|
|
Posted by dorayme on 01/04/08 03:09
In article <9q4rn399taav8f4c9e1dhsjhi6e3tiv0q3@4ax.com>,
richard <I.dont.care@do.you> wrote:
> On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 06:35:53 +1100, dorayme
> <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>
> >In article <kh8qn39a7np0g66j7h8rai3nar2ra11qte@4ax.com>,
> > richard <I.dont.care@do.you> wrote:
> >
> >> http://oldies.littleworldofours.com/home.html
> >
> >Don't use inches and pts in your css instructions for screen
> >representation.
>
> Another thing, the way I see it, a screen is nothing more than a fancy
> sheet of paper. Inches and points are defined by a standard that was
> around well before electronics came into the world.
OK. You complained about waiting 7 day for replies in another
post. Reply to this:
Did you read the urls I gave you?
Do you know that the percentage of area taken up by a square inch
on one monitor is no indication of the percentage area taken up
on another screen?
Would it not be safer and more sensible, even when thinking of
designing for visual users, to go for relative dimensions? Like,
for example, % widths and heights?
Do you know that by fixing widths in inches for boxes, even
though you specify pts for font sizes, many modern browsers will
allow users to enlarge the text size and that when this happens,
text can break out of the fixed size boxes?
Or that one excellent way of avoiding the latter is to specify
both font sizes and boxes in em units?
Have you ever seen print on a piece of paper that a reader can
alter the actual size of?
Have you ever heard of Leibniz's Identity of Indiscernibles which
has corollaries that say in effect that the more things differ,
the less they can be the same?
When you respond to this, we will go further. But please reflect
on this first.
You may continue to use really foul language as long as it is not
personally insulting.
--
dorayme
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|