- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2001 19:49:51 -0800
- To: <rowan@absolutely.co.nz>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I smell a FAQ. Hey, fellow WCAG members, why don't we have a FAQ, anyway? (For that matter, why doesn't ANYONE seem to have a detailed FAQ on web accessibility? Maybe I should make one, in my infinite free time!) Rowan, in general pixel sizes for positioning are not a huge barrier to access but don't necessarily help it -- well not more than you already assist access by putting pages in CSS. (Since you can turn those off and such.) In theory, em sizes for positioning are kinda helpful because it makes it more likely that you'll be able to fit your text into the page; by using one set of units for all values in your layout, you can get closer to whatever design you might want. In practice, I don't think it's that big a deal, though. Other people may disagree. :) --Kynn At 4:32 PM +1300 1/1/02, Rowan Smith wrote: >Hi there > >WAI Priority 3 guidelines (WCAG Checkpoint 3.4) recommend using relative >units rather than absolute. The Techniques document suggests that using ems >rather than pixels as a unit is a way of doing this even when using absolute >positioning. > >OK, I can understand that for text specifications like font sizes and line >heights, but does it apply to positioning layers on a page using CSS? Is >there an accessibility downside of positioning layers (div tags) by using >px? > >Thanks > >Rowan -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire http://kynn.com/resume January Web Accessibility eCourse http://kynn.com/+d201 Forthcoming: Teach Yourself CSS in 24 Hours
Received on Monday, 31 December 2001 22:50:14 UTC