On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 02:01:17 +1200 Volker Kuhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Blimey, how many web developers can you insult with a single sentence, > > spelling mistakes notwithstanding! > > How many web developers can insult users with a single page? > > HTML was designed as simple markup while leaving the exact rendering to > the browser. The number of spacer.gifs everywhere shows that web > developers fail to grasp this concept. Sorry, you're way out of date. Sure some dinosaurs still use these, the rest use css. Try /. for an example ( just been redesigned ), or digg, or a million or so others. > > There is no practical way for controlling fonts on websites (other than > the workarounds already posted). Personally I'm not sorry about it. > There's far too much visual stuff and lack of content already. Reminds > me of architecture somehow. More to do with ego message of the designer, > less with the user. The web is a media-rich environment. Why shouldn't be? You can perfectly legally request a font family ( and override it locally ), so why not extend it... after all, a font definition is far smaller than an image on most websites. > > > There are a few problems with pdfs in this case, like > > expanding/contracting menus, drag/drop, > > > Pdf's do not support a rich multimedia > > environment that web users expect these days. > > As long as it moves or looks sexy everyone's happy. Never mind the > content. That's only a small fraction of it. The best use of the screen area to communicate with the reader is top of the list to most designers - sure you get prima donnas ( and dinosaurs ) - but it's extremely difficult given multiple popular graphical browsers, some of which pay only lip service to the published standards, variable screen sizes ( and now cinemascope as well! ), and so on. css is designed to separate the format from the content, so at least there's a central point to 'control' the look and feel of a website, which helps. A commercial website is an extension of the company, and should be branded as such. If it looks like sh*t, then it's not going to promote the company. If your branding requires the use of a comic font, so should your website. Why shouldn't it? It's a component of the corporate image. > > Agreed re your comments on flash. Add fonts to the list. Why would web > developers be able to handle them more responsibly (if there was choice) > than flash? > > Volker > > -- > Volker Kuhlmann is list0570 with the domain in header > http://volker.dnsalias.net/ Please do not CC list postings to me. The web isn't a paper document. It has the ability to be media rich and dynamic. This requires a completely different approach to the content you publish. It is also the best part of a thousand years newer, so it is still learning. Not even TBL would dream of enforcing the original web standards on todays content, and he invented it... read some of ( one of ) his blog at http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/blog/4 Steve
