Forum Moderators: phranque
Don't see why the graphics card would affect the element size like that. Sounds like FUD to me.
Umm.. well I guess its back to basics...
Aside: Netscape actually displayed the site, albiet billboard size. Whereas before it would show text only.
As for scrunched up, all elements were stacked up, including text, images, and all unique div ID assignments. Elements were all huddled together in a corner.
This sounds like a monitor resolution issue, not css.
On the super-size pc, right-click the desktop, go to Properties, then click Settings in order to verify the resolution.
The scrunch up? NN 4.7 won't properly display a design that heavily relies on css for formatting, particularly in a table-less design.
Looks great on my home computer... My Monitor setting reads 1280 x 1024
That's why it looks great, because of the higher resolution.
Check the resolution of the monitors in which you see the Zoom Effect, I'll bet you'll see a lower resolution (800x600).
Sounds like one element of the problem is monitor resolution.
My Monitor setting reads 1280 x 1024
Doh! That explains the 'binocular effect' anyways.
A 12px font will always be (about) 12 pixels high - regardless of the screen resolution. I guess your library is using a very low screen res (like VGA 640x480).
On your 1280x1024 display 12 pixels is about an 85th of the screen height.
Whereas on a 640x480 display 12 pixels accounts for a 40th of the screen height.
To mimic this effect while testing I suggest you install the Screen Size favlets from [tantek.com...]
These simply allow you to resize your browser window to the appropriate dimensions so you can see (roughly) what people on lower res displays will see.
As for the bunching up problem. Not sure why it would look ok on your PC but not the one at the library. You could check for corruption during the upload by validating the online pages (the WDG Validator [htmlhelp.com] can validate an entire site in one go for you).
(Incidentally, my sincere apologies to the librarian: he was dead right. If that is the best resolution they can run the PC at then it is indeed "to do with the graphics cards" - because they clearly dont have enough memory on them!)
Monitor Resolution, Yes. That's what I've saying for the last two posts.
Additionally, you hardly see monitor resolutions of 640x480, that's for a very small 14 inch to 15 inch monitor. 640x480 is not likely the resolution in this case.
What you'll run into in significant numbers, as far as smaller monitor resolutions, is 800x600.
Validator also did not like end tags for /Head and /Body, which have since been removed.
Back to binocular, is it suggested to re-design for the 640x480 audience? Many monitors in this town are small ones, between the libraries and friends, and this town is considered fairly tech-savvy. I wonder if I should reconsider the smaller monitor audience as LCD.
Being a newbie, I am not sure how I would approach the construction.
<script type="text/javascript" src="javaScr/swapImg.js">
</script>
Also, you might want to put the </head> and </body> tags back ;)
is it suggested to re-design for the 640x480 audience?
No.
As I noted earlier, "you hardly see monitor resolutions of 640x480" and as DrDoc made explicit, "Everyone else is sharing the last 5-10%."
The 640x480 resolution should never have been brought up because it hasn't been a concern for many years.
If it looks fine at 800x600 rez, and at the higher resolutions, then that's all you should be worrying about. (I agree that 800x600 can be considered normal, but it in the context of a conversation about 1280 x 1024 rez monitors, it is a smaller rez- :))
A liquid layout will however, look decent on most size monitor resolutions. I think ebay has a liquid layout, in that the layout resizes itself according to the browser window size.
