-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 173
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
40em rule considered harmful (was is this spacing intentional?) #4958
Comments
The purpouse of the max-width is to limit the number of characters per line to about 90 (used to be 75, which is the typographic best practice). That's why font-size relative max-width makes most sense. Maybe even a ch css unit directly set to 90 for all elements might make more sense? (not sure if that accounts for monospaced vs normal fonts) |
Worth noting, this is a falesafe - so no text can become longer than 90 chars give or take, at which point it becomes difficult to read. It's the layout's job to create further limiting factors if needed. In this case, I think it's ok to have headings use the available space, as it creates denser documentation (fewer wrappings and lines overall), which if I understand correctly is very valuable to the docs team. |
This appears to be a duplicate of #5200 - @lyubomir-popov can you confirm? |
Thank you for reporting us your feedback! The internal ticket has been created: https://warthogs.atlassian.net/browse/WD-13783.
|
Triage: This is not something we are going to address now. Text max-width should be revisited and defined in new design system guidelines and architecture. |
Notice how the content (the
<p>
) is width constrained (seemingly due to a CSS rule ofmax-width: 40em
) whilst the header and the tab bar are "full width"Originally posted by @sparkiegeek in canonical/maas.io#815 (comment)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: