Re: RE : The Final Word on Browsers and the Future

Abigail (abigail@ny.fnx.com)
Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:09:21 -0400 (EDT)


Message-Id: <199610221509.LAA16061@melgor.ny.fnx.com>
Subject: Re: RE : The Final Word on Browsers and the Future
To: www-html@w3.org
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 11:09:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Abigail" <abigail@ny.fnx.com>
In-Reply-To: <199610211924.OAA06141@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com> from "Scott E. Preece" at Oct 21, 96 02:24:04 pm

You, Scott E. Preece, wrote:
++ 
++   From: Greg Marr <copper@sidehack.gweep.net>
++ 
++ | I see a major difference between:
++ | 
++ | In Mozillacolor Where Available 
++ | (which my wife used to have on her page, before 3.2 came out with all
++ | the body attributes)
++ | 
++ | and:
++ | 
++ | Download Netscape 3.0 Now To View This Site, and then resize your
++ | browser so this line just fits in the window.
++ | 
++ | The first tells people that the features are available if they choose
++ | to usme them, and the second that the author doesn't care about anyone
++ | not using the same software/platform/etc. that they are.
++ ---
++ 
++ I agree, almost.  I agree that pointing to features is more useful than
++ pointing to the browser (since the same feature may appear
++ asynchronously in different browsers).  The "resize to just fit this
++ line", however, is often useful.  Many sites include graphics or wide
++ tables that simply work a lot better if the window is the right size.

But then 'resizing to just fit this line' doesn't work, does it?
It will only work when using the same font and browser as the author
used.

++ Authors shouldn't do this without thinking about it, but when they *do*
++ need to do it, it's nice to tell the reader in advance, so she can set
++ things up before the data arrives.

Huh? I've yet to see a browser I cannot resize after the data has
arrived.



Abigail