Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
Lothar B. Baier wrote on Thu, 18 Nov 2004 22:47:16 +0100: But is it my fault, that dell or hp ore other produce laptops, which screensize and screen resolution are set to a default which makes it impossible to read a text easy? One size cannot fit all. With defaults come a means to change them to suit user needs. It should not bother you that some don't know this or don't use it. Is it my fault, that the designers of browsers after about 10 years of webstandards are not able to produce browsers which behave according to those standards? I don't think so. The newest and best ones do behave according to standards quite well, if not perfectly. So I think instead of spending a mayority of our time in finding solutions for problems, which are not caused by us, we should collect our energy to put presure on browser designers to produce browser which are standard Are you sure web page designers aren't causing problems? I suggest you don't know, but can find out a lot if you want. The open source Mozilla project, makers of Firefox, Camino and Mozilla Suite software, has several places where you can learn what they are doing, why they are doing it, and what users and page authors complain or rave about. I don't know about what M$ is or isn't doing, but I do know that the makers of Safari, Gecko and Opera do their best to produce browsers designed to work well within the defined standards, and still work as well as possible with M$'s undefined standards. Don't forget, a browser is a USER AGENT, not a web page author agent. It's purpose is to meet the needs of the user first, and web page authors secondarily. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
designer wrote on Thu, 18 Nov 2004 18:28:45 -: When you buy wallpaper, how on earth do you manage to change the default size of the pattern? I don't. If I don't like it, I don't buy it. Also, when you buy someone a coffee table book, say, of great art works, do you buy them seven copies, each with a different size type/layout and ask them which one they want? No, but if I can't find one I can read, I don't buy any at all. When you watch something on Television, do you have a set of large magnifiers (or reducers) to put in front of the screen, so you can use the one to suit your mood? No, I just buy a big TV. :-) These things (and nearly everything else in life) are at the mercy of the designers who helped produced them. For a lot of web designers (as opposed to web site producing technicians), a web site is just the same Ah, but no it isn't. Everybody's viewport is a different size. Besides differences in display size, resolution and DPI, browser window sizes are limited only by the user's ability to discretely choose some particular size, being nearly infinitely adjustable. The designer has no reliable way to know either how big it is, or how big anything in it is. You know the old saying: you can't please all of the people all of the time? Anyone who thinks he can is the one being arrogant :-) The web is a bit different. It presents an opportunity to get really close most of the time, by utilizing user preferences, rather than fighting them. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
Lothar B. Baier wrote on Thu, 18 Nov 2004 21:06:50 +0100: Somebody buys a laptop with a 14 inch screen and puts it 1400 by 1050 pixel screenresolution. Then he complains, that all of the text ist to small to read. That reminds me of the man, who choose a two-seated spider car because he likes it very much to drive fast with an open roof. And than he complains about the designer of that car, because he is not able to move his 5-room-houshold to the next city with that car and has to rent a truck. This not a good comparison. A laptop screen has what is known a native resolution. What that means is that choosing some other resolution, if that is possible at all to do, causes degraded rendering accuracy. Reducing resolution on such a display by some nominal amount, such as from 1400x1050 to 1024x768, causes a compounded effective resolution reduction. Nominally, going from 1400x1050 to 1024x768 is a resolution reduction of 46.5%, but doing that on a flat panel display produces degradation noticably in excess of 46.5%. To clarify my opinion: On every computer I know, it is possible to reduce the screenresolution to get bigger text to the screen. So, when sobody with a handicap on his eyesight uses to set the screenresolution to the max. possible, he should not blame a webdesigner for no longer being able to read the text on a website. I design all my websites on a computer with the screenresolution set appropriate to the size of the screen I use. If the user does the same, he will be able to read, what is written there. If not, it's not my fault. The problem is high resolution is designed for those who require high quality. People who pay extra to enjoy high quality don't easily accept the proposition that to improve some problem (font size) that they must discard the higher quality they paid for. What astute users of high resolution equipment do is adjust their own settings to ensure that high resolution does not shrink their fonts. Once they do this, their only problem with too small fonts results from web page designers who size in pt or px, disregarding user settings. IOW, changing resolution is not the correct way for a user to change font sizes. Depending on OS and software used, this is appropriately done by making some system wide settings change, or a software dependent preference change. Or, he could switch to a larger display. -- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof... U.S. Constitution, Amendment 1 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Font size and arrogance - ADMIN THREAD CLOSED
I don't think you understand the issue of accessibility at all. In many countries, laws have been needed to force people like you to catch up. THREAD CLOSED I have been watching this thread for a while, concerned that it would move from healthy discussion into abuse. It has. This list is supposed to be about supporting each other. No more font size discussions! Russ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: Re[2]: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
Be nice Iain! Final warning. Peter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Iain Harrison Sent: Friday, November 19, 2004 7:53 PM To: Lothar B. Baier Subject: Re[2]: [WSG] Font size and arrogance Hello Lothar, Thursday, November 18, 2004, 8:06:50 PM, you wrote: On every computer I know, it is possible to reduce the screenresolution to get bigger text to the screen. You've never used an LCD screen that only works well at one resolution? You've never used a PDA? I don't think you understand the issue of accessibility at all. In many countries, laws have been needed to force people like you to catch up. So, when sobody with a handicap on his eyesight uses to set the screenresolution to the max. possible, he should not blame a webdesigner for no longer being able to read the text on a website. I design all my websites on a computer with the screenresolution set appropriate to the size of the screen I use. If the user does the same, he will be able to read, what is written there. If not, it's not my fault. If I build a road for you, don't you worry about the six-inch-high jagged rocks sticking out of the surface, or the eight-inch-deep potholes in the road, or the 1:2 gradients. They don't matter. I drive a big 4x4 and that drives along the road with no trouble at all. I build the road for my car with a surface appropriate for the vehicle I use. If the user does the same, he will be able to travel, along that road. If not, it's not my fault. -- Best regards, Iainmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
[WSG] Font size and arrogance
Felix (and anyone else), When you buy wallpaper, how on earth do you manage to change the default size of the pattern? Also, when you buy someone a coffee table book, say, of great art works, do you buy them seven copies, each with a different size type/layout and ask them which one they want? When you watch something on Television, do you have a set of large magnifiers (or reducers) to put in front of the screen, so you can use the one to suit your mood? I'd be surprised :-) These things (and nearly everything else in life) are at the mercy of the designers who helped produced them. For a lot of web designers (as opposed to web site producing technicians), a web site is just the same - it isn't arrogant, it's called passion. If you as a client don't like what a web designer does, you choose someone else, just like with the wallpaper. You know the old saying: you can't please all of the people all of the time? Anyone who thinks he can is the one being arrogant :-) Bob McClelland, Cornwall (U.K.) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk - Original Message - From: Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 1:31 PM Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size It is arrogant to impose it, rather than merely wish it. [snip] No, the biggest problem is designers think their opinion of aesthetics is paramount to usability and access, failing to understand and/or accept that: The web is about control, but not the designer's, it is the user's control that is central to the design and philosophy of the web. John Allsopp at http://webstandardsgroup.org/features/john-allsopp.cfm Web pages should be ready to use on arrival. Zoom is a defensive measure designed to override designers' override of user default settings. Style switchers are helpful, but don't eliminate the basic problem. Visitors shouldn't need to make adjustments to use a page. If you like mousetype, fine, use it, but set your own defaults to mousetype before designing, allowing you, and *everyone* else to automatically enjoy the size best for them. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
Hi, everybody! I am reading the list for quite some time, so first of all a big thank to all of you who share their knowledge and tricks with fools like me. Regarding to the font size discussion I feel I have to give my first input to the list: Somebody buys a laptop with a 14 inch screen and puts it 1400 by 1050 pixel screenresolution. Then he complains, that all of the text ist to small to read. That reminds me of the man, who choose a two-seated spider car because he likes it very much to drive fast with an open roof. And than he complains about the designer of that car, because he is not able to move his 5-room-houshold to the next city with that car and has to rent a truck. To clarify my opinion: On every computer I know, it is possible to reduce the screenresolution to get bigger text to the screen. So, when sobody with a handicap on his eyesight uses to set the screenresolution to the max. possible, he should not blame a webdesigner for no longer being able to read the text on a website. I design all my websites on a computer with the screenresolution set appropriate to the size of the screen I use. If the user does the same, he will be able to read, what is written there. If not, it's not my fault. My job is to design pleesing websites, which are liked by both, the one who pays and the average user. I don't think it's my job, to solve all the problems in readability caused by bad browsers, wrong adjusted screens an bad default settings. Nobody pays me for that. Lothar B. Baier (an older guy, wearing glasses!) P.S. All typing mistakes belong to the one, who finds them! ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
designer wrote: When you buy wallpaper, how on earth do you manage to change the default size of the pattern? Also, when you buy someone a coffee table book, say, of great art works, do you buy them seven copies, each with a different size type/layout and ask them which one they want? You are talking about physical objects. A website is not a physical object. If you want absolute control of your layout, do print design When you watch something on Television, do you have a set of large magnifiers (or reducers) to put in front of the screen, so you can use the one to suit your mood? Interestingly enough, there are screen magnifiers used by people with low vision...but mentioning this obviously breaks your already very stretched analogy... These things (and nearly everything else in life) are at the mercy of the designers who helped produced them. For a lot of web designers (as opposed to web site producing technicians), a web site is just the same - it isn't arrogant, it's called passion. No, it's called myopic ignorance of the subject and of best practices. If you as a client don't like what a web designer does, you choose someone else, With the attitude displayed, I'm sure they will, I'm afraid. Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
Lothar B. Baier wrote: I design all my websites on a computer with the screenresolution set appropriate to the size of the screen I use. If the user does the same, he will be able to read, what is written there. If not, it's not my fault. It's just a shame not everybody is like you then, isn't it? Patrick H. Lauke _ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
-Original Message- From: Lothar B. Baier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 19 November 2004 7:07 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance I design all my websites on a computer with the screenresolution set appropriate to the size of the screen I use. If the user does the same, he will be able to read, what is written there. If not, it's not my fault. If a general user can't use a program that was designed for him, it is your fault. If he cannot read it, if it is too complex, if it completely misses his attention or gives him the feeling the site was not made for him - all of this is the developer's fault. Or do you want to blame the user for that? My job is to design pleesing websites, which are liked by both, the one who pays and the average user. I don't think it's my job, to solve all the problems in readability caused by bad browsers, wrong adjusted screens an bad default settings. Nobody pays me for that. People will pay you for it later. You produce good websites that work for all your users and it will pay back as there are no unsatisfied customers. You are talking about designing pleasing websites: my mother, who hasn't got a clue on how to adjust her screen, increase font-size or use any other browser than IE 5, don't you think she has the right to expect a pleasing website with a font she can read? ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
Hi! Patrick and Andreas, you both are right on one hand. But on the other one it's not so simple. My goal is surely to produce websites, which can be use by everybody and please their eyes. But is it my fault, that dell or hp ore other produce laptops, which screensize and screen resolution are set to a default which makes it impossible to read a text easy? Is it my fault, that the designers of browsers after about 10 years of webstandards are not able to produce browsers which behave according to those standards? I don't think so. And it's also not my fault, if somebody uses a computer with little knowledge of what he is doing. To go back to the example from my last post: if someone drives a car without driverlicense and runs into a tree, is that the fault of the car's designer? Have you ever seen a user who reads the handbook before he switches on the comp? I am in the computer business for more then 25 years now. I'm still waiting for that user. What I wanted to say is that if I try to please every single user in the wolrd, I would spend 95% of my time on special solutions or hacks, which are pleasing only 5% of the users. Nobody will pay me for that 95% time. Ideals are nice in theory, but usely not realy good, when they are put into practice. So I think instead of spending a mayority of our time in finding solutions for problems, which are not caused by us, we should collect our energy to put presure on browser designers to produce browser which are standard and to hardware designers to not set the default resolution of a screen to what is technicaly possible but to just something, which is compatible with human eyesight. Lothar ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
One comment... which can be use by everybody As long as you do that - there wont be any problems. If the user is an idiot - and they configure their machine in a stupid way - that's no-one's fault except the user. Gary ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
RE: [WSG] Font size and arrogance | accessibility in general I say
I would spend 95% of my time on special solutions or hacks, which are pleasing only 5% of the users. Although I wouldn't say it works out to be such a big percentage, but you are right you would spend some time on it. But you need to start spending that time on it, new laws being passed will sooner or later force you to start designing with accessibility in mind (recent cases against priceline etc). And to be fair, its not about 'pleasing' the users, it is about making the website usable to the audience. You may be focusing on font-size in your argument, but it sounds like an argument against accessibility in general. I would agree about hardware designers etc, but that just adds to Patrick's argument, people will be accessing your site with more than one resolution, you cannot predict how they will do that. By making your site have resizeable text you can accommodate them. It is harder to do, but the net gain is worth it. I wonder if this will turn into a bigger argument about fluid versus fixed designing... Tim Hill Computer Associates Graphic Artist tel: +612 9937 0792 fax: +612 9937 0546 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Lothar B. Baier Sent: Friday, 19 November 2004 8:47 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance Hi! Patrick and Andreas, you both are right on one hand. But on the other one it's not so simple. My goal is surely to produce websites, which can be use by everybody and please their eyes. But is it my fault, that dell or hp ore other produce laptops, which screensize and screen resolution are set to a default which makes it impossible to read a text easy? Is it my fault, that the designers of browsers after about 10 years of webstandards are not able to produce browsers which behave according to those standards? I don't think so. And it's also not my fault, if somebody uses a computer with little knowledge of what he is doing. To go back to the example from my last post: if someone drives a car without driverlicense and runs into a tree, is that the fault of the car's designer? Have you ever seen a user who reads the handbook before he switches on the comp? I am in the computer business for more then 25 years now. I'm still waiting for that user. What I wanted to say is that if I try to please every single user in the wolrd, I would spend 95% of my time on special solutions or hacks, which are pleasing only 5% of the users. Nobody will pay me for that 95% time. Ideals are nice in theory, but usely not realy good, when they are put into practice. So I think instead of spending a mayority of our time in finding solutions for problems, which are not caused by us, we should collect our energy to put presure on browser designers to produce browser which are standard and to hardware designers to not set the default resolution of a screen to what is technicaly possible but to just something, which is compatible with human eyesight. Lothar ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help ** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
But is it my fault, that dell or hp ore other produce laptops, which screensize and screen resolution are set to a default which makes it impossible to read a text easy? Is it my fault, that the designers of browsers after about 10 years of webstandards are not able to produce browsers which behave according to those standards? I don't think so. And it's also not my fault, if somebody uses a computer with little knowledge of what he is doing. I absolutely agree with you that we need to put pressure on browser companies to change and stick to the standards. But that takes a lot of time. When I first decided to ignore Netscape 4 by moving away from tables it felt scary. Now I just love it. But making that step took a long time. Sure it's not your fault if somebody uses a computer without being experienced in doing so. But that doesn't mean we should not consider those users. How many times does it happen to people that they try to program a new Video Recorder and it just doesn't work. Do they read the manual? No. Is it the fault of the manufacturer that they didn't read the manual? No. But if the manufacturer made the interface of the Video Recorder more intuitive and easy to use, everybody would be happy and the customer would recommend that Video Recorder to others. ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance | accessibility in general I say
hardware designers to not set the default resolution of a screen to what is technicaly possible but to just something, which is compatible with human eyesight. What size, a pixel? Engineers have created full-color screens, 400 pixels square, which are smaller than a dime. Certainly setting a monitor made of such things to display 1024x768 by default (the size of a quarter!) would not be compatible with human eyesight. Font rescalability and sizing a font based on today's technology will be useful on today's technology. But tomorrow is when it will be used. Standards aren't just about helping the blind to read. Just my little thought on the matter, in no way directed at one person or another, even though I quoted a portion of one person's post. This has been an interesting, if heated, thread. I think a large part of it revolves around being unable to measure people's default font size. The arrogance vs. idealist portion of the discussion. So I'm building something to measure the default size of things. Anyone know of someone else that has already done this? I'd hate to duplicate effort. -- Ben Curtis WebSciences International http://www.websciences.org/ v: (310) 478-6648 f: (310) 235-2067 ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance | accessibility in general I say
Actually, Felix has some interesting studies on his site about font size, pixel, resolution relationships: http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ And I couldn't agree more with you about stuff we design today probably not working tomorrowbut y'know, thankfully seperating content and presentation means that the content will probably stay in tact =). Terrence Wood. On 2004-11-19 1:02 PM, Ben Curtis wrote: Font rescalability and sizing a font based on today's technology will be useful on today's technology. But tomorrow is when it will be used. Standards aren't just about helping the blind to read. [snip] This has been an interesting, if heated, thread. I think a large part of it revolves around being unable to measure people's default font size. The arrogance vs. idealist portion of the discussion. So I'm building something to measure the default size of things. Anyone know of someone else that has already done this? I'd hate to duplicate effort. -- *** Are you in the Wellington area and interested in web standards? Wellington Web Standards Group inaugural meeting 9 Dec 2004. See http://webstandardsgroup.org/go/event24.cfm for details *** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance | accessibility in general I say
also look here: http://www.thenoodleincident.com/tutorials/box_lesson/font/ On 2004-11-19 1:02 PM, Ben Curtis wrote: This has been an interesting, if heated, thread. I think a large part of it revolves around being unable to measure people's default font size. The arrogance vs. idealist portion of the discussion. So I'm building something to measure the default size of things. Anyone know of someone else that has already done this? I'd hate to duplicate effort. -- *** Are you in the Wellington area and interested in web standards? Wellington Web Standards Group inaugural meeting 9 Dec 2004. See http://webstandardsgroup.org/go/event24.cfm for details *** ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
Re: [WSG] Font size and arrogance
here's some reading you might find useful: The Dao of Web Design http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dao/ ** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list getting help **
