Re: let's bump to 10mm from 9mm

I think Apple has moved from Pixels to Points.

Pixels is messy because so many screens like retina compress them into an
incredibly tiny space...

"Apple has a new unit of measure called a point, which is in no way related
to the typographers, or PostScript, point. It is a device-independent pixel
with no fixed relation to physical sizes. It is a pixel on non-retina
devices, and 2 pixels on retina devices. So far"


​
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/MobileHIG/LayoutandAppearance.html
​
http://www.uxmatters.com/mt/archives/2013/03/common-misconceptions-about-touch.php#sthash.sfRgVb65.l8WVbYtV.dpuf




Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 4:33 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
wrote:

> Patrick, I agree with your concern.    I've seen the number 44x44 pixels
> mentioned before for a minimum device independ pixel size.
>
> Jon
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Dec 17, 2015, at 3:47 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> wrote:
> >
> > For what it's worth, I think it's disingenuous to dictate a physical
> size "as measured on the screen", as developers don't always (in fact,
> practically never) have knowledge of the actual physical size of a screen
> and can therefore not do much in this respect. They'll be setting sizes of
> interface elements using CSS pixels (for web content) or points, and rely
> on the OS and, in the case of web content, the UA to have a sensible
> mapping (based on the device/OS' dpi or device pixel ratio) that translates
> that into actual physical dimensions.
> >
> > Take an iPad and an iPad Mini ... both have the same nominal resolution
> in CSS pixels, but their physical screens are vastly different in size.
> There's no way from JS for me as developer to determine the actual physical
> dimensions...so if I set a particular dimension for a control the only way
> I can (using CSS pixels, or any other CSS unit - even "mm" - which in the
> end is still based on a pixel), I can't guarantee that it'll be any
> particular physical dimension on the screen of both the iPad and iPad Mini.
> And if it came to actually auditing, you could end up in a situation where
> you audit my content on an iPad and it passes (as holding the ruler up to
> the screen of the iPad you'd measure 10mm), while auditing it exactly the
> same way but on an iPad Mini it would fail.
> >
> > I'd strongly advise that instead of talking about "mm" and "as measured
> on the screen", you should consider talking in terms of CSS pixels, points
> (see
> https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/MobileHIG/LayoutandAppearance.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP40006556-CH54-SW1),
> dp (density-independent pixels - see
> http://developer.android.com/guide/practices/screens_support.html#terms),
> "effective pixels" (see
> https://msdn.microsoft.com/library/windows/apps/dn958439.aspx#built-in_features_for_designers)
> or the like, with a note that whatever values you've chosen generally
> (though dependent on platform/OS/actual device/etc) will map to roughly 9
> or 10 physical mm)
> >
> > P
> > --
> > Patrick H. Lauke
> >
> > www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> > http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> > twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
> >
>
>
>