Its going off the side on mine, and it's a 1440x900.
Re: Signatures
Its going off the side on mine, and it's a 1440x900.
Being better than the worst does not inherently make you good. But being better than the rest lets you brag.
Originally Posted by Strike For The South
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
Re: Signatures
That might be right Greyblades. I guess there's some 75 pixels on both the right and the left of the board form. Then there's some 180 used for the left part where the avatars and usernames are. A 1440 screen probably can't display a 1200 pixel picture in a post.
Ja mata
TosaInu
Re: Signatures
as little as possible
Common Unreflected Drinking Only Smartens
Re: Signatures
I'd say 800 wide then. Plently of people still use 1280x1024. Or 1024x768.
Though with almost double the size, the increase in the limit needs to be even higher.
Re: Signatures
Width of 700 fits, just barely. 650 would be easier.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
Re: Signatures
Well, the easiest thing to do is scrollbars using the CSS overflow property and setting maximum limits on signature size. (Would use a number of ems on the vertical axis, and percent width on the horizontal one.) Alternatively, if Tosa can add scripts a bit of javascript to check size limits and automatically inject the show/hide code into the page could work even better.
- Tellos Athenaios
CUF tool - XIDX - PACK tool - SD tool - EVT tool - EB Install Guide - How to track down loading CTD's - EB 1.1 Maps thread
“ὁ δ᾽ ἠλίθιος ὣσπερ πρόβατον βῆ βῆ λέγων βαδίζει” – Kratinos in Dionysalexandros.
Re: Signatures
What resolution are you guys using.
All of them fit fine on mine, and I would presume nearly all on any normal monitor.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks