dpi / resolution / web pages

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

hello everyone,

I'm confused about this subject in general, but here's my concise issue:

I have chosen to set my Windows XP on the 'large' 125% dpi setting because
it seems to make it easier to generally see whatever I'm looking at. I toyed
with the font size options but didn't really grasp what specifically was
changing, so stayed with the dpi setting mentioned above.

Now; what specifically should my increased dpi (resolution?) setting have an
effect on? Everything I view in XP? I'm not convinced that some Mozilla
software is playing by the same rules, for example.

This brings me to a web authoring conundrum:

Am I right in thinking that the fonts and sizes in a correctly coded /
css'ed website should _always_ appear the same in any browser, regardless of
the end user's dpi setting(s)? ie the website should 'force through' a
consistent size etc.
(I'm assuming here that the end user has set /left their browser to allow
the web page to dictate such things. I'm also not talking about slight
cross-browser compatibility rendering issues.)

I hope you can clarify these matters for me, as I can then decide how best
to code my web pages. You can appreciate I'm currently going round in circles
to a large extent.

Many thanks,
Lee
England
24 answers Last reply
More about resolution pages
  1. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Lee,
    I also build quite a few websites and have come across some info that
    might be of interest to you. When you build a site, you can set the font
    size and/or picture size as you see it on YOUR own computer, but if you go
    to somebody elses computer and look at it, it might be totally different due
    to their own settings ie: their screen res and their dpi settings and also
    the TEXT SIZE that they can set in their own browser. So what I have found
    to work the best is to select sizes when building your pages that are
    somewhere in the middle of the spectrum for size.. ie: use size 3 or 4 for
    most fonts for a normal or reasonably normal size on the viewers machine...
    I also know that there are some vb scripts that you can use that will resize
    the recipients aspects, but I am reluctant to use them... For one, it makes
    the page take longer to load on their machine. If you need to go to say a
    larger font than size=7, then you can always use a <style> sheet for the
    text. I work on customer computers nearly daily and I see settings that
    they have come up with that would make it nearly impossible for a Web
    Designer to get around.... Some people are "different" as to how they like
    their machines set up...
    I hope this help you some..
    --
    Burt
    The Old Alaskan
    MVP's listed on TECKPAGE
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog/teckpage.htm

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:E09C08A0-4A64-43B5-A0EB-FC4C327A1E35@microsoft.com...
    > hello everyone,
    >
    > I'm confused about this subject in general, but here's my concise issue:
    >
    > I have chosen to set my Windows XP on the 'large' 125% dpi setting because
    > it seems to make it easier to generally see whatever I'm looking at. I
    > toyed
    > with the font size options but didn't really grasp what specifically was
    > changing, so stayed with the dpi setting mentioned above.
    >
    > Now; what specifically should my increased dpi (resolution?) setting have
    > an
    > effect on? Everything I view in XP? I'm not convinced that some Mozilla
    > software is playing by the same rules, for example.
    >
    > This brings me to a web authoring conundrum:
    >
    > Am I right in thinking that the fonts and sizes in a correctly coded /
    > css'ed website should _always_ appear the same in any browser, regardless
    > of
    > the end user's dpi setting(s)? ie the website should 'force through' a
    > consistent size etc.
    > (I'm assuming here that the end user has set /left their browser to allow
    > the web page to dictate such things. I'm also not talking about slight
    > cross-browser compatibility rendering issues.)
    >
    > I hope you can clarify these matters for me, as I can then decide how best
    > to code my web pages. You can appreciate I'm currently going round in
    > circles
    > to a large extent.
    >
    > Many thanks,
    > Lee
    > England
    >
  2. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Thanks Bert,

    That's certainly a big help.

    I'm still curious though as to why some websites I look at don't seem to be
    affected in the way I've described, whereas others do.
    Maybe a microsoft person here can explain specifically how a web browser
    should react when used on a pc with a non-standard dpi setting.

    So Bert, with my web-authoring hat on, should I _not_ attempt to code my
    pages with my XP set to 125% dpi?

    thanks again,
    lee
  3. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    with apologies, for Bert please read Burt.
  4. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Lee,
    David Candy came in here with a professional view point that you can
    take to the bank.. The 125 DPI setting that you use on your local machine
    will not affect what the opener of your website sees, only what YOU see on
    your machine.. However, if I were you, to get a better view of what the
    recipient "MIGHT" see, is to set your display setting say to 1024 X 768 on a
    19" monitor and anything less than that size, I would recommend 800 X 600
    res.. "with the dpi on your machine set at 96 as David mentioned... This
    will be about as close to the middle of the road as you are going to get.
    --
    Burt
    The Old Alaskan
    MVP's listed on TECKPAGE
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog/teckpage.htm

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:A52F1357-79CF-4650-9B25-49740E1CAD03@microsoft.com...
    >
    > Thanks Bert,
    >
    > That's certainly a big help.
    >
    > I'm still curious though as to why some websites I look at don't seem to
    > be
    > affected in the way I've described, whereas others do.
    > Maybe a microsoft person here can explain specifically how a web browser
    > should react when used on a pc with a non-standard dpi setting.
    >
    > So Bert, with my web-authoring hat on, should I _not_ attempt to code my
    > pages with my XP set to 125% dpi?
    >
    > thanks again,
    > lee
    >
  5. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    (Resolutionpx / 125dpi) = LogicalInches

    MonitorInches/LogicalInches is the ratio of logical inches to physical inches.

    Web pages are specified in pixels or logical units (inch, point (72/in), or twips (20/pt)). A lot mix units (fonts in points but other things in pixels).

    Likewise a dialog must be designed specially to handle anything else but 96dpi. Typically fonts are in points and measurements in pixels. Only modern designed apps can handle this seemlessly and this is mainly because they are getting ready for high dpi displays.

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.uscricket.com
    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:E09C08A0-4A64-43B5-A0EB-FC4C327A1E35@microsoft.com...
    > hello everyone,
    >
    > I'm confused about this subject in general, but here's my concise issue:
    >
    > I have chosen to set my Windows XP on the 'large' 125% dpi setting because
    > it seems to make it easier to generally see whatever I'm looking at. I toyed
    > with the font size options but didn't really grasp what specifically was
    > changing, so stayed with the dpi setting mentioned above.
    >
    > Now; what specifically should my increased dpi (resolution?) setting have an
    > effect on? Everything I view in XP? I'm not convinced that some Mozilla
    > software is playing by the same rules, for example.
    >
    > This brings me to a web authoring conundrum:
    >
    > Am I right in thinking that the fonts and sizes in a correctly coded /
    > css'ed website should _always_ appear the same in any browser, regardless of
    > the end user's dpi setting(s)? ie the website should 'force through' a
    > consistent size etc.
    > (I'm assuming here that the end user has set /left their browser to allow
    > the web page to dictate such things. I'm also not talking about slight
    > cross-browser compatibility rendering issues.)
    >
    > I hope you can clarify these matters for me, as I can then decide how best
    > to code my web pages. You can appreciate I'm currently going round in circles
    > to a large extent.
    >
    > Many thanks,
    > Lee
    > England
    >
  6. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    thanks again Burt and David,

    I need to learn and grasp the principles that David for eg has mentioned.

    It sounds like my belief was wrong, that a 'correctly' coded webpage will
    force through its intended size etc regardless of the end user's resolution
    settings. ie, I believed (assuming the end user's browser is allowing
    webpages to dictate fonts and sizes) that the browser would treat such a
    webpage as 'preset' and show it disregarding the general XP dpi or font size
    settings. Can I confirm that I indeed was wrong in believing this?

    Also, although I have chosen to use my XP in the large 125% dpi mode because
    it makes most things appear larger (not talking specifically about viewing
    webpages) I don't understand _why_ it makes things look larger. ie, I would
    have thought it just uses more 'dots per inch' implying clarity/detail may be
    enhanced but within the same size.
    Presumably this is how I should understand it :
    The 'dots per inch' is 'pixels used to resolve the original image',
    therefore using 'more pixels' to show something must mean it takes up more
    screen space and therefore appears bigger. ie the pixels don't 'move' so more
    pixels has to mean a larger viewed result. Have I got that right?
  7. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Lee,
    You don't have that EXACTLY right, but you are close... Here is a point
    of interest for you.
    Open any website and go to View/Source and look at the FONT selection that
    the web designer used... In MOST cases you will find that they name more
    than ONE font... The reason for this is because if the END USER does not
    happen to have the first font that the designer put on the page, then the
    recipients computer will look for the second font in the list and on to the
    third if neither of the other fonts are installed on recipients computer...
    If all else fails in the browsers search for the fonts on the recipients
    machine, most likely Windows will use Arial or maybe Times Roman or some
    such default or it might even be Marietta font... Again, you cannot TOTALLY
    control the recipients computer as for viewing your pages. Again, for
    instance you call for a size 4 font on your webpage. If the recipient has
    his setting in IE for small fonts, that would be close to the equivalent of
    you having named it size 3 on YOUR machine and viewed it in that you are
    using say Larger font in IE... It is a very IFFY thing when you start
    writing web page code.. Like I told you in a diff reply, I have viewed my
    own pages on friends computers that were set up with totally different
    settings and found them in some cases to not look like I had planned... BUT,
    it did teach me a lesson to be sure and put
    codes and such in the
    proper place to FORCE their machine to put a break line where "I" want it.
    There are a lot of tricks to this, but you can manage the recipients
    computer to some extents with careful coding... I sure hope this gives you
    more insight into this matter.
    --
    Burt
    The Old Alaskan
    MVP's listed on TECKPAGE
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog/teckpage.htm

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:2D6F1B19-C231-420D-8891-F9017C82FB22@microsoft.com...
    >
    > thanks again Burt and David,
    >
    > I need to learn and grasp the principles that David for eg has mentioned.
    >
    > It sounds like my belief was wrong, that a 'correctly' coded webpage will
    > force through its intended size etc regardless of the end user's
    > resolution
    > settings. ie, I believed (assuming the end user's browser is allowing
    > webpages to dictate fonts and sizes) that the browser would treat such a
    > webpage as 'preset' and show it disregarding the general XP dpi or font
    > size
    > settings. Can I confirm that I indeed was wrong in believing this?
    >
    > Also, although I have chosen to use my XP in the large 125% dpi mode
    > because
    > it makes most things appear larger (not talking specifically about viewing
    > webpages) I don't understand _why_ it makes things look larger. ie, I
    > would
    > have thought it just uses more 'dots per inch' implying clarity/detail may
    > be
    > enhanced but within the same size.
    > Presumably this is how I should understand it :
    > The 'dots per inch' is 'pixels used to resolve the original image',
    > therefore using 'more pixels' to show something must mean it takes up more
    > screen space and therefore appears bigger. ie the pixels don't 'move' so
    > more
    > pixels has to mean a larger viewed result. Have I got that right?
    >
  8. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    thanks again Burt,

    I think the central issue that I have obsessed with, is the idea that any
    _general_ non-standard resolution setting by the end user, if their browser
    is set to allow webpages to dictate fonts /sizes, will NOT mean the website
    is displayed as I intended it.

    ie I now believe / think that _any_ non-standard resolution settings by the
    end user will impact on a web design. Have I finally got this specififc
    belief correct?

    I can't really explain why I thought otherwsie; I always understood that my
    local settings are of course only as _I_ see it, but I had a hunch that there
    was some standard 'guaranteed' way of over-riding any settings at the user's
    end.
  9. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Lee,
    You are getting the message... You can control "some" aspects of what
    the recipient sees on your site, but most likely not ALL of code as exactly
    AS you coded it.. Some items WILL be as you coded, but other bits of code
    may NOT look the same to the recipient.. I will reiterate what I said
    earlier in this thread, use some fairly NORMAL settings as for font names,
    font size and even font color. There are basically 256 font colors that are
    recognized as definite web colors even though you have the option of coding
    ANY of 16.8 Million colors in your code... Here again, maybe the recipients
    machine has a video card that won't handle any more than the 256 basic
    colors.. If that be the case, Windows will most likely choose the NEXT
    appropriate color to display... I learned that the hard way too.. I have
    found that if you put up a web site and did some exotic things on the pages,
    it is a good idea to test it on OTHER computers as well as your own.. I have
    several buddies that I go to there place and double check my pages on THEIR
    machines the way THEY have them set up and occasionally I have to go back
    home and redo certain parts of the code to get them cleaned up... I hope
    all this brings you to a better understanding.
    Burt

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:2E2B5BC1-0F66-4FF1-99C7-506AFC56F4D1@microsoft.com...
    >
    > thanks again Burt,
    >
    > I think the central issue that I have obsessed with, is the idea that any
    > _general_ non-standard resolution setting by the end user, if their
    > browser
    > is set to allow webpages to dictate fonts /sizes, will NOT mean the
    > website
    > is displayed as I intended it.
    >
    > ie I now believe / think that _any_ non-standard resolution settings by
    > the
    > end user will impact on a web design. Have I finally got this specififc
    > belief correct?
    >
    > I can't really explain why I thought otherwsie; I always understood that
    > my
    > local settings are of course only as _I_ see it, but I had a hunch that
    > there
    > was some standard 'guaranteed' way of over-riding any settings at the
    > user's
    > end.
    >
  10. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    The browser decides formatting. You merely suggest formatting to it. That's the essential concept. The browser decides. That's the underlying design goal. Things have been added to html because authors demanded it but at it's heart you describe the data (a heading, a paragraph, or a list) and the browser decides how to show it.

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.uscricket.com
    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:2E2B5BC1-0F66-4FF1-99C7-506AFC56F4D1@microsoft.com...
    >
    > thanks again Burt,
    >
    > I think the central issue that I have obsessed with, is the idea that any
    > _general_ non-standard resolution setting by the end user, if their browser
    > is set to allow webpages to dictate fonts /sizes, will NOT mean the website
    > is displayed as I intended it.
    >
    > ie I now believe / think that _any_ non-standard resolution settings by the
    > end user will impact on a web design. Have I finally got this specififc
    > belief correct?
    >
    > I can't really explain why I thought otherwsie; I always understood that my
    > local settings are of course only as _I_ see it, but I had a hunch that there
    > was some standard 'guaranteed' way of over-riding any settings at the user's
    > end.
    >
  11. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Thankyou both;

    I've recently started to move away from my previous coding technique of
    stuffing all the design detail into the html tags, in favour of using a css
    template. I need to fully explore why this is the recommended technique, but
    I understand the basic principle that the html should really be used only for
    the physical structure.
    The most obvious benefit _for me_ of a css sheet is of course to avoid
    having to recode 60 odd pages for a slight or major generic design change!

    Btw, I've started to re-jig my coding with a view to sticking to the 'em'
    and '%' principle for sizes, which I now believe to be the most 'scalable'
    techniques.
    I'm still learning and have probably got the idea a little wrong, but
    anyone's welcome to look at the code on these 2 pages if they want to tell me
    how I'm doing:

    http://www.incelsite.com/incelsite.css
    http://www.incelsite.com/menu.shtml

    btw, I believe I've got my DOCTYPE line in the wrong place for it to be
    effective; apparently that line should be at the very start of the page ...?
  12. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    David,
    Thanks for the backup of what I said.... Just for the record: Your
    replies are golden.
    Burt

    "David Candy" <.> wrote in message
    news:%23gd18hC$EHA.3596@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    The browser decides formatting. You merely suggest formatting to it. That's
    the essential concept. The browser decides. That's the underlying design
    goal. Things have been added to html because authors demanded it but at it's
    heart you describe the data (a heading, a paragraph, or a list) and the
    browser decides how to show it.

    --
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.uscricket.com
    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:2E2B5BC1-0F66-4FF1-99C7-506AFC56F4D1@microsoft.com...
    >
    > thanks again Burt,
    >
    > I think the central issue that I have obsessed with, is the idea that any
    > _general_ non-standard resolution setting by the end user, if their
    > browser
    > is set to allow webpages to dictate fonts /sizes, will NOT mean the
    > website
    > is displayed as I intended it.
    >
    > ie I now believe / think that _any_ non-standard resolution settings by
    > the
    > end user will impact on a web design. Have I finally got this specififc
    > belief correct?
    >
    > I can't really explain why I thought otherwsie; I always understood that
    > my
    > local settings are of course only as _I_ see it, but I had a hunch that
    > there
    > was some standard 'guaranteed' way of over-riding any settings at the
    > user's
    > end.
    >
  13. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Lee,
    I see a couple things wrong when I opened the source on your second
    link.. First, you are right about the DOCTYPE, it is in the wrong place. I
    don't think it really makes a lot of difference, but it should be at the
    very TOP above the entering <html> tag. I didn't look the entire code over
    because you are using some "Program" to build your html and I don't like all
    the garbage they add to it.. I do all my webpage html in Notepad with no
    helper programs.. You can build a much cleaner code that way. I am not
    saying that it won't work, I just prefer to hand code my pages. Once you
    have something going, you can do most of it with just copy/paste technique
    to save a lot of typing.. I have hundreds of snippets of code saved in a
    fairly easy to navigate file system, so to retrieve them for use is rather
    simple..
    Now at the bottom of the code in your second link I also saw an error
    showing TWO </html> closure tags when you only need ONE of them at that
    point.. Like I said, I didn't tear apart the whole thing, but I do see some
    other little tidbits in there that I don't think are necessary..
    Glad to be of help..
    I was glad to see David Candy back up my messages to you... You can take
    what he says to the bank and in the past, he has helped me much and so have
    all the other MVP's on these groups.. I help where I can.
    Burt

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:CD21B3A5-535E-4F23-B72F-D636CD522247@microsoft.com...
    >
    > Thankyou both;
    >
    > I've recently started to move away from my previous coding technique of
    > stuffing all the design detail into the html tags, in favour of using a
    > css
    > template. I need to fully explore why this is the recommended technique,
    > but
    > I understand the basic principle that the html should really be used only
    > for
    > the physical structure.
    > The most obvious benefit _for me_ of a css sheet is of course to avoid
    > having to recode 60 odd pages for a slight or major generic design change!
    >
    > Btw, I've started to re-jig my coding with a view to sticking to the 'em'
    > and '%' principle for sizes, which I now believe to be the most 'scalable'
    > techniques.
    > I'm still learning and have probably got the idea a little wrong, but
    > anyone's welcome to look at the code on these 2 pages if they want to tell
    > me
    > how I'm doing:
    >
    > http://www.incelsite.com/incelsite.css
    > http://www.incelsite.com/menu.shtml
    >
    > btw, I believe I've got my DOCTYPE line in the wrong place for it to be
    > effective; apparently that line should be at the very start of the page
    > ...?
    >
    >
  14. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
    |
    | Thankyou both;
    |
    | I've recently started to move away from my previous coding technique of
    | stuffing all the design detail into the html tags, in favour of using a css
    | template. I need to fully explore why this is the recommended technique, but
    | I understand the basic principle that the html should really be used only for
    | the physical structure.
    | The most obvious benefit _for me_ of a css sheet is of course to avoid
    | having to recode 60 odd pages for a slight or major generic design change!
    |
    | Btw, I've started to re-jig my coding with a view to sticking to the 'em'
    | and '%' principle for sizes, which I now believe to be the most 'scalable'
    | techniques.
    | I'm still learning and have probably got the idea a little wrong, but
    | anyone's welcome to look at the code on these 2 pages if they want to tell me
    | how I'm doing:
    |
    | http://www.incelsite.com/incelsite.css
    | http://www.incelsite.com/menu.shtml
    |
    | btw, I believe I've got my DOCTYPE line in the wrong place for it to be
    | effective; apparently that line should be at the very start of the page ...?


    Go to: http://validator.w3.org/

    Validate by URL
    Address: [ http://www.incelsite.com/menu.shtml ] [Check]

    You have 17 errors.

    Go to: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/

    Validate by URI
    Enter the URI of a document (HTML with CSS or CSS only) you would like validated:
    Address: [ http://www.incelsite.com/incelsite.css ] [Check]

    You have 2 errors.
  15. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Ok; I find it difficult to interpret from the validator how I should correct
    things.
    Assuming my use of em and % in www/incelsite.css and www/menu.shtml is
    correct, I have noticed this situation:

    all looks normal in IE6 and Firefox when I have XP set on 96dpi. Good.

    However, I do like working generally in 125% dpi, and although I expected
    this to then 'screw up' my viewing of my pages on the web, I'm interested to
    see that Firefox seems to be 'compensating' for my XP dpi setting whereas IE6
    isn't. Firefox is in 'normal' text size mode and IE6 is in 'medium'.

    Or, rather than Firefox doing some kind of compensation that IE isn't, is
    it that IE6's idea of 'normal' is vastly different to Firefox's ?? Presumably
    not, seeing as the same settings do compare very closely when in 96dpi.

    out of interest, here are 2 screen grabs to show this:

    http://www.incelsite.com/IE6.gif
    http://www.incelsite.com/firefox.gif

    thanks for any thoughts,
    lee
  16. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Lee,
    There is one more possible work around for your need to use the 125DPI
    setting..
    Why don't you try dropping your Sreen Resolution on notch and set the DPI
    back to 96?
    You might have better luck.. It will display more properly.
    HTH,
    --
    Burt
    The Old Alaskan
    MVP's listed on TECKPAGE
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog
    http://www.cvinternet.net/~smokydog/teckpage.htm

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:1CFBC12F-2B2D-40F0-9CA9-489B3817226B@microsoft.com...
    > Ok; I find it difficult to interpret from the validator how I should
    > correct
    > things.
    > Assuming my use of em and % in www/incelsite.css and www/menu.shtml is
    > correct, I have noticed this situation:
    >
    > all looks normal in IE6 and Firefox when I have XP set on 96dpi. Good.
    >
    > However, I do like working generally in 125% dpi, and although I expected
    > this to then 'screw up' my viewing of my pages on the web, I'm interested
    > to
    > see that Firefox seems to be 'compensating' for my XP dpi setting whereas
    > IE6
    > isn't. Firefox is in 'normal' text size mode and IE6 is in 'medium'.
    >
    > Or, rather than Firefox doing some kind of compensation that IE isn't, is
    > it that IE6's idea of 'normal' is vastly different to Firefox's ??
    > Presumably
    > not, seeing as the same settings do compare very closely when in 96dpi.
    >
    > out of interest, here are 2 screen grabs to show this:
    >
    > http://www.incelsite.com/IE6.gif
    > http://www.incelsite.com/firefox.gif
    >
    > thanks for any thoughts,
    > lee
  17. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    "lee" <lee@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
    | Ok; I find it difficult to interpret from the validator how I should correct
    | things.

    Study the HTML and CSS specifications at http://www.w3.org/

    (Who|what)ever coded those .html and .css files does not understand how to code
    valid HTML and CSS. Any web browser will do its best to render the nonsense it
    finds in those .html and .css files.
  18. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.frontpage.client,microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Hi

    Isn't this in the wrong newsgroup, i.e. shouldn't it be in
    microsoft.public.frontpage.client?

    Interestingly these 2 are the ones I also peruse daily and sometimes
    contribute to.

    I am also a learner, but yes, the doctype should be the first line.

    I am interested in the debate re specifying points, pixels, percent. As my
    site is new, I would like to get everything set up correctly at the start
    and not have to redo everything.

    I would also like to move specs into my CSS to avoid repetition.
    I note in your table a repetition of:
    align="center" bordercolor="#cccccc" style="background-color:bisque; ...
    Couldn't this be part of the specification of class "menu" or some other
    class?
    This is a genuine question. Being new myself, I don't know what can or can't
    go into the CSS.

    I like the use of the functions mousein and mouseout. I haven't used
    functions myself yet, but why is there a parameter to mousein (namely
    'html') which isn't used in the function? Perhaps it is there for when you
    want to add something to the function at a later date

    I find the topic of the website "interesting" to say the least. However,
    that doesn't detract from the programming issues

    One point: There are no links from the pages invoked by the menu table back
    to the menu page. One has to close the page to get back. I suppose this may
    be obvious, but as a learner myself ...


    --
    Cheers,
    Trevor L.


    I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
    http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html


    begin 666 4_6_4.gif
    M1TE&.#EA'@`>`/?F`````/_ `/____Z_`/V^`/R^`/2X`/F[`,65`'I;`)YW
    M`"HE"BHG"B@E"N^T`/R]`"TJ"C,N"SXZ#^ZS`$(^$#0O#3 L"S<R#2TJ"S$N
    M"R\J##0O"_F\`.NQ`/B[`."I`.FO`# L"N6L`/6X`/J\`.VS`-RF`*N `"XI
    M"]*>`#<R"_:Y`/>Z`)UU`.BN`(QJ`,J7`,.3`.VR`"DE"I1O`"\J"R\K#"$<
    M""LF"[B*`-^G`.&H`*-[`"XJ"C\[$-2@`"DG"BHF"=:?`+>)`/BZ`(9E`#\X
    M#XAG`'E<`/>Y`#@T#AT9!HMI`"@E"XIH`(5E`-BC`"@F"C4O#"\I#*)[`#HT
    M##LU#9AT`+B,`"PG"]BB`"8C":%X`!\="=.?`$(_$"LH"N.K`*A_`#0P#:Z#
    M`"4A")ES`(YK`/N]`/6Z`."H`"DE"QT;!34P#+*&`+^/`.6M`*5[`"PI"X-C
    M`"4A"3(M#$ \$"PH"\Z;`+"$`"HG"RTI#)%M`#XZ$#0P"YQT`$$[#ZZ!`*N!
    M`# J#-"=`/2Y`#<R#N:M`#LU#R0@"",@"<>6`#0P#"PF";^.`"<B"]*=`'Y?
    M`"DD"ZJ `-FB`,21`+Z-`+Z.`#,O#MVG`"PF##(N"ZI_`,>5`#8R#.>O`.2L
    M`'=9`.^U`,.2`(II`-FD`/.X`"TH"_2W`/"U`#(L"XUK`.*J`.&J`#\Y#Z)Z
    M`#PY$+R-`)AQ`+R/`/:Z`.&I`'Q=`-">`#8Q"RLG"[.'`'E;`*1Z`"(?",F7
    M`+B+`#LU$!L8!MRD`#HU#ZA^`# K#1T;!C L#,:6`#DU#\&1`#8R#>NR`"HF
    M"IET`#\]$.FP`$,]$.JR`*)Y`-:B`"<E"IUY`" >"(]M`"\M#3 K"RTI"[J,
    M`#DT#KJ*`+&&`#0N"SLV#1P9!R,A"2 ="#$L# ``````````````````````
    M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
    M`````````````````````"'_"TY%5%-#05!%,BXP`P$````A^00%% #F`"P`
    M````'@`>```(_P#-"1PH, +!<@03*ARH0@)!@P,U"+2P0> &*0*W-5#8<&"5
    M#*<$:@(CL%$/@2%4"62PQ5PB@N"&41 8KHTV%.;N9&&P8$$N<Q@T'#,W)8C
    M7@1#)'MF+AH@*YXV%1MD`46S!C/6[+%ACE$V.>;HE"&(89F/+Q3L]$%T`8#;
    MMVXA9*AP88S )C,25@`&RX@KN $"!QX`MYLA@7H40L#D!Y=;P9 ##"BP0H9;
    M)75P`%'X2%*4QY$%3ZXLPFV-:N,4WKCF=D!HT04\I'+QP:VB+@J7N.7@^G5@
    M`B0,=*B5PBT;A<$`@/#0V_?D`PY$0.(&P)A"<0`^T7(-&#)<:#^\`?\@I] M
    MJ#0$``A8+P" 8/7L`93"XK8\@E:%X+M=[UZ__EDM`%">,CH8H)Y^[05P('_M
    MQ<"%@ D!X(@PIL#'8'_LM=<>,J] 2! `.6@Q07MO\1<`B?NUA\ T'@X$0!ZW
    M,'- A@D&1B,`'UAB38L"`1!'##N,D-Y;D<$E"A1#R,*C.6Y]XX4T+#3WV@,C
    MP &#&/65I\ ;)CC P0,#A"GF``00P$()U/P2X$),\G'"(FI,8 `1!Z#!'@E)
    MH%*""0AP0L.2/0)@ABZ^4,**"R!T\-8A860BQ"B!7)'E0FXI0,8EG>!!2'%N
    MP5!)+&[P\B>@'P+P!P_$3'*"(&]1H8 SV!0K,2F;@:YRQ@LOD,*$$T<\,4<D
    MN\Q*:Z!NV9+ L4B$`M>PM,*U++/01DM00 `A^00%% #F`"P'``P`#0`'```(
    M)@#-F1,@L&!!@@,!&#RH4" `A L?+IQHL.%$A0\A%LSHD**YA@$!`"'Y! 44
    M`.8`+ @`# `0``0```@A`,T!,$>P(,&!!@$(*+CP8$-S#04,!*"0X<2*# T:
    M;!@0`"'Y! 44`.8`+ L`#0`-``<```@G`,V9`R"P8$&"Y@0(0&A0(4&&!@=&
    4G-@08L&%!P50!* Q(46/Y@("`#L`
    `
    end

    begin 666 4_1_107.gif
    M1TE&.#EA$P`3`.9,`(J'A]BW`/C2`*6+`.[)`,"B`/+-`/7/`.K&`*B.`+&5
    M`*2*`.G%`*>.`+*6`._*`*&(`*V2`/3.`-NZ`-FX`)R#`-Z[`.7"`.7!`)J!
    M`/',`)V$`+B;`/W7`*"'`/K5`/[7`-2S`/O5`*N0`/W5`*.)`)A_`-"O`.S'
    M`+28`)N#`*>,`/W6`+.6`/;0`/#,`,6G`,ZN`,FK`/K4`/O4`+N>`)Z%`.&_
    M`)^%`+"4`)=^`*Z2`/C3`)F `.&^`)^&`+:9`.;#`,JK`**)`*R1`/G3`+R>
    M`$A&1O_8`%A75____P``````````````````````````````````````````
    M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
    M````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
    M`````````````````````````````````````````````````"'Y! $``$P`
    M+ `````3`!,```>_@$R"@TN%ADN#B82%2(V-AHJ"C(Z42(6*DY64EY)+C4='
    M`(X`2T<T/)R>2*"%1ZN&1P8$B).BC1TB12X2+P`(08:4("0S`@<&#R@,&#<6
    M%)-)T=+3T0$A)X4L'TE*2MS>W=]),C"%QN+AZ=X%-84:!-'@\MS10"V&%S[T
    MZO0*$9=+)@20QB]:@P&(F!2*(83:M!(_."E<4L (AQ0YB"08`,&&"HF='.P8
    9L6*!APT93(!<M&0(C@H]=$"*Q/)0I$ `.P``
    `
    end
  19. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    hello Trevor and everyone,

    That menu page is actually framed in the actual site, so is always available
    as a navigator.
    btw I saw the Frpntpage group but I'm not using Frontpage. My motive for
    starting this thread was to understand XP's resolution functionality.

    Yes, I too am a newbie to 'more than basic' html and css, and I don't
    pretend I have even grasped those properly yet. I find it very hard to learn
    specifics from documentation and specifications, whilst trying then to place
    how to put it all into practice. I need a training course.

    That 'menu' script wasn't written by me; I just used it wholesale from
    hotscripts.com or somewhere similar. There are bits of it that I don't
    understand or use.

    Burt; absolutely, working within XP's 96dpi does now show the same pages
    fine in IE6 and Firefox, but I was querying why Firefox apparently ignores or
    compensates for the higher resolution setting of 125%. This was certainly
    unexpected although handy.
    Someone else I've been mentioning this to has concluded that IE6 must be
    more closely tied to the OS than Firefox, although I'm asking at Mozilla to
    find out why. I mean, it's the same OS running both so I would have expected
    the same result.
  20. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.frontpage.client,microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    I'm not sure what all this is about, but you should not attach anything to
    the message. No gifs at the bottom. That's just the way newsgroups are.
    where is the original question?
    Elanor
    "Trevor L." <tandcl@homemail.com.au> wrote in message
    news:%23$zbU$P$EHA.2876@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > Hi
    >
    > Isn't this in the wrong newsgroup, i.e. shouldn't it be in
    > microsoft.public.frontpage.client?
    >
    > Interestingly these 2 are the ones I also peruse daily and sometimes
    > contribute to.
    >
    > I am also a learner, but yes, the doctype should be the first line.
    >
    > I am interested in the debate re specifying points, pixels, percent. As my
    > site is new, I would like to get everything set up correctly at the start
    > and not have to redo everything.
    >
    > I would also like to move specs into my CSS to avoid repetition.
    > I note in your table a repetition of:
    > align="center" bordercolor="#cccccc" style="background-color:bisque; ...
    > Couldn't this be part of the specification of class "menu" or some other
    > class?
    > This is a genuine question. Being new myself, I don't know what can or
    > can't go into the CSS.
    >
    > I like the use of the functions mousein and mouseout. I haven't used
    > functions myself yet, but why is there a parameter to mousein (namely
    > 'html') which isn't used in the function? Perhaps it is there for when you
    > want to add something to the function at a later date
    >
    > I find the topic of the website "interesting" to say the least. However,
    > that doesn't detract from the programming issues
    >
    > One point: There are no links from the pages invoked by the menu table
    > back to the menu page. One has to close the page to get back. I suppose
    > this may be obvious, but as a learner myself ...
    >
    >
    > --
    > Cheers,
    > Trevor L.
    >
    >
    > I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
    > http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
    >
    >
  21. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.frontpage.client,microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Huh????
    Include original post.

    "Trevor L." <tandcl@homemail.com.au> wrote in message
    news:%23$zbU$P$EHA.2876@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
    > Hi
    >
    > Isn't this in the wrong newsgroup, i.e. shouldn't it be in
    > microsoft.public.frontpage.client?
    >
    > Interestingly these 2 are the ones I also peruse daily and sometimes
    > contribute to.
    >
    > I am also a learner, but yes, the doctype should be the first line.
    >
    > I am interested in the debate re specifying points, pixels, percent. As my
    > site is new, I would like to get everything set up correctly at the start
    > and not have to redo everything.
    >
    > I would also like to move specs into my CSS to avoid repetition.
    > I note in your table a repetition of:
    > align="center" bordercolor="#cccccc" style="background-color:bisque; ...
    > Couldn't this be part of the specification of class "menu" or some other
    > class?
    > This is a genuine question. Being new myself, I don't know what can or
    > can't go into the CSS.
    >
    > I like the use of the functions mousein and mouseout. I haven't used
    > functions myself yet, but why is there a parameter to mousein (namely
    > 'html') which isn't used in the function? Perhaps it is there for when you
    > want to add something to the function at a later date
    >
    > I find the topic of the website "interesting" to say the least. However,
    > that doesn't detract from the programming issues
    >
    > One point: There are no links from the pages invoked by the menu table
    > back to the menu page. One has to close the page to get back. I suppose
    > this may be obvious, but as a learner myself ...
    >
    >
    > --
    > Cheers,
    > Trevor L.
    >
    >
    > I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
    > http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
    >
    >
  22. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.frontpage.client,microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Eleanor,

    Lee posted the first thread in
    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/expertzone/newsgroups/reader.mspx?query=dpi+%2F+resolution+%2F+web+pages&dg=microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize&cat=en-us-ms-winxp&lang=en&cr=US&pt=&catlist=B0DE109D-10E1-4C3C-BCC9-8EB7A22FC6A0&dglist=&ptlist=&exp=&sloc=en-us

    His later reply says that he doesn't in fact use FrontPage

    Sorry about using GIF's - they were just smileys
    --
    Cheers,
    Trevor L.


    I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
    http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
  23. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.frontpage.client,microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Wes,

    I confused Eleanor also.

    I thought that Lee's post should be on frontpage, but he has replied.

    See my reply to Eleanor on Tuesday, 18 January 2005 2:29 PM AEST

    --
    Cheers,
    Trevor L.


    I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
    http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
  24. Archived from groups: microsoft.public.frontpage.client,microsoft.public.windowsxp.customize (More info?)

    Heheheh, but it's only Monday here.......LOL

    "Trevor L." <tandcl@homemail.com.au> wrote in message
    news:%23CKdnMR$EHA.3236@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
    > Wes,
    >
    > I confused Eleanor also.
    >
    > I thought that Lee's post should be on frontpage, but he has replied.
    >
    > See my reply to Eleanor on Tuesday, 18 January 2005 2:29 PM AEST
    >
    > --
    > Cheers,
    > Trevor L.
    >
    >
    > I choose Polesoft Lockspam to fight spam, and you?
    > http://www.polesoft.com/refer.html
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

Configuration Resolution DPI Windows XP