Re: Resolution indpendence | |
| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] | |
olafBuddenhagen@xxxxxxx wrote: > First of all, we do usually have two information points: Resolution and > display size. From these, I think we can make a pretty good guess at the > viewing distance/angular resolution -- no need for an enormous database. You can make a guess, and you don't need a database. But you do need to allow the user to override your guess. > For one, while I do not agree with Glynn that for today's typical > resolution it's *only* the pixel grid matters, I never said that. That was an attempt at misrepresentation by someone who was arguing that it's *only* the physical size which matters. They appear to have succeeded. For me, with the monitors which I use and with my eyesight, the pixel grid is typically the limiting factor. On my primary monitor, the minimum physical size and the minimum pixel size both dictate the same font (12-pixel adobe-courier, which is actually 7x13). On monitors with lower dpi (which I use quite often), I need to keep the same pixel size (larger physical size) to retain legibility. If I had a monitor with higher dpi (I don't), I would probably need to retain the same physical size (larger pixel size) to retain legibility. For someone with poor eyesight and who only uses good (high-dpi) monitors, it's likely that the pixel grid will never be a factor. For someone with reasonable eyesight and a poor (low-dpi) monitor, the pixel grid may always be the limiting factor. > The bottom line is that finding the effective resolution involves many > parameters, which all have nonlinear effects. Yet the result is a > relatively simple two parameter function on display size and resolution. > Starting with a number of data points found by experiment, it should be > possible to fit a function that pretty well models typical user's > expectations about effective resolution. Any calculation based solely upon physical dimensions and pixel dimensions is going to be a starting point at best. You cannot determine the user's visual acuity and, at least initially, you cannot determine the priority which they attach to text density. If someone is using primarily graphical applications, where the only text is the UI (menu bar, status bar etc), using a larger font isn't going to significantly affect the amount of information they can get on screen (i.e. the size of the application's "canvas"). OTOH, if someone's primary application is a text editor, a 20% larger font will result in 20% fewer lines (and columns) of text on screen. Consequently, they are more likely to care if you choose a font which is any larger than is strictly necessary. -- Glynn Clements <glynn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> _______________________________________________ xorg mailing list xorg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
[X Forum] [Devices] [XFree86] [XFree86 Newbie] [Site Home] [IETF Annouce] [Security] [Fontconfig] [Bugtraq] [Rubini] [Photo] [Yosemite] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Video for Linux] [Linux RAID] [Linux Resources]