Comment 2 for bug 1659229

I don't like the new wording at all... It doesn't improve upon the status-quo (i.e. normal users won't understand it better) and makes some technical explanations less precise (i.e. technically experienced users will understand it less).

Some important points:
* "physical size" vs. "real-life size" - I honestly don't know what a "real-life" size should be. My display and TV have "real-life" sizes, yet they're pixel based. For every one working with UI design on computers pixels are very reals sizes. My recommendation: Keep "physical size" and explain it better (i.e. things that are meant to appear in a fixed size on a page of paper / are required to have a specific absolute size like a ruler)
* "Set 'viewBox'" vs. "Fit page to new size" - How is the page fitted? It's unexplained and therefore unclear. Tell the whole story: "Scale whole page as a group (without modifying size of any single objects; objects will remain unscaled internally)".
* "Scale elements" vs. "Scale drawing to fit page" - Does this mean the page remains unscaled? Better: "Scale page and all graphic elements individually (all objects will be scaled to the desired size separately)"
* "Ignore" vs. "My drawing is px-sized" - Both do not really explain what happens: "Do not rescale (graphic remains unscaled which might result in a changed physical page size while pixel based dimensions will stay constant)"

The parts I added in parentheses () above are meant as additional information (probably to be included in the message or alternatively as pop-up text) but I think it's necessary to better explain the individual options rather than to explain the background of the change in to much detail. For the user the only important information is "Physical size of one pixel has changed resulting in a different scaling of the image"