font sizes in pixels November 20, 2002 6:35 PM Subscribe
Is it possible, or even a good idea, to have font sizes in pixels rather than or in addition to the current scheme (which is in points)?
I've read the essay saying that pixel sizes are the best method of control, and it's true, but pixels mean you can't resize the text in IE, right?
If you want it to resize in IE, and work well in other browsers, I've found that % is broken, as is em, pt, and "larger". I use x-small > xx-large, but not xx-small, due to N4. It exerts a tiny amount of control.
posted by holloway at 7:19 PM on November 20, 2002
If you want it to resize in IE, and work well in other browsers, I've found that % is broken, as is em, pt, and "larger". I use x-small > xx-large, but not xx-small, due to N4. It exerts a tiny amount of control.
posted by holloway at 7:19 PM on November 20, 2002
You can also resize fonts in IE by holding control and rolling your mousewheel up/down.
As an overall design thing, I tend to think points are the superior system; users don't have to set preferences a million different times that way.
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 7:43 PM on November 20, 2002
As an overall design thing, I tend to think points are the superior system; users don't have to set preferences a million different times that way.
posted by Yelling At Nothing at 7:43 PM on November 20, 2002
You can also resize fonts in IE by holding control and rolling your mousewheel up/down.
YAN - not, as holloway says, if you use pixels for font sizing, unfortunately.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:49 PM on November 20, 2002
YAN - not, as holloway says, if you use pixels for font sizing, unfortunately.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:49 PM on November 20, 2002
I've found that using pixels rather than points in my style sheets makes my site look better in Chimera; otherwise, my text was really small in spots. Strangely, MetaFilter uses points and looks just fine. But then I never claimed to really understand CSS.
posted by mcwetboy at 7:58 PM on November 20, 2002
posted by mcwetboy at 7:58 PM on November 20, 2002
stavros:
YAN - not, as holloway says, if you use pixels for font sizing, unfortunately.
IE6 has an option called "Text zoom," if i remember right, and if i do then that should resize even pixel sizes. then again, that wouldn't be an issue at metafilter where font sizes can be customized.
As an overall design thing, I tend to think points are the superior system; users don't have to set preferences a million different times that way.
ironically, yelling, this has been my problem with font points.
posted by moz at 8:18 PM on November 20, 2002
YAN - not, as holloway says, if you use pixels for font sizing, unfortunately.
IE6 has an option called "Text zoom," if i remember right, and if i do then that should resize even pixel sizes. then again, that wouldn't be an issue at metafilter where font sizes can be customized.
As an overall design thing, I tend to think points are the superior system; users don't have to set preferences a million different times that way.
ironically, yelling, this has been my problem with font points.
posted by moz at 8:18 PM on November 20, 2002
... I have to throw in a beg here for font sizes in em's
posted by nathan_teske at 8:24 PM on November 20, 2002
posted by nathan_teske at 8:24 PM on November 20, 2002
Font sizes in points and pixels should work equally well as long as your browser is set to use the W3C standard of 96ppi. If Chimera isn't doing that, it's a bug.
posted by kindall at 8:49 PM on November 20, 2002
posted by kindall at 8:49 PM on November 20, 2002
I would have used (and preferred) pixels from day one, but back in early 1999, most (if not all) browsers didn't allow for px text resizing (IE 4 & 5, NN4). I went with points to be a bit more accessible.
I've been meaning to change over to pixels, as I hate the default look of MetaFilter. My personal setup is 10pt text with 8pt small text, which is 12px/10px. The default is about 16px/12px text sizes, which looks godawful.
Seeing how there is customization for members, I should change things over to px (I almost did when I recoded the CSS last month).
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:10 PM on November 20, 2002
I've been meaning to change over to pixels, as I hate the default look of MetaFilter. My personal setup is 10pt text with 8pt small text, which is 12px/10px. The default is about 16px/12px text sizes, which looks godawful.
Seeing how there is customization for members, I should change things over to px (I almost did when I recoded the CSS last month).
posted by mathowie (staff) at 9:10 PM on November 20, 2002
oh goodness, I hope the CSS font-sizing religious wars don't jump over to mefi.
but since there is customization available, rather than just relying on the browser options, I'd agree that pixels would be a good way to go here. (otherwise I'm with holloway on font keywords.)
posted by epersonae at 9:48 PM on November 20, 2002
but since there is customization available, rather than just relying on the browser options, I'd agree that pixels would be a good way to go here. (otherwise I'm with holloway on font keywords.)
posted by epersonae at 9:48 PM on November 20, 2002
Matt why not making it an option? Just let the member type in 12px or 10pt in the box, that way if someone decides to use say 5em or xx-small or even 120% they can do so.
posted by riffola at 10:12 PM on November 20, 2002
posted by riffola at 10:12 PM on November 20, 2002
Damn oops I deleted a few words and left it incoherent.
Matt why not make it a freeform option? Just let the member type in 12px or 10pt in the box, that way if someone decides to use say 5em or xx-small or even 120% they can do so.
posted by riffola at 10:13 PM on November 20, 2002
Matt why not make it a freeform option? Just let the member type in 12px or 10pt in the box, that way if someone decides to use say 5em or xx-small or even 120% they can do so.
posted by riffola at 10:13 PM on November 20, 2002
I think I may have been talking out my ass above, which is not unusual, as you all know. It's not px that IE won't resize gracefully, it's pt, ain't it?
I blame the kimchi.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:15 PM on November 20, 2002
I blame the kimchi.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:15 PM on November 20, 2002
no, stav, you were right the first time. the alleged problem with pt is (a) the wonky correlation between the measurements of print and screen and (b) the rendering methods of Mac and Windows. the main problem with px is the IE thing.
somebody said that IE 5 was the Netscape 4 of the new millenium...and I'm beginning to believe it!
posted by epersonae at 10:19 PM on November 20, 2002
somebody said that IE 5 was the Netscape 4 of the new millenium...and I'm beginning to believe it!
posted by epersonae at 10:19 PM on November 20, 2002
You can also resize fonts in IE by holding control and rolling your mousewheel up/down.
now THATS weird. i never heard this, so i immediately punched control and spun my wheel. here, the text does not resize, however the white space between blocks of text DOES. as in the space between the divs. strange.
posted by quonsar at 4:24 AM on November 21, 2002
now THATS weird. i never heard this, so i immediately punched control and spun my wheel. here, the text does not resize, however the white space between blocks of text DOES. as in the space between the divs. strange.
posted by quonsar at 4:24 AM on November 21, 2002
As MetaFilter seems to use a text size that's the same as IE6's default, why bother to specify any font size at all? For a text-heavy site like this I think it's fairly important not to take away from users the ability to resize text with their browser controls.
(0.8em Verdana often works well, clear and readable but not too large)
posted by malevolent at 6:18 AM on November 21, 2002
(0.8em Verdana often works well, clear and readable but not too large)
posted by malevolent at 6:18 AM on November 21, 2002
Quonsar - that's because the font size is specified in absolute units, that IE doesn't resize (try view/text size - that doesn't work either...). The white space resizes correctly, the text doesn't.
Relative font sizes (percentages rather than absolute units) do resize, which makes them better for sites which have accessibility issues (one of the sites I do has a high visually impaired throughput) but means you have much less control over what the end result's going to look like.
posted by monkey closet at 7:57 AM on November 21, 2002
Relative font sizes (percentages rather than absolute units) do resize, which makes them better for sites which have accessibility issues (one of the sites I do has a high visually impaired throughput) but means you have much less control over what the end result's going to look like.
posted by monkey closet at 7:57 AM on November 21, 2002
A List Apart has an article that recommends using pixels for Netscape 4, and CSS keywords (x-small, small, etc.) for more recent browsers. I usually spec fonts in pixels in my basic style sheet, then redefine the sizes for modern browsers using the keywords in my @import style sheet, which is the approach the article recommends.
Points would be better in a print-specific style sheet.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:58 AM on November 21, 2002
Points would be better in a print-specific style sheet.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:58 AM on November 21, 2002
« Older "not safe for people who don't want to see gay... | How can I contact a member with no email shown? Newer »
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
i suppose one valid reaction to this would be "boohoo! wait till you get to your normal computer"; i tend to look at this as a sort of technical problem with (i infer) a simple fix. pixels are a more consistent unit of measure on the monitor, and are widely used on many other websites that utilize css for layout. how about either converting our point sizes to pixels, or giving us the option to use either one?
posted by moz at 6:38 PM on November 20, 2002