> On Jul 21, 2016, at 2:05 AM, John J <cr8...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Working on my code, I decided to see what they CSS validator had to say > about it, and it threw out 154 errors, most of which were about rem as my > value of measure for things like padding, type, borders, margin. > > I am using rem on advice of a developer who said that a certain pinhead, > un-named browser needs it; other browsers can use/deal with it too. > > Yet the validator threw a hissy..Should I abandon all efforts to support > arcane versions of this browser, and stick only with em?
The default configuration of the CSS validator should handle the `rem` unit without any problems (other wise, make sure “CSS Level 3” is selected under the “more options” disclosure triangle thingie). http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/ I use rem units all the time for everything and more without trouble. All modern browsers handle this unit correctly. If you need support for IE 8 – which doesn’t support the `rem` unit, then what Tom says… (and note to Karl: no, just blindly replacing `rem` with `em` is _not_ the way to go. The computed value of something specified with the rem unit is based on the computed value of the font-size as set on the root element. For the `em unit` it is based on the font-size of the element itself.) Philippe -- Philippe Wittenbergh http://l-c-n.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ 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/
