On 21 February 2012 23:29, Kagamin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday, 21 February 2012 at 00:53:51 UTC, James Miller wrote: >> >> There are a potentially infinite number of possible configurations, >> and sites need to be aimed at the lowest-common denominator. Doesn't >> look right with an enlarged font size? Tough. > > > So the joke about "standard font size" isn't a joke?
Its more, if you are using a font with a massive difference in size, then obviously things aren't going to look right. However, if a website require pixel-perfect rendering, then it isn't going to work anyway once it hits a platform that isn't the one the designer works on. I'm not advocating that websites should be rigid, more that complaining that the site doesn't work under /your/ specific settings is really not fair to the developer. >> I'm pretty sure that making a website work in all browsers and all >> configurations is a punishment in hell for IE developers... >> -- >> James Miller > I completely agree. And it's hell for you when you're forced to support IE > because more than 50% of the customers use IE. if I have to type <!--[if IE 6]> ever again it will be too soon (we kinda support IE7, and actually support IE8+9) -- James Miller
