Template talk:Big

Size
Can we discuss this before making more changes? Please list your choice of the hour and back it up. --  Gadget850talk 01:02, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Key points to consider in deciding how to do this properly:
 * The HTML Big Element makes the text font size one size bigger (for example, from small to medium, or from large to x-large) up to the browser's maximum font size.
 * The big element is a text formatting control that increases the enclosed text by one size increment, based on the old HTML font sizes 1 through 7.
 * If you insert a  tag over text that is already font size 7, it will not get any larger.
 * Larger or smaller than the parent element's font size, by roughly the ratio used to separate the absolute size keywords above.
 * {xx-small, x-small, small, medium, large, x-large, xx-large}: A set of absolute size keywords based on the user's default font size (which is medium). Similar to presentational HTML's through  where the user's default font size is.
 * Based on these key points
 * "1.2em" is out of the question because it doesn't always make things bigger, and may in fact make them smaller. It also is not nestable.
 * "115%" / "120%" is less desirable due to the fact that it does not limit text size to a size equal to font size 7.
 * "larger" does exactly what  does, it increments the size of the text by one level (eg from "medium" to "large"), is nestable, and stops when the max value of 7 ("xx-large") has been reached. If we are going to have a template that is suppose to use css to replicate exactly what the obsolete tag use to do, then I believe it should do exactly what that tag use to do... — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 13:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Replies

 * We has a fixed size (115%) when we still used . The reason being that any CSS keywords resulted in inconsistent rendering between browser (IE being the biggest pain). 120% serves roughly the same purpose as the original tag; it raises the fontsize by 120% of its parent element. This is in line with other fontsize template like small. Is there a pressing reason we must exactly emulate, including its shortcomings?  14:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)


 * When people use Big expecting the same result as if they used , they should get the same result. I feel that the template being consistent with the tag is more important than the result being consistent across browsers (and everyone using IE should know their results may vary).  The end result is still larger text, and it's what they would expect if they used the tag this is suppose to replace... — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 17:33, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * That is exactly what it is doing now.  18:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * small, medium, large, x-large, xx-large, invalid, invalid, invalid... Nope... Fails to limit size to xx-large like it is suppose to... — &#123;&#123;U&#124;Technical 13&#125;&#125; (e • t • c) 19:47, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Let's try that with font-size:larger...     invalid?      Guess not... but then again,  doesn't exist in HTML5, so there is nothing to emulate.   22:04, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Multiplier
We have 20,000+ used of nested.

I added support to the sandbox for a multiplier x to make it easier to update such uses.

Sizes per HTML5. --  Gadget850talk 11:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Ugh... hardcoded pixels are bad™. You can nest big, and there are also large and resize.  11:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Figured you had seen HTML5. We should probably discuss size equivalents there. --  Gadget850talk 12:07, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I have. All keyword sizes are relative to  (equivilant to ), which is the borwsers default size of 16px (on Windows at least). Hardcoded pixel sizes will not account for non-default browser settings.   12:18, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Changed the sandbox to use percentages, increasing each step by 20%: 120%, 144%, 172%, 207% and 248%. As we discovered at Wikipedia talk:HTML5, IE and Opera increment nested, while Firefox and Opera grow exponentially. The current set of font size templates use rather random sizes, so they are not useful as a replacement.--  Gadget850talk 17:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 19 June 2017
49.228.245.138 (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

PAGE''' ]]) 20:27, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --Ahecht ([[User_talk:Ahecht|'''TALK

CSS
What is the purpose to replace &lt;big> by ?

Why not using  ?

Template-protected edit request on 7 August 2019
156.204.148.231 (talk) 07:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC) "params": { "topic1": { "label": "Topic", "description": "A topic mentioned on this disambiguation page", "type": "string" },       "topic2": { "inherits": "topic1" },       "topic3": { "inherits": "topic1" },   }
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 07:55, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Template:Big, Template:Large, and Template:Larger
See this discussion. – Jonesey95 (talk) 23:26, 7 January 2023 (UTC)