Re: maincss.css question

Posted by Adrian Crum on Jan 12, 2007; 11:10pm
URL: http://ofbiz.116.s1.nabble.com/maincss-css-question-tp176368p176388.html

Thanks for the reminder Daniel! I was going to get to that next. If you try out
the file I attached, you'll see there are still a few small issues I need to
work out. So, it's a work in progress.


Daniel Kunkel wrote:

> Hi Adrian
>
> This is great, but I think Chris Howe had a great idea a little while
> back when he talked about defining text in em so browsers can adjust the
> font size.
>
> Thanks
>
> Daniel
>
> -----
>
> This is a vague recollection of things read/done on
> css. Instead of setting the font size in pixels, you
> "should" use em units.  The most common approach is
> the following:
>
> BODY {
> font-size: 62.5%;
> }
>
> This makes 16px = 10px and so now:
> 0.8 em = 8 px
> 1 em = 10px
> 1.2 em = 12 px
> 1.4 em = 14 px
>
> and so forth.  em instead of pixels is used because
> IE/Win doesn't allow the user to resize text that is
> set in px.  This may or may not have been
> fixed/changed in IE7, but it's a much easier
> convention to apply consistently than is pixels.
>
>
>
> ----
>
> On Fri, 2007-01-12 at 14:17 -0800, Adrian Crum wrote:
>
>>I've spent the last two days consolidating the two main css files and cleaning
>>up the target file. There were a lot of duplicate and unnecessary assignments. I
>>also found font sizes expressed in points AND pixels, so I changed them all to
>>pixels. I also changed color names to color values - so that a simple global
>>replacement of color values will change the look of the site.
>>
>>So far, the new maincss.css file renders almost exactly the same. The only
>>difference seems to be in INPUT box widths.
>>
>>I have attached what I've done so far - if you'd like to take a look at it.
>>
>>Thanks for the book recommendation, btw. I'll definitely pick up a book or two.
>>So far I've been able to answer all of my questions with online CSS references.
>>
>>
>>David E. Jones wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Adrian,
>>>
>>>I see, no problem. Yeah, it was a project started and never finished!
>>>
>>>You'll probably also notice that there is still some table-based  
>>>formatting on the productdetail page that is a bit evil (well, and  
>>>ugly!) and needs to be converted to a CSS-based layout like much of  the
>>>other stuff was.
>>>
>>>-David
>>>
>>>
>>>On Jan 12, 2007, at 2:56 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>David,
>>>>
>>>>Thanks for the reply! I understand completely what the ID attribute  
>>>>is for. I was questioning why it was done differently than the rest  
>>>>of the file.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>David E. Jones wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>This was part of the experimentation with the Zen CSS Garden way  of  
>>>>>doing CSS. Using id attributes to mark regions and styling  
>>>>>implicitly  is the way we want to go in the future. If you're  
>>>>>planning on working  on CSS stuff and you haven't read through The  
>>>>>Zen of CSS Design, I  highly recommend it. Really cool stuff.  There
>>>>>is a link to the book  on the Docs & Books page on  ofbiz.apache.org.
>>>>>-David
>>>>>On Jan 12, 2007, at 2:42 PM, Adrian Crum wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>In the maincss.css file, Just below the comment
>>>>>>
>>>>>>/* ===== Product Detail Styles ===== */
>>>>>>
>>>>>>are six css classes defined using IDs instead of class names. Is  
>>>>>>there a reason for that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>