How to stretch a background (!) image horizontally (only) ?
in [CSS]
|
Prev: How (the heck) do you center a Web page in IE8 (for the umpteenthtime)?
Next: How to repeat a background image on the left side and another on the right side of a web page?
From: Andreas Prilop on 17 Mar 2010 12:10 On Tue, 16 Mar 2010, Jukka K. Korpela wrote: > http://www.adobe.com/products/postscript/pdfs/ps3fonts.pdf > mentions just "Geneva", whereas for other fonts, sorry, typefaces, > italic and bold versions are separately listed. See also http://images.apple.com/pro/pdf/L311277A_FontTT_v4.pdf page 29: Appendix B: Mac OS X Fonts > If your document does not use italics or bolding for some textual > content, the lack of italic and bold fonts doesn't sound like > a convincing argument against using Geneva for it. Well ... I assume you have at least some <Hn>, no? > so why not write just > font-family: Arial, sans-serif Why not write just { font-family: sans-serif } ? I don't even know a reason to specify Arial. What could be an improvement of Arial over the reader's own sans-serif? And the reader's own sans-serif may well be Arial. Can anyone give an example where { font-family: Arial, sans-serif } is better than { font-family: sans-serif } ? -- From the New World: http://www.google.co.uk/search?ie=ISO-8859-2&q=Dvofi%E1k
From: Jukka K. Korpela on 17 Mar 2010 14:08 Andreas Prilop wrote: >> If your document does not use italics or bolding for some textual >> content, the lack of italic and bold fonts doesn't sound like >> a convincing argument against using Geneva for it. > > Well ... I assume you have at least some <Hn>, no? I do, but that should not prevent me from using Geneva for copy text. Besides, there is no law requiring that headings be bold. >> so why not write just >> font-family: Arial, sans-serif > > Why not write just { font-family: sans-serif } ? Good question. I'd say that the basic reason for specifying first a specific font family is definiteness. > I don't even know a reason to specify Arial. What could be > an improvement of Arial over the reader's own sans-serif? If I specify Arial, I can expect Arial to be used in at least 90% of browsing situations, probably more. This implies that I can with some confidence set line-height according to the information about I have about Arial (and other relevant factors). This typically means a fairly large line-height. I can also expect the rendering of some characters that might be particularly important on my page to be usually as per Arial. For example, there will be just a little spacing around an en dash, so if this really matters, I can add a px or two of extra spacing there in CSS, without too much fear of creating too much spacing. And so on. Of course, when Arial is not used, my assumptions may fail, more or less. It's probably not catastrophical, as compared with the better rendering achieved in the vast majority of cases. For example, if I set line-height: 1.4 (expecting Arial to be used), I might get too much spacing between lines when Arial is not available and some other font is used. But I'd still say this is better than not assuming anything and not setting line-height at all. -- Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
From: Albert Ross on 17 Mar 2010 15:00 On Wed, 17 Mar 2010 17:10:30 +0100, Andreas Prilop <prilop4321(a)trashmail.net> wrote: >Why not write just { font-family: sans-serif } ? >I don't even know a reason to specify Arial. What could be >an improvement of Arial over the reader's own sans-serif? >And the reader's own sans-serif may well be Arial. Quite, that's my default. I think Helvetica or Geneva used to be the Mac default equivalent which is close enough for jazz. My all-time favourite serif font has to be one of the many versions of Garamond I've collected. Why would anyone stop me from using them in favour of that awful Times New Roman?
From: David Stone on 17 Mar 2010 14:47 In article <Pine.LNX.4.64.1003171647450.14053(a)sarge.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>, Andreas Prilop <prilop4321(a)trashmail.net> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, dorayme wrote: > > > It is frustrating to use Geneva when bold is wanted in my word > > processing apps (Geneva makes no bold available in the typeface > > package). In fact it simply mostly does not work at all. > > See? There is no "Geneva Bold". I was curious about that, largely because I haven't used Geneva since the days of bitmapped fonts and my ImageWriter (largely because of problems with pdf's or files transferred to WinXX machines) MS Word 2004 (Mac) appears to make Geneva text slightly darker when "bolded", and spaces the characters out more. It's an o d d effect, and rather disconcerting... For reasons that escape present memory, I find I seem to use either font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; or font-family: Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; when I specify anything at all. Arial seems to be as ubiquitous now as Helvetica once was, but personally I'm not sure I like either of them all that much!
From: dorayme on 17 Mar 2010 15:21
In article <Pine.LNX.4.64.1003171647450.14053(a)sarge.rrzn.uni-hannover.de>, Andreas Prilop <prilop4321(a)trashmail.net> wrote: > On Wed, 17 Mar 2010, dorayme wrote: > > > It is frustrating to use Geneva when bold is wanted in my word > > processing apps (Geneva makes no bold available in the typeface > > package). In fact it simply mostly does not work at all. > > See? There is no "Geneva Bold". > Yes, as I said. > > But if Geneva is specified in the CSS for an HTML doc, it looks > > fine to me on Mac, even with a great chunk of <b>text...</b> > > Sadly, most people today cannot tell real italics and boldface > from slanted and bolded fonts. Do you notice the difference when reading normal sized text on screen? I am impressed. Perhaps Macs do such a nice job that it does not matter too much? Anyway, I am sure it *does* matter for a print style sheet. <http://dorayme.netweaver.com.au/boldVfauxBold.html> What conclusions can be drawn from the URL as one enlarges one's text? I notice the real bold stands out from surrounding normal weight at bigger font sizes, the faux less and less. The intelligent design of the real bold powering ahead in the race for clarity at big font sizes? But the example may be unrealistic. And how clear is what browsers do what when fetching system fonts for screen representation? -- dorayme |