|
|
Posted by Jukka K. Korpela on 09/29/07 16:41
Scripsit Jonathan N. Little:
> fefewf wrote:
>> why is using pixel font sizes wrong?
I wonder whether we being trolled.
> Because for folks who use MSIE that cannot change the size.
Actually, there is one mistake and one misleading point in that statement,
although it's generally a good answer to people asking stupid questions.
Oops... there are no stupid questions, just... But to the point:
1) People using Internet Explorer (officially called Windows Internet
Explorer now, though some people prefer using the older full name or its
abbreviation) _can_ change font sizes on web pages. Most of them just don't
know how. (They need to use a setting that overrides _all_ font sizes set on
web pages, or use a user style sheet with !important.) Even fewer also care
to, so the basic conclusion is indeed:
> If a visitor cannot read the text...bye-bye visitor.
2) The misleading part is that the formulation suggests that this is some
kind of browser peculiarity, rather than the way browsers are required to
behave. If you set font size in pixels, then pixels shall it be. This is one
of the few things that IE implements by the book and many other browsers
don't. Letting font size increase affect such sizes is comparable to having
a control that lets the user specify the size of a millimeter or the
duration of a second. (In fact, the size of millimeter, inch etc. _do_
change if the monitor resolution is changed, but this is a different
oddity.)
> If you use em to size your fonts, it's like your library having
> large-print versions of every book. This simple practice allows you to
> offer a large-print version of your site.
Except that this also happens if you don't set font size at all. However,
setting font-size: 100% is recommended (though it is dummy in principle) as
a weapon against some browser bugs. Using % is somewhat less risky than
using em for font size, again due to browser bugs.
--
Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
[Back to original message]
|