- From: Lynn Alford <lynn.alford@jcu.edu.au>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:58:40 +1000
- To: W <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
At 04:24 PM 17/08/2004 +0100, Andy Budd wrote: >Patrick Lauke wrote: > >>I'd say no. Optimal width of, say, a column of text should really relate >>to the size of the font used, in my opinion. Hence, it would ideally >>be defined in ems or ens...so elastic or semi elastic layouts. >>Again, potentially a good idea for sites to define more than one stylesheet: >>an elastic or semi elastic one, and a fixed width one... > >But is that an accessibility issue, a usability issue, or a personal >preference? I'd call that a 'prevent the page from breaking' issue. If you have an absolute width for say, the navigation column, and an elastic width for the fonts; when the fonts are expanded enough, a long word can overflow the containing box and overlap the content in the next box. Been there, done that and it is very ugly indeed. I like that margins and paddings are in px, that makes much sense. But all basic widths should be of a similar type (be it em or % or even px) or layout can die in your lovely css very very quickly. Lynn
Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2004 22:58:48 UTC