W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2003

Re: Relative font sizes

From: James Craig <work@cookiecrook.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2003 14:04:00 -0500
Message-ID: <3E9C57A0.8000805@cookiecrook.com>
To: Mary Martinson <mmartins@dwave.net>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org

Mary Martinson wrote:
> At a recent web accessibility class where I recommended using relative font
> sizes, a person replied that if you use relative sizes, the fonts get all
> screwed up when viewed on a Mac.  Does anyone know if this is true?
> Thanks
> Mary Martinson

Not if you set them up the right way. There has been a lot of discussion 
about this on the CSS-D list recently. Check the Wiki.

http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=AvoidingHacks
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=FontSize
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingEms

Basically, setting the body element to a keyword or percent size is 
essential, then all child elements can use em or % size based on that 
initial value. Don't try setting the body size to an em. Also, the 
examples listed may be affected by different rendering modes in certain 
browsers. There are different CSS hacks/selectors for standards mode 
than for quirks mode. If you are unfamiliar with what rendering mode 
entails, view this page:

http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=RenderingMode

Good luck,
James Craig
Received on Tuesday, 15 April 2003 15:04:10 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:09 GMT