I thought this thread was closed by Russ??
Guys, if you do want to keep fighting a never ending argument, please
take it off the list.
Thanks
Original Message
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Date: Thu, 25 Mar
I've looked at these links earlier and my point was *phew* here we go
AGAIN...
Verdana is POPULAR! Most people have that. Arial is probably more popular,
so that is next in line as a backup. I understand that they are different
fonts, and I also understand that there are fonts that closer resemble
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> www.cabotconsultants.com.au is fine as a web addy I think. If there is
> not 'http://', 'ftp://', or whatever one usually assumes http but you
> don't need to type it.
The small attachment should show the difference. You come here asking
for help. Don't make it harder
Firstly, sorry about this, I know this thread was meant to close
yesterday... I promise this is my LAST post in this thread (^_^; )
www.cabotconsultants.com.au is fine as a web addy I think. If there is
not 'http://', 'ftp://', or whatever one usually assumes http but you
don't need to type it. A
This is my list of cross platform fonts (Mac >< PC). It may not be in
line with most, ...but what to he!! -chuck
Arial
'Arial Black'
'Comic Sans MS'
'Courier New'
Georgia
Helvetica
Hobo
Impact
Stencil
Symbol
'Times New Roman'
'Trebuchet MS'
Verdana
Webdings
=
On T
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've decided to stick with Verdana (>_<)
The world shall have Verdana. Heaven forbid any mere mortal user gets to
see the default he selected.
> If you visit www.cabotconsultants.com.au
It'd be nice if people would provided a URL, something *everyone* could
click on
>> When you make both height and width 76.1% of the default, the result is
>> less than 58% of the original.
>
> But in the end, it seems to me the user gets the same font size as if
> 'body
> {font-size: 100%;}, given that all the other font-sizes are set above 1em
> for regular paragraphs and abo
OTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Felix Miata
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 4:32 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
>
>
> On the contrary. Because authors using Verdana as primary
> size accor
I've decided to stick with Verdana (>_<)
If you visit www.cabotconsultants.com.au you can see that I haven't
miniturised the font, it's a nice readable size, plus I edited the CSS for
a test to show only arial, and the size wasn't a problem.
I can understand that it would be if the CSS told the f
Cb2 Web Design wrote:
> http://cb2web.com/tests/testing.shtml ?
> I have tested it in Opera 7.23, IE6 and Firebird and, IMO, the fonts within
> the div76 (blue box) and div100 (red box) containers look the same at text
> size medium (or 100%) and in fact, for the div76 container, the normal
> p
---
From: "Felix Miata" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 3:20 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
> Cb2 Web Design wrote:
>
> > I tend to agree with such suggestion: applying a percentage in the b
OK. The font size threat has given us all some great information and has
generated interesting discussion, but it has been dragging out a bit.
Unfortunately it has moved into new territory.
This thread is now officially closed!
Russ
> So you're saying we should all just use black default font
So you're saying we should all just use black default font on white pages
then? Not going to happen!
It's a pathetic argument Felix. Really not worth bothering with.
Peter
> On the contrary. Because authors using Verdana as primary
> size according
> to their own taste for the giant font, when p
Peter Firminger wrote:
> > [verdana]
> It won't ever bother the users that hate the font so much they remove it
> from their system. That's their choice.
On the contrary. Because authors using Verdana as primary size according
to their own taste for the giant font, when people without it see t
Hi Darian,
> I'm considering changing the fonts for my website's CSS to
> arial... maybe.
I wouldn't bother. Verdana is perfectly acceptable with the Arial,
Sans-serif backup.
> I still like verdana, I'm so stubborn (>_<) I don't think either of
> these font are really offending to anyone. May
: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 17:16:11 +1100
At this point, in regards to CSS - and the world in general - I feel like
interjecting the old chestnut "you can't please all of the people all of
the time ..."
On 24/03/2004, at 4:31 PM
*phew* ain't that true!!
I'm considering changing the fonts for my website's CSS to arial... maybe.
I still like verdana, I'm so stubborn (>_<) I don't think either of
these font are really offending to anyone. Maybe if I was considering some
crazy artistic font it could annoy some viewers. I du
screens is 'Times
New Roman' ugly sites??
Steven Clark
From: "Mark Stanton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RE: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 16:31:28 +1100
> When the page
At this point, in regards to CSS - and the world in general - I feel like interjecting the old chestnut "you can't please all of the people all of the time ..."
On 24/03/2004, at 4:31 PM, Mark Stanton wrote:
When the page specifies 'verdana, arial, helvetica,
sans-serif', such people almost nev
Mark Stanton wrote:
> > When the page specifies 'verdana, arial, helvetica,
> > sans-serif', such people almost never get to see their preference.
> ...unless they are using user style sheets, then they get to see whatever
> they want...
Theoretically. The problem is the majority of sites use
> When the page specifies 'verdana, arial, helvetica,
> sans-serif', such people almost never get to see their preference.
...unless they are using user style sheets, then they get to see whatever
they want...
Cheers
Mark
--
Mark Stanton
Technical Director
Gruden Pty Ltd
T
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Wow I wasn't aware of this! thanks for the link. Just out of curiosity...
> would you know the percentage of pcs without verdana? I mean, is it on mac
> etc? I like the font so much(>_<)
Any time Verdana is actually set to a size big enough to read, it's
large relativ
Wow I wasn't aware of this! thanks for the link. Just out of curiosity...
would you know the percentage of pcs without verdana? I mean, is it on mac
etc? I like the font so much(>_<)
would it be worth converting to arial? for the sake of i dunno 5%??? and
even if they don;t have verdana, although
t; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 12:15 AM
> Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
>
>
> The x-small and others are refered to as "absolute-size keywords"
> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-size-props
your font size is fine, not too small.
Steven Clark
From: Felix Miata <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 22:20:52 -0500
Cb2 Web Design wrote:
> I tend to agree
friendly. You can set margins, specific printing fonts
> and so forth with this.
>
> http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_mediatypes.asp
>
> I hope this link to w3schools is of help.
>
> Steven Clark
>
>
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&g
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I've tested the webpage on 3 differnet monitor on anything from 800X600 up.
> I've also tested it in Netscape, IE, Opera and FireFox. I noticed the
> Gecko browsers did display the font fairly small.
If you are on windoze and seeing Gecko at default 16px rendering thes
Cb2 Web Design wrote:
> I tend to agree with such suggestion: applying a percentage in the body and
> then work with the remaining sizes in ems.
> I have done that in here:
> http://www.excellentsite.org/
> Do you think font size is to small?
It certainly starts out that way. With 'body {font-si
ROTECTED]>
To: "Web Standards Group" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2004 12:15 AM
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
The x-small and others are refered to as "absolute-size keywords"
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#f
printing fonts
and so forth with this.
http://www.w3schools.com/css/css_mediatypes.asp
I hope this link to w3schools is of help.
Steven Clark
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
Date: Tue, 23 Mar
Thanks for the feed back!
I've tested the webpage on 3 differnet monitor on anything from 800X600 up.
I've also tested it in Netscape, IE, Opera and FireFox. I noticed the
Gecko browsers did display the font fairly small. I chose Verdana as it is
very clean for both print and display. I also inclu
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 10:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
>
> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
> opted
> for this...
>
> p.body {
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I opted
> for this...
> p.body {
>font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
>font-size: x-small;
>line-height: 2;
> }
> I found it's clean and clear.
Is your monitor huge, or y
t. Did you scan them in?
>
>
> Tim Hill
> Computer Associates
> Graphic Artist
> tel: +612 9937 0792
> fax: +612 9937 0546
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTE
Well... I'm new to this and it took me a long time to get that website w3c
xhmtl strict compliant!!! *phew*
I know the CSS leaves a lot to be desired. I'm in the process now of
rewriting it. I'll use a percentage on the body as suggested... and...
then I use percentage on p and h1, h2, etc? OR if
] On
Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 10:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
opted
for this...
p.body {
font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica,
612 9937 0546
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, 24 March 2004 10:39 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [WSG] Font size, and how large is large enough?
On a website I
The x-small and others are refered to as "absolute-size keywords"
http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#font-size-props
However, x-small will vary from browser to browser (sometimes quite
different) as you can see here:
http://www.browsercam.com/public.aspx?proj_id=53764
This may not be an iss
a!! thank you, didn't see this article
> as always when in doubt ask Russ :-)
>
> http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/relative/
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I
>> opted
>> for this...
>>
>> p.body {
>>font-family:
as always when in doubt ask Russ :-)
http://www.maxdesign.com.au/presentation/relative/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I opted
for this...
p.body {
font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: x-small;
color:
On a website I've recently developed (www.cabotconsultants.com.au) I opted
for this...
p.body {
font-family: Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: x-small;
color: #036;
margin-left: 18px;
margin-right: 18px;
line-height: 2;
}
I found it's clean and clear. Just wonder
Russ
So, is there are middle ground between absolute font sizing and no
resizing
at all? I reckon the answer (and happy to be persuaded otherwise), is
relative font sizing.
And I'd take Russ' advise one step further by adding that relative
positioning and sizing for the layout also would be bett
Maxine Sherrin wrote:
> Have just started major site overhaul at www.westciv.com ...
> 1. I want people to be able to read the text on my page, but I also
> want it to look stylish and not bulky
You don't know whether it looks bulky to me until you look at my PC
display. If it looks bulky t
Font size is a hotly debated topic. At one extreme of the font size debate
are accessibility purists who believe that web designers and developers
should not touch default font size at all [1],[2], and at the other extreme
you have the "pixel-perfect" web designers setting absolute pixel sizes on
c
On Tuesday 23 March 2004 15:55, Lorenzo Gabba | Quirk wrote:
> I tend to agree - I'm a fan of the
>
> p, .etc
> {
> font-size: 0.75em;
> line-height 1.5;
> }
>
I forgot to mention that it's probably a good idea (from a usability POV) to
declare:
body {font-size: 100%;} /* user define
On Tuesday 23 March 2004 09:08, Neerav wrote:
> 2. I'd be happy with +- 25%
>
I tend to agree - I'm a fan of the
p, .etc
{
font-size: 0.75em;
line-height 1.5;
}
... combination. It's roomy and easy to read, especially when used in
conjunction with Georgia or Verdana.
While re
1. I always set font sizes as a %, this way people can easily use their
browsers font controls to increase/decrease the size to improve
legibility eg: in Firefox pressing CTRL and + or CTRL and -
2. I'd be happy with +- 25%
3. re: fixing font size. As someone who wears glasses and has designed
Hi all,
Have just started major site overhaul at www.westciv.com which will
boldly try for
1. XHTML (would love strict but will prob. have to settle for
transitional)/CSS
2. WAI-AAA
3. improved architecture
4. uber-sexy stylishness
But this very first afternoon I'm pondering a couple of relate
48 matches
Mail list logo