Posted by dorayme on 02/19/07 22:13

In article <0001HW.C1FE8D420001407CB022094F@news.supernews.com>,
TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@mac.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Feb 2007 14:36:16 -0600, dorayme wrote (in article
> <doraymeRidThis-27436C.07361619022007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au>):
>
> > In article <0001HW.C1FDD5AB00269201B022094F@news.supernews.com>,
> > TaliesinSoft <taliesinsoft@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed that having the text rendered as images as opposed to text does
> >> increase the bandwidth of the document. But doing so allows me to have
> >> absolute control over the appearance of the page, something important to
> >> me.
> >
> > I predict you will come to lose that desire for absolute control as you
> > come to appreciate the order of difficulty you face. You do not have
> > anything like the control over the variety of devices out there that are
> > used to receive your content as you do over your own. The difficulty is
> > one of being reasonably satisfied that your devices are accurate
> > representatives of the devices used by others. And so hard is this latter
> > that the absolute control you seek is best softened.
>
> But, as I've repeatedly stated, every single modern day browser I've tested,
> whether on the Mac or on the PC, when using that browser's default settings,
> has displayed my website exactly as I have intended. I'll qualify that in
> that I am not interested in how the site displays on such as a cell phone but
> how the site displays on a typical computer.

I agree that your site is simple enough to justify to some
extent, your confidence in it. But what I am saying and what
others are suggesting to you will more and more come into its own
as you make other sites. The approach you are taking will become
to have more severe limitations as you contemplate more website
pages and sites.

Screens really do have a very diverse range of sizes and setting
out there... quite aside from the extremes.

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]