E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 12 (In chronological order)

From: Robert Fentress
Date: Tue, Jun 02 2015 6:51AM
Subject: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
No previous message | Next message →

I am confused as to the guidance given in the techniques for meeting or
failing to meet WCAG success criteria 1.4.4 (resize text)
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-scale>;.
I wonder if somebody could clarify best practice for me. While WCAG 1.0
seemed clear in its guidance forbidding font sizing with absolute units,
WCAG 2 seems more vague, simply stating that text should be able to be
resized 200% without loss of content or functionality.

What is unclear is whether the, now ubiquitous, browser page zoom
functionality means that units like px are acceptable, since text whose
size is defined this way will scale along with the entirety of the page.
If you just want to enlarge the text, independent of its containing
elements, however, you will not be able to do so (at least with native
functionality) if absolute units are used. To me, relying on zoom
capability to handle text resizing seems insufficient, because it often
necessitates horizontal scrolling (a problem for my father who has low
vision and boosts font size). That seems to be acceptable from the
perspective of WCAG 2, though, since a sufficient technique for 1.4.4 is "G142:
Using a technology that has commonly-available user agents that support zoom
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140916/G142>;". I've seen
this discussed different places on the web, but people seem to have
different perspectives on whether it is okay. WebAIM, at least, thinks "it
is not vital that text sizes be defined in relative sizes."
<http://webaim.org/techniques/fonts/#font_size>;

What do you folks think?

Best,
Rob

--
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255

Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies
Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061

From: Eades, Terri
Date: Tue, Jun 02 2015 4:42PM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

I think the "px vs. em" debate was born when responsive design was because fonts defined in px will NOT scale with the size the screen, therefore creating a usability problem because it can make reading difficult if your font is too big or too small for the screen you're on. It's not an accessibility issue in the traditional sense, but since good usability often results in better accessibility, I tend to lean on going with em's.


Terri Eades
Webmaster

Morgan Community College
920 Barlow Road, Fort Morgan, CO 80701
Phone: (970) 542-3155 | Fax: (970) 542-3115
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

www.MorganCC.edu







-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Fentress [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 6:51 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)

I am confused as to the guidance given in the techniques for meeting or failing to meet WCAG success criteria 1.4.4 (resize text) <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-scale>;.
I wonder if somebody could clarify best practice for me. While WCAG 1.0 seemed clear in its guidance forbidding font sizing with absolute units, WCAG 2 seems more vague, simply stating that text should be able to be resized 200% without loss of content or functionality.

What is unclear is whether the, now ubiquitous, browser page zoom functionality means that units like px are acceptable, since text whose size is defined this way will scale along with the entirety of the page.
If you just want to enlarge the text, independent of its containing elements, however, you will not be able to do so (at least with native
functionality) if absolute units are used. To me, relying on zoom capability to handle text resizing seems insufficient, because it often necessitates horizontal scrolling (a problem for my father who has low vision and boosts font size). That seems to be acceptable from the perspective of WCAG 2, though, since a sufficient technique for 1.4.4 is "G142:
Using a technology that has commonly-available user agents that support zoom <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140916/G142>;". I've seen this discussed different places on the web, but people seem to have different perspectives on whether it is okay. WebAIM, at least, thinks "it is not vital that text sizes be defined in relative sizes."
<http://webaim.org/techniques/fonts/#font_size>;

What do you folks think?

Best,
Rob

--
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255

Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061

From: Iaffaldano, Michelangelo
Date: Wed, Jun 03 2015 12:41PM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

It is a common misconception that page zooming has made the earlier recommendation for relative units obsolete. In usability testing I observed users with limited vision who still enlarge the font without zooming the page, in hopes of minimizing horizontal scrolling, which is so disorienting.

Michelangelo

-----Original Message-----
From: Eades, Terri [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: June-02-15 6:43 PM
To: 'Robert Fentress'; WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)

I think the "px vs. em" debate was born when responsive design was because fonts defined in px will NOT scale with the size the screen, therefore creating a usability problem because it can make reading difficult if your font is too big or too small for the screen you're on. It's not an accessibility issue in the traditional sense, but since good usability often results in better accessibility, I tend to lean on going with em's.


Terri Eades
Webmaster

Morgan Community College
920 Barlow Road, Fort Morgan, CO 80701
Phone: (970) 542-3155 | Fax: (970) 542-3115 = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

www.MorganCC.edu







-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Fentress [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 6:51 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)

I am confused as to the guidance given in the techniques for meeting or failing to meet WCAG success criteria 1.4.4 (resize text) <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-scale>;.
I wonder if somebody could clarify best practice for me. While WCAG 1.0 seemed clear in its guidance forbidding font sizing with absolute units, WCAG 2 seems more vague, simply stating that text should be able to be resized 200% without loss of content or functionality.

What is unclear is whether the, now ubiquitous, browser page zoom functionality means that units like px are acceptable, since text whose size is defined this way will scale along with the entirety of the page.
If you just want to enlarge the text, independent of its containing elements, however, you will not be able to do so (at least with native
functionality) if absolute units are used. To me, relying on zoom capability to handle text resizing seems insufficient, because it often necessitates horizontal scrolling (a problem for my father who has low vision and boosts font size). That seems to be acceptable from the perspective of WCAG 2, though, since a sufficient technique for 1.4.4 is "G142:
Using a technology that has commonly-available user agents that support zoom <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140916/G142>;". I've seen this discussed different places on the web, but people seem to have different perspectives on whether it is okay. WebAIM, at least, thinks "it is not vital that text sizes be defined in relative sizes."
<http://webaim.org/techniques/fonts/#font_size>;

What do you folks think?

Best,
Rob

--
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255

Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061


This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. Unless otherwise stated, opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the author and are not endorsed by the author's employer.

Le présent message, ainsi que tout fichier qui y est joint, est envoyé à l'intention exclusive de son ou de ses destinataires; il est de nature confidentielle et peut constituer une information privilégiée. Nous avertissons toute personne autre que le destinataire prévu que tout examen, réacheminement, impression, copie, distribution ou autre utilisation de ce message et de tout fichier qui y est joint est strictement interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, veuillez en aviser immédiatement l'expéditeur par retour de courriel et supprimer ce message et tout document joint de votre système. Sauf indication contraire, les opinions exprimées dans le présent message sont celles de l'auteur et ne sont pas avalisées par l'employeur de l'auteur.

From: EA Draffan
Date: Wed, Jun 03 2015 1:01PM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

I have to agree total zoom is not ideal for all users. For those who have reading difficulties and do not need image zoom, just increasing the size of text can be enormously helpful. This is also critical for reading skills when coping with cursive texts such as Arabic, which also has no capitals. We have this attribute as part of ATbar (https://www.atbar.org/) because of the trend of browsers to just offer total zoom. Increasing line spacing can also help some readers.

Best wishes
E.A.

Mrs E.A. Draffan
WAIS, ECS , University of Southampton
Mobile +44 (0)7976 289103
http://access.ecs.soton.ac.uk
UK AAATE rep http://www.aaate.net/
http://www.emptech.info

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Iaffaldano, Michelangelo
Sent: 03 June 2015 19:41
To: Eades, Terri; 'Robert Fentress'; WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)

It is a common misconception that page zooming has made the earlier recommendation for relative units obsolete. In usability testing I observed users with limited vision who still enlarge the font without zooming the page, in hopes of minimizing horizontal scrolling, which is so disorienting.

Michelangelo

-----Original Message-----
From: Eades, Terri [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: June-02-15 6:43 PM
To: 'Robert Fentress'; WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)

I think the "px vs. em" debate was born when responsive design was because fonts defined in px will NOT scale with the size the screen, therefore creating a usability problem because it can make reading difficult if your font is too big or too small for the screen you're on. It's not an accessibility issue in the traditional sense, but since good usability often results in better accessibility, I tend to lean on going with em's.


Terri Eades
Webmaster

Morgan Community College
920 Barlow Road, Fort Morgan, CO 80701
Phone: (970) 542-3155 | Fax: (970) 542-3115 = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

www.MorganCC.edu







-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Fentress [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ]
Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2015 6:51 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: [WebAIM] Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)

I am confused as to the guidance given in the techniques for meeting or failing to meet WCAG success criteria 1.4.4 (resize text) <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-scale>;.
I wonder if somebody could clarify best practice for me. While WCAG 1.0 seemed clear in its guidance forbidding font sizing with absolute units, WCAG 2 seems more vague, simply stating that text should be able to be resized 200% without loss of content or functionality.

What is unclear is whether the, now ubiquitous, browser page zoom functionality means that units like px are acceptable, since text whose size is defined this way will scale along with the entirety of the page.
If you just want to enlarge the text, independent of its containing elements, however, you will not be able to do so (at least with native
functionality) if absolute units are used. To me, relying on zoom capability to handle text resizing seems insufficient, because it often necessitates horizontal scrolling (a problem for my father who has low vision and boosts font size). That seems to be acceptable from the perspective of WCAG 2, though, since a sufficient technique for 1.4.4 is "G142:
Using a technology that has commonly-available user agents that support zoom <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140916/G142>;". I've seen this discussed different places on the web, but people seem to have different perspectives on whether it is okay. WebAIM, at least, thinks "it is not vital that text sizes be defined in relative sizes."
<http://webaim.org/techniques/fonts/#font_size>;

What do you folks think?

Best,
Rob

--
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255

Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061


This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail, delete this e-mail and destroy any copies. Any dissemination or use of this information by a person other than the intended recipient is unauthorized and may be illegal. Unless otherwise stated, opinions expressed in this e-mail are those of the author and are not endorsed by the author's employer.

Le présent message, ainsi que tout fichier qui y est joint, est envoyé à l'intention exclusive de son ou de ses destinataires; il est de nature confidentielle et peut constituer une information privilégiée. Nous avertissons toute personne autre que le destinataire prévu que tout examen, réacheminement, impression, copie, distribution ou autre utilisation de ce message et de tout fichier qui y est joint est strictement interdit. Si vous n'êtes pas le destinataire prévu, veuillez en aviser immédiatement l'expéditeur par retour de courriel et supprimer ce message et tout document joint de votre système. Sauf indication contraire, les opinions exprimées dans le présent message sont celles de l'auteur et ne sont pas avalisées par l'employeur de l'auteur.

From: _mallory
Date: Thu, Jun 04 2015 12:10AM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 07:01:44PM +0000, EA Draffan wrote:
> I have to agree total zoom is not ideal for all users. For those who have reading difficulties and do not need image zoom, just increasing the size of text can be enormously helpful. This is also critical for reading skills when coping with cursive texts such as Arabic, which also has no capitals. We have this attribute as part of ATbar (https://www.atbar.org/) because of the trend of browsers to just offer total zoom. Increasing line spacing can also help some readers.

That, and the reason I stuck with Firefox for as long as I did was
because zoomed images, being blurry things often next to text,
made reading harder (my eyes kept seeing blur in the periphery and
made me think all my vision was blurry, is the best I can explain
it).

cheers,
_mallory

From: Whitney Quesenbery
Date: Sat, Jun 06 2015 8:06PM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

I've started to see sites that respond to browser zoom in a responsive way.
It looks like they switch to a mobile template when the zoom level gets
high, so the text (and page overall) wrap well. Anyone else seeing this
trend?

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:10 AM _mallory < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 07:01:44PM +0000, EA Draffan wrote:
> > I have to agree total zoom is not ideal for all users. For those who
> have reading difficulties and do not need image zoom, just increasing the
> size of text can be enormously helpful. This is also critical for reading
> skills when coping with cursive texts such as Arabic, which also has no
> capitals. We have this attribute as part of ATbar (https://www.atbar.org/)
> because of the trend of browsers to just offer total zoom. Increasing
> line spacing can also help some readers.
>
> That, and the reason I stuck with Firefox for as long as I did was
> because zoomed images, being blurry things often next to text,
> made reading harder (my eyes kept seeing blur in the periphery and
> made me think all my vision was blurry, is the best I can explain
> it).
>
> cheers,
> _mallory
> > > > >

From: Karl Groves
Date: Sun, Jun 07 2015 6:35AM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

Whitney,

That's due to the move toward rem units. When a site is built using
rem units the breakpoints can be triggered when the page is zoomed.

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 10:06 PM, Whitney Quesenbery < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I've started to see sites that respond to browser zoom in a responsive way.
> It looks like they switch to a mobile template when the zoom level gets
> high, so the text (and page overall) wrap well. Anyone else seeing this
> trend?
>
> On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:10 AM _mallory < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 07:01:44PM +0000, EA Draffan wrote:
>> > I have to agree total zoom is not ideal for all users. For those who
>> have reading difficulties and do not need image zoom, just increasing the
>> size of text can be enormously helpful. This is also critical for reading
>> skills when coping with cursive texts such as Arabic, which also has no
>> capitals. We have this attribute as part of ATbar (https://www.atbar.org/)
>> because of the trend of browsers to just offer total zoom. Increasing
>> line spacing can also help some readers.
>>
>> That, and the reason I stuck with Firefox for as long as I did was
>> because zoomed images, being blurry things often next to text,
>> made reading harder (my eyes kept seeing blur in the periphery and
>> made me think all my vision was blurry, is the best I can explain
>> it).
>>
>> cheers,
>> _mallory
>> >> >> >> >>
> > > > --

Karl Groves
www.karlgroves.com
@karlgroves
http://www.linkedin.com/in/karlgroves
Phone: +1 410.541.6829

Modern Web Toolsets and Accessibility
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uq6Db47-Ks

www.tenon.io

From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Sun, Jun 07 2015 8:40AM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

On 07/06/2015 13:35, Karl Groves wrote:
> Whitney,
>
> That's due to the move toward rem units. When a site is built using
> rem units the breakpoints can be triggered when the page is zoomed.

Actually, nothing to do with rem units. When zooming in desktop
browsers, the internal representation of the viewport changes
accordingly (so say an 800px wide window zoomed to 200% has an effective
viewport of 400px), so triggers different @media viewport sizes. Unless
I'm misunderstanding the original question...

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

From: _mallory
Date: Mon, Jun 08 2015 2:01AM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 03:40:56PM +0100, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
> On 07/06/2015 13:35, Karl Groves wrote:
> >Whitney,
> >
> >That's due to the move toward rem units. When a site is built using
> >rem units the breakpoints can be triggered when the page is zoomed.
>
> Actually, nothing to do with rem units. When zooming in desktop
> browsers, the internal representation of the viewport changes
> accordingly (so say an 800px wide window zoomed to 200% has an
> effective viewport of 400px), so triggers different @media viewport
> sizes. Unless I'm misunderstanding the original question...

I first saw this in opera (presto), before rem existed. But I don't believe I
see it in all browsers today.

_mallory

From: Laurent Bracquart
Date: Mon, Jun 08 2015 2:16AM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi listers,


I believe several factors are in play here:

1. The way breakpoints are set (px vs. em/rem/%).
2. The type of zoom used (full page zoom vs. zoom text only).

From my tests, with Firefox 38:

* em breakpoints + full page zoom: can trigger the breakpoints.
* em breakpoints + zoom text only: can trigger the breakpoints.
* px breakpoints + full page zoom: can trigger the breakpoints.
* px breakpoints + zoom text only: can't trigger the breakpoints.


Best,

--

Laurent Bracquart
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =

Tél. 01 45 26 77 89

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Atalan
Accessibilité numérique et sensibilisation au handicap
Plus d'informations sur www.atalan.fr

Atalan est coordinateur des projets AcceDe Web et AcceDe PDF
www.accede.info

Le 08/06/2015 10:01, _mallory a écrit :
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 03:40:56PM +0100, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>> On 07/06/2015 13:35, Karl Groves wrote:
>>> Whitney,
>>>
>>> That's due to the move toward rem units. When a site is built using
>>> rem units the breakpoints can be triggered when the page is zoomed.
>> Actually, nothing to do with rem units. When zooming in desktop
>> browsers, the internal representation of the viewport changes
>> accordingly (so say an 800px wide window zoomed to 200% has an
>> effective viewport of 400px), so triggers different @media viewport
>> sizes. Unless I'm misunderstanding the original question...
> I first saw this in opera (presto), before rem existed. But I don't believe I
> see it in all browsers today.
>
> _mallory
> > > >

From: Frances de Waal
Date: Mon, Jun 08 2015 2:26AM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | Next message →

If the media-queries are set in px units, the layout will respond to the viewport width. In a default browser setting the complete layout will scale when zooming. A responsive layout with media-queries set in px will respond to the combination of both viewport width and zoom factor.

If the user changed the browser settings so that only the text will scale when zooming, the layout will only respond to the viewport width and not to the zoom factor. If the media-queries are set in em units though, the layout will also respond to the zoom factor.

Frances de Waal
www.waalweb.nl
classroom.w3devcampus.com/


> Op 8 jun. 2015, om 10:01 heeft _mallory < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > het volgende geschreven:
>
> On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 03:40:56PM +0100, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>> On 07/06/2015 13:35, Karl Groves wrote:
>>> Whitney,
>>>
>>> That's due to the move toward rem units. When a site is built using
>>> rem units the breakpoints can be triggered when the page is zoomed.
>>
>> Actually, nothing to do with rem units. When zooming in desktop
>> browsers, the internal representation of the viewport changes
>> accordingly (so say an 800px wide window zoomed to 200% has an
>> effective viewport of 400px), so triggers different @media viewport
>> sizes. Unless I'm misunderstanding the original question...
>
> I first saw this in opera (presto), before rem existed. But I don't believe I
> see it in all browsers today.
>
> _mallory
> > > >

From: Robert Fentress
Date: Wed, Jun 17 2015 8:05AM
Subject: Re: Browser zooming sufficient for WCAG 1.4.4 (resize text)
← Previous message | No next message

Thanks for the responses, everyone. I've been on vacation and just now got
back in the office. I hadn't considered the issue of breakpoints with page
zooming; I just assumed they wouldn't be triggered, but I guess I hadn't
thought about it enough. So, would it be fair to say that if you created a
responsive design with px units carefully with appropriate breakpoints, it
would be okay?

Best,
Rob

On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 4:26 AM, Frances de Waal < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> If the media-queries are set in px units, the layout will respond to the
> viewport width. In a default browser setting the complete layout will scale
> when zooming. A responsive layout with media-queries set in px will respond
> to the combination of both viewport width and zoom factor.
>
> If the user changed the browser settings so that only the text will scale
> when zooming, the layout will only respond to the viewport width and not to
> the zoom factor. If the media-queries are set in em units though, the
> layout will also respond to the zoom factor.
>
> Frances de Waal
> www.waalweb.nl
> classroom.w3devcampus.com/
>
>
> > Op 8 jun. 2015, om 10:01 heeft _mallory < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > het
> volgende geschreven:
> >
> > On Sun, Jun 07, 2015 at 03:40:56PM +0100, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
> >> On 07/06/2015 13:35, Karl Groves wrote:
> >>> Whitney,
> >>>
> >>> That's due to the move toward rem units. When a site is built using
> >>> rem units the breakpoints can be triggered when the page is zoomed.
> >>
> >> Actually, nothing to do with rem units. When zooming in desktop
> >> browsers, the internal representation of the viewport changes
> >> accordingly (so say an 800px wide window zoomed to 200% has an
> >> effective viewport of 400px), so triggers different @media viewport
> >> sizes. Unless I'm misunderstanding the original question...
> >
> > I first saw this in opera (presto), before rem existed. But I don't
> believe I
> > see it in all browsers today.
> >
> > _mallory
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >



--
Robert Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
540.231.1255

Technology-enhanced Learning & Online Strategies
Assistive Technologies
1180 Torgersen Hall
620 Drillfield Drive (0434)
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061