Probably what would be optimal with CSS is to have different designs and different style sheets for various common visual impairments. What would be great is if it were standardized and so people with certain disabilities would automatically be served up their style sheet based on their browser settings. Then Web designers would create a normal.css, largetype.css, protan.css, deuteran.css, and a Tritan.css. But this would require consensus among designers, CSS world, and the browsers.
Sarah -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Novitski Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 1:26 AM To: css-d@lists.css-discuss.org Subject: Re: [css-d] "Weak" layout I've never understood the sense of that criterion, e.g. "the page should survive two [or three] font size enlargements." Doesn't that depend entirely on what size the smallest font on the page is? What I don't know is if there's any kind of a minimum font size that we should ensure our readers can achieve. I doubt that there is one, given the variation in vision impairments, but I'll be curious to know what others think. Regards, Paul __________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d IE7 information -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7 List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/