Re: RE: best body text font size?

by "EB" <doublebase(at)wanadoo.nl>

 Date:  Thu, 4 Oct 2001 06:53:56 +0200
 To:  <hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org>
 References:  mtv
  todo: View Thread, Original
From: <x_670(at)mtv.com>

| I did not say it was by any means 100% fullproof or the perfect
| solution or something like that. I simply meant that it is for people
| who do not have perfect vision (or similar). I'm sorry I didn't word
| it correctly. All I meant was that in the Desktop Publishing industry
| it is commonly known that size 12 is the standard for body text.

if you are saying "size 12" and "desktop publishing industry" i assume
you are referring to points (printed)?
from the original message:
<quote>
>After a long time specifying size for body text in points, we are
>converting to pixels because we understand this comes closer to
>matching font size between Macs and PCs.
</quote>

| The reason for this is in the human eye. It is easier for the eye to read
| size 12 than any other size,

huh? based on what?
resolution, horizontal line width, font-family, line-height?

| just the same as it is easier for it to
| read Serif fonts rather than Sans Serif (in large quantities like
| body text).

i'd agree for printed text any day of the week and twice on sunday,
but make it the other way around on a pc screen;
(especially in large quantities)
personally i find 12px sans-serif very hard to read and i don't even
attempt to read 12 px serif (under my conditions).
sans-serifs are butt ugly but readable; i guess that's why they are
so popular on the web.

fyi:
one of my best friends happens to be color blind with an eye sight of
10%; he uses a 21" monitor with resolution 800x600 due to "industry
standards"; he could use a custom stylesheet but there *are* wise-
cracks that use !important for thingies like 10px blah.
personally i couldn't be bothered to care, but ymmv if you deal with
it on a daily basis.
the sad thing is that unlike other media the www offers the flexibillity
not to make this a problem; "designers" however seem to know better
what's suitable for the end user.

please don't feel assaulted but try to understand that some people may
overreact on things like "industrial standards for the disabled".

eric

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA