At 9:47 PM -0400 10/13/07, Kenny Graham wrote:
>I think the gimmick they're talking about is using
>body {font-size:62.5%;}
>in an attempt to give yourself the illusion of 1em = 10px.
>
>An "em" is relative to the user's default font-size, whereas a pixel
>is absolute*. So the 62.5% calculation only works with one specific
>default font-size. The gimmick isn't using em's, it's the idea that
>em's and px's can be converted back and forth. It's not like
>converting inches to cm, it's like converting "5 lengths of the user's
>thumb" to inches. If you want to size your page in pixels, you should
>use pixels, not em's. Em's are better, but the technique you were
>using above is an attempt to make em's behave identically to pixels,
>which is impossible since the size of an em is different for each
>user. Only use a font-size of 1.5em's if you want the font size to be
>one and a half times the size of the user's default font. Not if you
>want it to be a specific pixel amount.
As for me, other than borders, I never use pixels for anything.
All dimensions for everything, including graphics, are in em's. I
simply use a conversion ratio of 16 pixels equal 1 em.
To prohibit any inheritance issues when defining size (height/width)
for graphics or widths of anything, I use font-size: 1em; at the
start of the rule.
This technique works for me in everything I've done and I would never
go back to using pixels for anything -- unless a "more informed than
me" client demands it.
Cheers,
tedd
--
-------
http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
