Actually "he" is not being arrogant he is attempting to informer you no matter what your opinion is why this is being discussed and the majority is in favor in that the print community has already done the research to come up with adequate standards based on several factors not just willingness to read. It also has to do with eye fatigue, aging, corrective lenses, etc.. the list goes on and one really since they have been doing this for several decades.Crizzo wrote:That is not the point. I just want to let the choice to the user. I can read long lines and i do. Some don't. So you think 170 long, so everyone should not have a line longer than 100, why? If i will, i should be able to. If not, i can reduce the width of my browser. But what i'm not able to, speaking as a non developer, increase the width and get my long lines again, if i want them.callumacrae wrote:Not being able to read text properly is not fancy behavior.I'm on t his topic for about 8 years. Tried many things: em width, small, big, columns, big size, good line-height etc.I suggest doing some research on usability and user experience before chipping in on a debate on it: check out this article for starters.
But i'm on the conclusion, that i give the reader of my webpages the choice how long and wide the page is.
So don't be so arrogant if my opinion does not fit to yours.
You your self have struct the nail on the head for one of the necessary changes that needs to happen the increase font-size. The problem is not just the max-width although that is one problem. I am sorry that your opinion does not seem to match but if you give it time and let change happen you might fine that when everything is said in done it might surprise you.
As to the user being able to adjust this. They can but if its all implemented properly then they wouldn't need to and probably shouldn't unless they really no what they are doing.