SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 174
  1. #51
    Life is not a malfunction gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy
    TechnoBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Argyll, Scotland
    Posts
    5,321
    Mentioned
    214 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Which is easier to learn? Which is easier to apply?
    I don't think it's a case of which is easier. Either is easy enough - if somebody teaches you how. My guess is that the majority of users who need to increase text size are older folk. These people didn't learn how to use a computer at school - they've had to pick it up somehow on their own. They might have gone to classes - but how many basic computer classes teach accessibility issues? None I've come across. They don't, because they cater for the majority, who don't need to know.

    When I show somebody how to change their font size, I show them both how to zoom and how to set it in the preferences. In my opinion, it's easier to set it once, in the preferences, than have to zoom every site you visit.


    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Unless he doesn't know what is doing and make things worse. Do you think there are many who know that: using proper settings?
    I'm not sure what you mean by that. I have to assume that anybody who has changed their preferences has done so in a way that suits them. It's not for me to decide if they've done it right or wrong.

  2. #52
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Let's say you put on body font-size: 1em. Either you inherit the default values, affected by dpi or not, or the value you assume most users know how to change in an UA. By default, 16px. From there on you refer to this as 1em: 1em = 16px.
    Or 20px, or 24px, or whatever else is set in a very easy to find and use setting that Windows users have been using since Windows 2.01, and has worked 'properly' since Windows 3.0.

    Though I'm NOT assuming most users know how to change it -- My point is don't alienate the ones who do! (which is what you're advocating!)

    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    You may be serving some users, but that doesn't mean I'm losing them. Because I'm making tests first to see if 15px is viable and I'm using media queries to further improve the font size when needed.
    You mean like the broken 'switch' test of 1600px you're trying to use on your page -- meant to comment about that since it fails to kick in on my machine because I don't browse full screen; even if I did, I've got the tabs in portrait on one side and info bar on the other, meaning even maximized at 1920 wide I don't have 1600px width for pages? Along with your broken query overlaps (love how between 960 and 1100 it delivers two columns) I had a number of comments on your latest code... Heading to bed now, but I'll be posting there when I get up.

    Off Topic:

    Oh, and you might want to look at what your page does images off... and CSS off...


    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Finally, using em is more likely to give the user a bad experience and make him bounce, since his limited knowledge can grant him a 32px default. That's exaggerated, but it serves the purpose of making my point: the blame will be put on you, the developer, for using 1em.
    Giving them what they chose is... going to make them bounce? HUH? That doesn't even make sense. Users who don't know about it won't give a flying purple fish -- the ones who do are going to be pissed at you for NOT using EM... I don't get how your converse of that makes any sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Zoom being crap, that's one thing you'd have to prove. And don't pick lame sites to prove your point either. I can pick good sites to disprove it. Stick in your judgment to the actual Zoom option. Legacy browsers don't make for a good point either.
    Ok, how about your own? Zoom that in 50% to make the fonts useful, and see what it does.

  3. #53
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by TechnoBear View Post
    In my opinion, it's easier to set it once, in the preferences, than have to zoom every site you visit.
    That's the thing: you don't. Zoom is clearly misunderstood and under appreciated.


    Quote Originally Posted by TechnoBear View Post
    I'm not sure what you mean by that. I have to assume that anybody who has changed their preferences has done so in a way that suits them. It's not for me to decide if they've done it right or wrong.
    You assume. That's what's wrong. You don't assume about anything else, but you choose to assume about this one. As I said, a default 32px accidentally made through half knowledge, would mean a bad UX for that user visiting your site. And he won't know anything else but to blame you for that.

  4. #54
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Ok, how about your own? Zoom that in 50% to make the fonts useful, and see what it does.
    Gotcha! Opera does that, alone.

    Off Topic:


    I thought I said not to give examples of crappy sites! LOL

    But I have to say you're half wrong, my page looks fine with CSS off. I guess you're talking about the nav element. That's something beat to death already.

    You may have a point there, about images off, and I may just have to do something about it.

  5. #55
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    As I said, a default 32px accidentally made through half knowledge, would mean a bad UX for that user visiting your site. And he won't know anything else but to blame you for that.
    Ok, at this point you're just making **** up... that is SO unlikely a scenario it's not funny... it borders on a pathetic grasping at straws.

  6. #56
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Gotcha! Opera does that, alone.
    ... and what does that even mean? Falls apart miserably here; with Opera being the best of the lot compared to FF or IE. Particularly your media queries falling to pieces.

  7. #57
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Particularly your media queries falling to pieces.
    Not likely. You're grasping at straws now.


    What I mean by Opera failing at zooming out? Opera fails at zooming out, that's it. Alone.

  8. #58
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Maybe we should summarize it like this: suppose we have 100 internet users. 90 of them just surf and do nothing. Another 5 have bad eyesight and know how to use the zoom feature of their browser. The last 5 have also changed the default font size on their computer/browser to something a bit bigger. Now they all visit 2 websites: website A with body font size 16 px and website B with body font size 1 em. What happens in each of these situations for these users?

    As far as I understand it, website A works for 95 users. For the 5 who had their default font size increased, the website font is too small to read. Some may still know about the zoom feature, but that's still a hassle. Website B works (by default) for 100 (all) users.

    So it seems to me that method B (using em for body) works in more cases then method A. So is more accessible. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

  9. #59
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Ok, at this point you're just making **** up... that is SO unlikely a scenario it's not funny... it borders on a pathetic grasping at straws.
    Not quite grasping at straws.
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Finally, using em is more likely to give the user a bad experience and make him bounce, since his limited knowledge can grant him a 32px default. That's exaggerated, but it serves the purpose of making my point: the blame will be put on you, the developer, for using 1em.

  10. #60
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Not likely. You're grasping at straws now.


    What I mean by Opera failing at zooming out? Opera fails at zooming out, that's it. Alone.
    http://www.cutcodedown.com/for_other...ica_broken.jpg

    150% zoom in -- broken

    Zooms out to 20% without problems... well, other than the media queries tripping.

    Your media queries don't lap right -- which is why if your on a big display and you change the width to test all of them, you'll see it go from 4 column to two column and back to 4 column... zooming has the same effect on it, to the point that zooming inside a certain width it drops to a single column... and has content going off screen without scrollbars. You have... gaps between the values of your queries, and it's causing them to not apply how you seem to think they should.

    Pretty much broken site-building methodologies combined with design elements I would advise against putting on a page in the first place...

  11. #61
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by matthijsA View Post
    Another 5 have bad eyesight and know how to use the zoom feature of their browser. The last 5 have also changed the default font size on their computer/browser to something a bit bigger.
    Except it's not realistic at all: they don't know how to use the mouse wheel or "CTRL" and "+" but they know how to change dpi and default font settings for UA?

  12. #62
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Except it's not realistic at all: they don't know how to use the mouse wheel or "CTRL" and "+" but they know how to change dpi and default font settings for UA?
    That's not even close to what he said -- that's not even the same LANGUAGE as what he said. AGAIN just as with my posts you're quoting out of context and failing to grasp what anyone is telling you! NOWHERE does he imply that the third group doesn't know how to do that -- he's just saying they did something else; a common setting that again PEOPLE HAVE BEEN USING FOR TWO AND A HALF DECADES...

    He didn't say they didn't know how, he said they were ALSO making that change so they don't HAVE TO. Big difference...

    Repeatedly in this thread you have quoted people out of context, basically shoved words in people's mouths, and failed to grasp what anyone is actually saying... and it's not doing a whole lot to support your view.

    I'm done with this thread... because if I continue I'm going to end up violating just about every rule they have here... I rarely seen such an ignorant, nonsensical pulling of misinformation out of one's backside. At this point I can only assume intentional malice, given the number of times you've twisted everyones words to mean the opposite of what people are saying.

  13. #63
    om nom nom nom Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,233
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Mitică : chronic bad eyesite means you call in the nephews and they set it up for you. My husband set up all the computers in our local senior center for large fonts back when he was a volunteer there. Libraries have it set up too.

    I don't think you can say Matthijs was saying 5 out of every 100 people are changing their OS settings. I think he was using an example to make a point.


    Though I too am unhappy how many poor people are sitting there using magnifying glasses on computer monitors and pressing their noses against them when they could be so much happier if they just knew of CTRL++. I remember still when a friend's mom was shown that by a geeky friend. She started using the computer much more at home. Geeky friend's own mom has horrid eyesight from Type 1 diabetes. She finally got a computer set up, not with a screen magnifier software (surprised me) but with the resolution set to something like 640x480.

    In any case, why would you not build the version that works for more people by default? Why make website A if website B works for more people? (You can argue that website A does work for more people, but that's not the question)


    To get back to em's, someone's made a post about media queries and em's. I don't agree with everything in it but it's interesting: http://blog.cloudfour.com/the-ems-ha...a-queries-ftw/

    I think one reason I'm still using px for at least some of my media queries is, I'm unhappy with the current hype of build-for-iphone. As if there were more of those things than Nokias and Blackberries (there aren't, yet). So I'll deliberately set one media query sometimes to 482px or whatever is just wider than the advertised "iphone" width. They get the "mobile" layout. Guess they can go cry in their lattes, or turn their phones sideways. Lawlz.

    Quote Originally Posted by crusty
    At this point I can only assume intentional malice, given the number of times you've twisted everyones words to mean the opposite of what people are saying.
    I honestly don't think so, actually.

  14. #64
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    In any case, why would you not build the version that works for more people by default? Why make website A if website B works for more people?
    The point everyone except itmitica has been trying to make in this thread... Let's see how he twists it around this time with another bit of noodle-doodle nonsense and head in the sand lame excuses.

  15. #65
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    you'll see it go from 4 column to two column and back to 4 column... zooming has the same effect on it, to the point that zooming inside a certain width it drops to a single column... and has content going off screen without scrollbars.
    Jason,

    You're testing media queries grabbing the browser window by the corners. That's not testing media queries. That's children playing.

    Also, the content doesn't drop to a column without the scroll bars. It's a bug in zooming behavior for display: table-cell. That content is cut off, it never drops to a column, and that's for very high zoom values. You're trying to make a false point, for zoom values that are likely in normal boundaries it's working well.

  16. #66
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    You're testing media queries grabbing the browser window by the corners. That's not testing media queries. That's children playing.
    And how is resizing the window ANY different than showing it on a different size display? Isn't the point of using min-width and max-width in a media query to detect the browser window width?!?

    Again, do you even understand the technologies you're running your mouth about? Because it's VERY apparent you don't! Do you test with the web developer toolbar in FF to set the window size to common ones like say... 1024? 800? 1280? That's not "children playing" that's how you **** test you .... GAH...

    Where in blazes are you getting this ignorant BS?!?

  17. #67
    Life is not a malfunction gold trophysilver trophybronze trophy
    TechnoBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Argyll, Scotland
    Posts
    5,321
    Mentioned
    214 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    That's the thing: you don't. Zoom is clearly misunderstood and under appreciated.
    Well, obviously I've misunderstood it. If I use zoom, my browser remembers the zoom settings for the site I zoomed, but doesn't apply them to other sites. So, if I need font size enlarged overall, I have to zoom for each site I visit. You're saying I don't need to do that. I'd be interested to know how.
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    You assume. That's what's wrong. You don't assume about anything else, but you choose to assume about this one. As I said, a default 32px accidentally made through half knowledge, would mean a bad UX for that user visiting your site. And he won't know anything else but to blame you for that.
    Well, I have to assume something - either that people who change their preferences know what they're doing, or that people who change their preferences don't know what their doing. In the absence of any empirical evidence to the contrary, it makes more sense to assume they do.

    Anyway, @matthijsA seems to have summed up the whole issue in a nutshell.

  18. #68
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Do you test with the web developer toolbar in FF to set the window size to common ones like say... 1024? 800? 1280?
    I first test using tools like these: http://quirktools.com/screenfly/.

    And then I try sites on different mobile devices: my tablet, my iPhone, my Huawei.

  19. #69
    om nom nom nom Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,233
    Mentioned
    47 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bear
    If I use zoom, my browser remembers the zoom settings for the site I zoomed, but doesn't apply them to other sites.
    Some browsers (I think FF was one) will remember *domains* so as you go to new pages on existing domains the zoom is kept while new domains are back to the default.

    Quote Originally Posted by Crusty
    And how is resizing the window ANY different than showing it on a different size display? Isn't the point of using min-width and max-width in a media query to detect the browser window width?!?
    Actually, Mitică has this right: resizing a desktop browser is very different from testing in real devices. Devices have different ideas of what a pixel is, for one thing.

    Testing by resizing desktop browsers is what people like me do 'cause we be too po' to afford fancy mobiles, not because it's a good way to test media queries. I couldn't even run the Java for the Opera mini/mobile demos (hope to on my Sony tho)

    Quote Originally Posted by mitică
    And then I try sites on different mobile devices: my tablet, my iPhone, my Huawei.
    That's the better way to do it, though I'm not sure what a Huawei is. Sounds... exotic : )

  20. #70
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi Mallory.

    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    Mitică : chronic bad eyesite means you call in the nephews and they set it up for you. My husband set up all the computers in our local senior center for large fonts back when he was a volunteer there. Libraries have it set up too.
    I have to give you that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    In any case, why would you not build the version that works for more people by default? Why make website A if website B works for more people?
    Who's to tell? Using em in one thing, relying on em in another. I use it, I don't rely on it. That is, for me it's a relative measure that helps me have a better way to reference a base value of mine.

    To summarize and conclude, the whole point of my posts in this thread is this: em is no better than px because of it to work certain conditions have to be met.

    There are ways to make it work, there are scenarios where it works. There are ways to make it break, there are scenarios where it breaks. It's not prone to work, it's believed it will work. It's not better than px on any regard. If this has a feel of threat in some minds, I can't help it.

  21. #71
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    172
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    To clarify: my numbers are just an example. It could be 80/10/10 or 50/25/25 or 98/1/1. Doesn't matter. The thing is, by changing just a few characters in my stylesheet (body font-size:16px; -> font-size:1em; ) I am sure to make my site more accessible to more people. Whether that's 10 visitors or 10 million, doesn't matter. It's as simple as that. That's very, very little effort for a lot of gain.

    To itmitică: sure some fraction of the people who changed the default setting knows how to use zoom. But
    1) even if they know, it's still a huge hassle to have to zoom for every new site they visit. I have good eyesight myself and even for me it's very annoying to visit sites with 10-12px fonts and having to CTRL+++ every time.
    2) there's always a fraction of people with changed settings who do not know how to zoom (like all examples given by the others)

    The bottom line for me is: making sure a website is as accessible as possible is always a balance. Some things are very easy to do, others not so. If something will cost a lot of money/time for very little gain, you can debate whether to do it or not. But in this case, it's clear for me that it's a very, very small effort (using em for body size) for possibly a large gain.

    Especially since you told earlier that you were only using px for the body and set everything else in em/%. Then you already did 99% of the - possibly - hard work of working with relative font sizes (since dealing with the cascade/inheritance of relative sizes can be difficult in some situations or for some developers). But you don't take that last step. And by that you miss the big advantage. I don't understand why you don't change that last one line of code. What drawback does that have?

  22. #72
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    Some browsers (I think FF was one) will remember *domains* so as you go to new pages on existing domains the zoom is kept while new domains are back to the default.
    Actually Opera got that one right. It has the Zoom control visible in the lower right corner.

    For better zoom policies there are add-ons like this: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/fir...ullzoom-level/.


    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    [...]though I'm not sure what a Huawei is. Sounds... exotic : )
    A mere smartphone. But I like it very much because it's new. LOL

  23. #73
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by itmitică View Post
    Actually Opera got that one right. It has the Zoom control visible in the lower right corner.
    ... and that has what to do with what you quoted? That's right, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Oh, yay, it's visible... that has absolutely NOTHING to do with having browsers remember it on a per-site basis!

  24. #74
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by matthijsA View Post
    I don't understand why you don't change that last one line of code. What drawback does that have?
    I hold a different point of view. And it's technically sound, by my measure. At the very least I helped others see that simply putting em on body it's not a magical fix. There is much more required both on the user's part and on the developer's part. It's also part of a plan that both the developer and the user can abuse it or misuse it. Is that simple.

  25. #75
    Non-Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    892
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    ... and that has what to do with what you quoted? That's right, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Oh, yay, it's visible... that has absolutely NOTHING to do with having browsers remember it on a per-site basis!
    Sorry about that. It was a point for Opera, doing one thing I like.

    Anyway, this is for Opera: Settings->Preferences, the Webpages tab: Page Zoom.

    For older versions perhaps this one: http://my.opera.com/community/forums....dml?id=778882.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •