On 2009/08/11 12:26 (GMT-0400) Sam Brown composed: > I hate to skew the discussion by introducing another variable, but while > it is true that a layout designed using px for sizing is essentially > cemented in that size, all of the modern browsers I have seen now > emphasize page zooming over text scaling. So it is certainly true that a > user may choose to increase or decrease the font-size locally, I consider > that out of my control
Thank goodness. :-) CSS is supposed to be suggestive, not domineering. > and by doing so, the user accepts that a layout may > not hold together as well as it was originally designed. He shouldn't. It needn't be that way except for extreme cases. > However, if a > user has poor eyesight, for example, and wants larger text, they can use > the page zoom features of the browser to safely increase or decrease the > zoom and NOT impact the layout of the page at all. Page zoom is no panacea. Each variant has its flaws, besides being a defense mechanism that wouldn't be needed absent an offense. > I understand the argument from a purist perspective, usability should be > first and foremost in any design and/or layout, but realistically, I don't > see this as a practical issue given the more common usage of page zooming > over the now declining exposure of any sort of text scaling behavior in > modern browsers. How long do we design or build in support for what is > essentially becoming a deprecated behavior? 1-"Becoming" is the keyword in your question. It will be quite some time yet before all common browsers incapable of page zoom fall into disuse. In the meantime and beyond, designing for resolution independence via em remains as a method of universal support regardless of browser features and user personalizations. 2-Minimum font size, text zoom, and page zoom are all defense mechanisms, implemented after CSS gave designers the power to completely disregard a user's desktop and browser settings, needs and preferences. Designs that require users to employ defenses are by definition offensive, and rude, considering it is perfectly feasible to design politely using em sizing instead of px or absolute sizing. 3-In discussions among designers about the capabilities and effects of text zoom it is often overlooked that most users' browsers have the capability to text zoom before the fact, in the form of personalizable default text settings for the browsers installed on their personal computers. Pages shouldn't, and needn't, fall apart simply because a user chooses to personalize his personal computer instead of employing a page zoom defense against offensive web page designs. 4-Even when it does come to pass that most browsers in common use offer page zoom, users may still prefer to leave images at their intrinsic or specified size, and change only the size of text, before or after the fact. -- How much better to get wisdom than gold, to choose understanding rather than silver. Proverbs 16:16 NKJV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [cs...@lists.css-discuss.org] 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/
