- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 09:41:09 +0200
- To: Julia Collins <julia@we3.co.uk>
- Cc: <yoan.simonian@snv.jussieu.fr>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
This shows the problem with small, medium, etc - "very large" is a really unreliable number. At the moment I am working mostly on 20pt fonts (having lost my glasses), and they seem small and hard to read (but I struggle away because I like having a scannable screen - comfortable would be about 30pt. My experience has been that em and percentage do this a bit better - the other thing is that at larger base sizes I want to reduce the size difference - the gap between 36 and 42 pt is much easier to see than the gap between 10 and 12 pt, although it is a smaller percentage difference. When I get a CSS-3 capable browser I will be a happy camper. cheers Chaals On Tuesday, Jun 17, 2003, at 18:21 Europe/Zurich, Julia Collins wrote: > I agree, using the small, medium etc sizes is best, although beware > because > medium is very large indeed! Em is really useful when creating fluid > resizable layouts with css because it allows things like background > colours > on divs to resize in relation to the font size when people up the text > size > in their browsers, whereas percentages are a bit unreliable in this > respect. > At least that's my experience.... > -- Charles McCathieNevile Fundación Sidar charles@sidar.org http://www.sidar.org
Received on Thursday, 19 June 2003 03:42:06 UTC