Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Eric wrote: Hi Phillip, You ran Andy Clarke's site through the validator instead of trying to understand how the REM unit (the thread's topic) is used in CSS?! All I can say is that that's just a bit sad. Instead of trying to learn something your first action is to try to discredit the example I posted?! No, Erric. I ran Andy Clarke's site through the validator because David Laakso (a man who usually knows what he is about) reported that it rendered strangely in his browser. Whenever a site behaves badly, the first thing to check is its validity : until that has been established beyond reasonable doubt, there is little or no point in looking under the bonnet for more arcane causes. Well, I'll keep posting information to help folks learn and understand CSS. Feel free to run that info through the validator and a spell-checker if you want. The only thing that matters about such information is whether it is accurate, and as far as I know, that is not something that can yet be determined programmatically. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Philippe, (under example 25 for the width MQ – it applies equally to the REM unit) Sure, that makes sense as long as a font-size has been set for the root element. If there is no font-size set on the root element I'm not absolutely sure what would be used but based on my testing of the REM unit and UA default font-size my assumption is that the UA's default font-size value would be used. I need to look into that. Bottom line, if you go with relative units, go all the way. Well, that's one way to look at it, but you'll find many pages in the wild that use a mix of fixed and relative units... it most often works however. Eric On January 25, 2013 at 12:37 AM Philippe Wittenbergh e...@l-c-n.com wrote: Le 25 janv. 2013 à 14:04, Eric e...@minerbits.com a écrit : What does that have to do with developing an understanding of relative units in CSS? But, since you insist on changing the topic (which is usually done by those who don't understand the topic) let me just say….what the hell does it matter!? It has. The cited example site does trigger a serious scrollbar on my desktop browser(s) when zoomed in – a block (.work-nav.m-hide has it's width set in px)… There may be other issues, didn't check them. Bottom line, if you go with relative units, go all the way. On the subject of relative units, the media query spec has this: The ‘em’ value is relative to the initial value of ‘font-size’. (under example 25 for the width MQ – it applies equally to the REM unit) I'll let you ponder the meaning of it. http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/#width Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com On January 25, 2013 at 12:37 AM Philippe Wittenbergh e...@l-c-n.com wrote: Le 25 janv. 2013 à 14:04, Eric e...@minerbits.com a écrit : What does that have to do with developing an understanding of relative units in CSS? But, since you insist on changing the topic (which is usually done by those who don't understand the topic) let me just say….what the hell does it matter!? It has. The cited example site does trigger a serious scrollbar on my desktop browser(s) when zoomed in – a block (.work-nav.m-hide has it's width set in px)… There may be other issues, didn't check them. Bottom line, if you go with relative units, go all the way. On the subject of relative units, the media query spec has this: The ‘em’ value is relative to the initial value of ‘font-size’. (under example 25 for the width MQ – it applies equally to the REM unit) I'll let you ponder the meaning of it. http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/#width Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On 2013-01-25 13:37 (GMT-0500) Eric composed: Sure, that makes sense as long as a font-size has been set for the root element. If there is no font-size set on the root element I'm not absolutely sure what would be used but based on my testing of the REM unit and UA default font-size my assumption is that the UA's default font-size value would be used. I need to look into that. CSS is a non-essential component of web page rendering. Absent CSS and presentational HTML, text is rendered in the UA's default size, which is what is inherited by CSS as the root element size. -- The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive. Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Le 26 janv. 2013 à 03:37, Eric e...@minerbits.com a écrit : (under example 25 for the width MQ – it applies equally to the REM unit) Sure, that makes sense as long as a font-size has been set for the root element. If there is no font-size set on the root element I'm not absolutely sure what would be used but based on my testing of the REM unit and UA default font-size my assumption is that the UA's default font-size value would be used. I need to look into that. The keyword is 'initial'. Even if the author specifies a font-size on the root element, it won't have any affect on the (computed / used) value of 'em' or 'rem' used for the MQ. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/about.html#initial-value http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-values/#common-keywords http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-cascade/#initial It comes down to the value set by the UA stylesheet (in case of font-size, usually the value set in the browser preferences, or the system preferences). Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Philippe, It comes down to the value set by the UA stylesheet (in case of font-size, usually the value set in the browser preferences, or the system preferences). I knew I had read that somewhere. Thanks for clarifying it. Thanks, Eric On January 25, 2013 at 8:07 PM Philippe Wittenbergh e...@l-c-n.com wrote: Le 26 janv. 2013 à 03:37, Eric e...@minerbits.com a écrit : (under example 25 for the width MQ – it applies equally to the REM unit) Sure, that makes sense as long as a font-size has been set for the root element. If there is no font-size set on the root element I'm not absolutely sure what would be used but based on my testing of the REM unit and UA default font-size my assumption is that the UA's default font-size value would be used. I need to look into that. The keyword is 'initial'. Even if the author specifies a font-size on the root element, it won't have any affect on the (computed / used) value of 'em' or 'rem' used for the MQ. http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/about.html#initial-value http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-values/#common-keywords http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-cascade/#initial It comes down to the value set by the UA stylesheet (in case of font-size, usually the value set in the browser preferences, or the system preferences). Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote: Since I'm still in the process of getting to 'Pro level I can point you to a tree Pro's site if you're interested in see how the REM unit is used: Is Andy Clarke 'pro' enough for you? His calls his site Stuff Nonsense I'm sure you know the name. Eric. re: Stuff Nonsense http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Yes, very nice. Thanks. Shame that it is impossible to navigate the site in Android/2.3.6 [tapping the unicode symbol for navigation crashes the site, sending the user back to the phones desktop]; and, employing +1 zoom causes an enormous horizontal wiggle making the page difficult to read. Perhaps these issues will be corrected in future versions...? Best, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
David Laakso wrote: re: Stuff Nonsense http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Yes, very nice. Thanks. Shame that it is impossible to navigate the site in Android/2.3.6 [tapping the unicode symbol for navigation crashes the site, sending the user back to the phones desktop]; and, employing +1 zoom causes an enormous horizontal wiggle making the page difficult to read. Perhaps these issues will be corrected in future versions...? Perhaps addressing these might help : http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Perhaps a kind tweet or email to him (via contact links in the footer of his site) might be helpful? I'm pretty sure Mr. Clarke isn't on this list. At least not using his real name. I've never seen him post. He is, however, pro enough in my book. On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 8:30 AM, Philip TAYLOR p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk wrote: David Laakso wrote: re: Stuff Nonsense http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Yes, very nice. Thanks. Shame that it is impossible to navigate the site in Android/2.3.6 [tapping the unicode symbol for navigation crashes the site, sending the user back to the phones desktop]; and, employing +1 zoom causes an enormous horizontal wiggle making the page difficult to read. Perhaps these issues will be corrected in future versions...? Perhaps addressing these might help : http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/ -- Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Hello David, I would assume the Andy checked his design and code on all available devices since he's an industry leader in advocating such testing. I have no idea what's going on with your Android device, but if I were to diagnose the issue I'd start there. Besides, if what you describe has something to do with the site's code I don't think the the REM unit would be even close to the cause. I'd be happy to list more sites using the REM unit. Maybe there will be something wrong with them too. BTW - I apologize for my atrocious spelling, it was very late at night when I sent that message. Eric On January 24, 2013 at 8:25 AM David Laakso laakso.davi...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 11:49 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote: Since I'm still in the process of getting to 'Pro level I can point you to a tree Pro's site if you're interested in see how the REM unit is used: Is Andy Clarke 'pro' enough for you? His calls his site Stuff Nonsense I'm sure you know the name. Eric. re: Stuff Nonsense http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Yes, very nice. Thanks. Shame that it is impossible to navigate the site in Android/2.3.6 [tapping the unicode symbol for navigation crashes the site, sending the user back to the phones desktop]; and, employing +1 zoom causes an enormous horizontal wiggle making the page difficult to read. Perhaps these issues will be corrected in future versions...? Best, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Eric wrote: I would assume the Andy checked his design and code on all available devices since he's an industry leader in advocating such testing. Testing can reveal only the presence of bugs, not their absence. (Edsger Diskstra). All the checking in the world is a waste of time if he doesn't start by ensuring that his site is W3C-compliant. The site has putatively been authored to the HTML 5 specification, yet generates 11 validation errors and three warnings. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Looking through the validator output, i'd *guess* that the errors were things that the ...experimental feature: HTML5 Conformance Checker doesn't understand, such as vendor prefixes etc. On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Philip TAYLOR p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk wrote: Eric wrote: I would assume the Andy checked his design and code on all available devices since he's an industry leader in advocating such testing. Testing can reveal only the presence of bugs, not their absence. (Edsger Diskstra). All the checking in the world is a waste of time if he doesn't start by ensuring that his site is W3C-compliant. The site has putatively been authored to the HTML 5 specification, yet generates 11 validation errors and three warnings. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/ -- Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Tom Livingston wrote: Looking through the validator output, i'd *guess* that the errors were things that the ...experimental feature: HTML5 Conformance Checker doesn't understand, such as vendor prefixes etc. In its HTML 5 mode, the validator is indeed an imperfect tool, but in general it is fairly safe to assume that a document that fails validation is far more likely to be invalid than the validator is likely to be in error. In the specific case you cite (vendor prefixes) it is my understanding that these are non-standard (i.e., not in the specification) and therefore the error message is correct. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote: I would assume the Andy checked his design and code on all available devices since he's an industry leader in advocating such testing. Eric, re: stuffandnonsense.http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Nevertheless, the site -- as previously stated -- has issues [crashing the browser and a massive horizontal-scroll bar at +1] in Android/2.3.6. I made no assertion whatsoever as to either the cause or the cure of these outstanding issues. Best, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
David Laakso wrote: Nevertheless, the site -- as previously stated -- has issues [crashing the browser and a massive horizontal-scroll bar at +1] in Android/2.3.6. Crashing the browser asserts a causal relationahip that has not been demonstrated to exist. If a browser crashes, the browser is badly written, regardless of which page actually led to the crash. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 3:07 PM, Philip TAYLOR p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk wrote: Tom Livingston wrote: Looking through the validator output, i'd *guess* that the errors were things that the ...experimental feature: HTML5 Conformance Checker doesn't understand, such as vendor prefixes etc. [snip] In the specific case you cite (vendor prefixes) it is my understanding that these are non-standard (i.e., not in the specification) and therefore the error message is correct. My point exactly. It's throwing an error, but for something that the validator just doesn't understand and flags but is considered by most to be OK to have in the styles. Unless you are in the camp of no vendor prefixes ever and the like... -- Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Tom Livingston wrote: My point exactly. It's throwing an error, but for something that the validator just doesn't understand and flags but is considered by most to be OK to have in the styles. Unless you are in the camp of no vendor prefixes ever and the like... No,I am in the camp of Either it is valid, or it is not. Vendor-prefixes are non-standard, and a page that uses them is invalid : it is not that the validator does not understand them, it is that they are not defined in the specification to which the validator putatively refers when validating the page. This has nothing to do with what might or might not become standard (and therefore correct) one day : it is solely about what is standard (and therefore correct) today. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:40 PM, Philip TAYLOR p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk wrote: Tom Livingston wrote: My point exactly. It's throwing an error, but for something that the validator just doesn't understand and flags but is considered by most to be OK to have in the styles. Unless you are in the camp of no vendor prefixes ever and the like... No,I am in the camp of Either it is valid, or it is not. Vendor-prefixes are non-standard, and a page that uses them is invalid : it is not that the validator does not understand them, it is that they are not defined in the specification to which the validator putatively refers when validating the page. This has nothing to do with what might or might not become standard (and therefore correct) one day : it is solely about what is standard (and therefore correct) today. Philip Taylor I am not arguing your point, but merely try to say (poorly) that the errors the validator is flagging may not break the page. -- Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Tom Livingston wrote: I am not arguing your point, but merely try to say (poorly) that the errors the validator is flagging may not break the page. Of course : I hope I did not appear to suggest otherwise. Neither validity nor invalidity offer any guarantees of behaviour, but a page that is valid is more likely to behave correctly than one that is not. And whilst it is arguably acceptable for a site that exists only to provide a service to fail validation, it surely cannot be right to hold such a site up as an example of good practice, which is where this thread started and why this particular site is being critiqued. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 4:54 PM, Philip TAYLOR p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk wrote: Tom Livingston wrote: I am not arguing your point, but merely try to say (poorly) that the errors the validator is flagging may not break the page. Of course : I hope I did not appear to suggest otherwise. Neither validity nor invalidity offer any guarantees of behaviour, but a page that is valid is more likely to behave correctly than one that is not. And whilst it is arguably acceptable for a site that exists only to provide a service to fail validation, it surely cannot be right to hold such a site up as an example of good practice, which is where this thread started and why this particular site is being critiqued. I completely understand what you're saying, but Mr. Clarke tends to lean towards bleeding edge and favors modern ideas. It's his personal site for his business and, frankly, more power to him. I think it's important for newbies to understand that non-standardized things *may* be used to solve problems (test, test, test!), even though the validator complains. It's a personal call. No one will arrest you if you don't pass the validator. -- Tom Livingston | Senior Interactive Developer | Media Logic | ph: 518.456.3015x231 | fx: 518.456.4279 | mlinc.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
David, Nevertheless, the site -- as previously stated -- has issues [crashing the browser and a massive horizontal-scroll bar at +1] in Android/2.3.6. What does that have to do with developing an understanding of relative units in CSS? But, since you insist on changing the topic (which is usually done by those who don't understand the topic) let me just saywhat the hell does it matter!? Big deal, go view the site on another device so you can check the code and see how the REM unit is used in the wild. Do you understand the difference between an EM and a REM? Let's try to stay on topic. This all started because a member asked if using EMs would have an effect on his media queries. The answer to that question, as I'm sure you know, is yes it can be done. But, I did notice that you didn't warn the OP about the specificity issues that will arise when using EMs because they're relative to the parent element. Not sure if you've ever run across these issues, but I have and it's a major pain. And, those issues are exactly why the REM unit was developed. So shall we go into more detail on the REM and other relative units or move on to the next topic? Eric On January 24, 2013 at 4:03 PM David Laakso laakso.davi...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote: I would assume the Andy checked his design and code on all available devices since he's an industry leader in advocating such testing. Eric, re: stuffandnonsense.http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ Nevertheless, the site -- as previously stated -- has issues [crashing the browser and a massive horizontal-scroll bar at +1] in Android/2.3.6. I made no assertion whatsoever as to either the cause or the cure of these outstanding issues. Best, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Hi Phillip, You ran Andy Clarke's site through the validator instead of trying to understand how the REM unit (the thread's topic) is used in CSS?! All I can say is that that's just a bit sad. Instead of trying to learn something your first action is to try to discredit the example I posted?! Well, I'll keep posting information to help folks learn and understand CSS. Feel free to run that info through the validator and a spell-checker if you want. Eric On January 24, 2013 at 2:22 PM Philip TAYLOR p.tay...@rhul.ac.uk wrote: Eric wrote: I would assume the Andy checked his design and code on all available devices since he's an industry leader in advocating such testing. Testing can reveal only the presence of bugs, not their absence. (Edsger Diskstra). All the checking in the world is a waste of time if he doesn't start by ensuring that his site is W3C-compliant. The site has putatively been authored to the HTML 5 specification, yet generates 11 validation errors and three warnings. Philip Taylor __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
Le 25 janv. 2013 à 14:04, Eric e...@minerbits.com a écrit : What does that have to do with developing an understanding of relative units in CSS? But, since you insist on changing the topic (which is usually done by those who don't understand the topic) let me just say….what the hell does it matter!? It has. The cited example site does trigger a serious scrollbar on my desktop browser(s) when zoomed in – a block (.work-nav.m-hide has it's width set in px)… There may be other issues, didn't check them. Bottom line, if you go with relative units, go all the way. On the subject of relative units, the media query spec has this: The ‘em’ value is relative to the initial value of ‘font-size’. (under example 25 for the width MQ – it applies equally to the REM unit) I'll let you ponder the meaning of it. http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-mediaqueries/#width Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 12:04 AM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote: David, trim So shall we go into more detail on the REM and other relative units or move on to the next topic? Eric Neither. As for myself, I plan on taking in a good movie... Best, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote: I thought for the sake of beginners who might subscribe to this list we ought to discuss this in a new thread. Eric Since the mission of this list is the practical application of CSS, rather than disusing it, how about putting up a simple 2 column test page that shows how a pro would make all this happiness happen... enabling children of all ages to land on a readable and legible site delivered from one address to desktop, laptop, tablet, and mobile devices? Thanks. Best, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
well David, Since I'm still in the process of getting to 'Pro level I can point you to a tree Pro's site if you're interested in see how the REM unit is used: Is Andy Clarke 'pro' enough for you? His calls his site Stuff Nonsense http://www.stuffandnonsense.co.uk/ I'm sure you know the name. Since the mission of this list is the practical application of CSS, rather than disusing it, I'm sorry I thought this list was a place to share information about CSS in order to solve problems, share tips techniques and to learn. One way I've learned in the past is to ask questions and listen to people who know more than I do...it sounds like this list may be just for posting URLs to code samples. Sorry, but I really did think that the info I posted was fairly clear. Eric. On January 23, 2013 at 3:31 AM David Laakso laakso.davi...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Eric e...@minerbits.com wrote: I thought for the sake of beginners who might subscribe to this list we ought to discuss this in a new thread. Eric Since the mission of this list is the practical application of CSS, rather than disusing it, how about putting up a simple 2 column test page that shows how a pro would make all this happiness happen... enabling children of all ages to land on a readable and legible site delivered from one address to desktop, laptop, tablet, and mobile devices? Thanks. Best, David Laakso -- Chelsea Creek Studio http://ccstudi.com http://ccstudi.com __ css-discuss [css-d@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/
Re: [css-d] New Thread: The REM unit vs. EM's vs. PX's...
On 2013-01-19 14:49 (GMT-0500) Eric composed:
On 2013-01-14 17:00 (GMT-0500) Felix Miata composed:
users with competent UAs can avoid the need to apply zoom to restore some
legibility, at least potentially, via a user stylesheet containing the
^
following:
...
That simplicity could easily be expanded to include much more:
html,
...
#main
{font: medium/normal sans-serif !important}
Why in the world would you force your visitors to see only the default
sans-serif font?
Context!!! Here, no visitors are involved. Since most commonly specified
serif fonts have a smaller apparent size than common same size sans fonts,
the effect is some stabilization of apparent size, and less need to diddle
with zoom keys to avoid eyestrain.
The result though can be a big mess of overlapping and/or hidden content if
container sizing is also done in px.
To be honest I'm not sure what you mean by this. When exactly does setting an
element's size in pixels result in what you describe? I really am curious.
Again, context matters. A user stylesheet that only addresses text sizes in
the context of site styles sizing containers and positions in px instead of
(r)em or % commonly causes overflows that result in hidden and/or overlapping
content.
You might want to check the links on some of your pages...many are dead.
Examples please. I only fix broken ones I know about.
Also,
most of the pages you classify as friendly
(in terms of font-size) are using font sizes equal to and in some cases less
than the pages that are listed as 'unfriendly'.
Context and examples please.
Exemplars must be what they must be whether legible or friendly or not.
Interestingly the Nielsen Norman Group page you link to that's titled Let Users
Control Font Size sets font-size explicitly
to 14px, not 'medium', not 'large'...but in pixels.
I have no links to nngroup.com pages. Maybe Jakob Nielsen died? Did you
notice that page's URL on my site (useit.com) gets redirected to nngroup.com?
I just checked, and all useit.com links on my site are redirected to
nngroup.com. Apparently whoever is responsible for nngroup.com styling is
unfamiliar with or otherwise unable to reconcile the styling with the content
of the redirected useit.com pages.
http://web.archive.org/web/20120812200643/http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html
is the web archive of my link. If nngroup.com doesn't update its styling to
conform to its content in a reasonable time, I'll need to change my useit.com
links to come from web.archive.org.
I would love to discuss the tyranny of the minority that Mr. Nielsen and his
cohorts represent
Again, context is absent. Where are you quoting from here?
--
The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive. Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!
Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
__
css-discuss [css-d@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/
