Felix Miata wrote:
Because no designer knows the real world starting point outside his local
world, any deviation from 100% is inherently arbitrary.
OTOH, the "100% Easy-2-Read Standard" is a standard worthy of embracing to
the fullest. http://www.informationarchitects.jp/100e2r?v=4
Though I agree with the sentiment, the fact remains that the large
majority of websites out there do size text below 100% (and yes, more
often than not around the 75%ish mark). If a user perceives that size to
be a problem, she more likely than not has bumped up the default text
size of the browser to compensate for her daily browsing activity. Going
to 100% could then, potentially, go the opposite way and make the text
too big for her. Couple that with a client's habit of comparing the site
they're commissioning with the majority of other sites out there (and
the resultant moaning of "why is the text on our site bigger than on
competitor X's site?")...
P
--
Patrick H. Lauke
______________________________________________________________
re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively
[latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.]
www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk
http://redux.deviantart.com
______________________________________________________________
Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force
http://webstandards.org/
______________________________________________________________
Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team
http://streetteam.webstandards.org/
______________________________________________________________
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
