Discussion on signature sizes

[#1]

I don't really have a problem with small images as in the present rules, but would prefer to have a text only signature.
I'd agree that Speedtest data is only really relevant when discussing a particular speed problem.  Larger images means fewer posts per page thus impeding speed reading of longer threads.  I would rather read content than view the same images time after time.
Maurice

[#2]

Quote from: 7up

Quote from: Oldjim I have asked the question as the present software version appears to support it So does that mean the size limitation will be lifted or stay the same with hinderance to the signatures?

It only means I have asked the question

[#3]

What question?
All you say is that you HAVE asked THE question AS the current board SUPPORTS it.
What have you asked?! Or do you mean you've asked the question as to WHETHER the current board supports it?

[#4]

There is at least one positive outcome from this discussion - I didn't realise I could turn off signature and avatar display 
Now done!

[#5]

Quote from: pwatson

I didn't realise I could turn off signature and avatar display  Now done!

You mean you're no longer getting the benefit of my random avatars? 
After all the effort I went through too...

[#6]

I certainly support text only signatures, and not more than 4 lines of 10pt text. Signatures with small images are OK, but then "what is small?" becomes an issue. Not allowing any graphics avoids that.

[#7]

Made a sticky to help make it a little more obvious

[#8]

I would opt for text only signatures. Currently I've got display of signatures and avatars disabled. I'm also blocking images from speedtest and pingtest, which makes it easier to ignore speed moaner threads.

[#9]

I'm not too bothered whether it's text only or with (limited) graphics but would like to see the size reasonably restricted so that posts are generally significantly larger than signatures (and load times on slow connections are not unreasonably affected.

[#10]

unsticked as it has run out of replies

[#11]

From reading this thread it seems that there are some people that would prefer bigger signatures, some prefer smaller and some that are happy as they are. Threrefore I don't think changes need to be made to the rules on this topic.

[#12]

I think there should be more time, before a final decision is clearly made , as Oldjim had quite rightly pointed out, less the 2 minutes before your last response

Quote from: Oldjim

unsticked as it has run out of replies

I think whether or not the final decision, changes the size rule
The rules should be made more in layman's terms & absolutely clear to avoid any confusion, & to include an overall width rule, as was pointed out to me in a PM
State which is Height / Width by say (Height = 100px X Width 540px) or (H = 100px X W = 540px)
State that if image(s) are @ maximum height of 100px, then no text is allowed underneath, however if image(s) are @ 90px high, then text is allowed underneath image(s)
Maximum text font size is 10
Different resolutions will show the signatures differently & must be taken into consideration before any decisions are made
I will show a cached page of what was mine as an example
Firefox 27.0.1
Default Resolution @ 100%

After pressing CTRL & + twice which brings the resolution to 125%
Clearly produces


I also think that there should be clear instructions on how members can overall check that their signature is not breaking any rules
There should be an option implemented to preview the signature
As it is now we have to make signature ===========> Save =======> Go out & check signature in a post we have made =========> Go back to signature to make any changes ===========> Save & go around in circles until it is within the correct guidelines
Have a link to the guidelines that open in a popup box, next to the signature

[#13]

Quote from: TORPC

There should be an option implemented to preview the signature

There is a way to do this: start creating a post in say Chit Chat and develop the signature in there which you can preview. When happy copy it to your signature.

[#14]

@jelv
No offence
It seems you are missing the point
However in the interim that is a good suggestion for a workaround
Here is an example to avoid any confusion

[#15]

To comment on the points above
This is the part of the rule in question
"Signatures should use no more space than 5 lines of standard sized text would, this includes any blank lines and images you choose to use. Image based signatures should be limited to 100 x 560 pixels and a maximum total file size of 40kB."
Note it says - image based signatures - not images
It also says that - Signatures should use no more space than 5 lines of standard sized text would, this includes any blank lines and images you choose to use - which obviously precludes images which are 560 deep
Regarding the change of resolution that will not cause the effect you show unless the signature is wider than 560px - this post explains why http://community.plus.net/forum/index.php/topic,124302.msg1079093.html#msg1079093