5 ms·
I imagine it'd look fine on a MacBook Air. It doesn't on a 23" monitor, that's for sure. I want to believe that the people behind it didn't bother to test it o
by kmfrk 14y ago
I imagine it'd look fine on a MacBook Air. It doesn't on a 23" monitor, that's for sure.
I want to believe that the people behind it didn't bother to test it on different viewports, but I have created websites that look fine on everything from iPhones to large monitors without writing viewport-specific CSS.
It just seems incredibly sloppy, which is hard to believe for a company like ALA.
- bryne 14y agoIt's much more likely that you're creating websites that fail accessibility guidelines and that many people are forced to zoom in to read. 100%/16px is standard for article body copy.
- Silhouette 14y agoThe intro in the linked article is set with a 24px font size and 960px width. For me, on a good desktop screen, that is uncomfortably large on both counts for a full paragraph of body text. The main part of the article, set at 18px with about 700px width, is sensible IMHO.
- DanBC 14y ago> but I have created websites that look fine on everything Just checking, but really "look fine on everything", or "need to be zoomed in by many people"?
- kmfrk 14y agoNah, it looks fine. You can zoom in, if you want, of course, but it's entirely readable on a retina screen. Of course, those have been very sparse in layout such as blogs, so it's not a solution that fits all, but in a case like this, it would work just as well. A site like Hacker News obviously needs optimization for different viewports.
- DanBC 14y ago> You can zoom in, if you want, of course, It's pleasing to be in a situation where I can say (about ALA5.0) "you can zoom out, if you want, of course" :p
- oulipian 14y agoThe home page looks terrible on my 13" Macbook Pro, the illustration takes up almost the entire screen. Everything feels oversized and unbalanced.