At 1:08 AM +0200 9/6/07, Gunlaug Sørtun wrote:
>>However, if one removes your graphic from your
>>layout, then it's easily read. I think that
>>allowing the user to see/read a graphic via
>> scrolling is preferable than presenting
>>something that they can't read at any zoom
>>level. Don't you think?
>Yes, and I would give the user something completely different on a
>normal web page.
>I do prefer images to stay within their containers (columns), as long as
>a visually pleasing result can be achieved. This means I _do_ prefer to
>use max-width for images when that works, but the actual image dictates
>the actual solution.
>However, since that particular page is one of my test pages where
>solutions are _supposed_ to be tested to breaking-point and far beyond,
>that image isn't there to be read. It is there to break solution - and
OK, I realize that your page was a "test in
presentation" -- but aren't all "test in
presentation" supposed to solicit comments about
After all, if someone on this list post a request
for us to review a page that has a font size
that's too small or not sufficient contrast to be
read, then it's proper to comment, is it not? So
I don't see the difference here?
I guess what I didn't realize was that the image
was exempt from the test. My mistake, you clearly
placed it there and changed it's dimensions
according to zoom levels and the size of the
user's window, so I thought it was part of the
demo -- sorry.
Just a suggestion -- if you changed the image to
something that didn't have text on it (like a
flower), then no one can comment on it's lack of
IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/