I've been reading (and trying to learn from) the discussions on
accessibility and particularly font size. I have never had any success at
using ways other than pixels. When I read:
http://informationarchitects.jp/100e2r/?v=4
I agreed with the author that the text size looked OK (he uses
I've been reading (and trying to learn from) the discussions on
accessibility and particularly font size. I have never had any success at
using ways other than pixels.
…
So, whilst the idea of text at 100% sounds reasonable, I always get a mixed
bag of results. I feel as a
Hi,
check the link you will find the soln :)
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Safari-Font-Rendering-Scares-Windows-Users-57815.shtml
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/06/12.html
regards,
- hariharan k -
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 4:58 PM, Rimantas Liubertas riman...@gmail.comwrote:
I've
2009/7/7 designer desig...@gwelanmor-internet.co.uk:
I've been reading (and trying to learn from) the discussions on
accessibility and particularly font size. I have never had any success at
using ways other than pixels. When I read:
http://informationarchitects.jp/100e2r/?v=4
I agreed with
Try using font-size:0.8em this is a better method for font-size
accessibility
-Original Message-
From: li...@webstandardsgroup.org [mailto:li...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of designer
Sent: 07 July 2009 12:20
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] font size
Hi Nick,
- Original Message -
From: Nick Fitzsimons n...@nickfitz.co.uk
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 12:47 PM
Subject: Re: [WSG] font size - was [ Accessible websites]
Different fonts have different sized letter forms; _of course_ they
look different
...@webstandardsgroup.org] On
Behalf Of designer
Sent: 07 July 2009 12:20
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] font size - was [ Accessible websites]
I've been reading (and trying to learn from) the discussions on
accessibility and particularly font size. I have never had any success at
using ways other than
Sent: Saturday, 25 October 2008 1:00 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Font-size inheritance issue?
Good morning
http://www.westernwebdesign.com.au/EWAN/index.html
Two pages uploaded: Home and Operation. Does anyone know why the font-size
(specified in css - body 80%) is different
Hi Elizabeth.
Won't guarantee this is the source of your woes, but on the Operations page,
the h2OPERATIONS isn't closed.
Yes - how embarrassing! Can't believe I did that!
Another couple of minor points - I'd
suggest adjusting the line spacing on your lis - in Firefox they look
crowded by
Lynette Smith wrote:
Won't guarantee this is the source of your woes, but on the Operations page,
the h2OPERATIONS isn't closed.
Yes - how embarrassing! Can't believe I did that!
To err is human - typos happen :-) but this is yet another example
where running the W3C validator on the page
Hi all my name is Aaron and I own the new site cssboard.co.uk I am writing
to you all today to see if anyone could help me out with 3 minutes of their
time. I am startinga new magazine (FREE) called Css Design it is a magazine
designed at reaching the designers of the web world who loved and will
Hi Aaron,
I'm more than happy to supply a CSS menu tutorial for a standard or
drop down menu.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Aaron Wheeler
Sent: 25 October 2008 18:57
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] Font-size
To err is human - typos happen :-) but this is yet another example
where running the W3C validator on the page would have immediately
identified the cause of what looked like a CSS display issue.
You are SO right, Hassan -it is usually the first thing I do when I have
a problem - I can only
Good morning
http://www.westernwebdesign.com.au/EWAN/index.html
Two pages uploaded: Home and Operation. Does anyone know why the
font-size (specified in css - body 80%) is different on these two
pages? Home is the correct one, but it is bigger on the second page and
the succeeding page
Because all the paragraphs are wrapped into a h2
h2OPERATIONh2
pThe network has an executive committee who have been meeting monthly
since 1996. This committee discusses and acts on
EWAN busin
The h2 after OPERATION hasn't been closed.
Cheers,
Johan
PS. I don't think this is a Support
Thanks Johan - stupid of me!
Lyn
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all,
Looking for some advice. Currently working on a web project in Khmer and
running into a problem with how to style text. For non-Windows Vista
computers it is necessary to install a Khmer font. Most commonly the
open source fonts developed by KhmerOS and a few others.
The problem is
On Dec 3, 2007, at 6:05 AM, Terrence Wood wrote:
If, in laymans terms, font-size-adjust allows you to specify the
font-size based on the x-height of a preferred font-family, how is a
rendering engine supposed to deal with this if said font is missing?
Font-size-adjust works based on the
On 12/3/07, Philippe Wittenbergh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If, in laymans terms, font-size-adjust allows you to specify the
font-size based on the x-height of a preferred font-family, how is a
rendering engine supposed to deal with this if said font is missing?
My thinking was way off here -
On 2 Jul 2007, at 3:10 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
Paul Collins apparently typed:
I seem to be having trouble assigning the font-size:62.5%
Please note that...
Toldja.
N
___
omnivision. websight.
http://www.omnivision.com.au/
Paul Collins wrote:
The font stays slightly larger than 11px, when
I set it to 1.1em. this has worked fine on other sites, so not sure
why it isn't working here. Any ideas?
check that you haven't set a minimum font size in your browser preferences.
;)
Thanks for your replies everyone.
My target would be Firefox, Safari, IE, Opera. This seems to have
worked in the past on those browsers. It has worked fine for me in the
past.
Kepler, I tried adding it inline to the body tag, still can't get it
to work. Tony, I tried getting rid of the minimum
Hi all,
I seem to be having trouble assigning the font-size:62.5%; property to
the body of my document. Basically, it doesn't seem to be working and
I can't figure out why. The font stays slightly larger than 11px, when
I set it to 1.1em. this has worked fine on other sites, so not sure
why it
personally I have always had trouble with percentages and hence only use
em's
Maybe if you switch over to all em's it may help.
On 7/2/07, Paul Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I seem to be having trouble assigning the font-size:62.5%; property to
the body of my document. Basically,
On 2007/07/01 23:40 (GMT+0100) Paul Collins apparently typed:
I seem to be having trouble assigning the font-size:62.5%
Please note that if and when you do get it fixed to your liking, it
won't be to the liking of normal web users[1], particularly those who
employ a Gecko minimum font size, or
Evening groupHas anyone got any suggestions as to how I would mark up a font size menu, for example:pFont size:/pol liA/li liA/li liA/li
/olWith font sizes defined ever larger on the list items as a visual indication and the ordered list from an accessible unstyled point of view.Daz
, 2006
1:58 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Font size menu
Evening group
Has anyone got any suggestions as to how I would mark up a font size menu, for
example:
pFont size:/p
ol
liA/li
liA/li
liA/li
/ol
With font sizes defined ever larger on the list items as a visual
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
Behalf Of Darren West
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006
1:58 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: [WSG] Font size menu
Evening group
Has anyone got any suggestions as to how I would mark up a font size menu, for
example:
pFont size:/p
ol
liA/li
liA/li
liA
tags but I
know others do.
You can then use CSS to define the look of
those letters
ted
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darren West
Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006
2:38 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size menu
Cheers Ted
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size menu
Cheers Ted!
Even as I read ;-)
What are the browser issues with ol's? I would go and research but I gotta get
this project out the door by Friday :-o
As an unordered list would it not loose meaning especially if I signfy
After reading a well-known css author's statement in his brand-new book
that keywords worked best for him, I just went the keyword way
(including the Tan hack for Windows/IE) using small as the base font,
with all the rest specified in %. (http://www.birchhillaccommodations.com/)
Got comments
Hi,
So would is this the solution to the original problem:
div style=font-size: 0.90em;
Some text
div style=font-size: 0.80em;
More text
/div
Some text
/div
or an aside?
C
On Aug 25, 2005, at 5:43 PM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Geoff Deering wrote:
I'm just
Hi,
An experiment revealed this recursive down slide.
C
On Aug 25, 2005, at 5:38 PM, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Chris Kennon wrote:
div#something *{
font-size: 0.9em;
}
That's the quickest way of producing an ever decreasing cascade of
font sizes for every level of nesting you have
wendy wrote:
After reading a well-known css author's statement in his brand-new book
that keywords worked best for him, I just went the keyword way
(including the Tan hack for Windows/IE) using small as the base font,
with all the rest specified in %. (http://www.birchhillaccommodations.com/)
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:22:33 -0400, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
properly preferenced medium
according to who/what?
--
Tom Livingston
Senior Multimedia Artist
Media Logic
www.mlinc.com
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Tom Livingston wrote:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 09:22:33 -0400, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
properly preferenced medium
according to who/what?
According to what you failed to quote from what I wrote:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=medium shows the
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 10:40:55 -0400, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My browser preference is set to midway between extremes, which is
exactly the right size (not too big and not too small) when pages use
medium/100%/1em (or do not size at all) normal paragraph text.
So, using keywords,
I have tested this on my local machine (a PC running Windows XP Professional).
I have looked at it in 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x720, 1280x1024 and 1600x1200 and
I find no difference. I am using IE 6.0.2 and Firefox 1.0.6 for testing and
this page dispalys exactly the same in all resolutions of
Tom Livingston wrote:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 10:40:55 -0400, Felix Miata [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My browser preference is set to midway between extremes, which is
exactly the right size (not too big and not too small) when pages use
medium/100%/1em (or do not size at all) normal paragraph
Tom Livingston
So, using keywords, what happens when a user sets his/her
browser pref. to
'small', and an author specifies 'medium'? Is the users text
size changed?
A user doesn't choose between small/medium/large as their preference.
They'd set what size they want their 'medium' to be
Jeff wrote:
I have tested this on my local machine (a PC running Windows XP
Professional). I have looked at it in 800x600, 1024x768, 1280x720, 1280x1024
and 1600x1200 and I find no difference. I am using IE 6.0.2 and Firefox
1.0.6 for testing and this page dispalys exactly the same in
because they will not go beyond
the 9px mark when using keywords.
Buddy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Patrick Lauke
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 11:05 AM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: RE: [WSG] Font-size em and reseting
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 05:53:20 -0700, Chris Kennon wrote:
div style=font-size: 0.90em;
Some text
div style=font-size: 0.80em;
More text
/div
Some text
/div
Generally I tend to think its 'bad typography' to have different sizes
all over the page.
In the rare case
On Aug 26, 2005, at 5:12 PM, Lea de Groot wrote:
I didn't write the rule under scorn, the original thread follows this
reply.
I'm not a fan of inline styling or piling up values. I've worked
with stylesheets since Designing Killer Websites by Dave Siegel;
having quickly embraced the
If you are using em with font-size is there is a way to clear the font-size
of a box element (stop the inheritance)?I am having a hard time
explaining myself so maybe an example would be better.
So if you have this code, the More text would be 0.80em relation to the
0.90em.
div
Hi,
Maybe something like:
div#something *{
font-size: 0.9em;
}
On Aug 25, 2005, at 2:51 PM, Janelle Clemens wrote:
If you are using em with font-size is there is a way to clear the
font-size
of a box element (stop the inheritance)?I am having a hard time
explaining myself so maybe
Of Janelle Clemens
Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 4:51 PM
To: 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'
Subject: [WSG] Font-size em and reseting within
If you are using em with font-size is there is a way to clear
the font-size
of a box element (stop the inheritance)?I am having a hard time
Lea de Groot wrote:
On Thu, 25 Aug 2005 14:51:00 -0700, Janelle Clemens wrote:
If you are using em with font-size is there is a way to clear the font-size
of a box element (stop the inheritance)?
No, not really.
I normally get around this by only setting font-size in two places, as
Chris Kennon wrote:
div#something *{
font-size: 0.9em;
}
That's the quickest way of producing an ever decreasing cascade of font
sizes for every level of nesting you have within div#something...so not
really.
--
Patrick H. Lauke
__
Geoff Deering wrote:
I'm just wondering how people handle the IE text resizing problem, where
IE handles percentages much more accurately than em?
You can safely use ems as long as your highest font size is something
else, like %.
For instance, as long as you have something like
html {
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
Geoff Deering wrote:
I'm just wondering how people handle the IE text resizing problem,
where IE handles percentages much more accurately than em?
You can safely use ems as long as your highest font size is
something else, like %.
For instance, as long as you have
G'day Mates,
I've reviewed articles on A List Apart and the WSG sites, as well as, The CSS
Anthology, but I
really would like a more defintive answer pertaining to the best method for
re-sizing text.
Therefore, I thought it prudent to turn to the experts!
The following is my current set of
I know there are a lot of old school designers out there (and when I
say designer I mean those people who spend their hours in photoshop
and NOT doing the markup) who still insist that font-sizes be in point
size. That is simply not practical in the web-space (as, I'm sure you
know)...generally I
{font:
x-small/130% Veranda, Arial, san-serif;}).Is this a browser hack?
Thanks,
Janelle
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Darren Wood
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 1:55 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font Size Re
Janelle Clemens wrote:
Can you explain what the slash in your example is (body {font:
x-small/130% Veranda, Arial, san-serif;}).Is this a browser hack?
130% in this case is the line height. it's short hand for:
body {
font-family: verdana, sans-serif;
font-size: x-small;
line-height:
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Janelle Clemens
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 2:15 PM
To: 'wsg@webstandardsgroup.org'
Subject: RE: [WSG] Font Size Re-sizing
We are in the middle of redesigning our company's website and after using pt
for so long ems have been challenging to get
Wood
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 1:55 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font Size Re-sizing
I know there are a lot of old school designers out there (and when I say
designer I mean those
people who spend their hours in photoshop and NOT doing the markup) who still
, August 16, 2005 2:25 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font Size Re-sizing
Janelle Clemens wrote:
Can you explain what the slash in your example is (body {font:
x-small/130% Veranda, Arial, san-serif;}).Is this a browser hack?
130% in this case is the line height. it's
PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Brian Cummiskey
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2005 2:25 PM
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font Size Re-sizing
Janelle Clemens wrote:
Can you explain what the slash in your example is (body {font:
x-small/130% Veranda, Arial, san-serif;}).Is this a browser
Mario,
/* use percentile on html to prevent IE from seemingly using a logrimthic increase and decrease
in font size when scaling (IE
Bug) and use 100.1% to prevent a bug in Opera, and then set your font
sizes in em's after that. Declare Body and Table Font size together to
compensate for an IE
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The following is my current set of rules for allowing visitors to zoom text:
body
{margin: 0;
padding: 0;
font-size: 76%;
background: #6A6A8F;}
#container
{width: 100%;
font: normal 1em/14pt verdana, arial, sans-serif;
text-align: justify;
background: #fff;}
Any advice
Janelle Clemens wrote:
Oh, another quick question. Is it better to use % for line-height versus
pixel?Like I said I am used to using set sizes (pt px) for everything.
This css is such a learning/breaking bad habits adventure.
Actually the best answer should be neither, but due to
On 4/7/05 2:42 PM, russ - maxdesign [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hope could just have easily changed from an incomplete HTML4.01 Transitional
doctype to a complete version. This is not a criticism of Hope, as she may
have had other reasons for moving to XHML.
This was not a conscience nor
I created a simple webpage containing a few paragraphs, a list and a table
(for tabular data). For some reason that I cannot for the life of me work
out, the font size of the text is much bigger in the table than elsewhere on
the page. (Tested in FF, Safari, Opera/mac). It's driving me nuts! I
You have an incomplete doctype which makes browsers go into quicks mode and
then font size inheritance is ignored inside a table.
Russ
I created a simple webpage containing a few paragraphs, a list and a table
(for tabular data). For some reason that I cannot for the life of me work
out, the
Thanks, Russ! I've fixed the doctype on the real page and it works
beautifully now.
The page is on a site with a non-web standards design that I've inherited.
It's due for a revamp in a couple of months when I plan to introduce
standards. I thought I'd start to experiment with this new page but
but is there a standard way to set the
font size across all elements (irrespsective of inheritance)?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Hope Stewart
Sent: Monday, 4 July 2005 11:12 AM
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: [WSG] font size in a table
I
On 7/4/05, Webmaster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Hope,
This was bugging me for ages too. I don't know _why_ it does it but my
workaround to-date has simply been to implicitly set font-size for p, td and
li. My table and list text usually display larger when I only set the
font-size in the
On 4/7/05 1:23 PM, Webmaster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This was bugging me for ages too. I don't know _why_ it does it but my
workaround to-date has simply been to implicitly set font-size for p, td and
li. My table and list text usually display larger when I only set the
font-size in the body
PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of Hope Stewart
Sent: Monday, 4 July 2005 1:54 PM
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: Re: [WSG] font size in a table
On 4/7/05 1:23 PM, Webmaster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This was bugging me for ages too. I don't know _why_ it does it but my
workaround to-date has simply been
Paul,
To switch to standards compliant mode, you must have a full and complete
doctype but it does NOT have to be XHTML at all.
Hope could just have easily changed from an incomplete HTML4.01 Transitional
doctype to a complete version. This is not a criticism of Hope, as she may
have had other
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
* from what I remember, Opera has some rounding problems when
calculating font sizes that make it display text just a shade smaller
than other browsers; this is the reason for the additional 1 percent,
resulting in 101% (I think even 100.1% would do the trick, not
* IE has a problem resizing font sizes properly if the topmost size is
set in ems, but has no trouble with percentages. Setting the body in %
(or even the HTML element itself) will fix this problem. You can set
your base size to 100%, and then safely use ems for anything below that;
Hi
.body {font: 100%; }
You probably mean body {...} without the full stop in front
Unless you have a class called .body
Yes :)
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
.body {font: 100%; }
You probably mean body {...} without the full stop in front
I meant YES for this.
tee
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints
On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 21:41:02 -0400, Patrick H. Lauke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cole Kuryakin - x7m wrote:
So, what's the deal? is it better/safer to user 101% vs 1em to set the
initial font sizing for maximum cross browser compatiblility, or is
this just a matter of style and preference?
I've just gotten comfortable using ems for font sizing in my
projects by starting out with font-size=1em within the body tag. Now I'm seeing
that some people are using font-size = 101% in the body tag. I seem to remember
someone saying that using "1em" in the body tag makes some versions of
personally I always use the default font sized provided by css...if I
need it bigger then I use em values. here's an example:
body {
font: small Arial, sans-serif;
}
p { 1em; }
h1 {2em; }
h2 {1.8em; }
etc...
That way you know that the font will _always_ be readable. Even if
you start off
Cole Kuryakin - x7m wrote:
So, what's the deal? is it better/safer to user 101% vs 1em to set the
initial font sizing for maximum cross browser compatiblility, or is this
just a matter of style and preference?
Two things:
* IE has a problem resizing font sizes properly if the topmost size
regarding the balance between type readability and aesthetics in general and
with this site.
I think that large blocks of text should be comfortable to read for everyone
maybe at the expense of aesthetics, but in this case its only small amounts
of type that can be read quickly and wont cause
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
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
Javier wrote on Wed, 17 Nov 2004 10:25:51 +0100:
I'm trying to develope a site with proportional font size.
When I start to test what I did, I falled in problems with Firefox/IE
differences. Fonts that in Firefox appears big or normal in IE appear so
small. Then I tried to check other
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
Terrence Wood wrote on Fri, 19 Nov 2004 12:04:19 +1300:
I also note that Felix has not stepped up to the plate to support any of
his opinions with research based results despite demanding (and getting)
the same from the ``designer's side'' of the debate.
Your Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:50:17 +1300
Natalie Buxton wrote at Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:58:25 +1100:
Selectively quoting and removing the key point I made misrepresents
what I said in my earlier email:
I normally quote only portions relevant to comments I make.
I believe that the best the designer can do is ensure their fonts are
Terrence Wood wrote on Fri, 19 Nov 2004 00:50:17 +1300:
People get off making this assumption because 10-12pt type is the most
common font size used in the print world,
Web pages aren't printed on fixed size paper. Browser viewports are for
all practical purposes infinitely adjustable in
Felix.
A thread closed by a core member is not to be opened again. Period!
The topic has been exhausted.
If you have fresh information on the topic after a thread has been closed,
send it directly to the person and not to the list.
Peter
**
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
THREAD CLOSED
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list getting help
**
Here here. Bout 30 emails wasting everyones time.
More about standards less about egos!
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of russ - maxdesign
Sent: Friday, 19 November 2004 9:21 PM
To: Web Standards Group
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size ADMIN
On 11/19/04 4:02 AM Brett Walsh [EMAIL PROTECTED] sent this out:
Here here.
Make that hear, hear and you're on! :-)
Best,
Rick Faaberg
**
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See
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
Henry Tapia wrote:
Points about allowing the user as much text size control as possible are
well made and I agree, however I don't think I'd have a job as a designer if
I relied upon the average user to change their browser's default text-size
manually. In my several years working on the web,
Felix Miata wrote:
David Laakso wrote:
Jeroen Visser [ vizi ] wrote:
I myself set a base size on the body element (most of the time 76%
like Owen Briggs) and then use em's to set up the rest of the typography.
Hmm, 76% on the body element, thats 24% smaller than my default? Kinda
tough on us
Jeroen Visser [ vizi ] wrote:
I don't know why there's this 'designers who reduce browser base font
size are evil' attitude. I go with Owen Briggs, who relates browser
default size to general OS GUI elements' font size.
No problem with that, other than the fact that we see those tiny
text-bits
November 2004 09:39
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size
David Laakso wrote:
Jeroen Visser [ vizi ] wrote:
I myself set a base size on the body element
(most of the time 76%
like Owen Briggs) and then use em's to set up
the rest of the typography.
Hmm, 76% on the body
People get off making this assumption because 10-12pt type is the most
common font size used in the print world, and 10-12px on screen is close
approximation of that. 12px type is the preferred size according to
research:
http://psychology.wichita.edu/surl/usabilitynews/41/onlinetext.htm
Felix
The solution you posted is user oriented. What
about developers ?
Surely ANY solution has to be user orientated.
After all, we are
designing sites for users, not for developers.
Chris
Yes, as far as I'm asking for help to develope a well
designed site, I'm thinking in the user.
When I
Hi,
Felix Miata wrote:
It is arrogant to impose it, rather than merely wish it. What you are
doing is saying to your visitors I can't actually know what your
default is, but regardless what it really is, it's too big for me, and
I'm imposing a xx% reduction from whatever you chose as most
1 - 100 of 182 matches
Mail list logo
