Re: px in HTML
Nick Warne <nick-ucsffw2X/[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.dillo.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 10/04/16 23:23, James C wrote: > Hi All, > > I wonder what the steps are, to have a conversation about whether this > is a good move: > http://lists.dillo.org/pipermail/dillo-dev/2014-August/010200.html > > Regards, > James. I just quickly looked at that. It is not right. You can't guess. Dillo does the right thing in that what it doesn't understand it drops and uses a safe 'auto' value. 'px' '%' et al are all rendered differently, so you can't ignore one that the code doesn't know what to do with - i.e.: "ignoring garbage; using %g (possibly in pixels)\n", Possibly? That could be dangerous, if not bad coding. Nick > On 11/04/2016, Nick Warne <nick-ucsffw2X/[email protected]> wrote: >> On 10/04/16 16:21, Sebastian Geerken wrote: >>> On So, Apr 10, 2016, Nick Warne wrote: >>>> I have noticed that Dillo doesn't render px properly - this snippet: >>>> >>>> <hr width=500px align=left> >>>> >>>> just produces: >>>> >>>> . >>>> >>>> Using 50% (e.g.) works OK. Is this bad HTML or a 'to-do' thing? >>> >>> The HTML width attribute (which is depricated, btw) does not support >>> "px", instead, <hr width=500 ...> would be correct. >> >> Yes, thanks, I just sussed that out. Dillo is great for debugging HTML, >> as most browsers somehow parse crappy input into what seems right (but >> is wrong!). >> >> width=475 works great now. >> >> Thanks, >> >> Nick >> >> -- >> Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with >> time travel, you never can tell." >> -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara" >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dillo-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.dillo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dillo-dev >> > -- Gosh that takes me back... or is it forward? That's the trouble with time travel, you never can tell." -- Doctor Who "Androids of Tara"