Font-size switching

[dorayme]

At <http://preview.tinyurl.com/2f3z98> there is:

"This tutorial will show you how to add such a text size switcher
to your Web pages using PHP and CSS, thereby immediately making
your Web site more accessible and scoring you useful brownie
points from everyone over the age of 50. Keep reading, and find
out how!"

And there was I looking at this for the more natural purpose of
giving folk a way to make text smaller from default base of 100%!
In other words hoping to score brownie points with the under 50s.

 

[Jim Moe]

"This tutorial will show you how to add such a text size switcher
to your Web pages using PHP and CSS, thereby immediately making
your Web site more accessible and scoring you useful brownie
points from everyone over the age of 50. Keep reading, and find
out how!"

Rather insulting to people over 50. It assumes they all have vision
problems while no one under 50 does.
Then there is the old issue of deezyners selecting a font size for
everyone then providing a way for everyone to adjust it to their own
preference. A lot of hubris there when all they have to do leave the size
at 100%.

 

[Bergamot]

Rather insulting to people over 50. It assumes they all have vision
problems while no one under 50 does.

I've had poor vision since I was 8 years old. Age has nothing to do with it.

 

[dorayme]

Rather insulting to people over 50. It assumes they all have vision
problems while no one under 50 does.
Then there is the old issue of deezyners selecting a font size for
everyone then providing a way for everyone to adjust it to their own
preference. A lot of hubris there when all they have to do leave the size
at 100%.

A couple of things Jim, because of the way you have snipped my
post, let me make it clear that I did *not* say what is inside
the quote marks. Not something that many people would pick up
from the way you snipped the very short post.

I added "And there was I looking at this for the more natural
purpose of giving folk a way to make text smaller from default
base of 100%! In other words hoping to score brownie points with
the under 50s."

<g>

Aside from such personal concerns, yes, it is a bit rude I guess
of that website to have phrased it thus.

Your last remark seems to me to miss an important point and that
is that you can set 100% as default but still provide a facility
for people who are not so familiar with their web browsers but
would like bigger or smaller. This is different to dictating to
people some super small size and giving them an option for
bigger. It is a totally different tactic. It was in fact, part of
the post which you snipped.

 

[dorayme]

I've had poor vision since I was 8 years old. Age has nothing to do with it.

Almost totally untrue. Age has a lot to do with it. Social and
statistical facts are not some big secret.

 

[Kim André Akerø]

Almost totally untrue. Age has a lot to do with it. Social and
statistical facts are not some big secret.

Depends how you look at it. I've been using glasses since I was 7,
gradually degrading to about -7.5 on one eye and -6.5 on the other
nowadays (I'm 28). My sister had to start using reading glasses (for
astigmatism) about 4 or 5 years ago, and now she's 25. My mother
started with reading glasses at a much later age, a few years earlier
than when my sister did (although past her early 40's). My stepdad has
also gotten corrective glasses (also for astigmatism, but to a lesser
extent) at about the same time. Finally, my dad has been using glasses
for as long as I can remember (by looking at photo albums from my
childhood, I'd say at least since he was about 20).

Just looking at my own family, I don't think age has as much to do with
poor vision as statistics might think (I have the feeling there are a
lot of people out there having poor vision without admitting it, mainly
because of pride and/or vanity; too many times, I've heard people say
that "only old people wear glasses").

 

[dorayme]

Depends how you look at it.

It depends on *what* you look at. We get poorer in vision as we
get older. A statistical statement has different truth conditions
to other statements.
....

Just looking at my own family, I don't think age has as much to do with
poor vision as statistics might think (I have the feeling there are a
lot of people out there having poor vision without admitting it, mainly
because of pride and/or vanity; too many times, I've heard people say
that "only old people wear glasses").

It is hard to believe my fingers are typing this: many people
under 50 have poor vision, many people over 50 have great vision.

And you can make as many - well, up to a point - non-statistical
statements you like and the statistical one still remains like a
fortress, unaffected.

 

[Toby A Inkster]

Just looking at my own family, I don't think age has as much to do with
poor vision as statistics might think (I have the feeling there are a
lot of people out there having poor vision without admitting it, mainly
because of pride and/or vanity; too many times, I've heard people say
that "only old people wear glasses").

Of course, there are plenty of young people who wear glasses. I first got
glasses when I was about 15. I didn't start wearing them frequently until
I was about 23, and still don't wear them consistently, as my vision is
reasonable without them.

But the important factor here is that as you age, your vision tends will
do one of two things: it will stay the same, or get worse. It won't
improve. Which is why older people are more likely to need glasses than
younger people.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
[Geek of HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python/Apache/Linux]
[OS: Linux 2.6.17.14-mm-desktop-9mdvsmp, up 44 days, 21:33.]
[Now Playing: Coldplay - Sparks]

The Semantic Web
http://tobyinkster.co.uk/blog/2008/03/09/sw/

 

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

It depends on *what* you look at. We get poorer in vision as we
get older.

It's not as simple as that. For some purposes one's vision may improve.
True, I can't read easily now without glasses, but I don't need them
for driving now, whereas I did once. Myopia when young almost cancels
out with presbyopia when old, at least for some people.

None of this affects the HTML point, of course. I think we can all
agree that 100% is best.

 

[dorayme]

It's not as simple as that.

It is as simple as that. I am afraid you are not cottoning on to
my remarks about statistical statements. Perhaps there was
something about those remarks by me in a post or two, a post or
two back, that was unclear?

It is true that you would not be the first to have trouble with
the logic of statistical remarks. They are a most unintuitive
form for even otherwise competent humans, (witness Bergamots's
mistake on this, earlier in the thread.)

For some purposes one's vision may improve.
True, I can't read easily now without glasses, but I don't need them
for driving now, whereas I did once. Myopia when young almost cancels
out with presbyopia when old, at least for some people.

This is a bit like saying it is not simply true that people have
almost no chance of winning the lottery - because you won it.

Perhaps the trouble is that a lot of remarks of a statistical
nature are not flagged as such with obvious words like "Most" or
"X%". But it is extremely debilitating for a writer to be
required to flag his or her remarks with such obvious and literal
additions. Many writers, especially in scientific fields or
social surveys and even histories must simply be understood to be
talking broadly, statistically.

 

[Jim Moe]

A couple of things Jim, because of the way you have snipped my
post, let me make it clear that I did *not* say what is inside
the quote marks. Not something that many people would pick up
from the way you snipped the very short post.

I know. I was responding the sentiment in the quoted quoted text, not to
anything that you said.

Your last remark seems to me to miss an important point and that
is that you can set 100% as default but still provide a facility
for people who are not so familiar with their web browsers but
would like bigger or smaller. This is different to dictating to
people some super small size and giving them an option for
bigger. It is a totally different tactic. It was in fact, part of
the post which you snipped.

It took a long time for me (now, now! be nice!) to figure out why some
sites had that little row of A's (usually 3 or 4), all the same size,
somewhere on the page. Since I have JS normally disabled and a minimum
font size set, clicking on those had no results. When I finally twigged to
their purpose, I was then further disappointed that even the largest text
size option was never large enough, i.e., it never made it to 100%.
You are proposing doing the opposite. Are you be sure you can offer a
set of sizes that will be satisfying to the eagle-eyed?

 

[dorayme]

It took a long time for me (now, now! be nice!)

On this score I am not one to be superior in any way. I am taking
too long to develop my alternative theory of the concept of the

to figure out why some
sites had that little row of A's (usually 3 or 4), all the same size,
somewhere on the page.

Now that is a nice reminder, good point, that at least the A's
should reflect the size of what to expect, to give an idea to the
user.

Since I have JS normally disabled and a minimum
font size set, clicking on those had no results.

Those techniques were obviously not server side then.

When I finally twigged to
their purpose, I was then further disappointed that even the largest text
size option was never large enough, i.e., it never made it to 100%.

You see, I think this is what is going on! You have all been
through bad experiences on this score and it has made you unduly
wary.

You are proposing doing the opposite. Are you be sure you can offer a
set of sizes that will be satisfying to the eagle-eyed?

To not dare because one can not be sure is not exactly to be
generally recommended for beings with pretensions of pride and
independence.

Actually I don't care too much about the eagle eyed (I might even
tease them and make their button go to 2pt!). But 120% (up from
100) can do a power of good for a whole bunch of folk, mainly
elderly.

I say not to be too frightened to go that little extra distance
to help the deserving. Not to be too ideological. (I am so sick
of hearing - my own voice included - saying to leave this and
that to the user as some sort of absolute law which makes any
exception seem like a nostrum). The big thing is to allow the
website to stand on its own if none of these extras work.

Now and then, for example, I say things about how to download
stuff, I don't always *just* leave it to visitors. Because I have
seen so many folk so puzzled about computer operations. Those who
know do not need it. It won't kill anyone.

But I do agree that an author's tendency should be to the lean,
there are too many dangers in having enthusiastic good intentions.

 

[Travis Newbury]

I've had poor vision since I was 8 years old. Age has nothing to do with it.

While being young does not mean good eyesight, I do agree with dorayme
about the 50 year eyesight creep.

 

[Adrienne Boswell]

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Travis Newbury

While being young does not mean good eyesight, I do agree with dorayme
about the 50 year eyesight creep.

Dateline - Glendale CA - Ralphs Grocery Store 3/16/2008

When checking out, the checker said suddenly, "Can I see your ID,
please?". He had my six pack of George Killian Irish Red in his hand.

I thought he was talking to someone else, until he said it again, and I
said, "Me? You want ID from me?"

He said "Yes, I have to ask for ID for anyone who looks under 30."

Pointing at my gray hair, I asked again, "Me?"

With a very serious look on his face, he said, "Yes."

I took my ID out, and handed it to him saying, "I'm 51."

He said, "Well, you don't look it!"

I said, "Come here, I want to kiss you!" and I gave him a nice kiss on
the cheek. The whole supermarket broke into laughter.

My face may not look 51, but my eyes certainly know their age.

 

[Ed Mullen]

Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Travis Newbury


Dateline - Glendale CA - Ralphs Grocery Store 3/16/2008

When checking out, the checker said suddenly, "Can I see your ID,
please?". He had my six pack of George Killian Irish Red in his hand.

I thought he was talking to someone else, until he said it again, and I
said, "Me? You want ID from me?"

He said "Yes, I have to ask for ID for anyone who looks under 30."

Pointing at my gray hair, I asked again, "Me?"

With a very serious look on his face, he said, "Yes."

I took my ID out, and handed it to him saying, "I'm 51."

He said, "Well, you don't look it!"

I said, "Come here, I want to kiss you!" and I gave him a nice kiss on
the cheek. The whole supermarket broke into laughter.

My face may not look 51, but my eyes certainly know their age.

My city (Alpharetta, GA) inexplicably enacted an ordinance some years
ago that requires any purveyor of alcoholic beverages (stores,
restaurants, etc.) to check a photo ID when selling/serving an alcoholic
beverage. This trumps any state or federal law. After this ordinance
passed I was in my local grocery store with a typical collection of
"stuff" at the checkout, including some beer and wine. The clerk, upon
scanning the beverages, said: "May I see your ID, please?"

I said: "Hey, if any 20-year old (the legal age limit) comes in here
looking like me he DESERVES a freaking drink!!!"

Gray hair? Hell, I pointed to my lack of hair and gray beard and said:
"Are you freaking kidding me?" Unfortunately, the locals are serious
about enforcement and the stores are disinclined to pay the fines. On
the plus side, we're still allowed to shoot people who threaten us in
Georgia. Sigh. Oh well. Get a little, give a little.

 

[dorayme]

Adrienne Boswell wrote:
....

Gray hair? Hell, I pointed to my lack of hair and gray beard and said:
"Are you freaking kidding me?" ...

O come on Ed, tell us the best bit, what happened when you went
to kiss him?

 

[Ed Mullen]

O come on Ed, tell us the best bit, what happened when you went
to kiss him?

I would have kissed HER but, frankly, she wasn't that cute.

 

[Travis Newbury]

My city (Alpharetta, GA)...

How cool, I am in Lawrenceville...

inexplicably enacted an ordinance some years
ago that requires any purveyor of alcoholic beverages (stores,
restaurants, etc.) to check a photo ID when selling/serving an alcoholic
beverage. This trumps any state or federal law...

Ditto for Lawrenceville...

After this ordinance
passed I was in my local grocery store with a typical collection of
"stuff" at the checkout, including some beer and wine. The clerk, upon
scanning the beverages, said: "May I see your ID, please?"

I said: "Hey, if any 20-year old (the legal age limit) comes in here
looking like me he DESERVES a freaking drink!!!"

Got to love it. It happens every time in L-ville

Gray hair?

Nope, 51 and not a gray hair to be found. At Six flags weight/age
booth, I usually get "37 or 38" Good genes I guess...

Hell, I pointed to my lack of hair and gray beard and said:
"Are you freaking kidding me?" Unfortunately, the locals are serious
about enforcement and the stores are disinclined to pay the fines.

Yes they are. There is a package store I go to in Duluth all the
time, they know me by name (which is kind of sad I guess...) But I
still get asked to see the ID.

On
the plus side, we're still allowed to shoot people who threaten us in
Georgia. Sigh. Oh well. Get a little, give a little.

Got to love the south...

 

[Ed Mullen]

How cool, I am in Lawrenceville...

Neat! Very small world.

Got to love the south...

<g>