> Personally, I think there should have been a companion article > explaining why designers can't write code.
That would be the very wrong article. > This is a classic example: the whole point of setting the base font size > to this value is to make the maths easier when sizing all other font > rules; but that itself exposes the fact that the designer is still > basically designing with Pixel sizes! And there is NOTHING wrong with pixel sizes. Some myths just never die. > Under those circumstances, I would tend to encourage the use of sizes in > percentages, after a global reset to 100%. > > But then, I am a developer, and think that Design Types shouldn't be > allowed anywhere near an angle bracket - for their own good: they are > too sharp for the un-trained hand. So you say Dave Shea, Dan Cederholm, Douglas Bowman, Dunstan Orchard and other should not be allowed to write code? What a pity, they could teach a thing or two 99.999% of developer types out there. And yes, I am a developer. Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ > > Mike > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of CK > Sent: 24 April 2009 00:57 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [WSG] Box model in IE7 > > Hi, > > Would you elaborate on why the CSS rule invalidates the article? As it > appears the authors explanation is sound. > >> html { >> font-size: 62.5%; >> } > > > > ******************************************************************* > List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm > Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm > Help: [email protected] > ******************************************************************* > > ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [email protected] *******************************************************************
