- 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