Re: comments on newly generated html draft format and font sizes

Hi Ted,

On 2015-04-23 14:01, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Apr 23, 2015, at 6:40 AM, Henrik Levkowetz 
> <henrik(_at_)levkowetz(_dot_)com>
> wrote:
> > Do you have any comments on how this displays for you?
> >
> > https://zin.tools.ietf.org/pt/draft-ietf-idr-error-handling-19-responsive.html
> >
> Too small (not that you were asking me).   The problem with a
> responsive design in this case is that there is no need for it.   We
> just want the browser to display the text in a font that's readable
> on the display, and to flow it correctly, which it should do based on
> the xml2rfc html output.
The first problem I was trying to solve was that for me, the text without
responsive design was too small to read comfortably on my tablets.

I was assuming, maybe incorrectly, that other people might like to be able
to read on tablets, too.

> I wonder if you are reacting to the current HTML output of XML2RFC
> v2.
No, I've never found that particularly readable, and don't use it.

>   I don't like the way this looks, and I like the way your
> fixed-width text looks better.
I agree on that.

>   But we should figure out why that is, if there is general agreement about 
> it.
Right now, I'd be happy if I can provide something that looks pretty much
as it used to on laptops and desktops, and is better than it used to be
on tablets and large smartphones.


Best regards,

        Henrik

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature