code updated

[mark]

The code push has completed. If you see anything weird or broken, please let us know.

There was a brief error with being able to post entries that has since been resolved. I'm very sorry for that, but it should be okay now.

Comments

[vanessagalore]

You know, I'm sorry that I was an early adopter and spent weeks trying to make a pretty layout out of the very limited options that were offered with my less-than-stellar CSS skills. I paid for my account, when I had the option of doing a free one. I've migrated over here completely from lj, and I've cheered when the site has bested lj, for instance with searching. I've talked up this site to everyone, and I made the best of the layouts that were offered to me, even though it took me a lot of time. We were asked to report anything weird since the code push, and in the past people have been happy to help. Nobody said you were supposed to anticipate issues with custom coding. I understand that you're working with the default layouts, which is as it should be. I didn't bitch when you added "Network" and that changed my nav-links: I fussed with it until it looked okay again, because obviously that's a site enhancement. I was hoping that I could make this look okay again, rather than trash my whole layout.

It still looks like crap. Changing the padding has no effect now. I took out the left-align, which did nothing. I tried the align center which did nothing. The headings are all still skewed to the left, which they weren't before. Which is how the layout was by default, really not very pretty. So something is preventing me from spreading out my links in a visually appealing way. Maybe you think that looks okay, to have the links not centered over the journal?? I don't. Obviously I was using a workaround before and maybe it's not possible anymore.

I'm sorry I'm not an expert. I thought that was okay around here.

Firefox 3.5.3, screen resolution 1280x800.

[cesy]

Not being an expert is fine. People are doing their best to help. I'm sure someone will reply soon with another idea for how to fix it.

[ninetydegrees]

I don't understand why anything I've said made you angry (sorry if you're not; that's how your comment comes across to me).

I'm happy to help you. I don't expect you to be an expert or to be able to fix it on your own. I don't think it looks ok either. I wouldn't have answered and tried to find a fix otherwise. I'm sorry I wasn't helpful. I'll leave it to someone else.

[vanessagalore]

Sorry I overreacted. Just felt like you were annoyed because I have a customized layout and I don't have the knowledge to do that. Thanks for trying to help.

[ninetydegrees]

I wasn't annoyed and you do have the knowledge: you wouldn't have been able to customize your layout otherwise. :)

I admit I'm quite puzzled because none of the changes I made should have affected you since you have the nav links in the default place so I'm wondering if I did something wrong but I triple checked again and going back to the previous code didn't make anything better so this is kinda driving me crazy. Anyway, I'll give you a fair warning: I want to make the two-column-left option available to Negatives and that will probably imply changes for the nav links again as I can't right-align them as they're styled now.

[vanessagalore]

The nav-links have always been problematic in this layout. If you look at my lj vanessagalore, you'll see the effect I was trying to achieve. With each code push, I've had to tweak the padding, but this time padding seems completely ineffective. Did you see the solution offered by zvi, which helped? I think I had to use a left-margin when I first made the layout, and then at some point, I had to axe the margin to get it to work, and remade my header (which contains the background bar) so that it "fit" my links. (I'm sure there's a more elegant way to do the background.) From the little snooping I did about ul specs in the past, they cause problems for a lot of people. After a certain point, my head just explodes when the coding doesn't act logically or predictably, and padding in particular never seems to work the way I think it should. Thanks again for trying and I appreciate the heads-up on future changes--I won't go nuts making it perfect until those go through. Maybe it is time to find a new layout and replicate what I did with a different base. I've changed it so much, it's not recognizable as Negatives anymore, and all the changes I've had to make with each code push mean that I'm a little uncertain what's affecting each element at this point, and obviously frustrated by that.

[ninetydegrees]

Oh wow! It looks quite different on your journal here. Here's what it looks like for me in Firefox: http://i34.tinypic.com/bi08lf.jpg

If you want to, I can try to work on this. Just PM me.

[afuna]

I think i t could be because of specificity (they have .module-*, we used to have .module-*, so theirs overrode ours. Now we have .module-section-* .module-*,which is more specific, so order is no longer enough)

[baggyeyes]

Is it possible old changes on a given layout are futzing with current changes? I've noticed that when I've tried to test layouts - I've had to delete what the wizard created.

[ninetydegrees]

Oh got it. Thanks. :)