Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
We were told in the past by a massive client that for accessibility purposes
font sizes needed to be set to 74% as a minimum as the basic reading size
below which it's a straign on the eyes.
To answer the O.P. question about IE box sizing-- I think the issue has
more to do with IE's lack of mathematical ability than with box sizing,
as the extra width on those boxes caused by the border should still make
them 50% with the 'old' box model. The borders make them a tad larger in
'standards' mode, so in neither case should there be a gap.
But I can't resist replying to this:
> On Fri, 24 Apr 2009, Jason Grant wrote:
>
>
> 74% is 26% smaller than the viewer's preferred size, IOW, it's too
> small.
>
Yes, I agree somewhat. But an 'em' at 100% is normally 16 x 16 = 256px
total while 75% is 12 x 12 = 144px. It seems to me that 144 / 256 is
closer to half size, no?
> Setting "body { font-size: 100% }" leaves the font at the viewer's
> preferred size and prevents some IE weirdness.
>
Not only. Browsers with minimum font size set have problems, as more
than one article cited in this thread clearly demonstrates. Some
browsers install with a minimum size set by default, so the issue is
more than academic.
Cordially,
David
--
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [email protected]
*******************************************************************
