Template talk:Quote: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Text replace - 'Image:' to 'File:') |
m (Text replace - 'Adamcox82' to 'Adam') |
||
Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
<div style="padding: .4em .9em"> | <div style="padding: .4em .9em"> | ||
[[File:Quote1.jpg|100px|right]] | [[File:Quote1.jpg|100px|right]] | ||
Sorry, I'm having difficulty seeing the benefit of replacing .png images with transparent background with the .jpg shown to the right. Not only is the background a fixed colour, which means it's use is restricted to normal body text only (and not [[Royal Knights|here]] for example), but it's too heavily compressed and quite severely artifacted. Was there a problem with the original images that I wasn't aware of? —[[User: | Sorry, I'm having difficulty seeing the benefit of replacing .png images with transparent background with the .jpg shown to the right. Not only is the background a fixed colour, which means it's use is restricted to normal body text only (and not [[Royal Knights|here]] for example), but it's too heavily compressed and quite severely artifacted. Was there a problem with the original images that I wasn't aware of? —[[User:Adam|Adam]] <sup>([[User talk:Adam|talk]])</sup> 03:05, 1 March 2008 (EST) | ||
:Aside from all the quotation marks when shown in a quote having a light blue box around them that makes the actual mark extremely hard to see? No, nothing at all. | :Aside from all the quotation marks when shown in a quote having a light blue box around them that makes the actual mark extremely hard to see? No, nothing at all. | ||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:The size is exactly the same as the size of your png quotation marks and for what reason would a quotation mark ever need to be that size here? [[User:Knil|Knil]] 07:42, 1 March 2008 (EST) | :The size is exactly the same as the size of your png quotation marks and for what reason would a quotation mark ever need to be that size here? [[User:Knil|Knil]] 07:42, 1 March 2008 (EST) | ||
::If there was a problem with the rendering of the .png image, that's a different matter. But it's not something I was aware of; it looked perfect in my browser. Could you maybe take a screenshot of the problem and post it here? I'm curious to see how and why it was happening. —[[User: | ::If there was a problem with the rendering of the .png image, that's a different matter. But it's not something I was aware of; it looked perfect in my browser. Could you maybe take a screenshot of the problem and post it here? I'm curious to see how and why it was happening. —[[User:Adam|Adam]] <sup>([[User talk:Adam|talk]])</sup> 14:05, 1 March 2008 (EST) | ||
:::No longer possible as someone has deleted the original images. [[User:Knil|Knil]] 18:57, 1 March 2008 (EST) | :::No longer possible as someone has deleted the original images. [[User:Knil|Knil]] 18:57, 1 March 2008 (EST) |
Revision as of 16:17, 29 September 2009
Sorry, I'm having difficulty seeing the benefit of replacing .png images with transparent background with the .jpg shown to the right. Not only is the background a fixed colour, which means it's use is restricted to normal body text only (and not here for example), but it's too heavily compressed and quite severely artifacted. Was there a problem with the original images that I wasn't aware of? —Adam (talk) 03:05, 1 March 2008 (EST)
|