| |
In lugnet.trains, Steve Barile writes:
> After looking at Ben's pictures I had a question for everyone. I find it
> difficult to take in the entire picture when I have to scroll. I was
> wondering if anyone else had any feelings about what the optimal size pic is
> to post (on say, Brickshelf).
I usually just split the difference and try to plan everything online to be
slightly less than 600x800: pictures, html, etc.
One of the better browsers to use is one called Opera, currently in version
6. One of it's cooler abilities is to resize whole pages if one chooses.
Formerly, it didn't have as much functionality but this version seems to be
handling everything -- Java applets, Flash, CSS, what-have-you. I like it
pretty well so far.
And if you are mocking up html, Opera is not very forgiving -- certainly no
more forgiving than Netscrape, and this is good for locating errors.
[Netscrape had a few very sketchy versions a few months back, and as far as
I see still doesn't handle embedded tables very well if they run too deep.]
Opera tends to run fast as lightening and never seems to have a problem if
the page is written according to basic standards. If the page has a lot of
IE DHTML specific stuff, obviously it may not work as well as in IE. But on
the other hand, Opera does have other stuff it will do for you -- like kill
pop-up windows. That's a big plus in my view...seems to work in every
situation I have seen so far.
[This is in trains???!]
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | image sizes on Brickshelf
|
| After looking at Ben's pictures I had a question for everyone. I find it difficult to take in the entire picture when I have to scroll. I was wondering if anyone else had any feelings about what the optimal size pic is to post (on say, Brickshelf). (...) (23 years ago, 28-Jan-02, to lugnet.trains)
|
15 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
