- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 18:34:08 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
On 13/01/2017 18:26, Alastair Campbell wrote: >> Maybe we only need to drop "point"as a term > > Big +1, in all future work we should use the unit of the medium. Yes. There's a reason why guidelines for design/development by Microsoft, Apple, Google (particularly in the mobile space) use density-independent logical units of measure (dppx - density independent pixels; ep - effective pixels; and Apple's own custom use of "points" which have nothing to do with real-world spatial points nor with CSS points, but are their own custom way of saying "density-independent pixel") - see https://github.com/w3c/Mobile-A11y-Extension/blob/gh-pages/SCs/m2.md#evidence And it's exactly because they also realise that it's pointless (pardon the pun) to try and define sizes in real-world physical measurements when designing things that will be displayed on a variety of screen sizes. >> and let market pressure solve the base font issue for us. Over the > last 400 years publishers that used font below the critical print size > for fully sighted readers went broke. I wouldn't capitulate altogether. I'd still define a minimum font size, but define it in CSS pixels, and mandate that as the lower bound (possibly with exceptions, when it's ancilliary information - so maybe define it as the main content text of a page that needs to be at least X pixels in size?). P -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Friday, 13 January 2017 18:34:36 UTC