Judy, As Barry says, you can increase the padding of your content area to accommodate your maps, etc. However, this will not affect the appearance of your background image, which repeats rather untidily across the screen, and which cuts in half the image on the right-hand side. Of course, you may not be concerned about this, but I've found that even with smaller patterns which are less noticeable I can sometimes detect a hard line at the edges which at best can be irritating, and at worst give an unprofessional appearance to the site. That is why I suggested that, instead of having a continuous background you restrict your images to the left and right-hand side of the screen, as Barry has also suggested. Also, you say you have Photoshop. Why then do you not utilise this to its full potential and create your own backgrounds, over which you have much more control? Valerie On 19 February 2016 at 00:23, Barry Carlson via <[email protected] > wrote: > > > Judy, > > When you are talking about the "border", you are > effectively meaning the left/right "space" between the text and the > table border. That is "padding", and you can reduce it, and at the same > time increase the width. Or, if you want the available content area to > be 800px, then declare that as the width, and left/right padding added > will become the "space" between the "content" and the border. > > The CSS > file I sorted out is at:- > > > http://countjustonce.com/test/florian-pa-test.css > > When you post a > page, I am not aware of what FP includes are in it. > > Barry > > > ------------------- > > On 19/02/2016 10:48, JFlorian wrote: > > > Hi > Barry, > > Do you have a link to the new CSS you're referring to? > > My > focus isn't about the outermost border _per se_; It's about getting the > content area wider (which then makes the outer border thinner). If the > content area is narrow like it shows on the page below, I don't think it > will work for the very wide photos and maps I need to transfer. That's > my biggest concern. > > I'm also confused why my example page (below) had > any old codes, since it only contains css-appropriate tags (ids, > classes, h2... no font tags, no garbage). > > > > http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pawashin/test_with_feb-09-2016_css-new.htm > [1] This is the page I validated. Are there tags leftover that I > overlooked? > > I've been removing all garbage, fonts, etc. from every > page (so that won't be a problem), while trying to figure out how to get > the content area widened in the CSS and get display problems fixed with > the search boxes, includes, etc. So at this point the site existing on > my PC is "trash" without the CSS fixed. I haven't started moving content > yet, fearing I'd make a bigger mess of things. > > . > > If it would help > you to see them, I can transfer some map-photo content to the template > above and upload them, so you can see my concern about the wide photos > and atlas maps with the narrow content area. Would that help? > > Judy > > > > Links: > ------ > [1] > > http://www.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~pawashin/test_with_feb-09-2016_css-new.htm > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message >