Text sizes - use percentages?

On 06/03/14 15:59 Alan J. Flavell apparently typed:

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, Felix Miata wrote:

Several possibilities here:
http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=UsingFontSize

That's rather nice, in its way - it says about em units:

|Advantages: [...] Easily overridden by user stylesheets

|Disadvantages: Easily overridden by user stylesheet

I'll take the first option ;-)

ISTR writing that a coupla years ago, my way of subtly stating CSS is a
double edged sword. Glad you like it. :-)
--
"Blessed are they whose ways are blameless, who walk according
to the law of the Lord." Psalm 119:11 NIV

Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409

Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth

Steven wrote:

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 07:51:17 -0600, kchayka <usenet (AT) c-net (DOT) us> wrote:

Steven wrote:

I still have (and use) Opera 6.

I'm curious why. Newer versions are much better, as far as rendering
goes, anyway.

Opera 6 was my primary browser until late last year. I'm now using 8.5
which is much better in many ways. But Opera 6 has some nice features
that were dropped in 7 and it is better for me on some sites. However,
my use of 6 is declining.

I don't think the font-size 100.1%
causes any problems and it seems nice to support old browsers.

Supporting old browsers (i.e. keeping the content accessible) is one
thing, catering to a specific, old version of a minor browser that is
only used by maybe a handful of people is something else.

Obviously I am a biased neanderthal. But after reading some comments
here a while ago I changed some pages from fixed-size fonts to relative.
This is a nice policy but I was annoyed that it caused problems with
Opera 6. Then I read about the 100.1% fix, changed my CSS, and all was
fine. Still, as you say, it is a hack for an insignificant minority.

What it all comes down to is... is the time to implement the hack for that
insignificant minority worth the benefit to them? In this case, adding two
characters to a style sheet, from 100% to 100.1%, increases file size by
two bytes. Even at 300baud, two bytes is a minimal impact. Once you know
to add it to your CSS, it only takes a few minutes, and the fix is site
wide. I would say go ahead with that one. Now if I had to redo an entire
stylesheet, just for that same group, I might not bother.

Carolyn
--
Carolyn Marenger

On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 16:21:08 +0000, Mike Barnard
<m.barnard.trousers (AT) thunderin (DOT) co.uk> wrote:

Hi all.

I am playing with html and css. I don't (yet) have a working site,

<snip>

Just a quick thanks to you all. I love a thread like this where broad
discussion ensues, even if I'm only an observer!

I shall now (well,later this afternoon) experiment. <drumroll....>

--
Regards from Mike, Jan and Master Alex Barnard.
South Coast, UK.

[To reply by email remove ".trousers" spamtrap from email address]
--
The Source For Premium Newsgroup Access
Great Speed, Great Retention
1 GB/Day for only $8.95

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:51:10 -0600, kchayka <usenet (AT) c-net (DOT) us> wrote:

The greater issue, to me, is keeping track of what the blazes all these
hacks are and which browsers are targeted. Some are obvious because they
are so prevalent, like the *html hack for IE.

Good point. I will document my instances.

--
Steven