RE: Relative Font Size

Julian,

May I humbly point you to http://wats.ca/resources/relativesizing/20.  In this case, by using ems I can apply the sizing to more than just fonts.  To that end then, ems would be more "practical"?

Just my $.03 (which given the current US/Canadian exchange rate is about $.02...)

JF

> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On
> Behalf Of Scarlett Julian (ED)
> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 9:33 AM
> To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Relative Font Size
> 
> 
> 
> Jesper
> 
> I don't have that book; could you elaborate on your/it's 
> argument? I don't accept that a term's length of usage or 
> perceived professionalism is reason for using it. Pixel is a 
> professional term in web typography but we don't want that used 
> for font sizes do we? 
> 
> Again I would say that since em and % produce the same result in 
> terms of accessibility then there is no reason to use one over 
> the other. Unless you have another (better) argument.
> 
> Please don't think that I'm being pedantic; it's just that your 
> argument doesn't make sense and since you stated categorically 
> that using em is 'best practice' I feel you should qualify it.
> 
> regards
> Julian
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Jesper Tverskov [mailto:jesper.tverskov@mail.tele.dk]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2003 2:11 PM
> > To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Relative Font Size
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Jesper wrote wrote:
> > > Em is Best Practice for relative font-size but % works the 
> > same. I always use em.
> > 
> > Julian asked:
> > > Why? If they both work the same and are both relative units 
> > why is em better practice than %?
> > 
> > The em unit has a long tradition in typography and is the 
> > professionel term also in web design. "%" is more the 
> > expression of the people.
> > 
> > See: "The amazing em unit and other best practices", in:
> > 
> > Cascading Style Sheets
> > Designing for the web,
> > 2. edition, 1999
> > ISBN 0-201-59625-3
> > 
> > by Håkon Wium Lie and Bert Bos
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > Jesper
> > 
> > 
> The information in this email is confidential. The contents may 
> not be disclosed or used by anyone other than the addressee.  If 
> you are not the addressee, please tell us by using the reply 
> facility in your email software as soon as possible. Sheffield 
> City Council cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or 
> completeness of this message as it has been transmitted over a 
> public network.  If you suspect that the message may have been 
> intercepted or amended please tell us as soon as possible.
> 
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 18 June 2003 11:11:59 UTC