2 ms·
> that has been the standard for text since the type writers I have a feeling it was the standard because they used the minimum font size to make the letters r
by nottorp 3y ago
> that has been the standard for text since the type writers
I have a feeling it was the standard because they used the minimum font size to make the letters readable, and that's how much it fit on the physical page width. Which was standardized before typewriters for unknown historical reasons?
> You don't want to move your neck when you read a single line that's kinda silly.
I don't have to move my neck to read the article spread across the full width of my monitor. On 13" laptop or 24" desktops. Are you using a 21:9 utrawide?
- wraptile 3y agoIt's been this way forever because it's not particularly difficult science and is extremely easy to test for so there are probably thousands of papers covering this. Here's a good summary by Baymard Institute[1]. Also WCAG recommends line length set to <80 characters too [2]. I'm not sure what else could make this more convincing or official. 1 - https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability https://baymard.com/blog/line-length-readability 2 - https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/visual-presentation.html https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/visual-presentat...
- nottorp 3y ago> Also WCAG recommends "recommends". Want to deny me the option of longer lines?
- roryokane 3y agoJust like lelanthra currently applies custom CSS `body { max-width: 38rem; }` to this page, if the page had that maximum width set by default, you would equally have the ability to apply the CSS `body { max-width: unset; }` to the page. So you would not be denied the option of longer lines.