- 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