You can use functions to calculate these things for you. EMs perform initially in a similar fashion to REMs, until it comes to nesting. For example, take a div with a font-size of 2em, then add a paragraph with a font-size of 2em. The font-size of that paragraph is now 2ems relative to the div.
I quickly lose track of the maths and what size is what, and it quickly becomes unmanageable. This is what REMs solve - the size always refers back to the root. Not quite. Go have a read and then come back. In summary, both pixels and REMs for media queries fail in various browsers when using browser zoom, and EMs are the best option we have. It does get a bit more tricky though.
Both EMs and pixels have their downfalls with media queries when it comes to the difference of a decimal place of that unit. This works with browser zoom. So again, 6dp EMs are still out. The simplest acceptable option, is that we never create a min-width and max-width overlap in the same block.
The problem with the above is that there are certain scenarios where both media queries are hit, or both are ignore. So the safe bet would be to write something like:. The options in Chrome to change the default font-size is now very buried in the advanced browser options.
It also might be easier and quicker to ignore accessibility. The section having page-wrapper class inherits the font size of the parent html element 16px. It multiplies that value by the font size 1. Apparently, the value of the padding specified on the container class will inherit from the parent element. If the container class specifies a font size in em unit, the calculation will be extended further to use that value.
To override this inherited value, you need to explicitly set the unit of the element being styled to px. Note that the font size value of the div with container class above is computed based on its parent element, not the root.
The interesting thing here is that the Parent and Child in the HTML above do not have the same font size irrespective of the fact that they share the same class name.
The font size of Child is computed based on its parent i. While using em , it is advisable to define the font size on the html element instead of declaring it explicitly on other elements. The font size set on the browser by the user can affect the value when CSS rem unit is used within a web application.
This affects em units also as a result of inheritance. By default, the browser font size is set to 16px and inherited by the root element. If a user alters the font size of the browser through the settings, the page would be rendered to conform to the settings. When an em or rem font value is set on the html element with a custom browser setting, the computed pixel value will be a multiple of the browser font size setting with the specified font size.
For instance, if a website's html element has a font-size property set to 1. This is still not the optimal solution. A better approach will be to use This will equate 1rem to 10px. Starting with this as the base simplifies the calculations. Obviously, if you use em in a line where you actually declare the font-size, then it's impossible for em in that line to be relative to that same element's font-size after any font-size declarations on that element, because it won't know that yet - so instead it has to be relative to the font-size the element would have had before the font-size property on that same element is declared.
Since any other behaviour is literally impossible, I don't see any ambiguity there. TalhaSayed , you are confusing pixels with the px unit. They are not the same thing - read the CSS specs. The px unit is an absolute unit in the same sense as the in unit, or the cm unit, or the pt unit. I just googled for this and yes, I have to say I was wrong.
All these years and I had no idea. I guess I learned something new today. Show 10 more comments. Ilmari Karonen See bugs. Juan: That's because they use the simplest zoom method: scaling the entire page. Unfortunately, it's not very user-friendly. Which is why other browsers have text-zooming that magnifies the content only without changing the layout.
But that means web developers need to basically design their layouts for a wide variety of font sizes, greatly limiting what you can do design-wise. It's quite difficult to make a site look good in 16pt font as well as 48pt font.
Lesemajeste isn't scaling the entire page what "zoom" actually should be. Doesn't there come a point where the developer must tell the niche users to cope or not visit?
I would never build a single page with consideration for for 16pt and 48pt font. That is just stupid and as you pointed out, very limiting on layout. I think it is great that FF wants to make a special zoom for text only, but I am not going to design with that in mind.
Using px to define the width Here is an illustrating example. Using em instead A smarter way is to define the width in ems instead: div. I'm wondering: How will it adjusts to grid-systems using percentages for width? This is not true nowadays. It has been like this for a while now. Wolf, yes, but that is a horrible way of doing layout that wins you nothing and only brings suffering.
Show 5 more comments. A computer screen is normally NOT 96dpi! Or ppi, if you want to be pedantic. Vbakke Vbakke 1, 1 1 gold badge 10 10 silver badges 13 13 bronze badges. The px unit got its name from those screen pixels. Note that 1in is almost never actually a physical inch when talking about screen-based media I do not think the top voted answer is talking about physical inch. The relations are among the different absolute sizing schemes like in and pt.
For Eg. You might not like that, but getting your ruler out isn't going to make it any less of a fact, nor does it contribute to answering the question. For a nominal arm's length of 28 inches, the visual angle is therefore about 0. It's of use for everything that has to scale according to the font size. Daniel Rikowski Daniel Rikowski Nowadays, all modern browsers implement zooming by scaling all absolute units equally, rather than scaling just font sizes. Note that this answer was written in when this was less the case than it is now.
This leads to two related things: it's easy to keep proportions, if you choose to edit your font sizes in your CSS later on. Many browsers support custom font sizes, overriding your CSS. If you design everything in pixels, your layout might break in these cases. But, if you use ems, these overridings should mitigate these problems. Henrik Paul Henrik Paul I was just searching for a calculation formula :- maybe it was good to add a reverse example as well, like 2px is 0. Community Bot 1 1 1 silver badge.
It would be better to add an image that illustrates the effect. Scott Evernden Scott Evernden John Topley John Topley k 45 45 gold badges silver badges bronze badges. Barely any computer in the world uses IE6 in — Michael. MichaelMay Hence why the answer and other comments were written in Traingamer Traingamer 1, 8 8 silver badges 9 9 bronze badges.
If you asked me, they should use Firefox, but they don't actually ask me. Anonymous Coder Anonymous Coder 4 4 silver badges 2 2 bronze badges.
Isn't this highly dependent on that no-one touches their browser's custom css settings? Yea, you should just set font-size: 10px. DisgruntledGoat DisgruntledGoat
0コメント