I'll look at it, thanks!Bromite
No. The configuration options are pretty minimal, you can't do that.Does Jelly allow you to set a minimum font size?
Yes, freebsd.org looks much better in "desktop mode".a button for viewing in desktop mode
This won't do the things mobile browsers will do in absence of any CSS breakpoints. Instead, use F12 "devtools" and click on the icon for tablets and mobiles to see how chromium would render it on a mobile device. That's also what you can see in the screenshot I posted above.If I resize the browser on my laptop to a somewhat mobile screen size, it looks the same.
Nope. A mobile browser must render a scaled version of a website that obviously doesn't have a specific style for small screens. That's how mobile browsing always worked.The browser renders what is being presented, it doesn't do any magic.
It's something missing for a "top quality" website style. But rendering a graphical accident is the browser's fault.It clearly is the fault of the website.
A mobile browser must render a scaled version of a website that obviously doesn't have a specific style for small screens. That's how mobile browsing always worked.
No they do not and never have. But maybe you need to define "mobile browser" versus chromium and firefox.But any sensible mobile browser does it, because otherwise, websites that only have a "desktop style" render in a horribly broken way.
Ahh, now we're talking. Isn't (wasn't?) there a standards body that actually defined things like HTML standards and the way browsers were supposed to handle the standard language? And the we started having MS and Google and others adding their own extensions to make thing look blingier/faster/whatever? Like certain websites (banks, other commercial entities) that would only work in Windows?No browser has any responsibility to do such a thing. The closest you will get to that is a browser is required by the specification to handle broken HTML (errors) as best it can but no browser will attempt to fix styling.
The bolded portion I'm going to say "yes, it should" But that still puts the onus on the developers to actually do the work to support it. If the work has not been done, I don't think its the tools fault (browser) if the website doesn't look right, the fault (if there is any fault) goes back on the folks that created the website. Of course they will logically (rightly) put the blame back on whomever gave them the requirements and specs "It was never part of the requirements so we didn't do it"And again, that doesn't change anything about the fact, that a good quality website nowadays provides specific styles for different screen sizes. So of course there's room for improvement.
px
in CSS isn't really a pixel any more. If it was, it would break too many layouts (e.g. using bitmapped graphics) that just assume dpi to be somewhere between 72 and 120.Yes. The W3C now by way of WHATWGIsn't (wasn't?) there a standards body that actually defined things like HTML standards and the way browsers were supposed to handle the standard language?
Correct.a web browser should handle the standards correctly. Anything beyond that is best effort.
W3C CSS Standardare things like CSS actually part of the standard/standardized?
Correct.If the work has not been done, I don't think its the tools fault (browser) if the website doesn't look right, the fault (if there is any fault) goes back on the folks that created the website.