Re: [css3-values] Physical length units

On 19/2/12 22:47, Charles Pritchard wrote:
> It's no fun though. About 15 lines of CSS.
What 15 lines of CSS do you have in mind? When I needed to detect 
physical DPI or physical screen size in Gecko, I had to resort to 
JavaScript & matchMedia.
> For the most part, I'd prefer authors try to stick with "em". We've 
> got a lot of flexibility we're trying to get into design. Many big 
> players fail to test their site with browser zoom. 
I wasn't implying that truemm will replace ems. But when most authors 
use ems, they still define the root font-size in pixels, and then use 
ems to increase or decrease it as necessary. That root font-size would 
be much better off with truemm.
> I don't see why someone needs to say, well I want this letter to be 
> 8mm tall; other than using relative ratios. And "em" can be good for 
> that. It's a use case, but it's not a strong one. It is already poorly 
> executed with "px".
Because 8mm (physical mm) is always 8mm so if 8mm is sufficient to make 
type legible in one screen, it will be in all screens. 30 (device) 
pixels on the other hand might be legible in a screen with a certain dpi 
and too small in another, high-res screen.
> I'd prefer it if everything on the web were 1.5x larger and more 
> legible. Thank goodness for mobile phones. At least they have people 
> considering that sites should be easy to use with big targets to tap on.
Ditto.:(  At least in the past few years there's been some movement 
towards trying to get designers to use larger font sizes for body text.

-- 
Lea Verou (http://lea.verou.me | @LeaVerou)

Received on Sunday, 19 February 2012 21:58:35 UTC