On Friday 24 November 2006 11:55, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-11-22 at 10:46 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Wednesday 22 November 2006 10:15, Patrick W. Barnes wrote:
> > > My one suggestion would be to keep the original default font size.
> > > I've not heard any complaints about the font size in the past, and
> > > increasing it could break some of the less-proper design elements used
> > > in the wiki and wouldn't allow as much information to fit on any given
> > > screen.
> >
> > Well I usually have to bump up the text size when I read wiki pages.
> > Maybe my eyes are too sucky and my resolution too great, but I always
> > find the default wiki font sizes to be too small and I bump them.
>
> I absolutely agree. With the resolution on affordable monitors and LCD
> panels increasing, these tiny fonts are definitely hard to read. I use
> a user CSS page to fix that problem, but requiring new users to do that
> is silly. A better solution would be a cookie and at least a simple
> "small, medium, large" selector on the screen.
While it would be great to have an option for changing the font size on the
fly, that would be complex to add to the wiki. Most browsers already have
features to easily adjust font sizes, so we just need to set a reasonable
default. Keep in mind that the majority of viewers are still going to be
using 1024x768 or even 800x600.
The problem I see in the current stylesheets is the use of fixed font sizing
(".75em"), which results in extremely small fonts in some browsers with
certain configurations. Using relative sizing ("small") instead of fixed
sizing should allow browser configurations to determine what a comfortable
font size should be. A properly-configured browser should then alleviate the
need to make per-site or per-visit adjustments.
--
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64@xxxxxxxxx
http://n-man.com/
LinkedIn:
http://linkedin.com/in/nman64
Have I been helpful? Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
--
Attachment:
pgpesYVBGpv64.pgp
Description: PGP signature
