I'm definitely in the "points should measure physical size" camp, but that may be because I have a desktop publishing background and when HTML started using point sizes I found it baffling and still do. I'm perfectly happy to have 12 pt text look the same size on my 10" netbook as it does on my 22" desktop monitor. However, when I plug my netbook (with old Fedora 12 and Gnome 2) into my 720P, 37" TV, my previously legible text is now a 3 pixel high smudge. Clearly a better experience can be had here.
I think all text should be one of two things (unless I'm missing some important use case that doesn't fit with either): a) Relative to an arbitrary size the individual user finds comfortable and usable or b) relative to actual point sizes with an user controlled scaling factor such as when working with a document for printing.
In the first case, as developers, we (you/they/me/whoever) could either ask the user to select a comfortable text size or use some magical set of rules to choose a reasonable default text size. I imagine the rules would be based on things like the size and pixel depth relative to some common font type (e.g. 70% of the base size should be at least eight pixels high, ensuring some legibility for many fonts at small size; 500% of base size should allow a reasonable amount of text across the overall screen width; etc.). The user should also be able to set this base size to the equivalent of, say, 12 pt real-life print-on-paper text. This base size would be the reference against which all other text is scaled. Perhaps a percentage could be used for this scaling, as is done in HTML and CSS.
In the second case, it could be assumed that if the developer or designer is specifying point size, they are also implying that this text is in reference to printed text and text will default to being rendered based on pixel density in accurate physical point size, subject to application- or document-specific user controls to control scaling, such as viewing a word processor document at 150% or zooming to the width of the page and scaling the text as one would expect.
I realise what I'm really asking for is for all desktop and mobile platforms to abandon their current standards and conform to the product of my brilliance :-) but really I'm just whining about the misappropriation of a unit of measurement.
Some unrealistic demands, just for fun: 1) Hardware manufacturers, shape up and provide good quality EDID information in all your monitors, TVs, and other displays. 2) Platform developers, use that EDID data and a healthy dose of prescience to determine ideal default text sizes algorithmically and provide APIs based around my brilliant scheme detailed above. 3) Designers, stop being such control freaks and use relative text sizes wherever possible to take advantage of the APIs in demand #2.
Whew! Being right all the time takes a lot of typing! :-) - Thub
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at nvidia. Ex-biologist. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon and Bluesky.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: What is the point of points then?
Date: 2012-07-13 10:08 pm (UTC)I think all text should be one of two things (unless I'm missing some important use case that doesn't fit with either):
a) Relative to an arbitrary size the individual user finds comfortable and usable or
b) relative to actual point sizes with an user controlled scaling factor such as when working with a document for printing.
In the first case, as developers, we (you/they/me/whoever) could either ask the user to select a comfortable text size or use some magical set of rules to choose a reasonable default text size. I imagine the rules would be based on things like the size and pixel depth relative to some common font type (e.g. 70% of the base size should be at least eight pixels high, ensuring some legibility for many fonts at small size; 500% of base size should allow a reasonable amount of text across the overall screen width; etc.). The user should also be able to set this base size to the equivalent of, say, 12 pt real-life print-on-paper text. This base size would be the reference against which all other text is scaled. Perhaps a percentage could be used for this scaling, as is done in HTML and CSS.
In the second case, it could be assumed that if the developer or designer is specifying point size, they are also implying that this text is in reference to printed text and text will default to being rendered based on pixel density in accurate physical point size, subject to application- or document-specific user controls to control scaling, such as viewing a word processor document at 150% or zooming to the width of the page and scaling the text as one would expect.
I realise what I'm really asking for is for all desktop and mobile platforms to abandon their current standards and conform to the product of my brilliance :-) but really I'm just whining about the misappropriation of a unit of measurement.
Some unrealistic demands, just for fun:
1) Hardware manufacturers, shape up and provide good quality EDID information in all your monitors, TVs, and other displays.
2) Platform developers, use that EDID data and a healthy dose of prescience to determine ideal default text sizes algorithmically and provide APIs based around my brilliant scheme detailed above.
3) Designers, stop being such control freaks and use relative text sizes wherever possible to take advantage of the APIs in demand #2.
Whew! Being right all the time takes a lot of typing! :-)
- Thub