I have changed it to -2em. I have been experimenting. I think it
looks better set to -1em, but I won't change it unless I get a chorus
of "Oh yeah, -1em does look better."
I have committed the change. It might require a manual invocation of
the website generation script to make it take effect on the currently
served pages, of which I do not have access to initiate.
...Todd
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 3:03 PM, Phillip Carroll
<postmaster@???> wrote:
> I don't have a Mac, but I know Firefox, Chrome and Opera are among the most
> popular browsers for the Mac. The rendering engine for these will be the
> same whether PC or Mac. Can't really speak for the Mac buit-in browser,
> Safari.
>
> I tried the -2m change in Opera (on Win7), using Opera's built-in Dragonfly
> web developer tool. (Almost identical to Firebug) That change provides the
> same alignment as Firefox and Chrome.
>
> I can say with some authority that the rendering rules for this tag sequence
> should work the same in all modern browsers, including any recent IE
> version. The only browsers I can think of that might render it crappy are
> ancient IE versions like IE6 and earlier, which used a weirdo box model.
> And, if it even there if it looks crappy, I guarantee it would not look any
> worse than leaving it at -180px.
>
> I agree that the -180px was intended to be -18px, (an easy typo to make) but
> pixels will never align precisely with ems.
>
>
> On 11/5/2014 2:16 PM, Todd Lyons wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Phillip Carroll
>> <postmaster@???> wrote:
>>>
>>> I used ems because most of the horizontal positioning in the chapter css
>>> is
>>> specified in ems units (a generally preferred unit anyway).
>>
>>
>> Agree, the rest of that css seems to be standardized on ems.
>>
>>> Negative 2ems aligns it with the <dd> tag of the containing <dl>, which
>>> seems a reasonable thing to do.
>>
>>
>> It looks very good with "-2em". It renders the same in Chrome. Can
>> anybody see how it looks in a recent IE? And in whatever Mac uses for
>> their browser?
>>
>> ...Todd
>>
>
--
The total budget at all receivers for solving senders' problems is $0.
If you want them to accept your mail and manage it the way you want,
send it the way the spec says to. --John Levine
