Hannah wrote:
Quote:
>
Bergamot <bergamot@visi.comwrote:
>
>
>
Quote:
>FYI, this is what happens when you suggest the page use "fantasy" font,
>but the visitor doesn't have your requested fonts installed
>
My (kind of) client wanted a fancy font, that's why I chose fantasy as
fallback
The client isn't always right, you know. Using fantasy for body text is a very poor choice.
Quote:
(`"Comic Sans MS", "Postantiqua", fantasy' as the full list).
>
Any better suggestions, in the restrictions given by my client?
If your client has Comic Sans installed, then leave that as the first choice if you must, but drop the generic fantasy family. If you include no generic family at all, the visitor's default font will be used. That is a far better choice than fantasy.
Your client will just see Comic Sans and will never know about the rest. Don't punish her visitors any more than necessary.
Quote:
I think Comic Sans MS *is* closest to what my client likes.
Well, there's no accounting for taste...
Quote:
Quote:
>As for the overlapping parts, the page is scrolled all the way to the
>right. It does not fit within my normal viewport size.
>
Better now?
Absolutely not. Now keyboard scrolling doesn't work at all. :-(
Quote:
I completely changed the "frames" mechanism, following a
pattern I found on the web, after I found several more flaws in my own
stuff.
The flaws are different now, perhaps worse.
Keeping the fixed position navigation menu and putting the actual content in a too-narrow scrolling div is making the navigation more important than the content. That's backward thinking.
Besides, the stretching it does on the background images is a horrible effect.
--
Berg
