Font Size

[bdollahite]

Request:  Standardize the way Accordance describes fonts sizes.  

 

For example in version 13, Preference for Analytic Concordance display uses Very Small, Small, Medium Small, Medium, Medium Large, Large, and very Large.  So does the gear tool (as I would expect — consistency).

 

Yet in Preferences for Text (and Tool) Display — a font's point size is the way in which its sizes is described.  

 

I prefer the point size UI (user interface) and would like to see this become the standard way font sizes are presented/described within Accordance.

 

Justification:  Adjective are subjective — my large is you very large, my medium your ....

                       Point sizes are explicit, and cleaner as what an adjective descriptive size would map to on export.

 

 

[Joel Brown]

We deliberately use descriptors instead of numbers when there is a variance.  For example, Instant Details also uses the adjectives since it shows a variety of sizes, and you are setting all of them.

[bdollahite]

Thanks Joel

 

I don't want to argue — but I do want to understand your statement and ensure you understood my point of view and reason fro it.

 

I don't understand your reply.  You state you deliberately use descriptors instead of numbers when there is a variance.  I am not sure what "a variance" means.  I request was if you can pick a font size, then picking it as a number is precise and understood, while setting a point size by an adjective descriptor is ambiguous as what size is small (e.g., 10, 9 or 8 points).  If a programmer can set an adjective size, why can't those adjectives be mapped to point sizes?  Picking a number point size just seems more consistent with how font sizes are described and set outside of Accordance.

 

My second point is one of consistency with in Accordance.  As I stated above — some part used descriptors (which you stated is deliberate), yet other places in Accordance numbers (point sizes) are used.  I would think consistency of user experience would be of value to Accordance users.  So while I would not like to see the place where point size replace with descriptors (the opposite is what I am requesting), at least doing that would make Accordance internally consistent in how fonts sizes are set/described.

[Joel Brown]

Let me try to use an example.  If you were to be building a house, and I would ask you what size you wanted the windows to be, you would not be able to give a single number.  Some windows would be 36", some would be 12", some would be 40", etc.  However, when designing the house, you could definitely state that you wanted the windows to be 'bigger' in general, or 'smaller' in general, where all of them would be sized appropriately, while maintaining their relative sizes compared to each other.

 

Accordance's font sizes are (sometimes) the same way.  There is not a single font size being used in the area you are describing, but a sequence of font sizes that all keep the same relative size to one another.  So, if we were to say that the size was 12.0 point, that would be wrong.  *Some* of the fonts would be 12.0 points, while others would be bigger or smaller.

 

So, we decided, rather than being imprecise (or misleading) by saying that they are all 12.0 point), and rather than being verbose ("9.0 content/12.0 titles/11.0 hyperlinks" etc), we just use a single, clear adjective that the user can easily adjust.

[bdollahite]

Thanks Joel, you helped me to understand.  I agree, in places where a window's content has items with various point sizes  (like the Analytics items) — my request would cause more issues than it would resolve.   You have been most helpful.