On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 01:26:15PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> Unfortunately px is underspecified.
What do you mean?
>> Perhaps it would be beneficial to add
>>
>>
>>
>> to `mutt.xsl` to ask a browser to use an "ideal" viewport of the
>> device.
> But then, it seems that you may have prob
On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 06:04:59PM -0500, Derek Martin wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 05:09:46AM +0300, Alexander Gromnitsky wrote:
>> -body { margin-left:2%; margin-right:2%; font-family:serif; }
>> +@media (min-width: 768px) {
>> + body { width: 767px; margin: 0 auto; }
On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 09:28:08PM +0300, Alexander Gromnitsky wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 08:31:33AM -0400, Aaron Schrab wrote:
>> On my browser this is leaving a large blank area to the left of the TOC.
>> The narrowness of the space allocated for the TOC leaves a lot of
On Sun, Sep 04, 2016 at 08:31:33AM -0400, Aaron Schrab wrote:
> On my browser this is leaving a large blank area to the left of the TOC.
> The narrowness of the space allocated for the TOC leaves a lot of items
> being wrapped. Also, since that space to the left isn't considered to
> be part o
On Sat, Sep 03, 2016 at 09:53:26AM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2016-09-03 05:09:46 +0300, Alexander Gromnitsky wrote:
>> The patch is nothing radical, it just adds a simple media query.
> I wonder whether the choice should be left to the user (I mean
> that it should real
Hi,
The patch is nothing radical, it just adds a simple media query.
diff -r efccbd9bc6f6 doc/mutt.css
--- a/doc/mutt.css Tue Aug 30 18:43:02 2016 -0700
+++ b/doc/mutt.css Sat Sep 03 00:36:54 2016 +0300
@@ -1,4 +1,7 @@
-body { margin-left:2%; margin-right:2%; font-family:serif; }
+@medi
