[thelist] Font Size

[Tom Dell'Aringa]

--- "Timothy J. Luoma" <lists at tntluoma.com> wrote:
> Bertilo Wennergren wrote:
>
> > If some readers like to read pages with extremely small size text
> (maybe
> > they have excellent vision), they will already have set the basic
> size
> > to something really tiny. Using "font-size: 75%" would mean that
> those
> > readers get even smaller text, that they might not be able to
> read at all.
>
> which is another argument in favor of using relative font keywords
> instead of EM or % because the keywords do not compound
>
> ref:
>
http://diveintoaccessibility.org/day_26_using_relative_font_sizes.html
>
>   TjL

Erm. It seems to me that relative keywords are by far the WORST
solution. Especially with NS4 and mac platforms. xx-small and small
text often becomes *completely* unreadable, and there are missing
steps in the system. The 7 steps you are stuck with don't even make
sense. There is a great story on this somewhere, but I can't take the
time to find it now, however it shouldn't be hard to google it. I've
not come across many folks who actually use relative keywords for
this very reason.. I have never used them.

Tom

=====
var me = tom.pixelmech.webDeveloper();

http://www.pixelmech.com/
http://www.maccaws.com/
[Making A Commercial Case for Adopting Web Standards]

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
http://sbc.yahoo.com