- From: Steven Pemberton <Steven.Pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 13:30:53 +0100 (MET)
- To: Todd Fahrner <fahrner@pobox.com>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
> 2. The 1996 CSS1 standard suggests a 1/90" value for a "reference pixel", > extrapolated from a visual angle of 0.0227 degrees visual angle at arms > length. UAs are expected to scale pixels appropriately if the physical > resolution is known to vary significantly from this value. A 1/90" > reference pixel would suggest a rasterization of 12pt into 15px, rather > than 16. 15 is of course much closer to 16 than to 12, however. Because no > OS/UA currently assumes a 90ppi logical resolution, (nor implements > pixel-scaling per CSS1), I think the reference pixel value should be > amended to 1/96". It's simple to preserve the suggested 0.0227 degrees > visual angle by giving the reference user a longer arm's length. (^: I've always disagreed with this definition of pixel. It seems to demand that the browser know how far away the reader is. All of a sudden if you use a projector, the definition of pixel may change. A better definition *if you ask me* is: a px unit is 1pt rounded to the nearest whole number of physical pixels on the device. Steven Pemberton
Received on Wednesday, 16 December 1998 07:31:00 UTC