by "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
May 14, 2008 at 06:30 PM
dorayme wrote:
> In article <afe87$482ae40f$40cba7bc$19730@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> "Jonathan N. Little" <lws4art@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> dorayme wrote:
>>> In article <g0e6b4$k7n$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
>>> Holger Suhr <holgerholgerde@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> BTW. Your picture WSLS Header4.png looks bad because it has 800px
width,
>>>> but you show it only with 700px.
>>> Not on Safari 2 on my screen.
>>>
>> http://www.hotlinecomputing.com/wsls/WSLS%20Header4.png
>> Specified Dimensions: 700px × 150px
>> Actual Dimensions: 800px × 150px
>
> It does not "look bad because" it is html'd to be 800 rather than its
> native 700 on my Safari. Want to bet on this? I have a nice test but you
> need to put up $US25 (held in escrow, never rust a human, my papa used
> to say).
>
??? What ever you're take you'd better cut the dose. I don't understand
any of your posts lately.
The image is actually as by bowser says and if you download it 800px ×
150px but the OP has redimensioned it with html attributes 700px ×
150px. The squeezing the width causes a jagged edge to the text because
browser "resample" by dropping pixels.
--
Take care,
Jonathan
-------------------
LITTLE WORKS STUDIO
http://www.LittleWorksStudio.com
