- From: Alex Danilo <alex@abbra.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 08:49:21 +1000
- To: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Cc: Brian Blakely <anewpage.media@gmail.com>, www-style@w3.org
Hi Boris, --Original Message--: >On 10/5/11 2:55 PM, Brian Blakely wrote: >> In order to deliver appropriate layouts to, for example, a mobile media >> player, web-enabled TV, and a stadium jumbotron with a single codebase, >> and ideally an identical HTML codebase. > >Yes, yes. That doesn't answer my question. Why is linear size the >important metric there and not angular size? Perhaps one important reason is that the size of a finger over a 300dpi touchscreen has no relationship to a button you can activate on the stadium screen where you could hit it with a truck. >For the specific examples of TV and jumbotron, angular size seems like a >much more desirable measure than physical size. A viewer doesn't care >that the jumbotron is 100x bigger if it's also 100x further away. If all you do is view, that's a good point. But for user activation on the device where the UI is done by physically touching the content, that content may be more ideal if the hit areas correspond to the size of a finger, not the size of a fist on a 30" monitor, etc. Alex >-Boris > > >
Received on Wednesday, 5 October 2011 22:52:34 UTC