>>I believe that Windows internals does handle the fonts themselves properly but that it is the "whitespace" where its handling fails. Simplistically, I would say that Windows fails to scale the whitespace as it does with the fonts.
>>
>>I feel strongly about this for a simple reason: I get many Word documents with tables in them and in many cases those tables format POORLY on my "Large Fonts" systems yet look perfectly fine on my "Normal Fonts" displays. Invariably there is word-wrap happening in the "Large Fonts" display, causing the cells to be larger and look lousy.
>>I have the same kind of thing on both home-grown and external web pages. In virtually ALL cases, the fonts in question are standard and scalable.
>>
>>Have I changed your mind?
>
>So you are saying that Windows should take care that my buttons resize appropiately if a particular user prefers, or needs, large fonts so I do not have to make the buttos extra wide to accomodete any font growth? That'll be nice. But I'm not sure I should expect that as a given.

I guess that could be included. My main concern, because it is where it hits me all the time, is "whitespace" (and borders I suppose, visible or not).
But the fact of the matter is that if "Large Fonts" (and choice of proportion) is to be offered as an option, then it should handle it CLEANLY. The current handling is decidedly unclean.
Also, as it now is, a person can spend lots of time fighting a formatting problem that is not of their own making in the first place. Usually it is those of us who have experienced this problem that know where it lies. Others look everywhere but the right place.