W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > January 2013

Re: sample CSS property page: font-size

From: Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2013 11:28:03 -0500
Message-ID: <CAECD2427xOq19y09aPE-AJ_KchCNa4kDbJ4DzzPxUaZ289OyqA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
Cc: Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com>, Paul Irish <paulirish@google.com>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>, Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>
Re #5, I modified my list of suggested template/design enhancements
to capture what kind of changes they are & help decide which are more
important. SKIN is for minor CSS tweaks; TEMPLATE has to do with how
content generates in the final page; FORM has to do with any necessary
modifications to how content is input.

--Mike Sierra

On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 10:04 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com> wrote:
> I also just added more steps to the CSS Property Milestone plan [1] to
> capture the work to prove out this page design on a few other articles, and
> also to implement the necessary template changes.
> [1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Tasks/CSS_Property_Milestone
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 7:01 PM, Alex Komoroske <komoroske@google.com>
> wrote:
>> I sat down to provide detailed commentary on this page, and... I don't
>> really have much. :-)
>> It looks great overall to me.
>> Here are a few random thoughts:
>> How does the very short right-aligned description relate to the one-line
>> overview? They seem to substantially overlap in terms of information in this
>> case, although I could imagine the overview might have more information for
>> more complicated properties.
>> The "See CSS Text Styling Fundamentals for an overview." looks a bit out
>> of place as a prose parenthetical tacked on the end. Should that be
>> presented in a more structured way?
>> The green check marks draw a bit too much attention because that all of
>> the other cells in the overview table are just text.
>> We need to carefully think about the compatibility table design; this is a
>> complex area and we shouldn't jump into a given design without considering
>> the consequences. Font-size is a pretty straightforward property, but other
>> complications to consider include: how to show that support started prefixed
>> at one version and unprefixed at another, as well as how to include
>> information about sub-compatiblity information. For example, MDN's
>> box-shadow page [1] has four separate rows for basic support, multiples,
>> inset, and spread radius. That said, I like this compatibility design a fair
>> bit; the use of color for supported status makes it work both at a glance
>> and when you want specific versions.
>> Thanks for doing such an awesome job on this!
>> --Alex
>> [1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/CSS/box-shadow
>> On Wed, Jan 23, 2013 at 1:23 AM, Chris Mills <cmills@opera.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks for your continued work on this Mike - your comments all make
>>> sense to me. Just one specific thing you asked for comment on:
>>> The question of font-size: 62.5% versus font-size: 10px - this is a good
>>> point, and I think that these days it makes very little difference; it used
>>> to be that in the old days, using pixel sizes was bad because old IE
>>> versions couldn't zoom content sized in this way. But that is a problem of
>>> the past, pretty much.
>>> Chris Mills
>>> Opera Software, dev.opera.com
>>> W3C Fellow, web education and webplatform.org
>>> Author of "Practical CSS3: Develop and Design" (http://goo.gl/AKf9M)
>>> On 22 Jan 2013, at 22:20, Mike Sierra <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Mike Sierra
>>> > <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Mike Sierra
>>> >> <letmespellitoutforyou@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>> Great comments. Replies inline marked SIERRA below.  I think it's
>>> >>> wise
>>> >>> to keep a tally of the major template/skin enhancements necessary to
>>> >>> produce this suggested design -- will do that.
>>> >>
>>> >> As promised, a list of features needed to fine-tune the design:
>>> >
>>> > At Julee's suggestion, I captured these suggestions as a proposal here:
>>> >
>>> > http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Proposals/css_prop_enhancements
>>> >
>>> > --Mike Sierra
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2013 16:28:36 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:20:46 UTC