On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 20:47:06 -0500 Felix Miata <mrmazda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > E. Liddell composed on 2018-02-19 19:15 (UTC-0500): > > > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 16:49:16 -0500 Felix Miata wrote: > > >> For me, the wiki page above is quite sufficient, once the target distro > >> installation has been completed. The harder part is finding that page in the > >> first place. From https://wiki.trinitydesktop.org/Trinity_Desktop_Environment > >> it's not obvious to me that > > >> TDE > >> Documentation > > >> following > > >> Main page > >> and > >> Recent changes > > >> is how to eventually find it. The left column on that page needs to be wider so > >> that the link is not split over two lines when its font is forced to a legible size. > > > How large a font size do you need for this to be "legible" to you? I'm asking as > > the person who created the modified skin for the TDE wiki--I assumed that > > 11pt bold Arial/Libre Sans would be sufficient for most people using a normal-sized > > screen (that is, not a phone or very small tablet), but if a lot of people are having > > problems, I might have to see about revising it. > > 11pt physical would be a fine and dandy size in that context, but specifying > 11pt in any "current" web browser other than one using the KHTML engine gets you > 11px, which can be vastly different from 11pt, depending on screen density. CSS > since 2.1 or thereabouts made the px unit exactly equal to the pt unit, making > spec-compliant browsers unable to specify accurate physical sizes unless > physical screen density is equal to 96 DPI. KHTML (Konq) never complied with > this spec, while Gecko browsers do offer a workaround for those willing to write > custom rules using its proprietary mozmm unit. > > If you s/11pt/.917rem/ in #mw-navigation on screen.css:64 you should get a close > approximation of 11pt "physical" size if the near universal default 16px/12pt > remains in effect in the browser in use, and if you are using any moderately > recent 100% spec-compliant browser (which excludes Konq, which has no rem unit > support). > > However, as long as you retain the 170px sidebar width, you'll find the same > problem with overflow I see here as the user's screen density deviates above 96 > DPI. s/170px/10.625rem/ for div#mw-panel in screen.css:590 might be enough to > fix the sidebar width, but doing that would undoubtedly create need for other > sizing rule adjustments. > > http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/KDE/tdeCSS20180219.gif shows what I see. 11px CSS equates > to 30.25% of my browser's default 12pt (20px) size. Ah, okay, I begin to see the problem. At the time the website and various wiki and Bugzilla skins were created, HiDPI screens weren't available except on a few very expensive Macbooks, so there *was* an implicit assumption of ~96 DPI (and that's still the only type of screen I have to test on). I'll try to scrape together enough round tuits to re-examine the design, but making changes live will probably require Tim to do the final upload, so between the two of us, it may be rather a long time before results are visible. E. Liddell --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: trinity-users-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx For additional commands, e-mail: trinity-users-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Read list messages on the web archive: http://trinity-users.pearsoncomputing.net/ Please remember not to top-post: http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
