On 2011/03/06 18:31 (GMT+0900) Philippe Wittenbergh composed:
http://dev.l-c-n.com/_b/dejavu-12px.png
(not that I would recommend it for body text, but it does display fine)
Again I'm puzzled. How does one validate a font face?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/dejavu/files/dejavu/2.33/dejavu
On Mar 6, 2011, at 1:35 AM, Felix Miata wrote:
>> Your test case has bad fall back. I don't have DejaVu (*) installed
>
> What makes it "bad"? Did note 1 escape your understanding?
Note 1 is buried several screens deep. My bad for not having the time for the
need to scroll down that far to fi
I need to research what other characters/symbols are available.
http://www.alanwood.net/unicode/
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss
On 3/5/2011 10:35 AM, css-d-requ...@lists.css-discuss.org wrote:
> From: "Jukka K. Korpela" To: "css discuss"
> Subject: Re: [css-d] Trying to make text
> lighter than 100 Message-ID: <666BFB384B304003AF58CE70FC5C2133@JukanPC>
> Content-Type: text/pla
On 2011/03/05 21:30 (GMT+0900) Philippe Wittenbergh composed:
Felix Miata wrote:
http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Font/fonts-weightier.html should show at least
some readers that weights lighter than 400 do exist in at least a couple
of commonly available families, one of which is free and available
Some articles that deal with font-weight. I couldn't find any newer ones.
http://clagnut.com/blog/2228/
http://destination-code.blogspot.com/2009/01/font-weight-number-keywords-100-900.html
>From the Clagnut article, this remark puts things in perspective:
"Frankly it’s really depressing that thi
On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> This thread got me to investigating a little.
> http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Font/fonts-weightier.html should show at least some
> readers that weights lighter than 400 do exist in at least a couple of
> commonly available families, one of which is
On Mar 5, 2011, at 7:44 PM, Felix Miata wrote:
> http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Font/fonts-weightier.html should show at least some
> readers that weights lighter than 400 do exist in at least a couple of
> commonly available families, one of which is free and available to all, and
> installed by d
On 2011/03/05 09:33 (GMT+0200) Jukka K. Korpela composed:
...it is very difficult to get a font
weight smaller than 400 (normal), such as 100... you
won't find light versions of commonly used fonts.
This thread got me to investigating a little.
http://fm.no-ip.com/Auth/Font/fonts-weightier.ht
Keith Purtell wrote:
I'm using a carat character instead of an image of an arrow to point
upwards.
I suppose you mean the circumflex "^" (sometimes called the caret). I wonder
why you don't use an upwards arrow character instead. If you don't know how
to enter it in your editing environment,
> http://www.keithpurtell.com/kthings/gifts-of-song.htm#player
>
> and here's the CSS so far
>
> div.up {
> font-size:10em;
> font-weight:100 !important;
> vertical-align:-.3em;
> }
>
>
All of the web-safe fonts are available only in two weights (afaik):
normal (400
I'm using a carat character instead of an image of an arrow to point
upwards. I was able to use vertical-align to bring it closer to the text
it accompanies, but for some reason I've lost the ability to make the
carat character larger. Here's a link
http://www.keithpurtell.com/kthings/gifts-of
12 matches
Mail list logo
