- From: Steve Vosloo <stevenvosloo@yahoo.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:38:20 +0200
- To: "'W3C-WAI-IG List'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
EM or % is the way to go. A warning though -- I had a weird situation where I used both of these and when I applied it to text in a nested table the value doubled. Example, some text that was set to 80% of normal size (through CSS) suddenly became half as small when inside the nested table. But perhaps it was just me! Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Charles McCathieNevile > Sent: 10 September 2002 02:11 PM > To: Shashank Tripathi > Cc: 'W3C-WAI-IG List'; 'Jon Hanna' > Subject: RE: pt vs px for font sizes. > > > > On Tue, 10 Sep 2002, Shashank Tripathi wrote: > > > >You could consider using percentages. E.g., > > Yep. > > Below, I meant "normal text" - the general stuff that makes > up a page, which would be read through. I agree that > highlighting particular things is valuable, and small print > is so-called because people are used to the (in > theory) administrative detail they don't need to read being smaller. > > But a lot of sites use something like small, or 70%, as a > default size for ordinary paragraph text. So I have to > increase it again so I can read it. > > Cheers > > Chaals > > > | Oh, and please don't make normal text bigger or smaller > > | than the user's default. Although some people can't > > | change their default size, it is frustrating for people > > | who have set a size that they need.) > > > > > >I am not sure if I would completely agree with this stance though. > >Sizing text to convey certain meanings or to control prominence is a > >necessary part of presentation and font-sizes play an > important role in > >achieving that goal. For e.g., in a message board on a website, the > >text that people post could be normal sized but the time of > posting or > >the number of posts by a certain individual (which are not > an equally > >significant part of the overall information) could be a relatively > >smaller size. > > > >While it is frustrating for people to see fonts that are > incongruent to > >their 'ordinary' sizes, it is equally if not more > frustrating to scour > >for relevant info from a page that contains all the text in one > >same-sized blob. I would rather see the usual, focal topic of the > >interface in a 'normal' font, but would prefer all the > ancillary info > >to be slightly smaller...not to mention that certain sections can be > >highlighted for prominence (e.g., section titles). > > > >One could say "Use the standard H2 for the titles" -- but > perhaps this > >is a subjective issue where the designer's judgment comes > into play and > >one may decide that 18px of Arial looks better than whatever > "default" > >H2 the user has on his/her machine (e.g., an 18px Verdana). > > > >Shanx > > > > > >Shashank Tripathi > >www.shanx.com > > > > > > -- > Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles > tel: +61 409 134 136 SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe > ------------ WAI http://www.w3.org/WAI 21 Mitchell street, > FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia fax(fr): +33 4 92 38 78 22 > W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France >
Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2002 09:33:12 UTC