- From: Giuseppe Bilotta <giuseppe.bilotta@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 00:07:58 +0100
- To: Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>
- Cc: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, "robert@ocallahan.org" <robert@ocallahan.org>, www-style <www-style@w3.org>
On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 9:12 PM, Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com> wrote: >> Consider also a long hallwall, with the walls covered in a wallpaper-like >> OLED. On one side, the display is from floor to ceiling, and the other side >> has some chairs and cabinets and so starts from 4 feet up to ceiling. I use >> DIVs and CSS animation and a little JavaScript to move infographics and art >> and advertising around as you walk down the hallway. What does the display >> size tell you about the optimal viewing distance? Nothing. I might have >> smaller, detailed info at head level, and big arrows or background images at >> farther distances, way down there by those two doors at the end. >> > > 2010/1/16 Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>: > There is also the possibility that we (the designers) don't WANT > viewing distance to be considered. Say we design some app-like thing > to ultimately is going to be projected (or shown on large screen TV). > When we design and test the thing it's going to be viewed on regular > monitors, but we expect the final result to look identical to what we > see, only bigger. If viewing distance is going to have an effect on > sizes, it will become impossible to make these things. This is precisely why I wanted to give the designers the possibility to choose the 'expected' ratio between CSS and real units, some way to say "make 1px equal to one device pixel" vs "make 1in equal to one real world inch". (This could be pushed as far as allowing the designer to define new units, but this is most definitely out of scope for this discussion.) -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
Received on Saturday, 16 January 2010 23:08:46 UTC