Welcome Back!

[Andi]

First of all:

[size=18]WELCOME BACK![/size]



You may wonder now, what happened to all smilies. I'll bring the smilies back! Just give me a break! It's almost 1:30 am. xD


If you find anything that's wrong please tell me.

[ccexplore]

Hey, so guests can't post now?!?!?!?!?

 :exclamation

[Mindless]

I'm liking it.  Everything looks cleaner.  

[ccexplore]

Ok, it says that I can't have more than 20 messages in my Outbox.  It then supposedly go ahead and deleted my oldest 7 messages in the outbox, but it looks to me like it deleted the *newest* 7!

Gee thanks.  :-/

[ccexplore]

What happened to the quick-reply box?  :question

[Mindless]

What happened to the quick-reply box?  :question

It was probably one of the add-ons that hasn't been reinstalled yet.
BTW, non-guests can edit their posts.  

Edit: w00t! 2^8 post!

[ccexplore]

Ok, looks like I temporarily run out of things to whine about &#A0;

Yeah, after the glaring shock of the new look of the forum has settled down, I'm starting to like the new look of the forum.

Now let's see:

wingdings encryption test
"invisible text" test

Looks like tests passed.

[Mindless]

wingdings encryption test
"invisible text" test

Looks like tests passed.

wingdings fails from where i'm looking.

Edit: looks like Firefox doesn't like wingdings anymore... oh well.

[ccexplore]

What happened to the quick-reply box? &#A0;:question

It was probably one of the add-ons that hasn't been reinstalled yet.
BTW, non-guests can edit their posts. &#A0;

Edit: w00t! 2^8 post!

Ooh, nested quotes finally work! : party time :

Anyway, about guest postings. &#A0;Although I'm the main user of it, at the very least guest postings should be enabled for the "Game Help" and "Technical Help" forums, except in case of emergencies (eg. trolls or spambots etc.)

[Conway]

Ok, it says that I can't have more than 20 messages in my Outbox.  It then supposedly go ahead and deleted my oldest 7 messages in the outbox, but it looks to me like it deleted the *newest* 7!

Gee thanks.  :-/

  Yeah, I had over 100 that I'd been saving. It could have at least saved my 20 newest ones!

 I've noticed that this limit can be lifted in the admin settings. I'll set it to 100. (Andi, if there's a good reason way such a low limit was set, please feel free to change it back and give me a slap on the wrist if you wish!  )

[ccexplore]

Forum search is still buggy, the issue mentioned here still holds after this upgrade.

And I'm awaiting the opportunity to see whether the "must double-post to show the single new message on new page" (here) bug is fixed or not.

Oh yeah, love the new feature that counts how many remaining characters you're allowed in your post. :thumbs-up:

[Conway]

We need wingdings back too! Or even better, <span style="font-family:wingdings">HTML</span>!

Overall, I like the new boards. There are far more features.

[edit]I wonder what this looks like.[/edit]

And check out the 'live preview' feature in the reply form! It's awesome!  

[edit]Hmm, a slight complaint that my avatar has been squashed. But oh well, a few sacrifices won't kill people.  [/edit]

PS: Yippie! Another thing I just noticed is that when your text cursor is somewhere in the middle of your message, and you click on a tag, it inserts it where you cursor is instead of right at the end of your message! I'm glad to see that YABB has moved from the dark ages.

[Mr. K]

I'd wondered where we went yesterday, but it seems I know now.  YAY FOR THE UPGRADED FORUM!  ;D

EDIT:  I found some errors and annoyances.  I'm annoyed that I have to reenter my password to get into my profile (I actually almost couldn't log back in the first time I came to the new board because I'd last entered my password over a year earlier XD)
And for errors, I felt like looking at old topics and stuff, but they give me errors about not being able to find "*randomnumbershere*.txt"

[Proxima]

Euch, ugly........ and does the text have to be so titchy?

Cool smilies though. With the lemmings ones (all except ) I usually couldn't tell what expression it was meant to suggest.

"You have X messages, Y are new" will be convenient; saves me having to remember how many I had last time I checked  ;D

And yes, we need the quick reply box back. Especially for the 70-page topics.......

[Isu]

You'll have to excuse me, I tried to log on to the site yesterday, but it was down.

It'll also take me a bit of time to adjust from the old YaBB, so bear with me.

I had about 38 PM's, Time to see if they're all still there.

And I have to say that I prefer the site how it was a week ago, but it's always like that when I need to adjust to changes.

And just a small thing, but [size=20]what happened to four of my stars!?![/size]

[Andi]

So much stuff. I hope I can bring everything together.  

So at first the messages. I have the old data still saved. So anyone who has deleted messages pleas tell my by PM. I'll send you the old ones. Further I'll allow up to 50. Why onyl 50? They use space, too. And I'm thinking of making attachments possible (small ones, yeah. But Attachments) but if you prefer Messages just tell me.

Wingding: I'll check if I can add the font in the font selections.

Quick Reply: Will also check if there's a new addon.

Guest Posting: Will be enbled again. It was just disabled after the upgrade for no reason and I forgot to check it.

[ccexplore]

So anyone who has deleted messages pleas tell my by PM.

It looks like to PM Andi I have to set the recipient to be "admin" rather than "Andi"...... :

[Andi]

Or click on the PM Button under my Post.

edit:// Before I forget! I added the entry Wingdings in the font menu. With IE it works as for Firefox I have right now no idea.

[DragonsLover]

Wooow! Sweeet!

And what are the things improved and these still buggy?

[JM]

The design of the forum looks better

The forum takes a lot of time to load though no offence

[Shvegait]

<OK, I see you commented about deleted messages, I'll PM you now.>

The new board is alright, but a lot less Lemmingy! The other board had style. This one now really does look like Yet another Bulletin Board  :

[Jazzem]

This is looking great, kudos. I was all settled down with the old look, so it'll take a while to get used to, but everything has changed for the better.

Hip hip hooray!

I seem to get this message with older topics...

104 An Error Has Occurred!: Unable to open 1108633486.txt

[Lomay]

this forum looks abit cooler now  

[JM]

Yeah it looks awesome

I am well glad it has been upgraded ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[Lomay]

Yeah it looks awesome

I am well glad it has been upgraded ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

I do agree with you JM...but just one thing...what the heck happen to yours and mine avatars!?

[Conway]

Wehey! Wingdings works!

[edit]But not in Firefox.   [/edit]

[Shvegait]

Andi: Since NEWER messages get deleted, not OLDER ones, I was unable to get your PM (I'm assuming you sent one because it said I have 51.)

I can easily fix this by deleting one PM, but you will have to send it again it seems.

[Timballisto]

Uh...my browser must really be screwing this forum up.  All the table cells are in the wrong places or something, or whatever.  All the posts are squished into a column about 20 characters wide that is way to the right of the avatars.

Oh, and what about lemming smilies?

[JM]

I don't know Lomay. I've chosen a boba fett avatar as I like Star Wars

[Lomay]

I don't know Lomay. I've chosen a boba fett avatar as I like Star Wars

I see now.

[Andi]

A lot of stuff has to be done.

Bringing back the old style with the lemmings, loading up the old avatars again, loading up Lemmings smilies... and so on.

For the messages. As some of you had a lot of messages (more than the actual maximum) I ask you, is it OK to you if I send you all messages as one file?

And for the problem with the old threads, maybe there went something wrom with the converter. What threads exactly?
edit:// Foudn them all the old ones. I have to look if they are even in the backup.

[Proxima]

[size=14]I wonder, how about making a separate thread for suggestions / complaints?

I *hate* the smaller text size; it makes the board somewhat painful to read. (And yes, I see that it can be changed, but why not set it to 14pt as the default?

Not a big complaint, but I'd rather something more leap-out-and-hit-you noticeable to distinguish which fora have new posts than just changing one pastel shade to another......[/size]

[Andi]

[size=14]I wonder, how about making a separate thread for suggestions / complaints?[/size]

feel free to open one.

[size=14]I *hate* the smaller text size; it makes the board somewhat painful to read. (And yes, I see that it can be changed, but why not set it to 14pt as the default?[/size]

Hm, relative to your resolution. You an also try to increase the font zoom of your browser.

[size=14]Not a big complaint, but I'd rather something more leap-out-and-hit-you noticeable to distinguish which fora have new posts than just changing one pastel shade to another......[/size]

Sorry, I didn't get it.  :-?

[Mindless]

[size=14]Not a big complaint, but I'd rather something more leap-out-and-hit-you noticeable to distinguish which fora have new posts than just changing one pastel shade to another......[/size]

Sorry, I didn't get it.  :-?

I think he wants the Lemming icons back instead of these:

[ccexplore]

[size=14]I *hate* the smaller text size; it makes the board somewhat painful to read. (And yes, I see that it can be changed, but why not set it to 14pt as the default?[/size]

Hm, relative to your resolution. You an also try to increase the font zoom of your browser.

That's totally not the point. &#A0;Regardless of what the "correct" font size is, there is no denying that the new font size is smaller than the older one, and that fact won't change regardless of what your screen resolution is.

Given that there are 0 complains with the old font size, and at least 1 known complain about the new font size, it would only be logical to make the default size same as what it was before the forum upgrade, whatever point size that was.

[ccexplore]

Hm, relative to your resolution. You an also try to increase the font zoom of your browser.

Oh wait, how stupid of me to not notice this earlier.

Font size are in units of points, which are device independent (a point is roughly 1/72 of an inch).

So your statement is simply false. &#A0;Font size is not relative to the screen resolution, at least when the font size is specified exactly in points.

[ccexplore]

the default size same as what it was before the forum upgrade, whatever point size that was.

Unfortunately, Google doesn't have any cached copies of stuff from the pre-upgrade forum, so I'm not sure what the old size is supposed to be.

Seems to me though that [size=12]size 12[/size] might be a good candidate. &#A0;Amazing how much difference a point would make.

Actually, another thing I'm noticing is that the text are not black anymore, but some shade of gray. &#A0;That together with the slightly smaller font size are probably the main contributors to suboptimal readability. &#A0;I think if nothing else, you should get the default text color back to a true shade of black. &#A0;Just like how the color of quoted text.

[geoo]

Kinda strange, I can't recognize the text size being smaller than before, i.e. I see no difference.
I have no problems with reading it but I agree, the text color might be set a little darker.

Anyway, to change the text size it is possible for me to press Ctrl + Scroll with the mouse.
I use Firefox, but if I remember correctly, it also worked for IE.
I prefer the smaller size btw.

[Mindless]

I prefer the smaller size btw.

As do I.

[Andi]

I think he wants the Lemming icons back instead of these:

Ah! Will come!

[ccexplore]

If garjen didn't close up their forums to non-members, I could make a comparison to ascertain the old font size.

I think the color could be a big factor here.  The black actually does seem to make the text look a little bigger compare with the gray.  Just compare quoted with non-quoted text and see.

Another weird thing to note is, when you're replying, if you scroll down to look at the messages under "Topic Summary", you'll see that the text is displayed with font size of 12 rather than 11.  In fact, looking at that, I'm pretty sure now the original font size was 12.

[ccexplore]

Anyway, to change the text size it is possible for me to press Ctrl + Scroll with the mouse.
I use Firefox, but if I remember correctly, it also worked for IE.

It doesn't seem to work. &#A0;The IE text size setting has no effect, at least on my machine.  I wouldn't expect it to work anyway, since the default font and font size in this forum is completely specified as "Verdana" and 11 points, as you plainly see in the reply toolbar.  So the web page would (well, should) end up overriding whatever text size settings your browser is set to.

[Andi]

Yeah, on IE it doesn't work. Hm...

[DragonsLover]

I know that some codes of XHTML don't work on IE, but works perfectly with Firefox.

[ccexplore]

[size=12]Does XHTML has a tag that says "I want this specific font size but the browser is allowed to change it based on its own settings"? :-?

I'm not much versed in HTML, but I'm pretty sure in standard HTML, if you use the tags that specifies the font size exactly, a spec-compliant browser should obey the specified font size. &#A0;It's only if you specified the text size without a given font size (using tags like <h1> or the like) that the browser text size settings would go into effect.[/size]

[Mindless]

[size=12]Does XHTML has a tag that says "I want this specific font size but the browser is allowed to change it based on its own settings"? :-?[/size]

http://www.w3schools.com/css/pr_font_font-size.asp

Code: [Select]

xx-small
x-small
small
medium
large
x-large
xx-large

[ccexplore]

[size=12]Right, but from reading the page that was linked to, it appears that you can either specified a specific, fixed font size (eg. 10 points), or you can specify the font size in more abstract terms like "medium", in which case the browser gets to decide what point size to use (generally based on the browser's text size settings).

But, notice there isn't any combination that combines the two, something like "I want the font to be 10px if the user set its browser's text size settings to 'medium', and proportionally larger or smaller if the setting is something else". &#A0;That would be rather surprising since HTML/XHTML should be agnostic about browser implementation details such as text size settings.

So I'm still under the impression that if you can in fact change the font size of the text in this forum in Firefox, which I think is set specifically by default to Verdana 11px (based on the reply toolbar), then Firefox isn't compliant with HTML/XHTML (even if that means the browser is better by disobeying the web page's instructions to use a particular font size). &#A0;Or unless it's using some tags that's not actually official HTML/XHTML but some Firefox extensions thereof.[/size]

[Proxima]

I'd just like to mention that an additional problem is not merely the smaller text but also (perhaps even more so) the smaller line spacing. It's really noticeable in ccexplore's posts -- it seems he's been manually increasing the text size, but it doesn't actually make it much easier to read.

[ccexplore]

[size=12]In fact, I found the portion of the CSS that the forum uses that pertains to messages:

Code: [Select]

.message {
      font-size: 11px;
      font-weight: normal;
      font-style: normal;
      text-decoration: none;
      font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;
      color: #62686F;
}
I could very well be wrong about HTML/XHTML, but I'm under the impression that if the font size is specified exactly as 11px as you can see above, then a spec-compliant browser should use 11 points for the font size, not something else it thinks is better.

If I understand HTML/XHTML correctly, then whatever feature Firefox has that allows the text to be displayed with a different size, would be a Firefox-specific feature (and a non-spec-compliant one at that) which isn't supported by HTML/XHTML itself.  There is no reason to expect any other browser to change the text size when the font is specified exactly like above.

By the way, Andi, now you know where to go to make the text color black.  Change the #62686F to #000000.[/color][/size]

[ccexplore]

[size=12]Anyway, here's the portion of the CSS that the forum uses that pertains to messages.

Code: [Select]

.message {
      font-size: 11px;
      font-weight: normal;
      font-style: normal;
      text-decoration: none;
      font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;
      color: #62686F;
}This is where Andy would make changes to affect what the default font size, color etc. are. &#A0;Possibly the line spacing too but I'm not sure what the name of the attribute is for line spacing, if it's even possible.[/color][/size]

[ccexplore]

[size=12]Ugh, not again, another double post.

Maybe it's just on my corporate network, but I tend to notice that the board has trouble handling postings when 2 or more people simultaneously posted at the same time, as in the case of me and Ahribar apparently.  The board would time-out on me in that case, and then it would look like my post didn't make it thru, when apparently it did.[/size]

[ccexplore]

[size=12]For what it's worth, here's the CSS that the garjen YaBB forum uses:

Code: [Select]

<!--
/* General layout */
A:link &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; color: #80FF80; }
A:visited &#A0; &#A0; { text-decoration: none; color: #FF8000; font-weight: normal; }
A:hover &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; { text-decoration: none; color: #FF00FF; }
body &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ background-image: url(../../images/Background.jpg); background-attachment: fixed;
 &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;scrollbar-face-color: #AFC6DB; scrollbar-shadow-color: #000000; scrollbar-highlight-color: #DEE7EF;
 &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;scrollbar-3dlight-color: #FFFFFF; scrollbar-darkshadow-color: #AFC6DB;
 &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;scrollbar-track-color: #F5F5F5; scrollbar-arrow-color: ##DEE7EF; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial;
 &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;font-size:12px; margin-top: 0; margin-left: 0; margin-right: 0; padding-top: 0; padding-left: 0;
 &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;padding-right: 0;
}
text &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; color: #00FFFF; font-size: 11px; }
TD &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; color: #00FFFF; font-size: 11px; }
input &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; { background-color: #003060; font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 9pt; color: #FF8080; }
textarea &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ background-color: #0000C0; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 9pt; color: #00FFFF; }
select &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ background-color: #0000C0; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 7pt; color: #00FFFF; }
.copyright &#A0; &#A0;{ font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; font-size: 10px; }

/* YaBB navigation links */
a.nav &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-size: 10px; text-decoration: none; color: #FFFFFF; }
a.nav:link &#A0; &#A0; { font-size: 10px; text-decoration: none; color: #FFFFFF; }
a.nav:visited &#A0;{ font-size: 10px; text-decoration: none; color: #FFFFFF; }
a.nav:hover &#A0; &#A0;{ font-size: 10px; text-decoration: none; color: #FFFFFF; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: underline; }

/* YaBB alternating bgcolors */
.windowbg &#A0; &#A0; { background-color: #000060; font-size: 11px; font-family: Verdana; color: #FFFF00; }
.windowbg2 &#A0; &#A0;{ background-color: #003060; font-size: 11px; font-family: Verdana; color: #FFFF00; }
.windowbg3 &#A0; &#A0;{ background-color: #006060; font-size: 11px; font-family: Verdana; color: #FFFF00; }

/* Misc./title/category colors */
.hr &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; { color: #6394BD; }
.titlebg &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ background-color: #0000C0; color: #00FFFF; }
.text1 &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-style: normal; font-weight: bold; font-size: 12px; color: #FFFFFF; }
.catbg &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ background-color: #600000; color: #00FFFF; font-weight: bold; font-size: 13px; }
.bordercolor &#A0;{ background-color: #000000; }

/* Image fonts */
.imgbg &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-style: normal; font-size: 10px; color: #FF8080; }
.imgcatbg &#A0; &#A0; { font-style: normal; font-size: 10px; color: #FFFF00; font-weight: bold; }
.imgtitlebg &#A0; { font-style: normal; font-size: 10px; color: #00FFFF; &#A0;font-weight: bold; }
.imgwindowbg &#A0;{ font-style: normal; font-size: 9px; color: #00FF00; }
.imgmenu &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-style: normal; font-size: 11px; color: #FF8080; font-weight: bold; letter-spacing: 0.1em; }

/* Post quote/code colors */
.quote &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ font-size: 10px; font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial; color: #00FFFF; background-color: #0000CC; }
.code &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; { font-size: 10px; font-family: Courier New; color: #000000; background-color: #00CCCC; }
-->Unfortunately, the web page encoding for YaBB is structured in a way that makes it nearly impossible for me to tell which styles are actually being applied to the message text. &#A0;One thing I noticed though is that I'm not seeing any line-spacing attributes being specified anywhere, so I'm not sure Ahribar is correct regarding the line spacing (though no doubt it'll help with readability, even if it isn't the same line spacing as the old board).[/color][/size]

[ccexplore]

[size=13]I did some manual side-by-side comparisons between Garjen and a test web page I can edit, and discovered that on the Garjen, the font size is actually 13 not 12, and the line spaciing is normal. &#A0;Since the font size also affects the line spacing, that might explain Ahribar's observation about the line spacing. &#A0;(Note that this post has the font size set to 13.)

The style that would contribute to a font size of 13 on the old board would be this line:

Code: [Select]

.catbg &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;{ background-color: #600000; color: #00FFFF; font-weight: bold; font-size: 13px;One interesting possibility, since a few people here asserted that they saw no difference between the old and new, may be that IE is at fault when rendering the old board. &#A0;Perhaps the font size is supposed to be 11 on the old board, but maybe due to the way the styles are applied on the old board, you end up with a font size of 13 instead. &#A0;(Of course, it could just as well be the case that Firefox is incorrect in using a font size of 11 for the old board.)

If people are interested in doing a side-by-side comparison themselves, I can PM you the username and password of the garjen account I created for the purpose.[/color][/size]

[Andi]

YaBB has an included Style Editor. I can change it here without using the CSS file. (But I'll make the usual Christmas style again (this time hopefully with less snowflakes xD), so please be patient. Thanks!)

Anyway my opinion for the browser problem: Every brwoser (should) have different zoom levels. (100%, 150%, 200%, 75%, 125% and so on) Now if the font size is for instant 11px, a zoom of 200% would make the font 22px. And values like MEDIUM or LARGE also have browser internal font sizes. So I don't think a page can "force" a browser to show a font in a specific size (which sounds stupid to me). I think IE just sucks as usual and simply doesn't support it.

edit:// Btw, it's really set as font size 11. The old board also had size 11.

[ccexplore]

Anyway my opinion for the browser problem: Every brwoser (should) have different zoom levels. (100%, 150%, 200%, 75%, 125% and so on) Now if the font size is for instant 11px, a zoom of 200% would make the font 22px. And values like MEDIUM or LARGE also have browser internal font sizes. So I don't think a page can "force" a browser to show a font in a specific size (which sounds stupid to me). I think IE just sucks as usual and simply doesn't support it.

[size=13]IE doesn't have a zoom-level feature. &#A0;It does have a text-size setting, but that's specifically for the cases of imprecise font sizes like MEDIUM/LARGE etc, and the IE text-size settings definitely works on those. &#A0;In other words, the zooming is different from the text size settings used for font size that aren't specified in points.

When you use the zoom feature, in a sense the web page is still forcing the browser to use a specific size, just that it is displayed differently because of the zoom. &#A0;Think of it as Microsoft Word's (or whatever your favorite document editor is) page-preview feature. &#A0;You can zoom in and zoom out, but it doesn't really change the underlying font size. &#A0;It just changes how a particular font size is displayed.

You can argue that IE is bad for not including a zoom feature. &#A0;On the other hand, nothing in HTML says that a browser has to have a zoom feature, and Firebox/IE aren't the only browsers in the world, so any other browser out there which doesn't have a zoom feature will likewise run into similar issues.

As for whether the old board uses 11 or 13, I'll take your word for it, but it's indisputable that in IE, the old board is displayed with a font size of 13. &#A0;I can't tell what the intended font size is for the old board, because it's hard for me to tease out how the styles are applied in the HTML of the old board, as it's a little less clean than the way it's done in the new board.[/size]

[Mindless]

*digs around*
here we are:  ;D

Code: [Select]

           <font size="2">
            I didn't think doing fan-made levels would be possible, seeing how it'd be hard to make pictures of them, but I guess I was wrong. Nice work, Adam!
            </font>
well, now you have it, the old board used font size "2"

[ccexplore]

Ah hah! &#A0;Thanks.

So actually apparently the old board doesn't use specific font sizes, it uses a font-size specification that is not absolute. &#A0;Which means, as I have verified just now, that old YaBB boards like Garjen will size with IE's text size settings, as expected.

So it seems to me the correct solution would be to change the font size back to the way it was on the old board, which is NOT 11px, 12px nor 13px, but instead just a relative size of "2". &#A0;That way everyone's happy, since they can then just use the text size/zoom settings to set it to whatever they want, regardless of browser.

[Andi]

IE doesn't have a zoom-level feature.  It does have a text-size setting, but that's specifically for the cases of imprecise font sizes like MEDIUM/LARGE etc, and the IE text-size settings definitely works on those.  In other words, the zooming is different from the text size settings used for font size that aren't specified in points.

When you use the zoom feature, in a sense the web page is still forcing the browser to use a specific size, just that it is displayed differently because of the zoom.  Think of it as Microsoft Word's (or whatever your favorite document editor is) page-preview feature.  You can zoom in and zoom out, but it doesn't really change the underlying font size.  It just changes how a particular font size is displayed.

You can argue that IE is bad for not including a zoom feature.  On the other hand, nothing in HTML says that a browser has to have a zoom feature, and Firebox/IE aren't the only browsers in the world, so any other browser out there which doesn't have a zoom feature will likewise run into similar issues.

As for whether the old board uses 11 or 13, I'll take your word for it, but it's indisputable that in IE, the old board is displayed with a font size of 13.  I can't tell what the intended font size is for the old board, because it's hard for me to tease out how the styles are applied in the HTML of the old board, as it's a little less clean than the way it's done in the new board.[/color][/size]

As Firefox has a "text-only" zoom feature, it's the same again as IE. So it also only displays it bigger.

[ccexplore]

It's conceptually not the same as IE's. &#A0;IE's text size settings is specifically for specifying the text size when they are not specified exactly in points. &#A0;It used to be that, before HTML 4.0 or so, there's no support for directly specifying font sizes in points, the reason being that HTML is supposed to be general and ignorant of browser-specific implementations. &#A0;After all, a font size that might make sense for a computer screen browser might not be so ideal for, say, a PDA. &#A0;So back then, font sizes are only along the lines of "medium" "large", etc., and the browser gets to decide what actual font sizes they correspond to. &#A0;IE's text size settings is basically a setting on how to map from relative to actual font sizes.

It is in particular not a zoom feature. &#A0;There is no concept of "100% zoom" in IE's text size settings.

It sounds like in Firefox, what they did is that instead of having multiple mappings from relative to actual font sizes, they apparently just pick one relative->actual font size mapping. &#A0;But in addition, they actually have a real, "text-only" zoom feature, which affects how fonts are displayed, regardless of whether the font size is originally specified in relative or absolute terms.

So in other words, in IE (at least presently, I think I heard they'll put a zoom feature in for their next version), the mechanism is like this:

Code: [Select]

relative font spec --multiple-text-size-settings-> actual font size
                                                                                                          ^
absolute font spec-----------------------------------|
In Firefox, based on other people's descriptions here, it sounds like the mechanism is

Code: [Select]

relative font spec--single-text-size-mapping-> actual font size &#A0;--(zoom)--> displayed size
 &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0; &#A0;                  &#A0;  ^
absolute font spec-----------------------------------|[/color]

[DragonsLover]

XHTML is in pair with CSS. XHTML requires it. It's the CSS that change style, format of the texts, images... anything!

So, don't forget the CSS!

[Mindless]

There are still topics that are missing... ex. "Lemmings Sprite Format" in the Tech Help Forum.

[Andi]

Damn! I onlx checked a few of them. I didn't know all the other topics are missing. If I convert again, all our new stuff will be gone. >_<

[Mindless]

There's no way to convert only certain threads?

[Andi]

I donnu. You have to convet the dated and everything else and match it soehow to the others. But I'm thinking of uploading the old forum text-only and read-only.

[ccexplore]

So, when will the old smilies be available?

[Andi]

Added quick and dirty to the box on the left.  [smiley=laugh.gif]  Doesn't look too god right now, but I hope I have time to change it soon.

[DragonsLover]

[smiley=thumbsup.gif] [smiley=party.gif] Yaaaay! Lemmings smilies are back! Woohoo! [smiley=laugh.gif]

[Anatol]

Wahoo! Looks like a lemmings forum again! [smiley=cool.gif] [smiley=cool.gif]

[Andi]

Fixed the missing posts as well as "Lemmings, Lemmings... everywhere!".

[Mindless]

http://forum.lemmingswelt.de/cgi-bin/yabb2/YaBB.pl?num=1123282272

"Lemmings Sprite format" on the "Technical Help" forum still doesn't work.

[Proxima]

The Lemmings Level List Game doesn't either  

[Andi]

Some more?

[geoo]

Looking up the old topics, there are a lot not working ones.
You can easily find them because the last poster (right column) is "- Ex Member". At least this matches for all threads I checked.