Hello Elizabeth, I tested again this time using FF28 latest Chrome, Canary and IE10 (will boot Win7 later to check IE11). The results are the same - the only diffs I see are due to font rendering as far as I can tell.
Based on the material the Philippe posted there may be an issue when using a higher density monitor which I don't have access to (unless I try it on my wife's iPad...when she's not playing WwF that is). However, keep in mind that high density displays are still a tiny fraction of what's being used in the wild. For a little while that is...until 4K takes off. Eric > On April 7, 2014 at 4:41 PM "Davies, Elizabeth" <elizabeth_dav...@gallup.com> > wrote: > > > Tom sent me some screenshots and is also not seeing the effect on a Mac. I > checked around on our in house Macs, and this appears to be a Windows OS with > Firefox effect. What we're seeing is an overall inflation of the entire page > (not just font size). Where on a 1920 resolution screen, Firefox is behaving > as if it's at 1280 and using that media query break point instead of > continuing on to the higher one. For the same container, Firebug shows a > computed width of 1505px / Chrome tools shows a computed width of 1905px on > the exact same screen (1920X1080 screen resolution on the device). > > I hugely appreciate the feedback. It's brought to light that it's not just my > sites, but also the old ones as well as every single web site I've visited on > Windows high resolution with Firefox past version 28. I would love to say its > only inside this building, but my home computer has the same results. I'm > going to chalk it up to a hardware/browser combo issue and move on. For those > that can't see the inflation: > > Chrome: http://i59.tinypic.com/rwnfc6.png > Firefox: http://i60.tinypic.com/200cs2d.png > > @Eric: You are correct, the 62.5% is done for the base10 standardization as > this section of the stylesheet is used by non-CSS developers who will simply > use PX measurements if it requires any math. I get better compliance and less > downstream cludge by making it so. > > @Felix: The CSS on the Gallup sites are under my control (at launch anyway - > after that it escapes until a major evolution/redesign. That site is a first > crack at mobile first and is about half the size of the previous traditional > desktop first stylesheet. It contains about 1/3 of the typographic fiddling > than previously (and has already begun to bloat). The bulk of the weight on > that particular stylesheet is in the private pages where there are extremely > complex dashboard layouts and wizards. > > ELIZABETH DAVIES > Input | Intellection | Learner | Achiever | Belief > > > > All information in this message is confidential and may be legally privileged. > Only intended recipients are authorized to use it. > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > 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/ ______________________________________________________________________ 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/
