[thelist] Site check please rocky-hills.com

[Scott Glasgow]

Christian Heilmann wrote:
>>> Definitely not designed to be accessible. With zoom, it turns into
>>> an overlapping text mess, except for the text in images, which at a
>>> tiny fraction of the size of the UI text is nothing but microscopic
>>> scribble. Without zoom, such as using IE, the content text is also
>>> nothing but microscopic scribble. Have a look at
>>> http://members.ij.net/mrmazda/auth/defaultsize.html#note1
>>
>> It might look microscopic at your particular resolution and pixel
>> density, but on any mainstream monitor at default IE settings the
>> text is perfectly readable.
>
> looks ok here, too (Firefox / OSx). But the menu is a problem - when
> you resize the text it overlaps and part of the text get cut off.
>
> Felix, you've been down this road before on the CSS-D list. It is
> great to make people aware of accessiblity and text resizing issues,
> but using a worst case scenario screen resolution on a non-mainstream
> operating system will result in more people getting annoyed than
> listening to what you - and likeminded people - have to say.
<<::SNIP::>>

Glad to see your response; I was wondering if it was just me. I had to zoom 
in four times (Firefox) before serious layout degradation occurred, and the 
defaults looked just fine to me in FF, Opera, and IE. I would think that 
most users with that level of lack of visual acuity might be using either a 
reader or a magnifier in any event. I was also kinda curious as to how one 
designs _any_ layout that survives zoom to essentially any arbitrary level 
of magnification. Seems like the old "10 pounds in a 5 pound bag" problem, 
ya know.

Cheers,
Scott