On 2007/07/24 11:17 (GMT-0400) John Gribben apparently typed: > I've been struggling with reliable alternatives to pixel-based type sizing
There's little reliable about px sizing fonts except to guarantee large numbers of visitors to be unable to read your mousetype. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/designmistakes.html IE's text resizer doesn't work on px sized text, thereby rendering many unable to restore it to a legible size. http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingPixels > methods, but I haven't been able to find any. I've read many articles on http://clagnut.com/blog/348/ for instance? This we've covered before, e.g. http://archivist.incutio.com/viewlist/css-discuss/87185 and http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/Clagnut/eonsSS.html . Where else? Have you looked at any of the sites on http://cssliquid.com/ or at http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/Sites/dlviolin.html or http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/Sites/ksc/ ? > this subject. It's perhaps the aspect of standards-based coding that for > some reason I find the most confusing. Maybe the lack has to do with understanding how inheritance affects fonts? Keyword sizes are one solution that avoids inheritance difficulty until you gain better understanding. http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingKeywords > Here is an example: > http://windows.pedrera.com/clients/omnia/temp/ > With this template, I used a percentage (62.5%) to set the root parent size > for the body Why? You don't know what size 100% is anywhere but on systems you can see. When you stop thinking in arbitrary units (px) and instead think in relative units (e.g. em or %), there's no need for arbitrary base level adjustment or the arbitrary barriers to access that arbitrary adjustments impose. If you think a base level adjustment is required, the right place to do it is in your browser, not the CSS. Just be sure to test with other browser default sizes ranging from 7-8pt real up to 16pt real or more (or corresponding text zoom) and window sizes up to at least .3m wide when done to ensure usability remains for the widest possible spectrum of non-blind visitors. > and then used em units to set the size of all child elements. > This seemed to work well on IE 7, Firefox 2, and Safari 3 on my system (Win > XP 2002, SP2), but on my boss's machine (which is, I think, basically > identical to mine), the sizing method doesn't work on IE 7. The text is too > large, as if the Text Size were set to "Larger." I checked his browser > settings - the Text Size was set to "Medium" (as it was for my browser). "Too large" for who? Was he complaining it was too large? How old is he? How old are you? How large is his display? Yours? What resolution does he use? You? What actual pt sizes do you estimate his is/was? Yours? > Am I missing something? We have the same versions of IE, our Text Size > settings are the same, but his browser is rendering the type larger than > mine by an order of magnitude. Is that page the only thing on his desktop with different sized fronts from yours, or are other things on his larger too? It sounds like there's an important difference between his and yours - probably 96 DPI ("normal" fonts) on yours and 120 DPI ("large" fonts) on his. -- "All scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteoousness." 2 Timothy 3:16 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ 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/
