A Tale of Two Pages

[marain]

Style on http://www.marijuana.com is controlled by a css page. The css page controls (among other things) font size. One of the pages on the site is the privacy page. You can't get to privacy from the main menu, but the footer on each page has a link to it.

On the computer I'm using right now, and every other computer except one to the best of my knowledge, the font sizes on all the pages are exactly as specified in the css page. On one computer that I am aware of, the font size on all the pages except the privacy page are also as specified. On that one computer, the font size of the privacy page, and ONLY the privacy page, is a size or two larger.

That other computer has a Toshiba monitor, and uses Windows XP. I have no idea whether those facts are relevant, but I suppose we have to begin somewhere.

One last item: Folks here may ask me more questions about that other computer, or to try this or that, and I'll be happy to, but I have access to that other computer only on weekends.

A.

[jscheuer1]

If there is a link in the footer to the privacy page, it's private. I mean it doesn't use the word privacy. What do we have to click on to view that page?

[marain]

The link is five lines above the icons:

"Click here to see our Privacy Policy."

A.

[jscheuer1]

I think you linked us to a different site than the one you are talking about. Check the URL. Another moderator changed it from a hot link to a text link, but I checked the original and it's the same - goes to the same site as the text link.

Is this the correct URL:

http://www.marijuana.com

?

If it is, as I told you before, the word 'privacy' appears nowhere on the page, I even checked its source code, nowhere in there either.

[marain]

Very sorry. Correct link is http://www.njmarijuana.com.

A.

[jscheuer1]

Sorry, still not there. Here's the text above the icons:



Criminal Lawyers in New Jersey and MarainLaw.com
© Copyright 2006-2013, Allan Marain, New Brunswick, NJ, All rights reserved.
For information, questions, or suggestions about our site, please email our webmaster.
Web site design by DNEBA Enterprises » Accessible and Effective Web Design.
Search engine optimization by Rank Magic.
Page last updated 4 May 2013.
Hosted by Westhost »When you expect more from your Web host.

Nothing there about a Privacy Policy. And searching the entire page both visible and source text yields 0 matches for the word privacy.

[marain]

John, ever have one of those days when you think you're losing it? I saw it yesterday. I saw it this morning.

Let me get back to you, hopefully tomorrow. In the meanwhile, I'm sorry for wasting your time.

A.

[marain]

John, in editing the footer for NJMarijuana.com, I uploaded a file from the wrong folder. That is now corrected.

[jscheuer1]

I'm having trouble duplicating this. I have a virtual machine running XP and IE 8. No difference. There does seem to be some slight difference if I run it in IE 10 under Win 7 and use IE 10's IE 8 mode. However, it's not a full font size as far as I can tell.

BTW, on the 'bad' computer, which browser are you using, and which version of that browser?

In any case, in tracing the styles we see that font-size on the body is set to medium, and on the footer x-small. These are a relativistic settings. You could try something fixed, like 16px and 8px respectively. These may need to be tweaked to get what you're after, use a browser where there is no problem to determine the optimal pixel settings for these font sizes.

A problem with relativistic font sizes in some browsers is that they sometimes multiply. A subtle difference in layout can change how they're interpreted. Fixed sizes are never subject to that sort of interpretation.

Before you do anything though, make sure the cache on the 'bad' browser is cleared and that you refresh the pages involved. It might simply be showing you an older version of one or more of the pages.

And when you make any changes, if you choose to, clear the cache and refresh the page to make sure you are seeing the results of those changes.

Be sure to keep backups of any files you change before changing them.

[marain]

I'm having trouble duplicating this. I have a virtual machine running XP and IE 8. No difference. There does seem to be some slight difference if I run it in IE 10 under Win 7 and use IE 10's IE 8 mode. However, it's not a full font size as far as I can tell.

Seeing as it occurs on only one computer, and on only one page of THAT computer, I find less than surprising your difficulty in duplicating it.


BTW, on the 'bad' computer, which browser are you using, and which version of that browser?

My answer to that question will have to await the weekend.


In any case, in tracing the styles we see that font-size on the body is set to medium, and on the footer x-small. These are a relativistic settings. You could try something fixed, like 16px and 8px respectively. These may need to be tweaked to get what you're after, use a browser where there is no problem to determine the optimal pixel settings for these font sizes.

A problem with relativistic font sizes in some browsers is that they sometimes multiply. A subtle difference in layout can change how they're interpreted. Fixed sizes are never subject to that sort of interpretation.

I lean against making that change: We're talking about a minor annoyance that occurs only on one page (that we know of) on just one of three computers that I use, infrequently at that, that has antiquated software, and the page on which it occurs is one that few people ever visit. Were this a page that I was developing for a paying customer, I would definitely want to make whatever corrections needed fix it. But this is my own site. My posing the question, therefore, was hobby-ish, rather than business-ish. I am, more than anything, intrigued over why one page behaves differently than any other, and on only the one computer.


Before you do anything though, make sure the cache on the 'bad' browser is cleared and that you refresh the pages involved. It might simply be showing you an older version of one or more of the pages. And when you make any changes, if you choose to, clear the cache and refresh the page to make sure you are seeing the results of those changes.


Already tried that.



Be sure to keep backups of any files you change before changing them.

Always! That's how I was able to correct my previous upload mix up.

[marain]

Browser is Mozilla Firefox, v. 3.6.18. System is Windows XP Home Service Pack 3.

A.

[jscheuer1]

Whoa, that's so out of date. I doubt anyone would be using it in the real world, almost no one. I'm not even sure you can get Firefox that old any longer. It's a case of, if someone wants to run that browser, they have to expect things like that, and much worse on a modern web page. The Fox is up to v20 or higher now. They have been adding major version numbers more rapidly lately for less changes with each update. But great leaps forward in compliant rendering came at v7 back when updates came out only once a year or less.

evolt.org or some other repository of old browsers might have a Firefox that old. If so, I could install it on my vm, but it still might not let me see what you're seeing, it might be a setting or something peculiar to your installation of that version of Firefox. Even if I could see it, the diagnostic tools of that version of Firefox were very limited, so it might be hard to determine the cause. I think service pack 3 is the most recent update to XP, but there are tons of other important updates since then that are not service packs, that might impact this. Is the XP fully up to date? Mine is. Considering all that, and the fact that virtually no one will be using that browser to view the site, and the fact that it doesn't detract from the site's accessibility or functionality in that browser, well I think you can see it's hardly worth the trouble other than as a point of academic interest.

Hmm, it appears that Firefox 3 is still supported as a separate browser from the mainstream current versions and is up to 3.6.28 or higher.

So I think I will give it a shot to see what I can see.

[jscheuer1]

OK, I did that, and there's no difference in font size between the two pages:

OS Name Microsoft Windows XP Professional
Version 5.1.2600 Service Pack 3 Build 2600
Firefox 3.6.18

BTW - when I installed it, it told me that it was out of date. Presumably it wants me to update to 3.6.28, but I wasn't sure, it might have been to 20.0.1 (latest mainstream version). Anyways, I stuck with 3.6.18 just to see if I could see what you were reporting. And as I say, there was no difference here between the two pages. The layout is a little different, but opening one in one tab and the other in another tab and aligning similar texts between the two by scrolling each, then flipping back and forth, it's obvious that there's no difference in font size. The privacy page does have some headings in its main content area that are a little larger than the other content text, and the index page doesn't. But these are larger in any browser. Everything else was of identical font size between the two pages.

[jscheuer1]

Aha! I've now discovered that if while on the privacy policy page you increase the zoom level of the page (view > zoom) from the main menu or (Ctrl +) from the keyboard, it remembers that and applies it each time the privacy page is loaded. At the same time, the zoom level of the other pages are not affected.

So try this - view each page in turn. While on each page, hit (Ctrl 0), this will set them each to normal viewing - no zoom. Then switch back and forth between them. They should both appear to have the same font size now.

[marain]

You nailed it!

I am impressed!

A.