.
Post #90,054 by deSitter 3/21/03 12:43:49 PM Reply	Re: Possible fix? Good call, that worked. -drl
Post #90,057 by ChrisR 3/21/03 12:47:37 PM Reply	Works until... ...Scott decides to expand the list to 10 bullets - in which case the leading digit gets dropped again. :-)

Welcome to IWETHEY!