- From: Tom James <tom.james@digitext.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 15:16:54 +0100
- To: "'w3c-wai-ig@w3.org'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Steve Vosloo wrote ...
> 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.
You sometimes get multiplactive effects in tables: for example, a stylesheet
like:
td {font-size: 80%;}
p {font-size: 80%;}
applied to HTML reading:
<table>
<tr>
<td>
This is table text.
<p>
This is paragraph text.
</p>
</td>
</tr>
</table>
Results in the "table" text being 80% of the normal size but the "paragraph"
text being 64% (i.e. 80% x 80%).
As was alluded to earlier on a different thread, modern browsers also
sometimes run in "strict" or "quirks" mode with respect CSS depending on the
DOCTYPE you select. In the case of at least MSIE5.5 / MSIE6 on Windows, this
further complicates the sizing issue of text, particularly within tables.
In these situations, I am generally inclined to "leave well alone" with
regard font sizes, as the whole area rapidly spirals into deep complexities
when tring to get a cross-platform, cross-browser, resizeable solution. But
if you do want to control your font sizes more precisely, use ems or % but
test ultra-thoroughly!
Tom
Dr Tom James
Senior Consultant
===============================================================
Digitext - Online Information at Work
Telephone: +44 (0)1844 214690
Fax: +44 (0)1844 213434
Email: tom.james@digitext.com
Web: http://www.digitext.com/
>
Received on Tuesday, 10 September 2002 10:15:42 UTC