public inbox for [email protected]  
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dean Rasheed <[email protected]>
To: Jonathan S. Katz <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Sarah Conway Schnurr <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Proposed HTML Documentation Styles
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2018 11:49:35 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEZATCXJNswQky7LZNOtFPNndBn-2HtstQQz+gvKmcg_ubxHNA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
	<CAEZATCUEO7tqo4ZkdBm-EAb2NHHNEcggTTFoJrGxzkr5o9koZA@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CAEZATCWkuMgGAsFNgbTeYYQ1Kw-fgAYPpD3JkU1run0A=UN3eQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAEZATCWjKjybJtK84_bLHWVw2CGNT4OuugegpA-ZY4KQtMc6cQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>

On Fri, 12 Oct 2018 at 03:03, Jonathan S. Katz <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 10/11/18 3:01 AM, Dean Rasheed wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 06:49, Dean Rasheed <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> For example, attached are screenshots taken from my Android tablet
> >
> > For the record, that was a Samsung Galaxy Tab S2 8.0, with a screen
> > resolution of 2048x1536 and a device pixel ratio of 2.0, I think. So
> > the logical resolution is 1024x768, and in portrait mode, the logical
> > width is 768 pixels.
>
> Unfortunately HTML tables are not great in mobile web. With that said,
> we pushed up a change that should keep them from exploding as much to
> the right. We've also bumped up the font-size slightly from the current
> site so they could be slightly easier to read.
>
> (Note: when testing in the browser, they appear to be illegible unless
> you have super vision, but when on an actual device they are legible).
>
> There is only so much we can do now without redesigning how the tables
> are assembled.
>

Indeed. It's probably unrealistic to try to support really small
devices. I mentioned that particular one because there was a clear
regression from the old style. I have re-tested it and now it's much
better, so thanks for the fix.

Arguably, the font scaling in the @media CSS is now a little too
aggressive. IMO 60% rather than 50% is a little more readable for the
576-768px range, and 80% rather than 70% for the 769-992px range, but
that's a very subjective matter.

Regards,
Dean




view thread (20+ messages)  latest in thread

reply

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Proposed HTML Documentation Styles
  In-Reply-To: <CAEZATCXJNswQky7LZNOtFPNndBn-2HtstQQz+gvKmcg_ubxHNA@mail.gmail.com>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox