new documentation format for std.algorithm

[Jeff Nowakowski]

On 02/03/2011 06:15 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
>
> This is exactly the issue I was talking about, using relative font
> sizes in their current incarnation doesn't solve any problems per
> se.

It does, as I explained in my other post to you. Repeating an assertion
is not a logical argument.

> Also, it's precisely the point where one's ideal conceptions and
> reality differ. Just imagine what would happen if Wikipedia used a
> font-size of 1: Millions of users would complain that the body copy
> is way too large for something encyclopedic in nature.

Imagine if they used a font-size of 1 and hardly anybody complained. You 
just made up some crazy number.

I'd like to know exactly why Wikipedia chose the font size they did. I 
looked around and couldn't find any reason for it. They did at one time 
do a usability study, but it didn't mention anything about font sizes. 
I'm willing to bet this decision was poorly made by scant evidence and 
personal preference of a few.

> In the end, web development is not about constructing an ideal(istic)
> world, but about catering end user needs. If you can unite the two
> goals, that's great, but ignoring reality usually doesn't quite work
> out well…

Exactly so, but the problem is that a certain set of web designers have 
fooled themselves into a fantasy that they have actually come to some 
practical solution by settling on "standard" pixel sizes, when they have 
chosen a solution that cannot work and fails in practice.

At least when you use default sizes and flow layout it works in a usable 
manner, meaning zoom works properly and the text should be at a readable 
size. It also allows for an approach where at least a user has a 
standard way to display their preferred font size by default instead of 
by the whims of some designer who treats the web as a print medium.