[css-d] page expansion
These days with the ability of most modern browsers to zoom in on an entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance -- would it be best to use pixels for all measurements from now on? Thanks, Ce Ce __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [css-d] page expansion
Ce Ce wrote: These days with the ability of most modern browsers to zoom in on an entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? This is a design decision rather than practical CSS authoring (which we try to focus on in the list), so I will just try to correct some technical misunderstandings: Zooming a page is quite different from flexible font sizing, so the question is really illogical. If pixels are the most consistent measurement Pixel sizes vary. and not subject to inheritance -- No unit is subject to inheritance in any way. Values specified in pixels are inherited by just the same rules as any other values. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [css-d] page expansion
Ce Ce wrote: These days with the ability of most modern browsers to zoom in on an entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance -- would it be best to use pixels for all measurements from now on? Thanks, Ce Ce I think what one uses depends on particular situations and needs at hand -- what will do for this, may not do for that. One size fits all, as they say in the clothing industry, does not necessarily work for all situations on the Web. And our good friend of the list(s), Georg Sortun, has produced some layouts that defy contemporary reality-- sizing width elements in pixels, em's, and percent -- and throwing in min/max width to boot, all within one layout... -- A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming. http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [css-d] page expansion
What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed our web pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so that when someone chose a larger font size the page would expand accordingly. Now that browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point? On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:04 PM, David Laakso [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Ce Ce wrote: These days with the ability of most modern browsers to zoom in on an entire page (rather than just a text zoom), is it worth it to use ems or percentages rather than pixels for element and text sizing? If pixels are the most consistent measurement and not subject to inheritance -- would it be best to use pixels for all measurements from now on? Thanks, Ce Ce I think what one uses depends on particular situations and needs at hand -- what will do for this, may not do for that. One size fits all, as they say in the clothing industry, does not necessarily work for all situations on the Web. And our good friend of the list(s), Georg Sortun, has produced some layouts that defy contemporary reality-- sizing width elements in pixels, em's, and percent -- and throwing in min/max width to boot, all within one layout... -- A thin red line and a salmon-color ampersand forthcoming. http://chelseacreekstudio.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [css-d] page expansion
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Ce Ce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now that browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point? http://bryanrieger.com/issues/mobile-screens-and-pixel-sizes/ Desktop browsers aren't the only browsers. Just something to think about. -- Blake Haswell http://www.blakehaswell.com/ | http://blakehaswell.wordpress.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [css-d] page expansion
Thanks Blake. An interesting link. On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 5:54 PM, Blake [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Ce Ce [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now that browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point? http://bryanrieger.com/issues/mobile-screens-and-pixel-sizes/ Desktop browsers aren't the only browsers. Just something to think about. -- Blake Haswell http://www.blakehaswell.com/ | http://blakehaswell.wordpress.com/ __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [css-d] page expansion
Ce Ce wrote: What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed our web pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so that when someone chose a larger font size the page would expand accordingly. Now that browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point? Depends on what a design is supposed to expand in relation to. I've always thought it was best if designs adjusted to the environment, and the most critical variable is still the width of the browser-window. The em-based zooming you're referring to can be made to work well if it isn't locked to font-size, but most existing versions are locked to font-size and have therefore never worked well and never will - regardless of whether there are changes made to the environment or not. Font-resizing and page-zooming are minor, but important, variables that any design should just be able to take without causing overflow of the window to such a degree that they become unusable - too early. What's too early is up to each designer to decide, and each end-user to complain about. FWIW: my preferred browser has had page-zoom for so many years that it has become second nature both to use the feature and take it into account while designing. So, nothing has really changed for the last 8 years or so. As an end-user I usually rely on 'minimum font size', in my preferred and all other major browsers except IE, to make content accessible/ readable though. Sites that misbehaves - like those with zoom pages most often do, get a dose of fit-to-width to break their zoom-feature. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
Re: [css-d] page expansion
Thanks Georg for such a thoughtful answer. On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 7:40 PM, Gunlaug Sørtun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ce Ce wrote: What I am asking is that ideally -- in the past -- we've developed our web pages with CSS to expand both horizontally and vertically so that when someone chose a larger font size the page would expand accordingly. Now that browsers have the ability to page zoom (rather than just text zoom) is the importance of horizontal and vertical expansion a moot point? Depends on what a design is supposed to expand in relation to. I've always thought it was best if designs adjusted to the environment, and the most critical variable is still the width of the browser-window. The em-based zooming you're referring to can be made to work well if it isn't locked to font-size, but most existing versions are locked to font-size and have therefore never worked well and never will - regardless of whether there are changes made to the environment or not. Font-resizing and page-zooming are minor, but important, variables that any design should just be able to take without causing overflow of the window to such a degree that they become unusable - too early. What's too early is up to each designer to decide, and each end-user to complain about. FWIW: my preferred browser has had page-zoom for so many years that it has become second nature both to use the feature and take it into account while designing. So, nothing has really changed for the last 8 years or so. As an end-user I usually rely on 'minimum font size', in my preferred and all other major browsers except IE, to make content accessible/ readable though. Sites that misbehaves - like those with zoom pages most often do, get a dose of fit-to-width to break their zoom-feature. regards Georg -- http://www.gunlaug.no __ css-discuss [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
