Make the cuttag arrows scalable.

[facetofcathy]

Title:
Make the cuttag arrows scalable.

Area:
Entries

Summary:
This is a very small suggestion about some very small things--the cuttag arrow images. They are small in size on the screen--11-15 pixels a side. Small in file size--around 100 bytes. And small in target--the image link has no padding on it.

They should be bigger and scalable.

Description:
Make the images scalable.

It's easy to make the arrow images scale up with a user's font size. You just need to set a width on the image in ems--something like .7em, which at a 16px font would show the arrow the same size it is now, but would let the image get bigger as the font size went up.

The problem is that the images are so low resolution, even very minor enlargement makes them very blurry. Making the images much higher resolution to begin with means that they start out shrunk down and they have room to grow.

Users of touch screens that zoom on the arrows to make them big enough for a finger to hit will also benefit from a less blurry image.

This increases the file size of the image. I made an 88 pixel square .gif of the right-facing arrow and it went from 91bytes to 573bytes. Something more in the 44px range is likely adequate if file size is a concern--that would give a clean image at up to a 62px font size.

Make the target bigger for everyone.

"Target" refers to the area you have to hit with your cursor or your finger to click a link. Right now it is the size of the image, nothing more.

I use a padding of 0.2em on the image and it gives me an 18px square to hit at default font size, instead of an 11px square. It makes a huge difference. (By the way, the span class .cuttag is inconsistently applied in the code and doesn't appear on the closing collapse arrow.)

Making the image scalable and putting some padding on it would make it a feature more users can enjoy.

Poll #9802 Make the cuttag arrows scalable.

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: All, participants: 73

View Respondents

This suggestion:

View Answers

Should be implemented as-is.
56 (76.7%)

Should be implemented with changes. (please comment)
0 (0.0%)

Shouldn't be implemented.
2 (2.7%)

(I have no opinion)
15 (20.5%)

(Other: please comment)
0 (0.0%)