W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2012

Re: [css-units] Proposal for next level: Responsive Pixel

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 10:12:26 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDDyUoK6n+PLrbtAJKH3LCpHCBRanSWg5vpGmqxKaxs6rg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com" <mtanalin@yandex.ru>
Cc: Fran├žois REMY <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>, CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 6:43 AM, Marat Tanalin | tanalin.com
<mtanalin@yandex.ru> wrote:
> 31.08.2012, 17:35, "Fran├žois REMY" <fremycompany_pub@yahoo.fr>:
>> |  Actually, you can just specify base font-size for `HTML` element instead
>> of `BODY` element.
>>
>> Certainly not. If you do that, you can't know any more if the user is vision
>> impaired and volountarily INCREASED the root font size in its settings.
>
> If your goal is to link `rem` and user's default font-size, wouldn't specifying base font-size in `em` for `HTML` element sufficient?
>
>     HTML {font-size: .8125em; }
>     /* If default font-size is 16px, `rem` is now 13 pixels */

Yup, this'll work.  If you want to just repurpose rem as a "responsive
pixel", just use this:

html { font-size: .0625em; } /* set the rem to one "responsive pixel"
- on most machines, this'll equal 1px */
body { font-size: 16rem; } /* Set the base font size back to the
user's default. */

This does make it slightly harder to use rem for its originally
intended purpose, but you can just use 16rem anywhere you would
normally use 1rem for the same effect.

~TJ
Received on Friday, 31 August 2012 17:13:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 17:20:59 GMT