Re: [WSG] website fonts
I have been following this thread with interest. Some fonts are thicker than others. You have character spaceing. For example, Arial Narrow takes up less room than Arial and Arial black. I have come across some low vision individuals that only rquire thicker fonts and a little more spacing between the characters than normal.. Then their ar browser pixel differences. as far as I remember Internet Explorer defaults to a 12 point font and Firefox defaults to a 16 point font. Most people of all sight levels perfer a 14 to 16 pooinnt font. I am still trying how to get browsers default to a 16 point font and look the same in all browsers. Angus MacKinnon Keep On Trucking! *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
RE: [WSG] website fonts
Angus MacKinnon related: Internet Explorer defaults to a 12 point font and Firefox defaults to a 16 point font. Of course, fonts are adjustable in the browser (with some exceptions for hard coded fonts) so a user's preferences may be an override in many cases. -- I made magic once. Now, the sofa is gone. http://blog.dwacon.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
At 6/22/2009 08:49 PM, Felix Miata wrote: To put what you wrote another way, with a font family list such as your example, the visitor is at the designer's mercy to see only the designer's choice of fonts, instead of the visitor's, even if the visitor has spent big money on high quality but uncommon fonts and chosen as default one of them. To actually see his choice, the visitor will have to set is browser to completely ignore the designer's font choices throughout all documents. Like Mark, I say let the visitor's choice be the choice applied to most content, with the designer specifying otherwise only to highlight or provide character, as in headings, emphasis, or menuing. On body at least, it should be enough to specify either serif or sans-serif (partial deference to visitor), or nothing at all (total deference to visitor). If the visitor wants Comic Sans, let him have it. It's his puter, not yours. Oh, it doesn't stop with fonts! Some website producers are arrogant enough to force text and images on the visitor instead of allowing them to enjoy the default text and images they have written for their own browser. It's shocking; simply shocking. If people actually wanted to read the text, see the images, and enjoy the graphic and typographic design of other people (give me a break!), they would have connected these computers into a world-wide network and permitted us to browse around looking at one another's... hey... wait a minute... hmm, let me rethink this one. Regards, Paul __ Paul Novitski Juniper Webcraft Ltd. http://juniperwebcraft.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
At 6/22/2009 08:49 PM, Felix Miata wrote: To put what you wrote another way, with a font family list such as your example, the visitor is at the designer's mercy to see only the designer's choice of fonts, instead of the visitor's, even if the visitor has spent big money on high quality but uncommon fonts and chosen as default one of them. To actually see his choice, the visitor will have to set is browser to completely ignore the designer's font choices throughout all documents. Like Mark, I say let the visitor's choice be the choice applied to most content, with the designer specifying otherwise only to highlight or provide character, as in headings, emphasis, or menuing. On body at least, it should be enough to specify either serif or sans-serif (partial deference to visitor), or nothing at all (total deference to visitor). If the visitor wants Comic Sans, let him have it. It's his puter, not yours. I submit that installing a font on one's computer establishes a concrete desire to view text styled in that font to be displayed in that font. Conversely, if we don't wish to see text in a particular font, we can simply remove it or choose not to install it in the first place. We're still at the mercy of PDFs and word processing documents with embedded fonts and Flash movies and docs containing text-as-image, but plain text HTML cannot force fonts on us that we do not choose to see. The user has complete control over their own computer in this regard and cannot be forced or coerced by a document designer. I put it to you that all of the text on a page provides character to the page, not just headlines menus. It is the relationship between different fonts on a page that gives it deeper character. Sans-serif heads are not the same when paired with either serif or sans-serif body text. Please explain the boundary you perceive between body text, which you feel should not be styled by the page designer, and headlines, emphasis, and menuing which you think are OK for a designer to design. Why should the page designer not influence the former and why should the font-sensitive end-user relinquish control over the latter? Further, why should we not influence letter forms but have our merry way with foreground background colors, borders, images, surrounding margins padding, line height, and other stylistic memes that can affect both readability and the reader's aesthetic context just as much as or more than font choice? I suggest we go ahead and suggest font-families but do it intelligently and compassionately, choosing fonts for a particular purpose for their grace and readability and compatibility with column-width and all the rest of the page design. Regards, Paul __ Paul Novitski Juniper Webcraft Ltd. http://juniperwebcraft.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
Paul Novitski wrote: I submit that installing a font on one's computer establishes a concrete desire to view text styled in that font to be displayed in that font. More usually, it establishes that the system administrator for that computer installed a piece of software that came with the font. (Which is not to say that style sheets shouldn't suggest fonts, just that that isn't a good argument). -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
Oh, it doesn't stop with fonts! Some website producers are arrogant enough to force text and images on the visitor instead of allowing them to enjoy the default text and images they have written for their own browser. It's shocking; simply shocking. If people actually wanted to read the text, see the images, and enjoy the graphic and typographic design of other people (give me a break!), they would have connected these computers into a world-wide network and permitted us to browse around looking at one another's... hey... wait a minute... hmm, let me rethink this one. Paul, thanks for this one, made my day! Regards, Rimantas -- http://rimantas.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
To put what you wrote another way, with a font family list such as your example, the visitor is at the designer's mercy to see only the designer's choice of fonts, Yes, that's the point of typography and meeting the requirements of a client specification. Provided it's readable I don't see an issue and it can always be overridden. instead of the visitor's, even if the visitor has spent big money on high quality but uncommon fonts and chosen as default one of them. To actually see his choice, the visitor will have to set is browser to completely ignore the designer's font choices throughout all documents. Again, that's their choice. If they want to see their choice and know that they can do that, then they know how to do it, that's their requirement. The file they are viewing is in their cache, they can choose to do whatever they want with it. Like Mark, I say let the visitor's choice be the choice applied to most content, with the designer specifying otherwise only to highlight or provide character, as in headings, emphasis, or menuing. On body at least, it should be enough to specify either serif or sans-serif (partial deference to visitor), or nothing at all (total deference to visitor). If the visitor wants Comic Sans, let him have it. It's his puter, not yours. or hers ;) but yeah if they want to uncheck Allow pages to choose their own fonts then they can go right ahead as you suggest. What I'm suggesting is developing to the 50th percentile and making the design work for the majority of the audience. I'd suggest the outliers would be those who require different fonts for low vision requirements (a valid requirement), are die-hard fontists who like to control things (their choice, they can do the work to change the font) or have a love affair with viewing everything in SomeCrazyFont (and try to explain that one to a designer who sees their typographic design looking like crap). Cheers J *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
RE: [WSG] website fonts
Paul Novitski declared: plain text HTML cannot force fonts on us that we do not choose to see. Hmm... wonder if that explains why WEFT and BITS never quite caught on... ;~) -- The generation that took acid to escape reality is now taking antacid to deal with reality http://blog.dwacon.com *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
matt andrews wrote: 2009/6/22 Mark Harris w...@tracs.co.nz The biggest cost I have seen in web design since 1996, when I started, is the perceived need to make the web like the printed page. That, and the desire to make it pixel-identical in multiple browsers. Let the control go to the user, focus on getting information out there. You can't control everything, just make it make sense. Absolutely. This is probably old hat (where did *that* phrase come from?) to most on this list, but if you haven't come across it before, A Dao of Web Design, a short article by John Allsopp (of Westciv and Web Directions fame) is a must-read: http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dao/ Yeah, John said it well. To me, that is the fundamental basis of web standards. ~mark *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
At 6/22/2009 12:24 AM, matt andrews wrote:
2009/6/22 Mark Harris w...@tracs.co.nz
The biggest cost I have seen in web design since 1996, when I
started, is the perceived need to make the web like the printed
page. That, and the desire to make it pixel-identical in multiple browsers.
Let the control go to the user, focus on getting information out
there. You can't control everything, just make it make sense.
Absolutely. This is probably old hat (where did *that* phrase come
from?) to most on this list, but if you haven't come across it before,
A Dao of Web Design, a short article by John Allsopp (of Westciv
and Web Directions fame) is a must-read:
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/dao/
With respect, a few points:
- Allsop's article (which, although written in 2000 and out-dated in
some of its specific references to browser development, is completely
relevant today) primarily advises us not to try to control font-size.
With regard to font-family he writes, With CSS, you can suggest a
number of fonts, and cover as many bases as possible. But don't rely
on a font being available regardless of how common it is. So his
philosophy DOES permit font-family suggestions and advises merely
against RELYING on any particular font being available. To me this is
a far cry from avoiding font-family suggestions in the stylesheet.
- If we don't rely on the presence of particular font-families and
let go of the desire to make the web pixel-identical in multiple
browsers, then the philosophical problem goes away, does it not?
- Even if we suggest fonts in the stylesheet, they're just
suggestions. I don't consider this to be controlling the user
agent. A suggested font will display if it's on the user's computer
and otherwise default to something that is. The user has ultimate
control in installing fonts of choice and overriding all stylesheets
(including the default stylesheet the comes packaged with the
browser) with their own.
- CSS font-family suggestions are a perfect case of both graceful
degradation and progressive enhancement. The browser ensures that the
text will render if there is at least one font installed on the
client computer, then the stylesheet can suggest a series of families
that more closely approach the designer's ideal. It's a system
guaranteed not to break on even the most rudimentary system, and will
look better and better the more of the desired software (fonts) are installed.
- I submit that suggesting serif and sans-serif in the stylesheet is
exactly as controlling (that is, NOT) as suggesting Georgia or Lucida
Sans. It is 'controlling' in the sense that it's suggesting to the
user agent whether to use a serif font or not, but with no control
whatsoever in determining whether a corresponding font resides on the
user's computer. If I install even one serif font on my computer,
your CSS rule of 'font-family: serif' will invoke that font unless I
override it. If I install only sans-serif fonts on my computer, your
CSS rule will ultimately be ignored and I'll see your serif text in
my Helvetica or Univers.
- There is no such thing as a web page without styling. Every browser
comes with its own default stylesheets which will determine things
like font-size, margins, and padding if not overridden by the
author's or the user's own stylesheets. So we're not really living in
a pure universe in which it's possible not to style. If you don't use
a stylesheet at all, you're just asking the browser to apply its own,
so by refusing to control you're not helping to create a situation of
no control, you're simply passing the buck. As a Buddhist you can
refuse to kill animals but as long as you're alive you can't avoid
killing vegetables and microorganisms and you can't prevent the lion
from taking down the antelope nor the spider the fly. Styling
Happens. Get used to it.
- Finally, if your relinquishing of control extends to not even
suggesting font-families, what do you use stylesheets for? Unlike
font-family suggestions, stipulations of color, margins, padding, and
other properties really are commands and will be carried out in most
browsers. {margin-left: 10px;} doesn't say to the browser if you
feel like it, it says just do it. If you do use stylesheets at
all, it strikes me as odd that you would take exception to named
font-families, the one aspect of CSS that is the least controlling of all.
Curiously,
Paul
__
Paul Novitski
Juniper Webcraft Ltd.
http://juniperwebcraft.com
***
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org
***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 04:00:27 pm Mark Harris wrote: Henry Mencia wrote: So you just have serif or sans serif in the font-family? Pretty much, unless a client specifies otherwise (and I'll try to talk them around). The biggest cost I have seen in web design since 1996, when I started, is the perceived need to make the web like the printed page. That, and the desire to make it pixel-identical in multiple browsers. Amen to that, in fact I'd suffix the pixel identical thing with and Internet Explorer. It (IE) is probably the costliest burden in web design and development over the last 5 years at least. Fonts : Nothing to stop anyone from specifying a font list and the generic family at the end of the list. That way you can aim for the font you like best, then the font which most people have (they may be the same) and then less common fonts you still want to display, then the family. e.g I did a site primarily for linux users and specified the font as: DejuVu Sans Condensed, FreeSans, Helvetica, Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans- serif; The first two are quite common on Linux (Liberation is also a good, open source, Verdana like font), Helvetica is a common Mac font, the last three pick up 99.% (tm) of the slack and sans-serif picks up those browsers without any of them installed. Once you get to sans-serif, you are at the mercy of how the user or org has configured the browser for sans-serif display. Some may set it to Times Roman, some to Comic Sans. It'd be nice to try and avoid that ;) Cool site for further reading : http://www.sansseriftype.com/ Cheers James *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
On 2009/06/22 12:58 (GMT+1000) James Ellis composed: Fonts : Nothing to stop anyone from specifying a font list and the generic family at the end of the list. That way you can aim for the font you like best, then the font which most people have (they may be the same) and then less common fonts you still want to display, then the family. e.g I did a site primarily for linux users and specified the font as: DejuVu Sans Condensed, FreeSans, Helvetica, Tahoma, Verdana, Arial, sans- serif; The first two are quite common on Linux (Liberation is also a good, open source, Verdana like font), Helvetica is a common Mac font, the last three pick up 99.% (tm) of the slack and sans-serif picks up those browsers without any of them installed. Once you get to sans-serif, you are at the mercy of how the user or org has configured the browser for sans-serif display. Some may set it to Times Roman, some to Comic Sans. It'd be nice to try and avoid that ;) To put what you wrote another way, with a font family list such as your example, the visitor is at the designer's mercy to see only the designer's choice of fonts, instead of the visitor's, even if the visitor has spent big money on high quality but uncommon fonts and chosen as default one of them. To actually see his choice, the visitor will have to set is browser to completely ignore the designer's font choices throughout all documents. Like Mark, I say let the visitor's choice be the choice applied to most content, with the designer specifying otherwise only to highlight or provide character, as in headings, emphasis, or menuing. On body at least, it should be enough to specify either serif or sans-serif (partial deference to visitor), or nothing at all (total deference to visitor). If the visitor wants Comic Sans, let him have it. It's his puter, not yours. -- Cast but a glance at riches, and they are gone, for they will surely sprout wings and fly off to the sky like an eagle.Proverbs 23:5 NIV Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 Felix Miata *** http://fm.no-ip.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
Felix Miata wrote: On 2009/06/22 12:58 (GMT+1000) James Ellis composed: To put what you wrote another way, with a font family list such as your example, the visitor is at the designer's mercy to see only the designer's choice of fonts, instead of the visitor's, even if the visitor has spent big money on high quality but uncommon fonts and chosen as default one of them. I wish it was possible for users of all languages to set their preferred font for their language in all browsers. IT IS NOT possible. Doesn't matter which browser you use there are writing scripts for which a user can not set or specify a default font through the browsers user interface. The best you can do is write a stylesheet to override a sites CSS rules. But not all users are able to write their own stylesheets. Andrew -- Andrew Cunningham Senior Manager, Research and Development Vicnet State Library of Victoria 328 Swanston Street Melbourne VIC 3000 Ph: +61-3-8664-7430 Fax: +61-3-9639-2175 Email: andr...@vicnet.net.au Alt email: lang.supp...@gmail.com http://home.vicnet.net.au/~andrewc/ http://www.openroad.net.au http://www.vicnet.net.au http://www.slv.vic.gov.au *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***begin:vcard fn:Andrew Cunningham n:Cunningham;Andrew org:State Library of Victoria;Vicnet adr:;;328 Swanston Street;Melbourne;VIC;3000;Australia email;internet:andr...@vicnet.net.au title:Senior Manager, Research and Development tel;work:+61-3-8664-7430 tel;fax:+61-3-9639-2175 tel;cell:0421-450-816 note;quoted-printable:Projects:=0D=0A= http://www.openroad.net.au/=0D=0A= http://www.mylanguage.gov.au/ x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:http://www.vicnet.net.au/ version:2.1 end:vcard
[WSG] website fonts
hi. just looked at my fonts. need the following fonts: arial, helvitica, sans-serif and verdana. do not have these fonts for windows vista. think that was the problem, why not saying the name. can you help? where do i get these free fonts from? cheers Marvin. E-Mail: startrekc...@gmail.com Msn: startrekc...@msn.com Skype: startrekcafe Visit my Jaws Australia Group at http://groups.yahoo.com/groups/JawsOz/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
On 22/06/2009, at 3:58 PM, Marvin Hunkin wrote: hi. just looked at my fonts. need the following fonts: arial, helvitica, sans-serif and verdana. do not have these fonts for windows vista. think that was the problem, why not saying the name. can you help? Hi Marvin - I'm going to assume that you are running Windows. If this is the case then it is *highly* unlikely that you don't have at least arial from that list. The other thing to bear in mind is that 'sans- serif' is not a font but is a style or family of fonts that share a particular look (they don't have 'serifs' which are little flicks at the end of letter forms). I haven't seen your actual code but if your HTML is correctly pointing to a CSS file and your CSS is using a valid font declaration then it should work. If it doesn't then there may be something up with your operating system thinking that fonts are in a different place to where they really are or maybe something up with your Jaws setup. When you specify fonts with CSS the usual pattern is to list your fonts in the order that you prefer. Each one is a fallback position if the prior one doesn't exist on the system. Normally the last one in the list is 'sans-serif' (or 'serif' etc.). This is essentially saying that if you don't have *any* of the listed fonts on the system then use whatever is the default 'sans-serif' font. I hope that helps. Tim *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
Adding to what Tim said, It's possible that you're experiencing problems with Helvetica just because of a typo (you had written Helvitica). Also, it does not come with Windows Vista or Microsoft Office. Hope this helps! On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 2:25 PM, Tim Snadden li...@snadden.com wrote: On 22/06/2009, at 3:58 PM, Marvin Hunkin wrote: hi. just looked at my fonts. need the following fonts: arial, helvitica, sans-serif and verdana. do not have these fonts for windows vista. think that was the problem, why not saying the name. can you help? Hi Marvin - I'm going to assume that you are running Windows. If this is the case then it is *highly* unlikely that you don't have at least arial from that list. The other thing to bear in mind is that 'sans-serif' is not a font but is a style or family of fonts that share a particular look (they don't have 'serifs' which are little flicks at the end of letter forms). I haven't seen your actual code but if your HTML is correctly pointing to a CSS file and your CSS is using a valid font declaration then it should work. If it doesn't then there may be something up with your operating system thinking that fonts are in a different place to where they really are or maybe something up with your Jaws setup. When you specify fonts with CSS the usual pattern is to list your fonts in the order that you prefer. Each one is a fallback position if the prior one doesn't exist on the system. Normally the last one in the list is 'sans-serif' (or 'serif' etc.). This is essentially saying that if you don't have *any* of the listed fonts on the system then use whatever is the default 'sans-serif' font. I hope that helps. Tim *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** -- Josh Street http://josh.st/ +61 (0) 425 808 469 *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
Joshua Street wrote: Adding to what Tim said, It's possible that you're experiencing problems with Helvetica just because of a typo (you had written Helvitica). Also, it does not come with Windows Vista or Microsoft Office. However, If your user has it installed and doesn't have Arial installed (unlikely, even on a Mac), then text styled with this will appear in Helvetica font. The reason these towo are often associated is that they are visually similar and readily available. If neither are available, the browser will display the text in whatever sans serif font first appears listed on the client system. My personal feeling is that trying to specify fonts beyond serif and sans serif is such a crapshoot that I never bother. ~mark *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
Re: [WSG] website fonts
Mark, So you just have serif or sans serif in the font-family? On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 3:23 PM, Mark Harris w...@tracs.co.nz wrote: Joshua Street wrote: Adding to what Tim said, It's possible that you're experiencing problems with Helvetica just because of a typo (you had written Helvitica). Also, it does not come with Windows Vista or Microsoft Office. However, If your user has it installed and doesn't have Arial installed (unlikely, even on a Mac), then text styled with this will appear in Helvetica font. The reason these towo are often associated is that they are visually similar and readily available. If neither are available, the browser will display the text in whatever sans serif font first appears listed on the client system. My personal feeling is that trying to specify fonts beyond serif and sans serif is such a crapshoot that I never bother. ~mark *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org *** -- Henry Mencia Digital Designer ++ Mob: 0422217709 Web: www.henrymencia.com Email: stu...@henrymencia.com ++ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: memberh...@webstandardsgroup.org ***
