- From: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2010 11:08:18 -0500
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>
- Cc: www-style@w3.org
2010/1/7 Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@mit.edu>: > On 1/7/10 10:38 AM, Ambrose LI wrote: >> >> I don't understand why we are stressing the importance of physical >> accuracy in projections. Do people expect units to measure as spec'd >> when projected? > > I have no idea, but the spec says they should at the moment. As I see it, I (as a user conditioned by PowerPoint, Windows Movie Maker, etc.) envision 12pt on a slide to mean a size on some imaginary physical slide that will project at some suitable distance 12pt back to my computer screen, that, when projected on the day I (or my boss, etc.) give the presentation, will result in text large enough to be legible to most of my intended audience. After all, if I use a projector in a lecture hall or large meeting room, everyone will have a different viewing distance, so it is not even meaningful to talk about viewing distance in projections; we have to talk about imaginary slides and imaginary ideal projections. It is in this standardized imaginary environment that pt can take on a "physical" meaning. > Just like it > says they should measure as spec'd on an iPhone. Or on an eye-glasses > display. Or a contact lens display. That's what makes the physical units > physical. > > That's also what makes them clearly nonsense for anything where you don't > control the device; 12pt font on a contact lens display would be ... > interesting. -- cheers, -ambrose
Received on Thursday, 7 January 2010 16:08:51 UTC