Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

improve display on mobile phones #20

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
May 18, 2023
Merged

improve display on mobile phones #20

merged 8 commits into from
May 18, 2023

Conversation

domel
Copy link
Contributor

@domel domel commented May 7, 2023

@domel domel added the spec:editorial Minor issue or proposed change in the specification (markup, typo, informative text) label May 7, 2023
@domel domel requested a review from gkellogg May 7, 2023 17:11
@domel domel requested a review from gkellogg May 8, 2023 16:26
Copy link
Member

@gkellogg gkellogg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's odd that the tables are full-width for most widths, but then narrower for small sizes. It's in the small sizes where you would want to use all the available width. Can't see the effect on the grammar itself, because of Preview limitations, but I presume it's the same.

@pfps
Copy link
Contributor

pfps commented May 16, 2023

@gkellogg See also w3c/rdf-semantics#30

@TallTed
Copy link
Member

TallTed commented May 17, 2023

In the Context where each kind of escape sequence can be used, the contrast between the dark-green background and the black text thereon is problematic. A relatively simple fix would be to use white text for these; alternatively, the background could be made a lighter green.

@domel
Copy link
Contributor Author

domel commented May 17, 2023

@TallTed done

@TallTed
Copy link
Member

TallTed commented May 18, 2023

The table in §2.5.2 Numbers would benefit greatly by narrowing the first 2 columns and passing that width to the 4th column. (The 3rd column is only slightly wider than its widest value, so should remain very close to the same width.)

Similarly, the 2nd column of the table in §7.2 RDF Term Constructors could pass some width to the 3rd.

In both cases, words are broken to wrap and keep the table close to if not smaller than the viewport. Better not to break words, and to overflow the viewport and need soome horizontal scrolling.

@domel
Copy link
Contributor Author

domel commented May 18, 2023

@TallTed I'm not happy with hacking tables like this. IMO it should be decided by User Agent, but OK I hacked those tables you mentioned. Hope you like it now.

@domel domel merged commit f6edce6 into main May 18, 2023
@TallTed
Copy link
Member

TallTed commented May 18, 2023

If User Agents would do the right thing, I'd be happy to let them. Your latest changes don't seem to have had the intended effect.

§2.5.2 Numbers delivers (showing the whole table):
Screen Shot 2023-05-18 at 06 13 02 PM

§7.2 RDF Term Constructors delivers (showing the widest values of col1 and col2):
Screen Shot 2023-05-18 at 06 16 21 PM

Both tables still have wraps within words, in smaller viewports.

@pfps
Copy link
Contributor

pfps commented May 19, 2023

This PR has the effect of making the font size smaller for tables when the window with becomes small (but still over 1/2 of the width of my laptop's screen with what I consider to be a reasonable font size). This has the decidedly negative effect of making the tables harder to read. There does not appear to be any benefit to this for many, and probably all, of the tables as they could be rendered at the normal font size with no problems.

Here is an example:
Screenshot from 2023-05-18 21-00-05

@TallTed
Copy link
Member

TallTed commented May 19, 2023

Please be aware that I will be offline and unresponsive through May 30. That will not change my interest in getting this resolved in the best way for all, which it is not yet. I would have suggested not merging this PR, given the ongoing mixed feelings about its effect. I will suggest that there should be a new issue opened on this topic for the Turtle document, regardless of how the others stand.

@pfps
Copy link
Contributor

pfps commented May 20, 2023

See w3c/rdf-star-wg#61

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
spec:editorial Minor issue or proposed change in the specification (markup, typo, informative text)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants