Sent by tedd on 31 January 2005 23:11
> > http://www.webbytedd.com/text-zoom/
>>
>> The technique is simply to use em's instead of
>> pixels and to make the
>> presentation within css. The above link explains it.
>
>That's a great example, but I have a question about
>the "just divide by 16" part.
>
>As I understand it, an "em" is the width of the
>capital letter M in the current type, so should change
>depending on your font. The em and ex (height of the
>capital X in the current type) are used in
>typesetting.
>
>Does the divide by 16 hold true for all fonts, or just
>the ones you've used?
Charles:
Short answer: I dono, it just seems to work.
Long answer: It doesn't make much difference. One could get all
wrapped up in nit/pixel picking, but the differences between browsers
at different zoom levels (which are not linear) with font types
doesn't account for much. In other words, you could try to make
everything look identical across browsers/platforms/fonts, but the
end result is that it going to look different regardless.
In all honesty, I think the 16:1 ratio has it's foundation in more
basic stuff. For example a 12 point font in windozes appears 16
pixels high, but only 12 pixels on a Mac. Considering that I use a
Mac and 16:1 looks OK to me, it solves both worlds.
If you want to study the pixel/font/screen-resolution/browser problem
further, check out:
http://www.webdevelopersjournal.com/columns/ajs_ppi.html
tedd
--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://sperling.com/
______________________________________________________________________
css-discuss [EMAIL-REMOVED]]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/