Am 24.01.2012 10:07 schrieb Felix Miata:
On 2012/01/23 10:35 (GMT+0800) Ghodmode composed:
960px is a good max width... for most site visitors.
...where "most" is as little as 50% + 1 of today's visitors.
Is there statistical evidence for any of these two statements?
OTOH, the em unit bears a predictable relationship to both legibility
and usability, and thus is the better way to determine how wide is wide
enough.
This is an old discussion. In a perfect world, the em unit would
undoubtedly be the only reasonable choice. But in today's reality, some
crucial parts of designs, such as image and border dimensions, do only
work well if defined in pixels. (Look at a GIF logo scaled to an em
size.) To have some kind of reliable relationship between the dimensions
of a web page and its elements is a very common wish of website
designers and their clients.
Another downside of em is the fact that it is relative to the font size
of the current element, and thus not reliably constant throughout a
page. Once rem will be broadly implemented, it will be the unit of choice.
Screen densities are rising and will continue to rise.
Sure - which will also result in better renderings of images and borders
with relative widths. And furthermore, the awareness of graphic
designers (who usually are the ones who demand fixed page widths from
us) for the differences between screen and print designs will rise. I am
confident that in, let's say, 10 years the circumstances for using rem
as the unit of choice will be dramatically better than today.
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
