Re: Technique 3.4.1 Check document for relative units of measure

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