Agree with the theory behind it all.  Just for me, I don't really appreciate
people setting their own stylesheets.  I mean... okay for people that have a
vision problem, or when encountering a site with green on red type.  But
hink about it... most of the author's time goes into the design.  Then your
stylesheet comes around and just changes the whole lot.  Making it look
bland, making all pages look the same,... Your approach just makes me think
about adding !important everywhere.  Personal view is this is even worse
that MS's SmartTags.

- Kayjey -



> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
> [mailto:owner-hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org]Namens jim barchuk
> Verzonden: woensdag 3 oktober 2001 23:06
> Aan: hwg-techniques(at)hwg.org
> Onderwerp: Re: best body text font size?
> 
> 
> Hi Robert!
> 
> > After a long time specifying size for body text in points, we are
> > converting to pixels because we understand this comes closer to
> > matching font size between Macs and PCs.
> >
> > However we are debating what size to use as a body text default.
> > For PCs, something about 10 seems best, but Mac users report
> > makes the text quite large on their systems.
> >
> > I assume this is why many sites now seem to be specifying smaller
> > sizes (at least for the PC).
> 
> No, they do that so they can stuff more text on the screen 
> because some
> dimwit research 'scientist' decided that users don't know how 
> to scroll
> down, or if they do know they won't bother. (That last point 
> is true in
> the sense that if the initial content of the page isn't what they're
> looking for they have no need to scroll down.)
> 
> The ultimate squeeze extremists use FONT SIZE=1 at the top of 
> the page and
> that's it. That is 100% illegible for me. Literally 100% illegible.
> 
> > Thus I'm curious what everyone here thinks is the best compromise
> > for body text, for readability on the widest possible range of
> > hardware/software platforms.
> 
> I think we're missing some of the point of HTML and web browsers. The
> purpose is not to 'cast in electrons' -exactly- what we want 
> the user to
> see. It is in fact impossible. The purpose is to give the 
> user content,
> with -some- preference how the author would like it displayed, let the
> client software deal with the display details. *and* let the 
> user set some
> preferences.
> 
> The purpose of the venerable FONT was to set a standard size that the
> -user- could adjust as they needed/prefered. Then there's some author
> leeway two sizes larger and smaller for Yelling, YELLING, and 
> whispering,
> (((whispering))).
> 
> I am more and more often setting my browser to 'use my fonts 
> and colors,
> override document fonts and colors' for many web pages because I can't
> -see- the frigging thing. When I leave that page I tend to forget to
> change it back so it just stays that way. It's not -my- loss 
> if -I- see
> the content the way -I- want to see it and not the way some
> sans-serif-geek thinks it looks better.
> 
> The short answer is that the more authors muck around with 
> fonts, the more
> users will figure out how to enforce their preferences, thus 
> negating the
> author's efforts.  Think about -that- one. :)
> 
> Have a :) day!
> 
> jb
> 
> -- 
> jim barchuk
> jb(at)jbarchuk.com
> 
>  
> 

• Web Designer Courses
• Off the Shelf Training Courses

HWG hwg-techniques mailing list archives, maintained by Webmasters @ IWA