Mailinglist Archive: opensuse (714 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse] web site bug 646418 (was: help forum no help...)
On 2011/10/07 18:20 (GMT) Jim Henderson composed:

On Fri, 07 Oct 2011 04:28:37 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

On 2011/10/07 04:06 (GMT) Jim Henderson composed:

to reproduce it (and hence attempt to resolve it with some knowledge of
how you managed to get to see something that apparently nobody else
sees), it would be useful if we could get some information about that
configuration so it can be reproduced. contains
reproduction steps for aka

I've now been able to view the bug as well - I have similar questions to
Per's about how to reproduce the 120 dpi desktop (which I see Dave has
tried to help answer as well).

Hopefully upthread on 2011/10/07 18:00 (GMT-0400) I answered this to your satisfaction.

But I also see that the crux of the issue is the font sizes being defined
in px, which doesn't account for high dpi configurations and resolutions.

Actually that's inaccurate. Defining size in px is a special problem for users of old IE versions, because those browsers disobey most available mechanisms designed to enlarge text sized using px.

For everyone else, the difference between sizing in px, pt, mm, in, etc. and other sizing methods is primarily one of degree and methodology:

sizing in px or pt or mm or the like totally disregards whatever the visitor's browser default(s) is/are set to


sizing the major portion of page text in keywords, %, rem, em or ex values other than medium (keywords), 100(%), 1(rem), 1(em), or ~2(ex) is an imposition on the visitor that assumes her browser default(s) is/are inappropriately set (in most cases, assumed too large by the site's stylist).

In either case, all except users of old IE versions can _resize_ the page's text. Resizing is a defense, which like most defenses, is unnecessary to apply in the absence of offensive behavior (disrespect of browser defaults).

Some problems are these:

1-disregarding defaults entirely (px, pt, mm, in, etc) is rude
2-assuming defaults are wrong is rude
3-that most web sites do 1 or 2 above is not justification to be rude
4-application of defenses requires reactive user activity, typically preventing and/or delaying use of a just loaded page
5-applying browser defenses to overcome the rudeness (minimum font size; zoom; user CSS) often has side effects that are similarly rude, and can even make a page completely unusable
6-that WCAG 2 does not directly address all the above is reprehensible inaction from a standards body

That seems a fair complaint. I'm not quite sure how it relates to the
mess that you saw in that forum post, though.

As I wrote upthread on 2011/10/06 21:20 -0400, it's about the impossible task of developing user styles capable of automatically counteracting the 150k+ of site styles to undo the site's mousetype.

In case it didn't get your attention, the purpose of is to show that the majority of forum content text is a small fraction of the size of the browser's (10pt) UI text, and a smaller fraction of the the browser's (12pt) default proportional size. The only forum text that isn't smaller is the relative behemoth thread titling.

The problem isn't just that the browser defaults aren't respected, but how severely they are disrespected by a relatively mild (25%) deviation from the 96 DPI "norm". 120 DPI isn't all that high. Laptops 133 DPI or higher, and other devices higher still, are not at all unusual any more, and are more severely affected.
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata ***
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >