Felix Miata wrote: <<::SNIP::>>
Small equals approximately 88.75%, so the result due to the cascade is the p text is 88.75% X 80% X 90%, or 63.9%. To the poor IE user already requiring "larger" or "largest" text in the first place, you're making it (unless a rare user who knows how to locate and select "ignore font sizes specified on web pages") impossible to make comfortably large enough to read if large enough to read at all: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/crysanct2.png
<<::SNIP::>>
This brings up a question I have been wondering about. What is the consensus (if there is a consensus :-) on the best way to provide resizable (accessible) text while still permitting reasonably consistent layout without torturous CSS? Font-size keywords? Relative sizes? I've found and read some online resources on the subject and I believe that I would lean toward font-size keywords, but I'm interested in finding if there are more reasons to choose a different method which I haven't encountered. Cheers, Scott ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
