W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > site-comments@w3.org > November 2009

Re: Redesign Styles Hypocritical

From: James Hopkins <james@idreamincode.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 08:19:21 +0000
Message-Id: <BA05F095-5BAD-4537-B44B-93526C22C3F0@idreamincode.co.uk>
To: Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net>
Cc: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>, "site-comments@w3.org" <site-comments@w3.org>
> I guess I must not have been subscribed to the right mailing list  
> while the
> redesign was going on.

I would also say that www-style is probably the wrong mailing list to  
bring this up on; site-comments seems a more appropriate mailing list  
to use for these sorts of problems.

> Apparently the fact that I noticed on
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/site-comments/2009Sep/0005.html  
> didn't
> get seen by the right people.

I see from the email you linked to that Ian Jacobs replied (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/site-comments/2009Sep/0006.html 
) to your initial email, and a resolution was settled on.

> How on earth does the W3 reconcile the new styles' "body: font:  
> 13px..." in
> http://www.w3.org/2008/site/css/advanced with best practices as  
> expressed on
> http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/font-size ? How is 13px in the new better  
> than user
> default in the old? If not better, then why changed?
>
> Quoting that URL:
>
> 'Size: respect the users' preferences, avoid small size for content
>
>   * As a base font size for a document, 1em (or 100%) is equivalent to
> setting the font size to the user's preference. Use this as a basis  
> for your
> font sizes, and avoid setting a smaller base font size
>   * Avoid sizes in em smaller than 1em for text body, except maybe for
> copyright statements or other kinds of "fine print."'
>
> How does this hypocrisy happen? Why does the W3 need to be as rude  
> as most of
> the rest of the web? Is it really possible to meet WCAG 2.0 while  
> setting
> font sizes in px? Even if technically allowable, does it meet the
> accessibility spirit?
>
> Is there some reason for not maximizing readability? Gray (#333)  
> text on
> white background, though technically meeting the luminosity  
> threshhold,
> really doesn't, since that standard presumes out-of-the-box settings  
> on a
> brand new LCD, not one that is correctly set for an environment that  
> is not
> as bright as a retail store shelf, or a faded older one whose  
> brightness and
> contrast are already maximized to insufficient effect.
> -- 
> The husband should fulfill his marital duty to
> his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband.
>           1 Corinthians 7:3 NIV
>
> Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
>
> Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/
>
Received on Monday, 30 November 2009 08:19:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 24 October 2012 16:21:32 GMT