Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> writes: > On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Ben Finney <ben+pyt...@benfinney.id.au> > wrote: > > You have control over how large your window size is, and if you have > > purposes so different that they demand different widths, then you > > can easily make different-width windows. > > I don't know about yours, but my web browsers all have one width > regardless of which tab is open.
Yes, all the tabs have the same size within one window. So PJ can instantly make a *new* window for the different purpose that needs a different window width. Then all the tabs within that new window will have the right width for this new purpose, and tabs in the existing window will continue to have the right width for the other purpose. If you have a web browser which is incapable of opening a new window, let me introduce you to Firefox, Chromium, Epiphany, or any other widely-used free-software desktop web browser that does what it's told. > However, I agree that web sites shouldn't impose a width. Let it flow > out! For some purposes, I can see a benefit: some sites truly are best treated as specific applications with a specific interface width. Documentation – or any other passage of many paragraphs of prose – is not one of those, and should not be artificially limited in presentation width by the site author. The web browser frees the viewer to have text presented how they're best able to read it; don't hobble that. (The irony of my simultaneously holding the position that messages via email and Usenet should be limited to 80 columns plain text is not lost on me.) -- \ “Software patents provide one more means of controlling access | `\ to information. They are the tool of choice for the internet | _o__) highwayman.” —Anthony Taylor | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
