Re: for the thousandth time already....
by "Kehvan M. Zydhek" <kehvan(at)zydhek.net>
|
Date: |
Fri, 22 Jun 2001 17:04:46 -0700 |
To: |
"Maggie Carr" <m.a.carr(at)decaelo.com>, <hwg-graphics(at)hwg.org> |
References: |
90 |
|
todo: View
Thread,
Original
|
|
Maggie,
Marc's advise notwithstanding, you mentioned frames specifically in your
post. Netscape 4.x and below cannot to frames to pixel-perfect resolution,
no matter how hard you try. You can get it to look about right, but it won't
be perfect. That's because Netscape takes the pixel width (or height,
depending) you give it, divides that into a percentage based on the
available rendering window's size, rounds that percentage to an integer,
then calculates it BACK to pixels (again, rounded to an integer). The result
is gaps in frames. To watch this process in action, resize the browser along
the same axis as the frames (in this case, since the frames are vertical,
resize the browser's width). Do it in small jumps of just a few pixels each
time. After Netscape refreshes and reloads the page, you'll see the frame
gap get bigger or smaller (including overlapping a bit) depending on the
calculations it does. I've found in tests that Netscape renders my frames
with a plus or minus of about 10 pixels of where I wanted it.
One possible alternative, if feasable, is if the image is a background image
for the frame itself (and is not loaded using an <.img src> tag), then you
can experiment with making the background image larger than needed but
leaving frame 2's image as-is, that way the gap may not be visible as much
when the frames are put together.
Netscape 6 does not have this problem.
Hope this helps,
Kehvan
----- Original Message -----
From: "Maggie Carr" <m.a.carr(at)decaelo.com>
To: <hwg-graphics(at)hwg.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 13:21
Subject: for the thousandth time already....
> Hi Everybody
>
> Sorry to be asking one I know we've been through at least a thousand
times,
> but I am snookered on a single-pixel split in an image that spans two
frames
> (vertical) in Netscape, while Explorer displays it seamlessly. I've got
> everything I can thing of set to "0" and still get that line that looks
like
> a run in the stocking of my page ;-)
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Maggie.
>
>
HWG: hwg-graphics mailing list archives,
maintained by Webmasters @ IWA