I am a bit curious about this.
The graphic design people I work with say it is their preferred font for
web pages. The reason being that it is "kinder" to the eye both in terms
of shape and size.
The HTML "hardcore elititst" profess that it is a useless font because
it is too big compared to other fonts.
Personally I do not care one way or the other, but I generally trust
graphic designers more than programmers and rules lawyers when it comes
to pure design.
It seems to me that the only argument against using Verdana is that a
large number of browsers do not support it and therefore it causes their
pages to render with a very small font.
Can anyone honestly say they do not have the Verdana font installed?
Jul 21 '05
300  18490 
In article <Pi************ *************** ****@ppepc56.ph .gla.ac.uk>, fl*****@ph.gla. ac.uk enlightened us with... On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, kaeli wrote:
Or override the font size *if* they require it.
They can't (at least in MSIE, still the most used browser out there).
Overriding fixed font sizing is in the accessibility menu.
But a simple view -> text size -> larger doesn't work unless you set the
browser to ignore font sizes in ALL pages (I just tested this with MSIE 6).
Which, IMNSHO, is way less than desirable. I should not have to change my
browser options that apply to all sites because one site has an inconsiderate
designer. Especially since I like to have several windows open at once.
--
--
~kaeli~
If that phone was up your a$$, maybe you could drive a
little better! http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
"kaeli" <ti******@NOSPA M.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@nntp.lucent.c om... In article <11************ @corp.supernews .com>, anonymous@_.com
enlightened us with...
When all the popular kids did drugs (got drunk, got laid, whatever) in
school, did you do it, too?
There are a lot of valid reasons to do things.
"Because other people do it" isn't one of them.
I infer from your comment that you disagree but you didn't specify
exactly how.
I don't necessarily disagree with your statement that a lot of sites do
certain things. I disagree only with the notion that just because they do
things, you should do them or it is acceptable to do them. Whatever that
"them" might be.
If all the "popular" sites started using Flash navigation, that wouldn't
make it okay in general for any one site to use Flash navigation. You have to
individually look at what a site is meant to do, who it is geared for, and
so on. Same goes for javascript. A lot of sites use javascript, but if they
use it to do base functionality (that is, if you disable script, their site
breaks), there are serious cons to that. Whether those cons are enough to
change the design to not rely on script is highly application dependent.
That goes for anything, be it script, flash, applets, or hard-coded fonts. If
you get a lot of visually impaired visitors, they'll get pretty pissed about
hard-coded fonts. If you don't, I bet no one will even notice.
My 2 cents.
I'm not as purist as most people in this NG, but I don't see a reason to
use something simply because it *can* be used. And I am highly into doing the
most you can do to ensure your stuff doesn't kill people's browsers, even
if the browsers are old. May not WORK in them, but it shouldn't crash them,
either. If I can make a site do all I want it to do (or, more importantly,
all my client wants it to do) AND validate AND work in the most browsers,
I do that.
My point is this: If fluid design and propotional fonts are superior then
that would be the preominate design method at popular sites (or all sites?),
but it's not is it? IMO if there were sufficient evidence that the use of
fixed font sizes and non-fluid site design were hurting their sites then
designers of popular sites may well abandon those methods. If that happens I
will too.
Please don't ridicule me again by saying: "When all the popular kids did
drugs (got drunk, got laid, whatever) in school, did you do it, too? There
are a lot of valid reasons to do things. "Because other people do it" isn't
one of them."
Signed,
me
"kaeli" <ti******@NOSPA M.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@nntp.lucent.c om... In article <Pi************ *************** ****@ppepc56.ph .gla.ac.uk>,
fl*****@ph.gla. ac.uk enlightened us with... On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, kaeli wrote:
> Or override the font size *if* they require it.
They can't (at least in MSIE, still the most used browser out there).
Overriding fixed font sizing is in the accessibility menu.
But a simple view -> text size -> larger doesn't work unless you set the
browser to ignore font sizes in ALL pages (I just tested this with MSIE
6). Which, IMNSHO, is way less than desirable. I should not have to change my
browser options that apply to all sites because one site has an
inconsiderate designer. Especially since I like to have several windows open at once.
Each to his own, it's not a problem for me.
Signed,
me
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, kaeli wrote: fl*****@ph.gla. ac.uk enlightened us with...
Overriding fixed font sizing is in the accessibility menu.
But a simple view -> text size -> larger doesn't work unless you set the
browser to ignore font sizes in ALL pages
Correct. You'd have to turn it on and off.
Which, IMNSHO, is way less than desirable.
No arguments there.
That's where third-party addons help.
Google suggests http://simon.incutio.com/archive/200...izeBookmarklet
In article <11************ *@corp.supernew s.com>, anonymous@_.com enlightened
us with...
Or override the font size *if* they require it.
They can't (at least in MSIE, still the most used browser out there).
That's the problem with fixed font sizes. If they could just change it, it
wouldn't be an issue.
I can do it in IE: Tools, Options, Accesibility, Ignore font sizes.
That overrides ALL fonts on ALL pages while set.
Rather irritating to have to change that for one site, especially if you
have multiple windows spawning and such.
I checked - it carries over into a new window.
All they can do is use their own style sheet altogether, which would
totally break those types of layouts to the point of unusability.
Please give example URL of a popular site broken to the point of being
unusable by overriding font size.
In IE, I set it to ignore fonts and set the font at largest.
If this had form fields in it, they'd be unusable.
http://glish.com/css/7.asp
The side form is illegible.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/
This one is totally FUBAR for the navigation.
http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/
Amazon's top nav bar is completely illegible.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/su...615696-5763219
Google news cuts off the left bar.
http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us
Google Group threads are completely and utterly illegible. Text overwrites
itself. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...ce01ed7f20a36e
Want more?
I could find more.
--
--
~kaeli~
Found God? If nobody claims Him in 30 days, He's yours to
keep. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
In article <11************ *@corp.supernew s.com>, anonymous@_.com enlightened
us with...
My point is this: If fluid design and propotional fonts are superior then
that would be the preominate design method at popular sites (or all sites?),
but it's not is it?
That's not really what you said in the beginning, now is it? You said it
later to clarify what you meant. And I don't disagree with you overmuch when
you put it this way.
The part I took exception to was this, and only this. The OP I replied to,
which said:
"It seems to me that many of
the most popular sites use fixed font sizes, usually in pixels, whatever
font they please and non-fluid layouts. With few exceptions the only people
I see not doing this are militant IE haters and fundamentalist designers
whose posts I read in NG's. As proof I offer www.weather.com. I don't say
this is a great site but everybody needs to know what the weather will be
like sometime."
Summarized: 'They do it, so why shouldn't I?'
And that's never a good justification. Ever. The "because other people do
it" defense is not worthy of a mature adult. So I'm glad you clarified your
thoughts.
If you want to say that, for example, 5% of your visitors would have problems
and 95% would not, and you're not wasting time on 5% of people, that's
another thing entirely. And quite valid, especially if you're talking paying
people money to putz with a design that is only broken for 1-5% of users.
Please don't ridicule me again by saying: "When all the popular kids did
drugs (got drunk, got laid, whatever) in school, did you do it, too? There
are a lot of valid reasons to do things. "Because other people do it" isn't
one of them."
Don't post ridiculous things and you won't get ridiculed. Easy, isn't it?
The notion that just because other people do things makes those things
acceptable (without providing any reasoning whatsoever) IS ridiculous. There
is a difference between agreeing on a business model's effectiveness and
simply copying one because it's "popular".
--
--
~kaeli~
Bakers trade bread recipes on a knead-to-know basis. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
"kaeli" <ti******@NOSPA M.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@nntp.lucent.c om... In article <11************ *@corp.supernew s.com>, anonymous@_.com
enlightened us with... >
> Or override the font size *if* they require it.
They can't (at least in MSIE, still the most used browser out there).
That's the problem with fixed font sizes. If they could just change
it, it wouldn't be an issue.
I can do it in IE: Tools, Options, Accesibility, Ignore font sizes.
That overrides ALL fonts on ALL pages while set.
Rather irritating to have to change that for one site, especially if you
have multiple windows spawning and such.
I checked - it carries over into a new window.
All they can do is use their own style sheet altogether, which would
totally break those types of layouts to the point of unusability.
Please give example URL of a popular site broken to the point of being
unusable by overriding font size.
In IE, I set it to ignore fonts and set the font at largest.
It is your option to do so.
If this had form fields in it, they'd be unusable.
http://glish.com/css/7.asp
If pigs had wings they could fly.
The side form is illegible.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/
Looks OK to me with font sizes ignored via accessibility.
This one is totally FUBAR for the navigation.
http://reviews-zdnet.com.com/
By FUBAR I suppose you mean it isn't as pretty, but it still works doesn't
it? Interesting a site as popular as ZDNet uses fixed font sizes, they must
not be too worried about it hurting their popularity.
Amazon's top nav bar is completely illegible.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/su...615696-5763219
Not if you adjust the font size to smaller of smallest.
Google news cuts off the left bar.
http://news.google.com/nwshp?hl=en&gl=us
Not if you adjust the font size to smaller of smallest.
Google Group threads are completely and utterly illegible. Text overwrites
itself. http://groups-beta.google.com/group/...ce01ed7f20a36e
Not if you adjust the font size to smaller of smallest.
Want more?
I could find more.
The sites still work for me so I cannot agree with your assertion that they
are unusable. What you have proven is that some of the most popular sites on
the web use fixed font sizes.
Signed,
me
In article <11************ *@corp.supernew s.com>, anonymous@_.com enlightened
us with... "kaeli" <ti******@NOSPA M.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@nntp.lucent.c om... In article <Pi************ *************** ****@ppepc56.ph .gla.ac.uk>,
fl*****@ph.gla. ac.uk enlightened us with... On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, kaeli wrote:
> > Or override the font size *if* they require it.
>
> They can't (at least in MSIE, still the most used browser out there).
Overriding fixed font sizing is in the accessibility menu.
But a simple view -> text size -> larger doesn't work unless you set the
browser to ignore font sizes in ALL pages (I just tested this with MSIE
6). Which, IMNSHO, is way less than desirable. I should not have to change my
browser options that apply to all sites because one site has an
inconsiderate designer. Especially since I like to have several windows open at once.
Each to his own, it's not a problem for me.
It's not a problem for me that my condo doesn't have elevators or ramps,
either. Oh, wait, I'm not in a wheelchair and I can walk up stairs! Of course
it doesn't bother me. Silly me. What WAS I thinking?
--
--
~kaeli~
Is it true that cannibals don't eat clowns because they
taste funny? http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace
me wrote: My point is this: If fluid design and propotional fonts are superior then
that would be the predominate design method at popular sites (or all sites?),
but it's not is it? IMO if there were sufficient evidence that the use of
fixed font sizes and non-fluid site design were hurting their sites then
designers of popular sites may well abandon those methods. If that happens I
will too.
My gut feeling is that the failure to use fluid design ultimately comes
from experience with print media, where total control over presentation
is not only possible, but unavoidable. People with experience in print
media -- and most people have such experience, if only with word
processors -- have yet to cast aside some things which experience has
taught them, and learn the possibilities and contraints of the new
medium that is the web.
"kaeli" <ti******@NOSPA M.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:MP******** *************** *@nntp.lucent.c om... In article <11************ *@corp.supernew s.com>, anonymous@_.com
enlightened us with...
My point is this: If fluid design and propotional fonts are superior
then that would be the preominate design method at popular sites (or all
sites?), but it's not is it?
That's not really what you said in the beginning, now is it? You said it
later to clarify what you meant. And I don't disagree with you overmuch
when you put it this way.
The part I took exception to was this, and only this. The OP I replied to,
which said:
"It seems to me that many of
the most popular sites use fixed font sizes, usually in pixels, whatever
font they please and non-fluid layouts. With few exceptions the only
people I see not doing this are militant IE haters and fundamentalist designers
whose posts I read in NG's. As proof I offer www.weather.com. I don't say
this is a great site but everybody needs to know what the weather will be
like sometime."
Summarized: 'They do it, so why shouldn't I?'
And that's never a good justification. Ever.
Nothing of the sort but you've convinced yourself anyway.
The "because other people do
it" defense is not worthy of a mature adult.
I defended nothing, I did acknowledge how often that design method is used
and I drew the conclusion that the designers who use those methods must not
feel that it's a problem.
As for your implication that my expression of my opinion was not worthy of a
"mature adult" I can say that your approval is of no consequence.
So I'm glad you clarified your
thoughts.
Whatever.
If you want to say that, for example, 5% of your visitors would have
problems and 95% would not, and you're not wasting time on 5% of people, that's
another thing entirely. And quite valid, especially if you're talking
paying people money to putz with a design that is only broken for 1-5% of users.
We can agree on that if nothing else.
Please don't ridicule me again by saying: "When all the popular kids did
drugs (got drunk, got laid, whatever) in school, did you do it, too?
There are a lot of valid reasons to do things. "Because other people do it"
isn't one of them."
Don't post ridiculous things and you won't get ridiculed. Easy, isn't it?
Mature adults don't need to resort to ridicule when expressing themselves. I
treated you with courtesy, it's unfortunate that you are unwilling to do the
same for me.
The notion that just because other people do things makes those things
acceptable (without providing any reasoning whatsoever) IS ridiculous.
I never said that, you assumed I did. You failed to prove that I have said
anything ridiculous.
There
is a difference between agreeing on a business model's effectiveness and
simply copying one because it's "popular".
Where did I say copy?
Signed,
me This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion. Similar topics | |
by: Anand |
last post by:
Hello,
I'm using the following style and am having a problem that Arial get's
rendered with fuzzy edges in the browser IE6:
..headline {
font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:16px;
font-weight:bold; color:#007550; line-height:16px;
}
If I use the same style, but with Verdana, the script has sharp edges.
..headline {
font-family:Verdana,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:16px;
|
by: Mary Ellen Curtin |
last post by:
I love Verdana and Georgia, because I can read them. I've read back
postings here on why the usual
font-family: Verdana, Geneva, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif
spec is less than ideal, because (as I understand it) e.g. "a" in 12pt
Verdana is actually a different real size than it is in 12-pt Arial.
That,
of course, is one reason I find Verdana especially legible and lovable.
|
by: Karl Smith |
last post by:
Anyone who has read c.i.w.a.* for more than a few weeks knows that one
of the pet hates of the CIWAHians is Verdana (it's a typeface, BTW).
Future archeologists stumbling across these messages out of context
could be forgiven for thinking "Verdana" must be some kind of
dangerous animal. We must get rid of it, before it gets us!
Oddly, they can never seem to articulate *why* they dislike Verdana,
other than some vague assertion that it...
|
by: kchayka |
last post by:
<URL:http://www.w3.org/QA/Tips/font-size>
In the "recommneded practices", I don't agree with their second bullet
point, but the last 2 bullets sound like really bad advice, at least in
a WWW context.
How can they, in good conscience, advocate using font-size-adjust when
it is virtually unsupported, besides probably being dropped from the
next spec update? If they just made some disclaimers about browser
support or font availability on...
|
by: Randall Parker |
last post by:
Using IE 6.x (whatever is the latest) on Windows 2000.
For these two CSS definitions if I remove the 2 lines that have the
"mso-" font family definitions (mso-fareast-font-family, and
mso-bidi-font-family) then the "SmallerText" assigned as a class to a
div tag produces larger text than the "SmallerText2". So x-small is
treated as a bigger font size than plain old small.
How the heck is one supposed to know all the MS stuff one needs...
| | |
by: marktang |
last post by:
ONU (Optical Network Unit) is one of the key components for providing high-speed Internet services. Its primary function is to act as an endpoint device located at the user's premises. However, people are often confused as to whether an ONU can Work As a Router. In this blog post, we’ll explore What is ONU, What Is Router, ONU & Router’s main usage, and What is the difference between ONU and Router. Let’s take a closer look !
Part I. Meaning of...
|
by: Oralloy |
last post by:
Hello folks,
I am unable to find appropriate documentation on the type promotion of bit-fields when using the generalised comparison operator "<=>".
The problem is that using the GNU compilers, it seems that the internal comparison operator "<=>" tries to promote arguments from unsigned to signed.
This is as boiled down as I can make it.
Here is my compilation command:
g++-12 -std=c++20 -Wnarrowing bit_field.cpp
Here is the code in...
|
by: jinu1996 |
last post by:
In today's digital age, having a compelling online presence is paramount for businesses aiming to thrive in a competitive landscape. At the heart of this digital strategy lies an intricately woven tapestry of website design and digital marketing. It's not merely about having a website; it's about crafting an immersive digital experience that captivates audiences and drives business growth.
The Art of Business Website Design
Your website is...
|
by: tracyyun |
last post by:
Dear forum friends,
With the development of smart home technology, a variety of wireless communication protocols have appeared on the market, such as Zigbee, Z-Wave, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, etc. Each protocol has its own unique characteristics and advantages, but as a user who is planning to build a smart home system, I am a bit confused by the choice of these technologies. I'm particularly interested in Zigbee because I've heard it does some...
|
by: agi2029 |
last post by:
Let's talk about the concept of autonomous AI software engineers and no-code agents. These AIs are designed to manage the entire lifecycle of a software development project—planning, coding, testing, and deployment—without human intervention. Imagine an AI that can take a project description, break it down, write the code, debug it, and then launch it, all on its own....
Now, this would greatly impact the work of software developers. The idea...
|
by: isladogs |
last post by:
The next Access Europe User Group meeting will be on Wednesday 1 May 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC+1) and finishing by 19:30 (7.30PM).
In this session, we are pleased to welcome a new presenter, Adolph Dupré who will be discussing some powerful techniques for using class modules.
He will explain when you may want to use classes instead of User Defined Types (UDT). For example, to manage the data in unbound forms.
Adolph will...
| | |
by: adsilva |
last post by:
A Windows Forms form does not have the event Unload, like VB6. What one acts like?
|
by: 6302768590 |
last post by:
Hai team
i want code for transfer the data from one system to another through IP address by using C# our system has to for every 5mins then we have to update the data what the data is updated we have to send another system
|
by: muto222 |
last post by:
How can i add a mobile payment intergratation into php mysql website.
| |
