- From: David Dorward <david@dorward.me.uk>
- Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 20:06:45 +0000
- To: webmaster@amelox.com
- CC: www-validator@w3.org
webmaster wrote: > The <width> statement does not take em measurements in <body>, <table>, > and <all listings>, if not others. There is no <width> element in HTML, and no width attribute takes anything that isn't a pixel based integer or a percentage - but that is what CSS is for. IE has bugs with styling body elements (which can be worked around), the default table-layout model can ignore the width (but that can be changed). > Imagine reading a newspaper that has only one column with every > paragraph splashed over the entire page width. > > That would look terrible, would you agree? That is what happens with > these new wide-screen 16:9 monitors . Only if a width isn't specified in the stylesheet and the user maximised their browser window. > When switching from 1024x768 resolution to 1280x1024 resolution the > fonts look better, but are much smaller – still hard to read. So adjust the font size preference in the browser. > To rectify, one switches from 96 DPI to 120 DPI. Now everything looks > normal again, but with the better resolution. Hopefully one would switch to the actual DPI of the monitor rather then using one of those values if they don't match. > This solves one problem but creates another. Now all the formatting is > haywire! Only on badly styled webpages. > The way to get around this dilemma is to give all measurements in em > units because that automatically adjusts for the DPI. No, it doesn't. Em units adjust based on the font size, not the DPI of the screen. > The problem is that only <p> accepts the em units. Not true. > Nothing is constraint by body sizing since <body> does not recognize em units. Not true. IE has bugs with setting the width of the body, but that is easy to work around by using a div element as a child of it and ancestor of the content. > Neither do <table> Not true, but see my above comments about table-layout > and all forms of listings, such as <ul>, <ol>, and <li>. I don't know any browser that has problems setting the width of list elements. What does this have to do with the W3C Validator Service? -- David Dorward <http://dorward.me.uk/>
Received on Friday, 6 March 2009 20:07:44 UTC