On 5/9/07 (20:15) Felix said:
>The point of pointing that page was the repetition factor, that people
>eventually believe as fact anything sufficiently repeated, whether
>proven true or otherwise. In web development circles, "the defaults are
>too big" is a mantra that is not even close to a proven fact
That was, in part, why I started this thread; I felt (and still feel)
that the notion of "you MUST design for 100% of your users' default text
size because that is their preferred text size" was becoming a mantra.
People sometimes repeated it dogmatically, without really thinking about
it. Dogmatism worries me.
The idea that maybe people are not *choosing* these defaults seems
increasingly deemed to be a heresy, and anybody who dares to think "gee,
I actually prefer the look of this page with slightly smaller type"
risks being thoroughly pilloried as an artsy-fartsy-designer-type
completely divorced from the real world. That worries me too, because
it's dismissive.
I'm not saying that the {font-size:100%} argument is wrong, but I am
saying that treating it as dogma is probably not the thing to do. If we
didn't keep asking questions and revisiting these things, then we'd
probably still be creating table-based layouts, right?
--
Rick Lecoat
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
