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.

Received on Friday, 31 August 2012 17:13:13 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 11 February 2015 12:35:14 UTC