- From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
- Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 15:25:16 -0400
- To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>
- Cc: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>
A test file is available at: http://aprompt.snow.utoronto.ca/TableBorderTest1.html Please let me know if you get different behavior from what I've seen. Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org> To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca> Cc: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org> Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 12:17 PM Subject: Re: Technique 3.4.1 Check document for relative units of measure > We suggest that they use .3 em and realise that under current implementations > they may not get their desired effect. Which is not ideal, and I imagine that > in practice they will use pixel sizes. > > specifying 3em if they don't want something 3em is clearly wrong. > > Do you have a test page we could use for a few more browsers? > > Charles > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Chris Ridpath wrote: > > So what do we suggest that the author use to set the border size? If they > want a thick border and specify 3em that will work fine now. But when the > browsers implement em size properly, the 3ems will be much too large. > > Chris > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org> > To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca> > Cc: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org> > Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 11:55 AM > Subject: Re: Technique 3.4.1 Check document for relative units of measure > > > > Which is not the greatest implmentation I can think of, although I can see > > that it is quick to implement (i.e. just take all units as pixel units...) > > but doesn't make it a bad idea to use relative units as far as I can see. > > > > Chaals > > > > On Thu, 28 Sep 2000, Chris Ridpath wrote: > > > > I just tried a test table with Netscape 4.7 and IE5. Both browsers > exhibit > > the same behaviour. > > > > Any table border size 1em or less shows up the same as a 1 pixel border, > > independent of the document font size. > > A table border of 2em displays the same as a 2 pixel border, independent > of > > the document font size. > > A table border of 3em displays the same as a 3 pixel border, independent > of > > the document font size. > > > > So it appears that the browsers ignore the relative 'em' size and > convert > > the border to an absolute number. > > > > Chris > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org> > > To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca> > > Cc: "WAI ER IG List" <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org> > > Sent: Friday, September 22, 2000 9:15 AM > > Subject: Re: Technique 3.4.1 Check document for relative units of > measure > > > > > > > .1 em is a good size. For someone who is using a very large fot so > they > > can > > > see it, a 2px border may just disappear, but a .1 em border will still > be > > > visible. > > > > > > Charles McCN > > > > > > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000, Chris Ridpath wrote: > > > > > > Could the 'border' attribute be an exception to this rule? It's a > common > > > practice to use 1 or 2 for a table/image/frame border to indicate > that > > there > > > should be some sort of thin line surrounding the object. If we do > > require a > > > relative measure for a border, what would it be? (I think that an > 'em' > > or > > > 'ex' would be too large to replace a 1 pixel border.) > > > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 > 134 > > 136 > > > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative > > http://www.w3.org/WAI > > > Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia > > > September - November 2000: > > > W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis > Cedex, > > France > > > > > > > > > -- > > Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 > 136 > > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative > http://www.w3.org/WAI > > Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia > > September - November 2000: > > W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, > France > > > > > -- > Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI > Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia > September - November 2000: > W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France >
Received on Thursday, 28 September 2000 15:25:52 UTC