 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Freddy D
Subject: Re: Home page (64kbu) (not an advertisment !)
Date: 3 Apr 2000 17:27:47
Message: <38e90cd3@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
slr### [at] zero-pps localdomain...
> Looks good, now I've got ideas of making pov buttons for my
> site, no I can't do it, it'll make loading a lot slower.
Thanks...
The buttons are 4700 to 5100 bytes heavy in jpg...
FD
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Wasn't it Freddy D. who wrote:
What mail/news prog are U using and how do U get to do that
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wasn't it Freddy D. who wrote:
>
>> An additional advantage to removing foreground objects from the
>> background is that you might be able to re-use some of the components on
>> other pages, and significantly reduce the amount of graphic reloading
>> when changing page.
>Yes. but I have only 2 big pics : title pic and the background. These two are
>loaded
>by the browser and re-used for each page if necessary, no ???
Well, yes, but only if you manage to write the text and other contents
of each page so that they are the same length. I find it useful to have
some pages that have significantly more content than others. If you use
the same fixed length background on a longer page then the text would
start to write across the top of a second copy of the background tile.
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 4 Apr 2000 08:38:41 +0100, Mike Williams <mik### [at] nospamplease>
wrote:
>Well, yes, but only if you manage to write the text and other contents
>of each page so that they are the same length. I find it useful to have
>some pages that have significantly more content than others. If you use
>the same fixed length background on a longer page then the text would
>start to write across the top of a second copy of the background tile.
Why?
<BODY STYLE="background-image: url('image.gif'); background-repeat:
no-repeat;">
:)
Peter Popov ICQ : 15002700
Personal e-mail : pet### [at] usanet
TAG e-mail : pet### [at] tagpovrayorg
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Freddy D
Subject: Re: Home page (64kbu) (not an advertisment !)
Date: 4 Apr 2000 18:45:56
Message: <38ea70a4@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
4b71LTABwZ64Ewf$@econym.demon.co.uk...
> Well, yes, but only if you manage to write the text and other contents
> of each page so that they are the same length. I find it useful to have
> some pages that have significantly more content than others. If you use
> the same fixed length background on a longer page then the text would
> start to write across the top of a second copy of the background tile.
Yes... I've done a (really good) background that just can repeat itself...
I've even tried to put my browser in 1024*768 and it works...
Maybe you can see by yourself ;-)
http://www.profd.com/index-new.htm
.. and thank you for tips...
FD
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Wasn't it Freddy D. who wrote:
>4b71LTABwZ64Ewf$@econym.demon.co.uk...
>> Well, yes, but only if you manage to write the text and other contents
>> of each page so that they are the same length. I find it useful to have
>> some pages that have significantly more content than others. If you use
>> the same fixed length background on a longer page then the text would
>> start to write across the top of a second copy of the background tile.
>
>Yes... I've done a (really good) background that just can repeat itself...
>I've even tried to put my browser in 1024*768 and it works...
>
>Maybe you can see by yourself ;-)
>http://www.profd.com/index-new.htm
>
>.. and thank you for tips...
Well, yes, putting your text in a separate frame on plain white
background is *one* solution. It's a bit of a drastic change from what
you originally posted here.
I've put an example of what I was thinking of at
http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/profd/
(Or there will be an example there, as soon as the web server refreshes
it. It shouldn't take long.)
Notice that this looks quite like what you originally posted (except I
had to use one of my own tiles in the background because I couldn't
extract a tileable one from your original image) but the various
components automatically adjust to sensible positions when the size of
the screen changes. Try un-maximising your browser window and adjusting
the size. Everything stays in the same relative position and things only
go wrong when the window is smaller than the width of the title image.
If there were more text, the bottom graphics would move down in the same
way.
It's all done with tables, rather than frames.
--
Mike Williams
Gentleman of Leisure
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Freddy D
Subject: Re: Home page (64kbu) (not an advertisment !)
Date: 5 Apr 2000 14:26:54
Message: <38eb856e@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
aOYt+DAP### [at] econymdemoncouk...
> Well, yes, putting your text in a separate frame on plain white
> background is *one* solution. It's a bit of a drastic change from what
> you originally posted here.
It is now gray.. Gray70 exactly...
> I've put an example of what I was thinking of at
>
> http://www.econym.demon.co.uk/profd/
Yes.. been there.. (it's very surprising to see my stuff on an other server.. :-))
But I've seen that the background was overwhelming all the page (it's too grey or
strange or..)
A plain gray is imho suffisant...
> Notice that this looks quite like what you originally posted (except I
> had to use one of my own tiles in the background because I couldn't
> extract a tileable one from your original image)
Yes yes... I haven't use a tile for the background, just plain pov-ray, normal with
bumps, and 6 light_sources..
> but the various
> components automatically adjust to sensible positions when the size of
> the screen changes. Try un-maximising your browser window and adjusting
> the size. Everything stays in the same relative position and things only
> go wrong when the window is smaller than the width of the title image.
> If there were more text, the bottom graphics would move down in the same
> way.
Done that.. cool !.. Why am I unable to do this simple thing ?...
I've noticed that pictures don't exactly touch the edge of screen... I want that...
> It's all done with tables, rather than frames.
Why should people tell me that frames are bad ?... :-))
btw : last version of home page is uploaded, with extra stuff
(I'll post a screen-shot later here if you or someone are interested...)
.. and thanks a lot !...
> --
> Mike Williams
> Gentleman of Leisure
--
FD aka Freddy D. aka Prof D.
Pro### [at] wanadoofr
http://profd.est-ici.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
