My biggest complaint is the regressions on font size both on macOS and iOS. Some of the copy which was of comfortably readable size is now microscopic (for example, the organization and job title on a contact card in the Contacts app). Similarly, on macOS, when the sidebar icons are set to small, the labels also become terribly tiny.
What happened is that the accessibility setting “reduce transparency” which indeed used to reduce transparency and made glass backgrounds darker, now makes them fully black. So dark icons don’t come out of the background anymore. What we got back is a slider that does not make the glass darker, just more opaque. But notifications are still white on light glass. So it really got worse for me.
My grandfather and uncles have left me a vast pile of Urdu magazines and books, many of which are withering away due to old age. I’m working on digitizing them so I can enjoy them on modern devices. Very much in initial stages.
> Firefox now limits CSS to 75 levels of nested blocks and functions, preventing crashes that extremely deep nesting can cause under some circumstances. More deeply nested rules and values no longer parse.
Very interesting change. I’ve yet to see CSS more than 20 levels deep. Good to put a stop to such insanity.
I’ve found that ch and ex units are heavily influenced by latin characters. They just give weird results with non-latin characters leading to magic numbers. But the concept is really solid: use them if you want the spacing relative to text.
This is a problem whenever someone outside a culture tries to design for that culture. I have just enough knowledge of say, CJK+Arabic to read them, but not enough to know if the font/kerning/justification I'm using is attractive or ugly to natives.
It's often easy to spot Chinese goods because English writing on the stickers or manuals is in that horribly ugly latin serif font with bad kerning, which almost certainly looks fine if you don't read English all day.
rem is related to the ch, though. It's not an awful compromise if a designer insists on tools like Figma. Sometimes just taking their work in rems and just removing the `r`s is enough to meet their designs and also have better relative units.
(The difference between rem and em is "root", ie, only using the top-most font size and sometimes the font-size before things like zoom and other similar adjustments. If a designer complains about the `r`s you removed, sometimes just showing them the difference at multiple zoom levels is convincing enough.)
(The difference between em and ch is em is wider. If a designer is always giving you weird decimals like 0.79em or 1.24em that may be an indicator that they themselves would be happier working and thinking in ch. em is the width of the capital M which is often the widest letter in most latin sections of fonts. ch is the width of the number 0 which is often the most "typical" width in the latin sections of fonts.)
(ETA: Both of which relate to the comment above complaining that both ch/em and others fall apart when dealing with non-latin scripts, because they are established as latin-centric.)
reply