Re: [WSG] site check: FONT sizes
Bert Doorn wrote: I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best what suits people they have never met. Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do? The 'consumers' then decide if they like the design and whether they want it or not. There is little point in anyone paying for a 'designer' if they are going to do it themselves! Maybe 'provider' is a better term than designer. Or Georg's term : 'Web carpenter' is more to the point here. -- Best Regards, Bob McClelland Cornwall (UK) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
About 4-5 months ago they built a new national library here in Norway, the architects worked alot with making the place accesible for users with different disabilites. Essentially they did everything wrong. The biggest mistake was of course not to talk with anyone blind or in a wheelchair. There was some high-contrast art on the floor which seemed like a trail to follow to someone visually impaired, they'd just end up in a wall. There was switches installed that would open doors for people in wheelchairs or with crutches, but it was placed about 1 meter away from the door and those who were blind couldn't find the switch in addition to that it was a real struggle for people in wheelchairs because the door closed too fast. These architects actually really tried to make the life easier for people with different disabilites, but they didn't know anything about how these people expected things to work. Now they have to rebuild the whole thing. Don't make assumptions, they might turn out expensive. When it comes to font-sizes I'd really like to blame the browsers. I don't think it's up to us to provide tools for enlarging or shrinking fonts, just like it's not up to newspapers to provide a spyglass with every paper. Both Windows and MacOS are shipped with different tools to help people with special needs. Among those tools there's a zoom-tool. In addition browsers like Opera also has a zoom-tool and as I've heard IE7 will also come with a zoom-tool. The problem with IE6 and FireFox is that the function to increase or decrease font-size is well hidden and they are also very easy for users to change without themselves knowing it. My argument:Newspapers comes out with fixed font-size, but people who's got low vision may very easily use a spyglass to read easier. People in need of a spyglass gets themselves one. The same thing applies to web and computers, it's just that not all people are aware of the invention of digital spyglasses. Solution: Spread the word of this invention. I'm of course also willing to listen to your arguments, you might have thought of something I've never thought of!Best regardsVincentOn 2/18/06, Designer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bert Doorn wrote: I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best what suits people they have never met.Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do?The 'consumers' thendecide if they like the design and whether they want it or not. There is little point in anyone paying for a 'designer' if they are going todo it themselves!Maybe 'provider' is a better term than designer. Or Georg's term : 'Webcarpenter' is more to the point here. --Best Regards,Bob McClellandCornwall (UK)www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk**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] site check: FONT sizes
Vincent Hasselgård wrote: When it comes to font-sizes I'd really like to blame the browsers. I don't think it's up to us to provide tools for enlarging or shrinking fonts, just like it's not up to newspapers to provide a spyglass with every paper. Both Windows and MacOS are shipped with different tools to help people with special needs. Among those tools there's a zoom-tool. In addition browsers like Opera also has a zoom-tool and as I've heard IE7 will also come with a zoom-tool. The problem with IE6 and FireFox is that the function to increase or decrease font-size is well hidden and they are also very easy for users to change without themselves knowing it. My argument: Newspapers comes out with fixed font-size, but people who's got low vision may very easily use a spyglass to read easier. People in need of a spyglass gets themselves one. The same thing applies to web and computers, it's just that not all people are aware of the invention of digital spyglasses. Solution: Spread the word of this invention. I'm of course also willing to listen to your arguments, you might have thought of something I've never thought of! Best regards Vincent Hi Vincent, I couldn't agree more. Your point about the library shows clearly that cooperation between designer and user is paramount as a starting point in discussions. It's all a question of balance - consideration for the user (and proper knowledge of his/her needs) and consideration of the usability of the 'components' of the product. How far the designer can impose his own 'design' is (must be) a function of the usability. With a table-lamp it doesn't matter (you have the choice to buy a different lamp), with a light-switch in a public place it's crucial. It's all about the balance between the amount of freedom the designer has in the relationship between his 'product' (be it a lamp or a web site) and his 'audience'. But blaming the designer for shortcomings in the tools used to 'employ' the product is approaching the problem from the wrong end. It's still important, but it isn't where the main action should be directed. Big topic this - and a difficult one. -- Best Regards, Bob McClelland Cornwall (UK) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Designer wrote: Maybe 'provider' is a better term than designer. Or Georg's term : 'Web carpenter' is more to the point here. Depends on what you put into that term... :-) A good carpenter should know how to do his/her job in order to make a building functional for inhabitants and visitors, as well as look somewhat aesthetically pleasing. A good carpenter often knows more about how things work than an architect. The same goes for a 'web carpenter', which is why I use that term. One should at least know how browsers work, and a lot about human needs - regardless of what term is used. Browsers are generally not very well designed for human needs outside the mainstream. However, what little they provide should be taken into account by the web designer. It is strange to see web structures that have no or very low built-in functionality in that they break when visitors apply their small wishes for a readability-oriented font size. Not much aesthetics left then either, so I sometimes wonder what to call those behind such products. I don't think web pages/sites need any built-in font resizing functionality/widgets. They just need to be well designed so they can take a reasonable amount of user-options - included font resizing. The rest should be left to those who design user-agents. Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Designer wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:06:36 +: Bert Doorn wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 00:22:22 +0800: I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best what suits people they have never met. Bert - Isn't that what all good 'designers' do? The 'consumers' then decide if they like the design and whether they want it or not. There is little point in anyone paying for a 'designer' if they are going to do it themselves! Good designers know who and what they're designing for, the nature of the medium they're dealing with. CSS is a language of suggestion, not control. Those trying to control this uncontrollable don't understand the unique nature of the web. http://css.nu/articles/font-analogy.html http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/essence.html -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/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] site check: FONT sizes
Bert Doorn wrote: To use similarly strong wording, I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best what suits people they have never met. A Designer gets paid to understand their audience. The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS or any applications -- from the supplied defaults. Imagining that the situation is different for browsers is simply delusional. To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults and minimal resizing capability is to abdicate your responsibilities as a Designer. -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com opinion: webtuitive.blogspot.com dream. code. ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Hassan Schroeder wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:21:36 -0800: The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS or any applications -- from the supplied defaults. Where is the data that backs up this assertion? Why is it OK to help some unknown quantity of users who don't at the expense of all those who do? To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults This is not a fact. This is your opinion. Some people change the defaults by making things bigger rather than smaller. One man's poison is another man's pleasure. -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/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] site check: FONT sizes
Felix Miata wrote: The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS or any applications -- from the supplied defaults. Where is the data that backs up this assertion? That assertion is based on my experience working here in Silicon Valley since the mid-80s, *doing usability testing* among other things (including teaching people to use the Web and write HTML, back in the day when it was just coming into widespread use). You may choose to believe otherwise, but that doesn't change the behavior I've observed, and continue to observe. -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com opinion: webtuitive.blogspot.com dream. code. ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Hassan Schroeder wrote: Felix Miata wrote: The vast majority of users, even those working in high-tech firms here in Silicon Valley, *never* change *any* settings -- of the OS or any applications -- from the supplied defaults. Where is the data that backs up this assertion? That assertion is based on my experience working here in Silicon Valley since the mid-80s, *doing usability testing* among other things (including teaching people to use the Web and write HTML, back in the day when it was just coming into widespread use). You may choose to believe otherwise, but that doesn't change the behavior I've observed, and continue to observe. And what we conclude from that observed behaviour seems to be what all the arguing is about. Some conclude the default is too big and ugly so they take it upon themselves to change it for everybody. Others conclude that if people are not changing the defaults, they are probably comfortable with those defaults and therefore we should not mess with it. You can't please everybody all the time, but perhaps there's a middle ground somewhere. If you're going to change font sizes, do it in moderation. Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading, user-friendly websites ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
On 2/18/06, Vincent Hasselgård [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My argument: Newspapers comes out with fixed font-size, but people who's got low vision may very easily use a spyglass to read easier. People in need of a spyglass gets themselves one. The same thing applies to web and computers, it's just that not all people are aware of the invention of digital spyglasses. Solution: Spread the word of this invention. Give a man (or woman) a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll be fed for a lifetime. How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really... how about if these sites had a link to a page that explained how to increase font-sizes in various browsers, use zoom options, etc? This is a lot better, because then your users know how to use your site better as well as all the other sites they encounter. Basically, they're fed for a lifetime. As an aside, I think it's useful for sites to have options to change the colors or fonts of the layout, but not just to increase font size. Many of them only increase the font size by a very small amount anyway. -- -- Christian Montoya christianmontoya.com ... rdpdesign.com ... cssliquid.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] site check: FONT sizes
Christian Montoya wrote: How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really... Completely agree. how about if these sites had a link to a page that explained how to increase font-sizes in various browsers, use zoom options, etc? This is a lot better, because then your users know how to use your site better as well as all the other sites they encounter. Basically, they're fed for a lifetime. But is it our job as web *content* developers to teach our users how to use their browsers? The onus is on the browser developers to make their tools more intuitive and user friendly, and to expose that functionality to users in a much more sensible and direct way... -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Patrick H. Lauke wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 17:00:21 +: But is it our job as web *content* developers to teach our users how to use their browsers? The onus is on the browser developers to make their tools more intuitive and user friendly, and to expose that functionality to users in a much more sensible and direct way... Nobody seems to want to take the first step on this. I doubt M$ will, so it's probably up to open source contributors to make the first move, but from what incentive? If you know any you can convince, here are two places to start: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24846 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198450 -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/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] site check: FONT sizes
Christian Montoya wrote: [snip] How many websites do we come across with some Java or server-side option to increase text size? It's almost as common as the XHTML and CSS validator links. Is it really useful? No, not really... how about if these sites had a link to a page that explained how to increase font-sizes in various browsers, use zoom options, etc? This is a lot better, because then your users know how to use your site better as well as all the other sites they encounter. Basically, they're fed for a lifetime. Ah yes, but would you put the explanation in a new window? :-) Sorry Christian, I couldn't resist that! -- Best Regards, Bob McClelland Cornwall (UK) www.gwelanmor-internet.co.uk ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Felix Miata wrote: Nobody seems to want to take the first step on this. I doubt M$ will, so it's probably up to open source contributors to make the first move, but from what incentive? If you know any you can convince, here are two places to start: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24846 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=198450 Half related, but: at the time when text resize widgets were starting to get more and more popular, I quickly put together my little text size toolbar for FF https://addons.mozilla.org/extensions/moreinfo.php?application=firefoxid=472 This it the sort of thing that needs to be installed and visible by default. So, trying to do my bit on the browser front :) -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 05:21:36 -0800, Hassan Schroeder wrote: To ignore the fact that the most common browser has crap defaults and minimal resizing capability is to abdicate your responsibilities as a Designer. Hassan, With all due respect, I find that IE's default settings are just fine for me. I am using a laptop with a 15 screen at 1440 x 1050. I don't use it on my lap as I find that too close for comfort. Not to belabor the point, I suggest that the trend seems to be towards smaller screens at ever higher definition. My own site was designed three years ago, when 800 x 600 was the norm. It uses reduced font sizes -- now I wish that I hadn't done so, and am redesigning it. I agree with you about having to know your audience. But your audience changes daily, hopefully. Cordially, David -- David Hucklesby, on 2/18/2006 http://www.hucklesby.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] site check: FONT sizes
i might leave this site the way it is but on my next site i will try and implement a font size adjuster. lisa, If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user could increase the font as much as they like. It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'. can you give me an example of the this?...it sounds like this would be a tough nut to crack for me. are there other recommended options for a font volume controller, swicthing style sheets/skins etc.. i dont want my designs to look crappy but i personally always up the text a couple sizes for easier reading using command +- in ff. would be cool to implement something that allowed users to do the same in ie. -best kvnmcwebn ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
kvnmcwebn lisa, If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user could increase the font as much as they like. It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'. can you give me an example of the this?...it sounds like this would be a tough nut to crack for me. Lisa forgot to put the sarcasm tags around her content. She wasn't being serious there... are there other recommended options for a font volume controller, swicthing style sheets/skins etc.. I'm fairly hardline and say that this is not the type of functionality we as web *content* developers should be bothering with. The onus is squarely on the *browser* to provide this functionality to the user. Patrick Patrick H. Lauke Web Editor / University of Salford http://www.salford.ac.uk Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Lisa forgot to put the sarcasm tags around her content. She wasn't being serious there... ...lisa please stop horsing around... i guess i will have to research the issue more... try and find the balance.. -best kvn ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
kvnmcwebn wrote: i guess i will have to research the issue more... try and find the balance.. When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably already done that in his browser. Still, here is a page full of links on font topics to give your research a head start: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/wauth2.html -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/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] site check: FONT sizes
Felix Miata wrote: When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably already done that in his browser. ..which is the utterly erroneous presumption upon which the entire argument fails :-) -- Hassan Schroeder - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Webtuitive Design === (+1) 408-938-0567 === http://webtuitive.com opinion: webtuitive.blogspot.com dream. code. ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Hassan Schroeder wrote Fri, 17 Feb 2006 07:36:35 -0800: Felix Miata wrote: When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably already done that in his browser. ..which is the utterly erroneous presumption upon which the entire argument fails :-) There's nothing erroneous about making the only respectable presumption possible. It doesn't matter how many don't do it or don't even know how to do it, because users are the only ones in a position get it right. Nothing you can do based upon any misguided presumption you can know better stands any better than a random chance of improving for any in that group, while you are 100% certain to make it worse for all those who do. -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/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] site check: FONT sizes
Hassan Schroeder wrote: Felix Miata wrote: When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably already done that in his browser. ..which is the utterly erroneous presumption upon which the entire argument fails :-) To use similarly strong wording, I sense an utterly erroneous presumpton that the designer knows best what suits people they have never met. People who have totally different combinations of vision, equipment, software and experience in using it. As long as we have web designers who want to control everything and force their own preferences on everybody else, this argument will remain, long after my children have become grandparents. For what it's worth, yes, I am guilty of adjusting font sizes too. And yes, I find that I often have to adjust my browser settings (usually making text larger as my vision is not that good) because other designers have gone even further than I have in this regard. Regards -- Bert Doorn, Better Web Design http://www.betterwebdesign.com.au/ Fast-loading, user-friendly websites ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Hassan Schroeder wrote: Felix Miata wrote: When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably already done that in his browser. ..which is the utterly erroneous presumption upon which the entire argument fails :-) Probably... but the user gets what s/he has decided - whether s/he knows it and wants it - or not. Maybe s/he will learn how to make it work as it is supposed to - one day? One can only hope... Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Hassan Schroeder wrote: Felix Miata wrote: When your page respects the user's decision what size fonts are most appropriate for him, your page needs no resizer, because the user won't need to again resize just for having visited your page. He's presumably already done that in his browser. ..which is the utterly erroneous presumption upon which the entire argument fails :-) Then you should try educating them, rather than 'managing' them mark ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Mark Harris wrote: Then you should try educating them, rather than 'managing' them So then educated users set their preferred font size, and then (apart from a few sites that do the right thing and don't go below 100%) the rest of the web appears even smaller (or in any case differently sized). -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Patrick H. Lauke wrote Fri, 17 Feb 2006 22:26:54 +: Mark Harris wrote Sat, 18 Feb 2006 10:39:00 +1300: Then you should try educating them, rather than 'managing' them So then educated users set their preferred font size, and then (apart from a few sites that do the right thing and don't go below 100%) the rest of the web appears even smaller (or in any case differently sized). Sounds like a deficient curriculum to me. Mine includes: * Choosing browser(s) * Setting defaults * Font-families * Proportional size * Monospace size * Other (alternate charsets, Opera) * Zoom * Setting a minimum * Disallowing page colors * Turning off all author styles user/accessibility modes * OS/Desktop customization * Advanced/optional: * User CSS * Background/history/chaos -- Love your neighbor as yourself.Mark 12:31 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/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] site check: FONT sizes
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Mark Harris wrote: Then you should try educating them, rather than 'managing' them So then educated users set their preferred font size, and then (apart from a few sites that do the right thing and don't go below 100%) the rest of the web appears even smaller (or in any case differently sized). I meant more that educated users would know *how* to set their font size. Some do, some don't. Anyone making an assumption either way is going to make a wrong choice for the other group. The only way (slow, I know) to get to a point where we don't have to worry about their knowledge is to make information available to them. Cheers mark ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Yes but Patrick, If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user could increase the font as much as they like. It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'. L -Original Message- From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] It's just a shame that people who pay for web design usually insist on the smaller text sizes, because historically 99% of web sites in the wild have tended to serve a slightly reduced font size... -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Herrod, Lisa wrote: Yes but Patrick, If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user could increase the font as much as they like. It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'. But only if the button for larger looks like Ricardo Montalban and the one for smaller like Hervé Villechaize... -- 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 __ Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
Herrod, Lisa wrote: Yes but Patrick, If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user could increase the font as much as they like. It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'. L song id=yankee-doodle Oh, Lisa Herrod came to town a-riding on a pony But then Russ bucked and threw her off because her bum was bony! Yes, web standards are such fun bringing joy and order With sarcasm and some sly digs designers we do slaughter! /song *runs and hides* ** 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] site check: FONT sizes
I've always wanted my own theme song. I believe I have finally arrived. -Original Message- From: Mark Harris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 17 February 2006 12:27 PM To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] site check: FONT sizes Herrod, Lisa wrote: Yes but Patrick, If you provide the user with a Javascript pop-up window that they right-click to display a pretty flash-based font-increasing app, the user could increase the font as much as they like. It's known as the 'Clydesdale Hack'. L song id=yankee-doodle Oh, Lisa Herrod came to town a-riding on a pony But then Russ bucked and threw her off because her bum was bony! Yes, web standards are such fun bringing joy and order With sarcasm and some sly digs designers we do slaughter! /song *runs and hides* ** 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 **
