Re: Asha'ille site update

[Consolidating replies to keep under the quota.]

On Wed, Dec 08, 2004 at 12:06:03PM -0800, Arthaey Angosii wrote:
> Emaelivpeith H. S. Teoh:
> > > Other, shorter, formats (by popular demand ;) ) are linked from
> > >
> > >    http://arthaey.mine.nu:8080/~arthaey/conlang/lexicon/
> >
> > The concise dictionary format is nice. The tabular format doesn't show
> > up right on both Opera 7.54/Linux and Firefox 0.8/Linux; the right
> > column is too wide and extends past the right margin. (This could be a
> > side-effect of my stubborn and entirely irrational insistence that
> > browser windows be exactly 800 pixels wide, no more, no less. So feel
> > free to ignore me if you so choose. :-P)
>
> I'd like it to look nice even at such small ;) screen sizes. But I'm
> not sure how to fix this particular problem, besides offering a
> single-column table alternative. Suggestions?
Isn't there a way in CSS to specify relative positions rather than
absolute positions? E.g., something along the lines of "place this
element at 50% across the browser window". It's probably a bad idea to
use absolute sizes/positions on webpages, 'cos it'd show up wrong if,
e.g., you load it up on a handheld device.


[...]
> > I was hoping to find some page that describes how the Roman
> > orthography maps to the IPA sounds, though. I know I've seen it before
> > (or maybe you told me on IRC) but I can't seem to find it. Is it
> > linked from the main page?
>
> It's up there, hiding in the Scripts section. Here's a direct link:
>
>     http://arthaey.mine.nu:8080/~arthaey/conlang/scripts/kateinu.html
D'oh! How did I miss that? I guess I *am* blind after all.


[...]
> Do you think that chart belongs in the grammar section, too? Probably so...
>
> Okay, there is now a separate "Romanized Pronuncation" page link from
> the Grammar section. :)
Cool. Although, shouldn't that come after the phonetic inventory page?
It'd kinda make sense if you said what the phonetic inventory was
before saying how to transcribe it. :-)


> > Also, at the bottom of stress.html I see the message: [an error
> > occurred while processing this directive]. I don't think this is
> > intentional. :-)
>
> What error? No error. You saw nothing. Nothing, I say! (The
> non-existent error has now been fixed. ;)
:-)


> > PS. Whatever happened to the IRC server? It's been down the whole day
> > yesterday and still isn't back yet.
>
> I second your question. Hope the machine hasn't died or anything serious...
[...]

Or maybe Robert just hasn't been paying attention to the ircd?


On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 04:39:50AM +0100, Henrik Theiling wrote:
> Hi!
>
> "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh@...> writes:
> >...
> > browser windows be exactly 800 pixels wide, no more, no less.
>
> Really?  Same anankastic behaviour for me. :-)
So I'm not the only one! :-) I absolutely dislike browser windows that
fill up the entire screen. I like to be able to see more than one
window at a time. Mostly 'cos I use mouse-focus, and like typing stuff
into other windows while another one is placed on top. I mean, how
else would you minimize the number of clicks necessary to copy-n-paste
text from a large window into a smaller one? And how else would you
fire off some background command in xterm while reading something else
in the browser window on top? :-)


> (At least with screens of exactly 1600 pixels width.  I love two
> browser windows next to each other.)
My current resolution is only 1024x768, so that doesn't quite work.
Besides, I hate multiple browser windows... long live MDI! :-P


> > So feel free to ignore me if you so choose. :-P)
>
> No!  Don't ignore! :-)
:-)


T

--
The early bird gets the worm. Moral: ewww...

Reply