Andreas Boehmer [Addictive Media] wrote: > Oh, I do agree that he has got some good points in his article: all 10 > points are valid issues, but nothing we haven't really heard before. The
We'll only hear it less when heed is paid it, or when the gummint steps in to force it. Which would you rather have? > problem I have is that he creates a list of the "Top Ten Web Design > Mistakes" based on statistics provided by a very particular group of people. Indeed, those whose interest is in a usable web for everyone. What a novel interest they have. > Let's assume we went and converted all of the fixed font sizes into relative > font sizes. On every website that exists. Would that make a huge difference > to our web experience? Maybe a little, but not much. No, because that's only half a fix, if that much. Many designers are already using relative sizes, but mostly 76% or 80% or some other non-100% undersize instead of just fixing with pt or px. Either way, most web page text IS presumptively too small, because it is set smaller than the UA preference. So, users use their defense mechanisms zoom and minimum font size to make it big enough, and most of such pages break, with hidden or overlapping content, because the designers didn't allow for it. -- "Be quick to listen, slow to speak." James 1:19 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/ ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************
