- From: <joeclark@joeclark.org>
- Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2001 23:22:33 +0200
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
CSS font sizing is heavily dependent on browser and platform. The
Zeldman's article amounts to a flowchart of what works and what
doesn't. Design for your audience. But understand what you're getting
into.
It must be pointed out that current betas of Windows IE 6
allow font resizing no matter what, just like Macintosh IE 5 and
Opera (though the font sizing on the Mac alpha of Opera-- the Mac
Opera alpha-- needs fixing). Some browsers with no CSS support, like
the relatively fabulous iCab, allow font resizing. It is likely that
in six months or so nearly all widely-used browsers will permit font
resizing. I also personally believe that Netscape 4 is so broken in
so many ways (even different decimal versions of N4 have different
bugs!) that it is not worth supporting at all anymore. (The extreme
adherents of this belief-- subscribers to the To Hell with Bad
Browsers campaign-- are the vanguard in this respect.)
And in any event, there is no reason this issue should
devolve into a sort of jihad or litmus test, where someone (like me)
who dares espouse a contrary opinion is deemed to know nothing about
accessibility and all of whose *other* ideas can no longer be
trusted. Stop acting like antiabortionists, born-again Christians,
animal-rights activists (of whom actually I am one), or any
single-issue zealots who string tripwires across people's paths.
Gloating exclamations of the "See! I knew we couldn't trust him!"
ain't helping nobody.
This issue should not devolve because, apart from reading
convenience for nondisabled people (at best tenuously defined as an
accessibility issue), font sizing affects low-vision people, *who
typically use screen-magnification software to blow up EVERYTHING on
their system*. Browsers' built-in font-sizing mechanisms are
something of a moot point, if not a complete moot point.
Further, I haven't written the damn Fonts & Colours or CSS
chapters of my book yet, and I hope they will contain the most
comprehensive testing and evaluation of this issue yet devised, with
plenty of pictures.
It is too early to pillory me. You haven't seen the final
book yet. And, I'm sorry, kids, but I have feelings.
As for the parody <http://www.joeclark.org/book.html#parody>
: It is an instrument of convenience, really. I intend to do limited
makeovers of individual pages here and there on different real-world
sites, but I cannot be bothered negotiating permissions to rework a
real E-commerce site. I wouldn't do it for free anyway. So my friends
and I are concocting a site that no one can feel proprietary or
defensive about ("Hey, man, quit dissing my site!"), that will evoke
a few laughs, *yet also* will showcase all the standard tropes of
commercial sites as built by the big Web-design companies.
Through satire, the item being parodied comes into sharper
focus. And one must love and embrace a subject to satirize it. (Ask
Mary Walsh.) Designers can look at the parody site and see exactly
the sort of devices and features their own sites (or the sites they
are forced to create against their best judgement) actually have, and
how they can be made accessible.
Kynn's crusade for sites that are truly (and preferably
automatically) adapted for screen-reader compatibility is one that
other authors, from T.V. Raman to Sam Marshall, have espoused. It is
not to be discounted, but it is still something of a dream, or
vapourware. I have six months to write the book. By the time I get to
the Future Dreams chapter, things may have changed, and there may be
something real to talk about. But for now, making commercial sites
accessible is reality. I have different ways of teaching it. I have
different ways of teaching pretty much everything in accessibility.
One would think you would support some new blood in the field. (Not
that I'm new, going back 20 years in accessibility and having been
online for a decade.)
And one last thing, everybody: Get it out of your heads that
beautiful, visually-complex Web sites are somehow immoral or
improper. Anything can be made accessible. You haven't lived until
you've watched an excellent film with equally excellent captions and
audio descriptions. It's not a question of beauty *or* accessibilty.
I want *both*. I want everything at once. More-moer-more! So does a
larger swath of the population than many of you might suspect.
I am going to go back to writing my damn book now. If anyone
wants to write a countervailing book, I have three contacts at
competing publishers (my book was the subject of much interest) I can
hook you up with. Then we can all appear on the same panels and utter
the magic words "Jane, you ignorant slut" as we disagree with each
other with smiles plastered on our faces.
- --
Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
Author, _Building Accessible Websites_
(New Riders Publishing, October 2001)
<http://joeclark.org/book/> | <http://joeclark.org/access/>
Received on Wednesday, 4 April 2001 17:22:48 UTC