Web design: Text size vs. zoom
-
Not quite the light hearted bacon-related post that has become standard fare in the Lounge, :~ but I'm interested in people's opinion. Is it still advisable to style website for changes in text size? Most browsers support zoom, which will scale the page evenly. The relative proportion of graphical elements such as images and text size remain constant. This makes pages much easier to design: text written across a 200px graphic background will look pretty much the same at increased and decreased magnification. Changing text size, which is the older implementation of making pages accessable to people with vision difficulties, will scale the size of the text while keeping all other layout and graphical elements the same size. My question comes from a site I'm helping to design. I only need to support recent browsers, all of which support zoom. Relying on zoom for accessability will make design much easier, but I'm not sure yet about moving away from established recommendations. Anyone have something to say the matter?
-
You're going to get opinions both ways, some saying you must use varying font sizes to those who say you must use fixed font sizes. Typically the former arguments are older arguments based on older browsers, and the latter argument based on modern browsers and their excellent zoom functionality. Me? I've always found using relative font sizes an exercise in pure pain because you're fighting so many battles at once: fonts, browser oddities, layout, CSS inheritence, the immediate problem of image scaling relative to font scaling, to name a few. My call: use absolute, not relative font sizes and let the browser and the OS scale appropriately. It's far more consistent to the user.
cheers, Chris Maunder The Code Project | Co-founder Microsoft C++ MVP
Chris Maunder wrote:
You're going to get opinions both ways, some saying you must use varying font sizes to those who say you must use fixed font sizes. Typically the former arguments are older arguments based on older browsers, and the latter argument based on modern browsers and their excellent zoom functionality.
Exactly! IMHO, most people who argue against fixed font sizes are just parroting what they read in old books or design related blogs or websites. In addition, I would suggest reading up on "Progressive Enhancement."
-
Not quite the light hearted bacon-related post that has become standard fare in the Lounge, :~ but I'm interested in people's opinion. Is it still advisable to style website for changes in text size? Most browsers support zoom, which will scale the page evenly. The relative proportion of graphical elements such as images and text size remain constant. This makes pages much easier to design: text written across a 200px graphic background will look pretty much the same at increased and decreased magnification. Changing text size, which is the older implementation of making pages accessable to people with vision difficulties, will scale the size of the text while keeping all other layout and graphical elements the same size. My question comes from a site I'm helping to design. I only need to support recent browsers, all of which support zoom. Relying on zoom for accessability will make design much easier, but I'm not sure yet about moving away from established recommendations. Anyone have something to say the matter?
I have always been a proponent of fixed layouts. That way, you, the designer, have a lot more control over the design and presentation of the website, and can offer the user a better experience. This in turn will lead to better results for the site owner (you or your client/employer) - more signups, more sales, whatever. This means fixed font sizes, fixed widths, fixed image and box sizes, and so on. Let the browser handle the rest. I don't agree with the view that the user should be in complete control of how the site looks. You don't control the way your paper books are designed, do you? Nor do you change the font size in them. Or the colors. Of course, do be sure to create your design with the needs of your audience in mind, but that doesn't necessarily mean letting them play with every damn thing in your design.
-
In my opinion, I will stay away from the zoom, since it distorts the images and other graphics. intead I will choose text size big enough that, most of the user will not need to zoom. now a days most of the users have > 1024 width so you can design the website with larger fonts without any problem. And if larger font is not an option due to lot of content, then you can just provide 'A' and 'A' at the top where you change the stylesheet which has larger fonts.
Rutvik Dave wrote:
now a days most of the users have > 1024 width so you can design the website with larger fonts without any problem.
I just had to deal with a third party website that made the exact same assumptions. They where wrong assumptions...
Common sense is admitting there is cause and effect and that you can exert some control over what you understand.
-
In my opinion, I will stay away from the zoom, since it distorts the images and other graphics. intead I will choose text size big enough that, most of the user will not need to zoom. now a days most of the users have > 1024 width so you can design the website with larger fonts without any problem. And if larger font is not an option due to lot of content, then you can just provide 'A' and 'A' at the top where you change the stylesheet which has larger fonts.
Make that assumption and 99% of netbook users will beat a path to your door... ... carrying flaming torches and pitchforks.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
Make that assumption and 99% of netbook users will beat a path to your door... ... carrying flaming torches and pitchforks.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
Dan Neely wrote:
99% of netbook users
But you can still ignore them from 'most of the users' right ? ...and 99% of those 99% will have atleast 1024 screen width. (even tablets have that resolution now a days)
-
Dan Neely wrote:
99% of netbook users
But you can still ignore them from 'most of the users' right ? ...and 99% of those 99% will have atleast 1024 screen width. (even tablets have that resolution now a days)
You wrote "> 1024" not ">= 1024", it's just as much of a bug IRL as in code; :doh: >1024 resolutions in 10" netbooks are very rare; I have one but it cost ~$100 extra and the text is borderline too small unless you zoom and defeat the whole purpose of a higher res screen.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
-
You wrote "> 1024" not ">= 1024", it's just as much of a bug IRL as in code; :doh: >1024 resolutions in 10" netbooks are very rare; I have one but it cost ~$100 extra and the text is borderline too small unless you zoom and defeat the whole purpose of a higher res screen.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason? Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful? --Zachris Topelius Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies. -- Sarah Hoyt
Oh... you are as picky as my compiler :doh: OK...ok... my bad, I meant >= 1024. :)
-
Not quite the light hearted bacon-related post that has become standard fare in the Lounge, :~ but I'm interested in people's opinion. Is it still advisable to style website for changes in text size? Most browsers support zoom, which will scale the page evenly. The relative proportion of graphical elements such as images and text size remain constant. This makes pages much easier to design: text written across a 200px graphic background will look pretty much the same at increased and decreased magnification. Changing text size, which is the older implementation of making pages accessable to people with vision difficulties, will scale the size of the text while keeping all other layout and graphical elements the same size. My question comes from a site I'm helping to design. I only need to support recent browsers, all of which support zoom. Relying on zoom for accessability will make design much easier, but I'm not sure yet about moving away from established recommendations. Anyone have something to say the matter?
I'm going to express the middle age viewpoint here. IF YOU MAKE THE TEXT TOO SMALL OR TOO LIGHT, I WON'T STAY AT YOUR SITE, AND I WILL BUY FROM SOMEONE ELSE. It's that simple. Quiche-eating, jasmine tea sucking design Nazis may think 4 point light gray text on an off-white background is divine, but I won't stay at a site that uses it, because I CAN'T FUCKING READ IT.
Software Zen:
delete this; -
Not quite the light hearted bacon-related post that has become standard fare in the Lounge, :~ but I'm interested in people's opinion. Is it still advisable to style website for changes in text size? Most browsers support zoom, which will scale the page evenly. The relative proportion of graphical elements such as images and text size remain constant. This makes pages much easier to design: text written across a 200px graphic background will look pretty much the same at increased and decreased magnification. Changing text size, which is the older implementation of making pages accessable to people with vision difficulties, will scale the size of the text while keeping all other layout and graphical elements the same size. My question comes from a site I'm helping to design. I only need to support recent browsers, all of which support zoom. Relying on zoom for accessability will make design much easier, but I'm not sure yet about moving away from established recommendations. Anyone have something to say the matter?
I thought Zoom was an IE thing?! Or is it just used to fix things in IE (HasLayout for CSS!)
-
Um, no, your question was about accessibility. There are many non-blind users that use screen readers as a tool for accessibility because corrective lenses are not available to solve the issue. If you want to make a website easier to view for people that wear corrective lenses but can't be bothered to put them on that is one thing but to confuse it with making your site accessible is another. For the effort involved, I see no reason not to just make your site actually accessible. (Although, to be honest my current website is not).
Need custom software developed? I do custom programming based primarily on MS tools with an emphasis on C# development and consulting. I also do Android Programming as I find it a refreshing break from the MS. "And they, since they Were not the one dead, turned to their affairs" -- Robert Frost
Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:
If you want to make a website easier to view for people that wear corrective lenses but can't be bothered to put them on that is one thing but to confuse it with making your site accessible is another.
As a wearer of glasses since age 4, my eyes now are causing me problems with reading. Because of my prescription, I can't use bi-focals or vari-focals. All I can do is have a second pair of glasses, so I am a user of Zoom and would recommend that this solves your problem. BUT whatever you do, don't follow the path of google. :( Since I moved from Alta-Vista I have been using google, but on my IPAD I have stopped, because they introduced a "better" mobile version which does NOT allow you to zoom the results. Do fall into this trap!
-
Not quite the light hearted bacon-related post that has become standard fare in the Lounge, :~ but I'm interested in people's opinion. Is it still advisable to style website for changes in text size? Most browsers support zoom, which will scale the page evenly. The relative proportion of graphical elements such as images and text size remain constant. This makes pages much easier to design: text written across a 200px graphic background will look pretty much the same at increased and decreased magnification. Changing text size, which is the older implementation of making pages accessable to people with vision difficulties, will scale the size of the text while keeping all other layout and graphical elements the same size. My question comes from a site I'm helping to design. I only need to support recent browsers, all of which support zoom. Relying on zoom for accessability will make design much easier, but I'm not sure yet about moving away from established recommendations. Anyone have something to say the matter?
Well, all I can say is what I do. I have low vision. I use the zoom feature 'cause it's easy. I like that it increases the size of everything. One of my browsers is set to use my own fonts anyway. I also sometimes use the Readability app in firefox. It isn't worth it to spend too much time fiddling the format on web pages if all you're worried about is accessibility.