Re: style sheet scalability (was: Specifying style notation in <link>)

Mary Morris (marym@finesse.com)
Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:02:15 -0800


Date: Tue, 5 Dec 1995 10:02:15 -0800
From: marym@finesse.com (Mary Morris)
Message-Id: <199512051802.KAA11055@thyme.finesse.com>
To: lilley@afs.mcc.ac.uk, seibert@hep.physics.mcgill.ca
Subject: Re: style sheet scalability (was: Specifying style notation in <link>)
Cc: preece@predator.urbana.mcd.mot.com, Hakon.Lie@sophia.inria.fr,


> Legibility should normally be increased with a larger display area, 
> assuming you don't get make the image too big for your display ;), as 
> long as the number of pixels you use on your screen is an integral 
> multiple of the number in the bitmap.  

OK. I'm confused here. It has been my experience that if you blow up
a GIF image too much, the image loses quality due to the face that
the image is a bunch of pixels being drawn absolutly. Text gets
"jaggies" quickly under this scenario. That is why Postscript 
uses algorythms to scale text larger instead of just blowing up
the pixels. I would assume that this would be true for many other
image types as well. Highly ditherable but not already dithered 
images would benefit from being blown up better than others, but
images that the designer dithers suffer from scaling problems.

Can you explain "how" legibility increases with significant size
enlargement?

Mary