W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > March 2004

Re: thoughts on non-compliant browsers

From: David Woolley <david@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2004 00:14:26 +0000 (GMT)
Message-Id: <200403080014.i280EQG00966@djwhome.demon.co.uk>
To: www-style@w3.org

> I am not sure I understand your point. Are you saying that pixel sizing 
> of fonts has no value? that it, in reality, has no meaning?

No.  He is saying that making user font sizes override all
absolute sizing, not just pixel sizing, provides a better tradeoff
between designer wants and user needs than the IE solution of
disabling designer font sizes entirely.

I long ago turned off IE font sizes.  I don't actually need to use
anything bigger than medium on IE, all I need is for designers not to
make important text smaller than 100% of the default size.  However,
many too many pages these days do exactly that.

Other solutions to the problem would get more complex and would
probably involve a minimum font size.

It seems to me that the Mozilla solution ought to work well with the
good practice of setting the font size then setting the dimensions of
other things in terms of ems.

> but I explained why we choose pixel sizing for *one* part of the page 
> which has large text to begin with.

You may have large text, but the majority of designed sites have too
small text in absolute sizes, and that is the problem that Mozilla
is attempting to solve.  It's an unfortunate fact of life for
responsible designers that abuses by the majority will result in
counter-measures in browsers.

> Doesn't this make mozilla a sh*tty browser?

No.  It makes Mozilla a more designer friendly browser than IE.
Received on Sunday, 7 March 2004 19:14:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:27:12 UTC