All very well, but down at Shaw-Trust they (pretty much everyone) prefers the click to change method (e.g. three varying size "A"s next to each other and you click on the one you like the size of... www.webcredible.co.uk).
But, I complained, if you set the size of text you like in your browser then text in all websites sites, that aren't fixed size text, will be the right size?
Yes, but some sites don't support changing text size and break.
What do you mean? Either a site will be coded old school with fixed font size, in which case it wont change or it be relative size and will work?
No, some sites have relative font size but don't support larger sizes so if you change the font size in your browser the layout will be broken and you'll need to change it back in order to use the site.
You can't be serious, show me a site like that...
www.virginmedia.com (try IE with anything other than default font size)
oh...
IE6 Screen shot with larger and normal font size...
I used to grumble about the 3-As (the little, big and just-the-right-size ones) but then I figured this: They may not be necessary as you can change text size in the browser, but they don't harm anybody and they do assist X% users who don't know how to change text size in browser and/or only want the text biggened on that site and not others, where X is small but not insignificant. In short, if something is 0% harm and X% good, then there is no good reason not to do it.
ReplyDeleteYep, I'm coming round to that way of thinking. When we have any accessibility testing done, they always recommend we implement it so I guess I should really! (though where does that leave us with the WCAG 2.0 any colour, any background colour functionality! the browser can do that, do you want to build that in your website too. In a couple of year we could have loads of similar yet significantly different implementations of this kicking around! )
ReplyDelete