> What problem do you think it's trying to solve, and how does zooming solve it?
According to sibling subthreads here, a lack of readablity. Since I don't think line length matters much, making text larger is pretty much the only thing left. Zooming is the easiest way to achieve that. It also doesn't alter the layout of the site as much as simply increasing the font-size.
> By the same token, you can always use Ctrl+- then for sites that use a "large font", right?
Of course. Being a power user, I can even set the font-size ))
I'm just pointing out that expecting people to do the latter makes no sense unless they are a power user.
> making text larger is pretty much the only thing left
Wikiwand doesn't "make the text bigger". It leaves the text size alone. I've already mentioned this more than once. cf cr.yp.to, danluu.com.
> I'm just pointing out that expecting people to [set the font-size] makes no sense unless they are a power user.
I don't know what you think I'm saying. I'm not talking about power users. I'm saying that Wikipedia shouldn't be injecting rules for small font sizes in the main content. Everyone can leave the font size alone. Wikipedia cramming thousands of lines of CSS down the tubes, where the incorrect font size is among them, is like people who say "backslash" when dictating a URL—they're going out of their way and getting it wrong.
'cept for you, right? (Or why are we here otherwise? Reminder: someone started complaining about how large the text looks on Wikiwand site.)
> The problem Wikiwand is trying to solve is better solved by browser zoom on large screens
What problem do you think it's trying to solve, and how does zooming solve it?
> If a non-power user wants a site larger they'll just zoom in.
By the same token, you can always use Ctrl+- then for sites that use a "large font", right?