Quick Questions

serious problem with readability of sl (bar thingie at top *always* obscures text) [#902]

Back to forum

New reply

reply serious problem with readability of sl (bar thingie at top *always* obscures text) (2007-03-14 16:49) [#3160]

hi, i can't read sl normally. maybe somebody can help.

i use standard mozilla without any extensions and a large font (which i have to use or else i cannot use the computer). linux.

all pages have a problem: if i scroll one page, i miss 2 lines. the bar thingie at the top with the search box obscures those lines. for accessibility reasons, i cannot fix it each time. therefore i usually don't read sl. but i would like to.

i think it must be because i use a large font. but that is, in my opinion, a very reasonable thing for a user to do.

would this be hard to fix? i don't want to just give up on the wiki. for accessibility reasons, i can't fix it myself.



ArnoHollosi: screenshots? (2007-03-14 15:27) [#3168]

Can you email me some screenshots of the problem? (e.g. screen shot before scrolling, screen shot after scrolling.) I'm not sure that I understand your description.

Which version of Mozilla are you using?

Mirsha: ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 11:37) [#3164]

I just had a peek at some of the CSS and I can see where the problem could lie due to the arrangement and stacking of DIV tags which is a bit wacky. Much of the layout seems to be derived from using em sizes which I am assuming is throwing things off for you since you are overriding the default font with your own personal one which has different dimensions.

If you use the default font though you can still make that font larger and it will maintain the layout ratios and allow you to use the site with ease. Just remove the font you are using and simply go to view > text-size > increase in Firefox (short cut ctrl + +) to increase the size of the font to whatever is most comfortable for your own personal use.

ArnoHollosi: Re: whacky CSS (2007-03-14 15:28) [#3170]

lie due to the arrangement and stacking of DIV tags which is a bit wacky

it is whacky indeed, but for a reason: the multiple DIVs are there to fix bugs in browsers. It took some time to read up on the issues, test, redesign, and come up with this solution :o) You would not believe how hard it is to support IE, Mozilla/Firefox, Safari, and Opera.

Mirsha: Re: whacky CSS (2007-03-14 18:08) [#3172]

I don't disagree with the multiple DIVs, just how they are used as it's not a method I would consider. If I was formulating the layout I'd use a div for the top bar, a div to contain everything below it then two child div's in that div to contain the menu and the main content then use the css float attribute. This would have solved the problem above since none of the DIVs would overlap each other.

I'm not well versed in cross browser support so I don't know if this would work on Safari and Opera but it should as I think it's the most common solution to use this sort of layout. I simply have to support IE at work and I force everything to conform to Firefox as well simply because not being able to use the debug features of Firebug will drive you insane eventualy.

ArnoHollosi: Re: whacky CSS (2007-03-17 12:49) [#3207]

there is actually a reason for the way it is done: this way the content pane is first in the HTML, and all the navigational links come afterwards. Look at SL with a text based browser (or disable CSS styles in your browser if it allows it) to see what I mean.

RBerenguel: ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 12:43) [#3166]

I have tried adjusting Firefox font size (ctrl++ or ctrl+mouse scroll button) and it just looks good (big, but good), with no scrolling problems. Hope this serves!

reply ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 19:57) [#3173]

thanks for thinking about accessibility. i hope the

two of you are far off track. increasing size in firefox is not a solution in any way at all, otherwise i would have used it. i tried it many times.

first, i said mozilla, not firefox (gecko notwithstanding), and second, i said i need large fonts in order to use the computer, and i said that there are accessibility issues.

this means that i need every page on every site to have larger fonts when it is loaded, not one page on sl after many, many, many clicks and menu drags to get to the font i need.

(perhaps both of you thought i only ever visit one page and can drag the mouse many times?)

again, thanks for thinking about accessibility.

X Re: ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 20:05) [#3175]

tried to edit, couldn't.

RBerenguel: ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 20:21) [#3176]

My SO's mother is visually impaired, and uses a general system magnifier, in Windows. It's like having a screen 4 times bigger. Don't know of similar solutions for linux. Just for a try, I set up Default Font Size at 64pts in FireFox? configuration, and could navigate quite well Sensei Library. Ctrl++ or Ctrl Scroll button set this value higher or lower for the current tab, or current session if there is only one tab, as far as I know. Just my 2c, hope this helps. I am generally at Windows with FireFox?, not Mozilla, so I can't help in this particular issue.

reply ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 20:50) [#3178]

as i wrote, ctrl-+ would not work.

even if it did work, which it does not.

please try to read my posts carefully. every time i have to say something that i already said, it is physically painful for me. this isn't casual chat for me.

magnifiers require more mouse drag actions. please trust me so that i don't have to type to explain.

reply ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 20:59) [#3179]

arno, do you get the prob now? will do screenshot if abs nec.

you page down and you miss 2 lines. see the bar at top with search box? that covers those lines.


ArnoHollosi: possible solution (2007-03-15 19:13) [#3189]


try the following: go to UserPreferences, set the "Font size" to "very tiny", and the "Content font size" to "very much larger". This should result in a smaller font for side and top bar, but same font size for page content. The top bar should then no longer go over two lines.

reply ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 21:06) [#3180]

note that this very page works without covering too much of one line. taht is because there is no "discuss page" link in the bar.

all normal pages on sl have "discuss page" which doubles the size of the bar because it is below "edit page". then it covers two lines.

so if you change the html/css/whatever to put "discuss page" next to "edit page" instead of below it on normal pages on sl, then you will fix the line eating problem well enough to work.

reply ((no subject)) (2007-03-14 21:07) [#3181]

no room, so if you put edit page and discuss page in sidebar, problem basically solved.

X Re: ((no subject)) (2007-05-09 02:50) [#3347] who is this ip??

xela: How to reproduce the problem. (2007-03-15 00:24) [#3182]

It took me a little while to understand what the problem was, because I too tried enlarging the font and it looked just fine at first.

For me, in both firefox and mozilla, going to a "large" font looks fine, but it's when the font size is even larger--300% of default size--that the problems start to appear.

At my default font and window size, the links at the top of the page ("sensei's library"..."edit page"..."discuss page"..."tools", etc) fit on one line. If you make the font large enough (or the window narrow enough), they don't fit, so the top bar expands to two or more lines, and that's when text starts getting covered over.

(For me personally it's not a problem, but I can see how it might make life very difficult for others.)

reply ((no subject)) (2007-03-15 23:44) [#3192]

xela wins.

xela: ((no subject)) (2007-03-16 01:39) [#3193]

Actually, I think Arno just won: see "possible solution" above.

floss: ((no subject)) (2007-03-16 22:16) [#3198]

no, arno's workaround does not work at all.

think about it: in order to make the text that small in the bar, i would have to allow web pages to create text that small on every site on the web.

if i were able to do that, then i wouldn't have to make the font large in the first place. you forgot to set the minimum font size to a readable (i.e. large) size when you tested it.


  • every* time i respond here to a well meaning but ineffective personal workaround to sl's line obscuring bug it is *physically painful*. believe it or not, well meaningness doesn't stop the pain.

so please trust me when i say that a workaround doesn't work so that i don't have to type more. please don't propose any more workarounds unless you *know* (not guess) that they will work.

is nobody willing to fix this bug and the board/mark size bug? if nobody wants to, then *please say so now*. it is *really miserable* to type if nobody intends to make the site accessible anyway.

do you want me to just give up and leave you alone? then please say up front whether anybody intends to make this site accessible with the line obscuring bug and the small board/mark size bug described elsewhere. it is too painful to keep trying so you get exactly what you want. i and others won't get to use the site, but at least i won't have to type in foolish hope of something that will never happen. i have been assuming that there is a chance you intend to make the site accessible.

the web really sucks if you can't use it, though. i wonder if this site has ever thought about creating an accessibility policy. i'm guessing not.

i proposed moving some of the bar text to the sidebar as one possibility. that is not perfect, but it would be easy and might work.

floss: ((no subject)) (2007-03-16 22:21) [#3199]

maybe nobody will even read what i just wrote all the way through. :( this really sucks.

floss: ((no subject)) (2007-03-16 22:31) [#3200]

i will have to severely limit future typing. please keep this in mind.

xela: Please don't give up! (2007-03-17 01:07) [#3201]

Yes, I am reading every word you type, and I'm sure others are too. Remember that the maintainers of the site are volunteers and don't work here full-time: if it's necessary to change the CSS to fix this problem, I would expect it to take a few weeks. There might be another clever way to fix it, but I'm afraid it's beyond me. I can tell that you are frustrated, but I do sincerely hope that you are able to enjoy the rest of the site soon.

floss: ((no subject)) (2007-03-17 02:09) [#3203]

i know sl is volunteer.

[ext] http://senseis.xmp.net/?FutureUseOfSL

Harleqin: ((no subject)) (2007-03-17 12:00) [#3205]

Don't yell at me if it doesn't work, but have you tried using the "arrow down" instead of "page down"?

ArnoHollosi: have looked into it some more (2007-03-17 12:44) [#3206]

I have looked into this a little bit more:

  • top bar issue can be fixed within reasonable time (although it means coding and supporting multiple CSS styles)
  • scaleable graphics mean a major overhaul of the wiki enginge. I.e. based on my current workload don't expect this to be done any time soon (we are talking months here.)

That leaves one option I see: use Opera. Yes, I have read that you have not installed it. But Opera is available for all major Linux platforms and its zoom functionality works way better than any other browser I know. I just tried SL on Opera/Linux with 250% zoom. It works excellent (apart from the fact that the top bar issue still needs tweaking.)

floss: ((no subject)) (2007-03-17 20:48) [#3209]

opera not installable. no kb when lying dn. imo toolbar doesn't add anything; can use bottom or sidebar. but totally up to you. thanks for any accessibility you do decide to do and for thinking about it. over and out. i will monitor progress but prob not reply to any workarounds etc.

ArnoHollosi: misunderstanding? (2007-03-17 20:56) [#3210]

maybe you misunderstood: I'd be willing to invest the time to help you with the toolbar. But the graphics is too much work right now. So should I do something about the toolbar only?

Still don't understand why Opera is not installable. It is available for just about every version of Linux. If it is too much work for you to install (given the typing problems you mentioned) why not ask a friend to install it for you?

floss: ((no subject)) (2007-03-17 20:51) [#3211]

thanks for any accessibility you do decide to do and for thinking about it. over and out. i will monitor progress but prob not reply to any workarounds etc.

reply ((no subject)) (2007-05-12 13:01) [#3364]

this is not an accessible site.

i understand completely that everybody is a volunteer. i understand completely that some of the work is undesirable. i understand completely that some things take time. and not everybody cares about accessibility. i would prefer that you say so instead of saying that it is open to anyone, as sl does.

most likely all that is required to fix the bar at the top is to move one (or all) of the links to the sidebar.

did you try that? the bug is still there.

you cannot make a site accessible by telling a user to install and configure a different, specific, proprietary browser (that would not even work (*)) to use that one site.

i *completely understand* that accessibility is maybe a low priority here. but please don't assume that the site is accessible just because i stopped saying it isn't.

if i want a go wiki, my best hope is for some other site to arise that will take its place. go is just a game so it doesn't matter. i shouldn't have typed in this forum. but you gave me the impression it would do some good. i request that you don't make others try as hard as i did.

(*) trust me.

Unkx80: Add a "X" button to the toolbar? (2007-05-12 20:01) [#3366]

Arno, as a quick workaround, I think it might be possible to just add a "X" button with some Javascript, so that the toolbar gets hidden when it is pressed. We already have the "X" buttons on forum pages. Example of my suggestion: top toolbar on [ext] http://finephotography.tk/ where a minimize link is available. Do you think this is a viable temporary solution?

It would be good if floss and others can also comment on this suggestion.

reply ((no subject)) (2007-11-25 04:50) [#4088]

floss gave up a long time ago, and cannot use this site any longer. Read his comments MUCH more carefully. Then read them again. You didn't even understand his last comment when he told you so. This site, judging from this thread alone, is HOSTILE to accessibility. Really, it is. Read what he says CAREFULLY, and what your responses have been. Don't pretend to care about accessibility when you are completely unwilling to take it seriously. It is not floss's fault for not using Opera. For crying out loud!

Wikipedia is not hostile to it, and they have guidelines at [ext] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Accessibility

This site will never change.

ArnoHollosi: Accessibility (2007-11-25 12:07) [#4089]

Dear anonymous,

I take this serious so let's review the problem:

  • SL runs on all browsers.
  • Floss needs very large fonts. SL supports that.
  • However, the top bar may have a line break when using very large fonts. Then the top bar obscures some part of the page.
  • Additional scrolling, other browsers, etc. are not an option.
  • I suggested using UserPreferences to scale down the font of the top bar. Not perfect, but a quick workaround. No need to do this for every page, but only once per year (the cookie expires after one year.) That would instantly solve the problem! Drawback: the items on the top bar would not be as readable, due to smaller font. Judging by Floss' comments he hardly uses the top bar anyway. So why was this solution rejected out of hand?
  • I also said: resizing diagrams is complicated. The images do not get generated on the fly, but are pregenerated and cached. Changing that mechanism to adjustable image sizes is much work. Also, either I would have to change the function to generating images on the fly or cache different sizes of images (both options eat server resources.)

I know accessibility guidelines in and out. Apart from the diagrams SL is very accessible. Try reading it in a text browser and you see what I mean. I even went to the trouble having a blind friend of mine evaluating my design with her equipment, when I introduced this design years ago. She liked it. It's so easy to pass judgement anonymously, isn't it?

On a side note, since when does Wikipedia resize images on the fly? Have never seen this option, neither on Wikipedia nor on any other website for that matter.

And even if Floss and others don't want to hear it (and I may be scolded for this statement): accessibility is not a one way street, where all the work has to be borne by the content provider and the visitor says: "I use equipment X, nothing else, and it has to work." I stand by this statement, no matter how severe the disablity is.

pasky: Re: Accessibility (2007-11-25 12:52) [#4090]

About the scaling down topbar font workaround, I think floss commented that he has also set minimal font size for webpages so that badly designed webpages are still readable; presumably this prevents this workaround from working.

Back to forum

New reply

[Welcome to Sensei's Library!]
Search position
Page history
Latest page diff
Partner sites:
Go Teaching Ladder
Login / Prefs
Sensei's Library