Posted by Norman L. DeForest on 08/29/05 16:02

On 29 Aug 2005, [iso-8859-1] Kim André Akerø wrote:

> rf wrote:
>
> > Kim André Akerø wrote:
> >
> > > For some reason, I can't get the middle column of this setup to work
> > > properly in IE (go figure).
> >
> > That is not your only problem.
> >
> > Those pictures of text are, for me, unreadable. I almost have to fire
> > up magnifier to see what is in the buttons and the headings on the
> > right hand side.
> >
> > And this:
> > http://users.bigpond.net.au/rf/screenshot/x4.jpg
> >
> > I suspect you are trying to control too many things. Simply leave out
> > most of your css (line-height, the width of that center div) and let
> > the browser figure things out. It's quite capable of doing so.
>
> I've removed the width for the center div and the line-heights from
> elsewhere now, but the text size in the images themselves aren't
> exactly my problem. That's how I received the material from the layout
> designer. I just puzzle the pieces together (and that's one heckuva
> jigsaw puzzle, I tell ya). Precision placement is what it is.

Since the menus on the right don't currently go to the bottom of the page,
is there any reason you cant specify the height of the divs in em instead
of pixels? (perhaps "height: 1.2em" instead of "height: 15px") That way,
if a Firefox user presses Ctrl-+ (Control-plus) to enlarge the text
because of vision problems, the menus would enlarge vertically and reduce
the horizontal overlap of the menu items. (There is still vertical
overlap at very large font sizes but I don't know of a complete cure that
wouldn't mess up your current design. I'm just learning CSS as it's only
recently that I got graphical access and a graphical browser I feel safe
with.)

> And from what I could tell, the position of the center <div> is still
> way down on the page.
>
> I know, the text sizes suck, and I'm more or less forced to outfit a
> lot of the font-size in pixels, since it needs to fit within the images
> they're supposed to be layered on top of (read: used as background).
> Personally, I would've gone for percentages, but that didn't appear to
> be the case of the guy who actually designed this thing.

Another small problem is with the world map image at the top right
corner of the page. Until I noticed the red dot and took a closer look
to see why it was there, I thought that that corner of the page was just
a blank black rectangle. The map is so dark it's almost impossible to
see. On my previous dimmer monitor it *would* have been impossible to
see.

Perhaps if you bumped up the brightness and contrast of that image
slightly then more people would notice that there's a map there.

--
``Why don't you find a more appropiate newsgroup to post this tripe into?
This is a meeting place for a totally differnt kind of "vision impairment".
Catch my drift?'' -- "jim" in alt.disability.blind.social regarding an
off-topic religious/political post, March 28, 2005

[Back to original message]