[thesite] test.evolt.org change fyi

[aardvark]

> From: ".jeff" <jeff at members.evolt.org>
>
> > no... unless i saw it and forget it out of sheer
> > horror...
> 
> it's creepy how well the faces line up eh?

that's why you've got Photoshop... what's funny is i remember that 
photo being taken (the one on the left)...

> > i thought you also said padding was an issue... and at
> > low resolutions, it gets kinda wonky, too...
> 
> oh boy is it an issue.  padding doesn't actually do what we want.  we
> need to use margin.  i'll put it back on just so you can see what i'm
> talking about.  check this out in nn4:
> 
> http://test.evolt.org/article/wuss/20/15177/
> 
> ummmm, pretty overlayed graphics, yummm.

NN4.08
http://roselli.org/xfer/evolt_author.gif

erm, seems ok...

> > ok, why are we using <small>?  it's no smaller for me
> > than if you dumped it and *just* used the sidebar
> > class...
> 
> incorrect.  using <small>, at least with some of the stylesheets, is
> definitely a couple of pixels smaller.

so, not incorrect, just incorrect with some CSS files?

> view the article above using granite.css.  i've left the "received"
> section wrapped in <small>, but removed <small> from the "given"
> section.  see the size difference?

ahhh, yes...

so, we're going to stuff style-only HTML into our page strictly to 
adjust the size of the text, then?

yes, that's a weighted question... i don't see how <small> offers 
any structure or semantic meaning to the content within...

> > also, inconsistencies in indenting make it hard to
> > read...
> 
> inconsistencies where?  the author block?  or the content flowed to
> the left of the author block?

in the HTML...

> > and do you think we're being a little <strong>-happy in
> > there?  none of those need to be pronounced strongly, so
> > would a CSS style be more appropriate?
> 
> perhaps.  i'd just like to avoid styling these things as much as
> possible. since the items to the left are labels or identifiers for
> the information to the right it seemed right to denote that by
> wrapping the items on the left with <strong>.  i've removed it from
> the "received" section to see what it looks like.  i don't know if i
> like it better or not.

i prefer how it looks un-<strong>ed...

but even if i didn't, i'd rather see more CSS than HTML that offers 
no valid structure/semantic value...

doesn't mean i want to add CSS, it's just a lesser evil, IMO...

> > should we remove all table padding attributes and rely
> > on CSS?
> 
> i don't know that that will solve any of our problems.

i doubt it would, but that's not why i suggested it... doesn't matter 
to me, really, just curious...

> > and for those who haven't seen how it may look with code
> > blocks alongside:
> > http://test.evolt.org/article/kiss_the_monkey/18/16861/
> 
> that looks pretty good, at least in ie6.  i'm almost afraid to see how
> badly nn4 butchers it.
> 
> just looked, and yup, the textarea overlaps the author block.  some of
> the stylesheets have a lineheight set for .content so the text
> disappears underneath the textareas, pictures, etc.

no text disappearance... but still, yeah, way wonky...
http://roselli.org/xfer/evolt_layout.gif

> > um, then how do i get back to the airport?
> 
> i can "arrange" to have someone take you back.

is he in the concrete business?

> > at least that guy on ebay just kicks your ass...
> 
> huh?

sorry, thought you were more hep to internet jokes...