E-mail List Archives

Re: Resize Text - rem with a px fallback

for

From: Alistair Duggin
Date: Jun 25, 2014 8:28AM


> The only thing that you can possibly gain by using rem instead of em is ease of authoring
Exactly, that’s why we are using rem. Ease of authoring and maintainability are very important on a large code base. That is why the rem unit was added in the CSS3 specification.






On 25 Jun 2014, at 13:38, Jukka K. Korpela < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> 2014-06-25 13:26, Alistair Duggin wrote:
>
>> I’m working on a responsive website and to set the size of the fonts
>> we are using rem with a fallback in px.
>
> Use the em unit and you won't need a "fallback in px" (which is not really a fallback but switches to something completely different).
>
> The only thing that you can possibly gain by using rem instead of em is ease of authoring: you need not calculate multipliers, taking into account the nesting of elements that may have their font sizes set in em or percentage. But when you need to consider "fallbacks", authoring becomes more complicated.
>
>> I’m wondering if text not being resizable in some legacy browsers
>> would result in a WCAG 2 fail.
>
> Does it matter? It is surely an accessibility problem, possibly a minor one, but completely unnecessary in this case.
>
> Yucca
> > >