W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Making pt a non-physical unit

From: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 11:48:26 +0100
Message-ID: <cb7bb73a1001160248g3cbb3243k71359907e03434e8@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 10:39 AM, Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2010/1/16 Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
>>
>> If print vs screen is to be considered, I'd rather see it influence
>> whether viewing distance should be considered or not, where print
>> sizing would be unaffected by (assumed) viewing distance, in contrast
>> with screens and projections, where an estimate of the viewing
>> distance can be done from the device size (an information typically
>> available from the o/s). For example, an iPhone with a 160dpi (=5/3
>> the CSS dpi) is usually held a 3/4 the distance of a typical monitor,
>> thus leading to a 1.25 (rounded to 1) correspondence between CSS and
>> actual dpi.
>
> But how do you estimate the viewing distance, even if only
> approximate, for projections? In a large lecture hall or meeting room,
> it would be a very large range, say 250 metres (from the first row to
> the back row). Such estimates are useless.

People sitting at extreme positions are going to have suboptimal
viewing experiences regardless. So the question would rather be: what
is the typical 'optimal' viewing distance for a projection with a 100"
diagonal?

-- 
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
Received on Saturday, 16 January 2010 10:49:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:23 GMT