Moderator: Community Team
EBConquer wrote:Vertically is the correct nomenclature.
Metsfanmax wrote:EBConquer wrote:Vertically is the correct nomenclature.
Vertical alignment (as in CSS) is a specific term meaning alignment up or down. But based on looking at the wall page, the issue I see is that the latter rows are offset to the left (i.e. horizontally). Anyway I don't care about the terminology, I just want to make sure I understand what is being discussed.
betiko wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:EBConquer wrote:Vertically is the correct nomenclature.
Vertical alignment (as in CSS) is a specific term meaning alignment up or down. But based on looking at the wall page, the issue I see is that the latter rows are offset to the left (i.e. horizontally). Anyway I don't care about the terminology, I just want to make sure I understand what is being discussed.
I still don t understand your logic... horizontally everything is perfectly fine, it's vertically that it's not aligned.
Whatever this CSS logic is... it s wrong. Basically, if you prefer, there is an alignment problem with the columns, not the rows
riskllama wrote:I think more medals would solve this problem.
Metsfanmax wrote:betiko wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:EBConquer wrote:Vertically is the correct nomenclature.
Vertical alignment (as in CSS) is a specific term meaning alignment up or down. But based on looking at the wall page, the issue I see is that the latter rows are offset to the left (i.e. horizontally). Anyway I don't care about the terminology, I just want to make sure I understand what is being discussed.
I still don t understand your logic... horizontally everything is perfectly fine, it's vertically that it's not aligned.
Whatever this CSS logic is... it s wrong. Basically, if you prefer, there is an alignment problem with the columns, not the rows
The way you're describing it is the reverse of what the issue actually is. The problem is that the rows after the first are all offset horizontally to the left compared to the first row, not that the later entries in each column are offset to the left relative to the first entry in the same column. From a visual perspective they are two ways of describing the same thing, but it makes a difference from a technical perspective.
It probably could be fixed straightforwardly by inserting some padding after each line break.
InnyaFacce wrote:The easy fix ...
Row 408 of the coding
Remove the [ & nbsp ; ] at the start of the coding on that line
It will move everything over to the left and the alignment will be the same for every row
betiko wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:betiko wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:EBConquer wrote:Vertically is the correct nomenclature.
Vertical alignment (as in CSS) is a specific term meaning alignment up or down. But based on looking at the wall page, the issue I see is that the latter rows are offset to the left (i.e. horizontally). Anyway I don't care about the terminology, I just want to make sure I understand what is being discussed.
I still don t understand your logic... horizontally everything is perfectly fine, it's vertically that it's not aligned.
Whatever this CSS logic is... it s wrong. Basically, if you prefer, there is an alignment problem with the columns, not the rows
The way you're describing it is the reverse of what the issue actually is. The problem is that the rows after the first are all offset horizontally to the left compared to the first row, not that the later entries in each column are offset to the left relative to the first entry in the same column. From a visual perspective they are two ways of describing the same thing, but it makes a difference from a technical perspective.
It probably could be fixed straightforwardly by inserting some padding after each line break.
Shit you are one pain in the ass when you start being like that..
In terms of coding it s obviously written in lines not in columns like some kanji, but the result of this horizontal imperfection is a vertical imperfection. Ffs, let it go man
riskllama wrote:I think more medals would solve this problem.
Metsfanmax wrote:betiko wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:betiko wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:EBConquer wrote:Vertically is the correct nomenclature.
Vertical alignment (as in CSS) is a specific term meaning alignment up or down. But based on looking at the wall page, the issue I see is that the latter rows are offset to the left (i.e. horizontally). Anyway I don't care about the terminology, I just want to make sure I understand what is being discussed.
I still don t understand your logic... horizontally everything is perfectly fine, it's vertically that it's not aligned.
Whatever this CSS logic is... it s wrong. Basically, if you prefer, there is an alignment problem with the columns, not the rows
The way you're describing it is the reverse of what the issue actually is. The problem is that the rows after the first are all offset horizontally to the left compared to the first row, not that the later entries in each column are offset to the left relative to the first entry in the same column. From a visual perspective they are two ways of describing the same thing, but it makes a difference from a technical perspective.
It probably could be fixed straightforwardly by inserting some padding after each line break.
Shit you are one pain in the ass when you start being like that..
In terms of coding it s obviously written in lines not in columns like some kanji, but the result of this horizontal imperfection is a vertical imperfection. Ffs, let it go man
OK, I will let it go, along with any motivation to get this fixed.
IcePack wrote:Volunteer of the month
Metsfanmax wrote:IcePack wrote:Volunteer of the month
You are welcome to do something about this if you desire.
IcePack wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:IcePack wrote:Volunteer of the month
You are welcome to do something about this if you desire.
Isn't that you know....the sole purpose of why you are here?
IcePack wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:IcePack wrote:Volunteer of the month
You are welcome to do something about this if you desire.
Isn't that you know....the sole purpose of why you are here?
betiko wrote:Sorry but what suggestion got implemented or what error got fixed by mets? There probably are some stuff, but what i mostly see is that he's always discussing about the rhetorics.
In this case, it wasn't about understanding the problem I was adressing, it was just about being a smart ass.
Innyafacce goes straight to the point, finds the problem and the solution in one post..
Metsfanmax wrote:IcePack wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:IcePack wrote:Volunteer of the month
You are welcome to do something about this if you desire.
Isn't that you know....the sole purpose of why you are here?
And why are you here? To join threads for the sole purpose of sniping at people?betiko wrote:Sorry but what suggestion got implemented or what error got fixed by mets? There probably are some stuff, but what i mostly see is that he's always discussing about the rhetorics.
In this case, it wasn't about understanding the problem I was adressing, it was just about being a smart ass.
Innyafacce goes straight to the point, finds the problem and the solution in one post..
No, my posts were about understanding the problem you were addressing, with the goal of trying to solve it. I already described how to solve it. But yeah, call me an ass, see how far that gets you.
IcePack wrote:Metsfanmax wrote:IcePack wrote:Volunteer of the month
You are welcome to do something about this if you desire.
Isn't that you know....the sole purpose of why you are here?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users