On 2009/03/14 21:55 (GMT+0200) Jukka K. Korpela composed: > But what's the point of suggesting generic font families only?
Allowing a user to actually see his preferred font family used on a web page not of his own making? > Well, maybe > it makes popular browsers use Arial instead of Times New Roman, but if > that's what you really mean, why not say it - and why not suggest something > more sensible instead of Arial? More sensible, like Helvetica? Or something of apparent larger size, like Verdana? Smaller Calibri, which most Macs and older and FOSOS computers don't have? > The problem with Arial is that in the common default font size, it looks too > large to many people. Looks good to many people too. It's my default, on purpose. > The generic font families are really a shot in the dark. Not that much. Most pre-Vista systems at least have either Helvetica or its clone Arial, or a metric equivalent, like Liberation Sans, Nimbus Sans L, or Albany AMT. On recent Linux systems, odds are the default is DejaVu Sans, a close equivalent to Verdana. If an individual visitor's browser isn't set to one of them, or something of slightly larger apparent size than Helvetica/Arial, odds are that's his preference, something worth respecting. > "Sans-serif" can > mean pretty much anything - in particular, the "size impression" varies _a > lot_. As to size, indeed!: http://fm.no-ip.com/auth/Font/fonts-msvista.html -- "The plans of the diligent lead to profit as surely as haste leads to poverty." Proverbs 21:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ ______________________________________________________________________ css-discuss [[email protected]] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
