On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:57:04PM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > Having small fonts isn't common, at least not amongst folk that I've > > directly observed in usability testing. Having text at sizes that don't > > strain the eyes is more common. > It doesn't seem unreasonable that the site be readable despite the font > size. The logo overlaps the text at any point size under 16, at least in > my browser, which is quite big. My screenshot was with size 12, which is > what I use everywhere and I'm sure I'm not alone. I don't know anything > about HTML but is it possible to set a minimum font size or force it to 16? DPI (dot pitch to the metric world) makes a big difference here. Your screenshot, displayed on my system, is hard to read, and I still have 20/20 eyesight.
For my normal use, I use Bitstream Vera {,Sans,Mon}, 12pt (minimum enforced), 100dpi, 1586x994 (1680x1050 screen, but my browser is the aforementioned size). > Moving the text in the middle column down so it begins under the logo > would also work, wouldn't it? All of our other pages (except b.g.o) > have either the plain purple banner or black banner with links across > the top, and it works fine there. Is there some reason it can't be > done here also? ViewCVS, glsamaker, bugday, there are plenty that don't have the banner. For a site that needs to provide dense information, I actually strongly dislike the waste of space that is the black area at the top of g.o, but I'll try to come up with a more compact version. My usability design range in testing this spans: 1024x768 to 1680x1050, at both 72dpi and 100dpi. However it seems that I didn't take into account fonts that render extremely small :-(. I'll try to make a smaller logo with the SVG that nightmorph pointed out. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
pgpY1wTAYy3Wn.pgp
Description: PGP signature