trinity-devel@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: October 2014

Re: [trinity-devel] Re: [trinity-users] New TDE site released

From: "E. Liddell" <ejlddll@...>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 15:39:54 -0400
On Sat, 18 Oct 2014 13:22:52 +0200
Slávek Banko <slavek.banko@...> wrote:

> On Friday 17 of October 2014 12:42:32 E. Liddell wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:06:04 +0900
> >
> > Michele Calgaro <michele.calgaro@...> wrote:
> > > On 10/17/2014 10:04 AM, Slávek Banko wrote:
> > > > Just by chance I came to the page with mailing-lists. I have a little
> > > > smaller browser window, the result is seen in the screen shot.
> > >
> > > Confirmed. When resizing Firefox window, if the width is less than 1250
> > > pixel (more or less), then I see the same problem.
> >
> > It's the PRE blocks containing the top-posting demonstration.  I've
> > committed a fix that re-wraps those, which should be okay down to something
> > below 800 x 600.
> >
> 
> Good job, now it looks good.
> On the page http://www.trinity.desktop.org/patches/ is the same problem.

The problem there is the format of the table, which is outside my control, since
it's generated by code I didn't write.  It's just got too many fields in it.

Two possible fixes:

-combine the date, time, and GMT offset fields into one field.  Then the separate 
bits of date-time information would arrange themselves one below the other if the 
screen width is too narrow, instead of trying to stay side-by-side.  Alternatively, 
convert all dates to GMT or some other constant timezone and ditch the offset
field to get a bit more space.

-remove the WIDTH="50%" stipulation from the last field of the table.  Doing
only this means that the table will look bad once you get it down below a
certain width, though, so it's best combined with a rework of the date columns.

(This page was extremely difficult to work with due to its size.  Does it really
need to contain every single commit going back to 2009?  Maybe it would be
better just to keep the last six months' worth or the last few hundred?)

E. Liddell