Closed jfly closed 12 years ago
No, I don't think so. He asked for smaller images, which has a similar effect. The real point is to be able to fit a round of scrambles on a screen. However, we should think about the best way to produce scrambles so that an entire round's scrambles (or those of two) can easily be displayed on a screen. A radical idea, but what about also generating HTML?
I think we should not make the scramble font larger. I did this with 2x2x2 scrambles once, but it just made them obnoxiously large (and, since the current scrambler is not padded, made it easy to see short scrambles.) Huge text isn't necessarily much better. For puzzles where there is a lot of text, we wouldn't be able to make it much larger, anyhow.
The current scrambler is not padded?
I wasn't suggesting statically increasing the font size, but rather, dynamically increasing it based on how much space is available. We could even do the computation in a way such that all the scrambles on a particular page show up the same size, which this would keep the view consistent. We can also have a max font size, so I don't agree that this will necessarily look obnoxious.
Perhaps. But I think the issue here is not font size, it's being able to fit enough scrambles on a screen. Font size is not necessarily the solution. It be worth doing, but perhaps it's not the best idea here.
For one, if we are using portrait pages, most laptops will necessarily waste about half the screen while displaying one set of scrambles (although this is good for two sets).
As I see it, decreasing the size of the images is equivalent to increasing the size of the font, except one wastes paper.
Yeah, except the printed pages have different scales. I'm not saying you're wrong, just point out that this is not purely about font size.
I think this is what Pedro asked for.