Dan Youngquist composed on 2014-11-09 05:17 (UTC-0800): > Felix Miata wrote: ... >> http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411.png ... >> Proposed fix: ... > ...or not. Your screen image looks perfectly readable to me. Really, even after you scale the image so that its UI text matches your own in size? Exactly how big is that image on your screen. How big is your screen? How close is it to your eyes? Apparently the context present in it, and the context absent, escaped your comprehension. Maybe this one will work better: http://fm.no-ip.com/SS/trinitylistarchive1411-180.jpg Context present (in both): Notice how much tinier the text in the message body is compared to *all* other text present in the image, including the message's footer. Footers typically contain the smallest text on any given page that has a footer. Why should that not be the case here? In the earlier screenshot, the 10px message body text is a mere 30.8%[1] of the 18px monospace browser preference and its UI (menu) text, 25% of the 20px proportional browser preference. In the newer, message body text is a mere 14.8% of the size of UI text, 11.1% of the proportional preference. Context absent: 1-Screen size. Maybe your screen is 27" or more, while mine might be 17", or less. 2-Screen pixel density. Yours might be average, or less. Mine are higher than average. 3-Viewing distance. 4-Visual acuity. Not everyone has equal vision. Sizing web page text in px is neither necessary, nor respectful of page users. W3 recommends it not be done.[3][4] https://www.trinitydesktop.org/ doesn't do it, and neither should the list archive. [1] 10^2 / 18^2 = .308 [2] 10^2 / 20^2 = .250 [3] http://www.w3.org/2003/07/30-font-size [4] "Advisory Techniques for 1.4.4 - Resize text" http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/ -- "The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation) Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks! Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/
