Size Down Those Signatures!

[kirish]

There is another option to enforce this rule without relying on users. It would require a little bit of work on Brandon's part, but it would be a permanent solution.

If the server-side script could wrap a DIV element around each signature and apply the CSS properties:

max-height:200px;
overflow:hidden;

then the browser will make sure each signature does not extend beyond the 200px limit. Max-height, I know, is supported by Firefox, Netscape 6+, Opera 5+, and Safari 1.3+. As you probably realized, it is not supported by IE at this point. However, IE7 has finally added support for it, so nearly all web traffic will support it in a short while.

I am personally for this option. This will not only solve our issues of perpetual scrolling, but it will force people to keep their signature size down to the limit if they want them to be seen. And as for our IE friends, they will get the benefits soon enough.

[Freddy Schurr]

I am for the above post!

[TubaMorg]

Quick way to check your sig image height: Right mouse click on the image and click properties. At least this is valid for windows computers.

[coastertux]

TubaMorg, that only works if your sig is one image with no text.

[ICE MAN]

Originally Posted by Adam Richards

Hey everyone,

This may be long, but bear with me, I have a point (for once ). For the record, I run 1280x800 pixels on my screen. I've been looking around the forums over the past few weeks, and I've been noticing people who have had excessively large signatures, some even to the point of taking up a page and a half of my screen (not mentioning any names here).

I do know about the other threads relating to this, but there hasn't been one in over a year, and resurrecting the last one might not have as much impact.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a signature nazi, who complains about someone's signature being a few pixels over the limit, but many people are just outright disregarding the rule and disregarding gracious professionalism, just because "it isn't enforced."

The forum rules state:Yet day in, and day out, I can take 10 random threads out of the portal and find several people who violate such a simple rule of courtesy and respect. It isn't very hard to keep a signature under 200 pixels.

Until now, I was happy to just sit by, and negative rep people as they went by for grossly large signatures, and then I got a nice reply to one of the post I negative rep'ed telling me to live with it because they don't care what I think. I won't post any names or any direct quotes out of respect for them, but I was utterly shocked that a mentor of a well-respected team would act in such a way.

For those who follow the rule, you're awesome. It isn't something hard to abide by. For those of you who don't, here is my challenge to you: Have some gracious professionalism, show respect towards your fellow community members, and just follow a simple rule. Thank you.

I really hate to interject here but to me this makes no sense to me what so ever. Now, this whole thread has been started to make people understand that the 200 pixel limit should be abide by. OK i can understand that. but then you go to the length of such acts of bad reputation points for the crime of having a large Sig, and you even go to the point of calling these criminals to have bad gracious professionalism. Now, how in the world is giving bad rep to people for just having a large Sig in any way a reflection of you being a very GP person. For one it is not up to you to regulate or monitor those who are breaking the 200 pixel limit. that job is up to the moderators on CD. Although i do feel that you may PM someone and simply say, hey your Sig exceeds the 200 pixel limit, could you please fix this at some point in the future. and maybe you could even through in some advice on how to shrink ones Sig but no you don't even go to the lengths of helping those who you deem to be breaking a CD law. So all you seem to be doing is complaining and not helping, to me this is not being very GP. Now of all of the announces in life you are complaining about the fact that now you have to scroll a few more times via your mouse. to me that isn't such a big announce. in the future i would ask that when you choose to bad rep and PM someone on how there Sig is exceeding the 200 pixel limit to not only complain that they are wrong but to help them shrink there Sig and remember is what you are doing GP. if you feel like someone needs to be reported then PM a moderator. if you and your girlfriend decide to bad rep me on this issue then fine but remember if you do that then you deem yourself to be someone who completely defies the rules of GP. if you have anything to say to me then simply reply to me on this thread. please don't PM. I took the time to express my feelings on this issue for all of CD to view.
-Cory

[Brandon Martus]

Nice idea, Kevin. It shouldn't be too hard to implement, either.

[Adam Richards]

Originally Posted by ICE MAN

OK i can understand that. but then you go to the length of such acts of bad reputation points for the crime of having a large Sig, and you even go to the point of calling these criminals to have bad gracious professionalism. Now, how in the world is giving bad rep to people for just having a large Sig in any way a reflection of you being a very GP person.

From the FAQ on User Reputation:

Originally Posted by vBulletin User Reputation FAQ

Negative reputation should be given if the person is posting something that detracts from the conversation. If the post is rude, inappropriate, breaks forum rules, is not gracious, etc; these are all good reasons to give negative reputation.

Since the 200px rule is in place, and your signature is part of your post, a signature which violates the 200px rule falls under a good reason to give negative reputation.

Now, moving away from that and back OT:

Wouldn't another option for limiting signature size be to put an iframe around the signature contents, with a width=100%, even if its only used for those people who use Windows' IE?

[kirish]

There are many ways using existing HTML and CSS to limit a signature to a certain size, but there are very few ways to limit it down to a certain maximum size. DIV elements, IFRAMEs, and others can be used to give a signature, say, a 200 pixel height, but then every single signature on the forum would become that height. I do not think lengthening current signatures is desired.

As an amendment to my original suggestion, I would recommend that instead of setting the max-height as a pixel count, use an equivalent em count. That makes the page more accessible to those who set their base text size to something larger than normal. Since most browser's default font size is 16 pixels, that would make 200px equal to 12.5em.

For those that do not know the details of CSS measurements, an em is a unit of length that is based on the text size. This way, if a user increases their base text size to something larger, say they cannot read small print, the dimension will grow accordingly. This way, lines of text that previously fit in a 200px limit do not suddenly dissapear.

Anyways, that is my recommendation.

[KarenH]

Who needs software to measure a sig?

It seems to me that you could take a piece of paper, hold it up to the ruler on your screen, make pencil marks on the edge of the paper corresponding to the ends of the ruler, then hold the paper up to your sig to see if it fits within the marks. The only cautions would be to have the image in the middle of your monitor to avoid optical distortion, and to be careful not to mark the monitor with your pencil or fingers.

This technique would be particularly useful if you don't have a ruler handy for measuring things in the traditional way. Of course, it won't be accurate if you're trying to push the limit at exactly 200 pixels.

[JVGazeley]

About time someone said it.

I would support that code idea. Would be very good at enforcing the rule.

I always try to stick within it but have had trouble in the past with resizing pictures, thus pushing me a couple of pixels over. As it stands, I think if I hit enter to shift this years motto onto a new line, I'd be over the size limit. I have always tried to stick within the limits but I have seen others out there who seem to disregard them entirely.

If some people can make the effort to obey the rules, everyone should be able to.

[JVN]

Yep 200 pixels is the legal limit.
I wish everyone would keep them less than 100 pixels.

Food for thought-
Who do you really think is reading your 10 line signature anyways?

Not me. It's just more to skim over.

If you want people to actually read your signature, or get anything useful out of it, maybe you should go with the minimalist "less is more" approach.

-JV

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by JVN

Yep 200 pixels is the legal limit.
I wish everyone would keep them less than 100 pixels.

Going to 100 pixels would be a good start...