Font size, my discovery...

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Henry, Oct 14, 2004.

  1. Henry

    Henry Guest

    G'day...

    I was fighting with font sizes in css for hours and finally I've
    discovered, what is going on.

    Check simple code.

    <html>

    <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Language" content="en-us">
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
    <title>Let's try some text in Times New Roman </title>
    </head>

    <body>

    <p>Let's try some text in Times New Roman 12pt.</p>
    <p><font face="Arial">And now the same text in Arial.</font></p>
    <p><font face="Tahoma">And now the same text in Tahoma.</font></p>
    <p><font face="Verdana">And now the same text in Verdana.</font></p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>
    <p>&nbsp;</p>

    </body>

    </html>


    I was trying to avoid to set font sizes because I've never liked Times
    New Roman.

    And other fonts, 12pt, are definitely bigger than Times New Roman.


    IMHO, fonts comfortable for reading is the font of your menus and your
    environment. Everybody are setting their screen sizes that way, so
    everything has right, comfortable sizes.

    When Arial, Tahoma or Verdana is used on web pages, they are bigger that
    Times New Roman and that's why most designers are forced to change sizes.

    These fonts are right size in 10pt if compare to Times New Roman.


    I don't think that many people are adjusting size of letters in the
    browser, because their browsers are set up that way, that menus and text
    is in the comfortable size anyway. If fonts are 2 points bigger than
    menu's fonts, that the size is perfectly OK.

    Or... somewhere I'm terribly wrong.

    ;)
    Henry, Oct 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Henry

    rf Guest

    Henry wrote:

    > G'day...


    G'day.

    > I was fighting with font sizes in css for hours and finally I've
    > discovered, what is going on.


    Why? Just leave it out completely and your viewer will get exactly what she
    has set up her browser for, being what she is most comfortable with.

    If you choose to change it in any way you will only be changing it away from
    your viewers preferences. You don't see (or rather hear) radio stations
    adjusting the volume of the music for us do you? :)

    > <p>Let's try some text in Times New Roman 12pt.</p>


    The font element has been deprecicated for years. You should be using CSS
    these days.

    Never specify font size in pt or px. The most used browser has bugs wherein
    doing so means your viewer cannot change her font size without resorting to
    the accessibility options to ignore your font specifications.

    Use em of %.

    > <p><font face="Arial">And now the same text in Arial.</font></p>
    > <p><font face="Tahoma">And now the same text in Tahoma.</font></p>
    > <p><font face="Verdana">And now the same text in Verdana.</font></p>


    Don't use verdana. All opinion I have seen is that it is unsuitable for the
    net. It is too large. This induces authors to reduce the font size to
    something like 80%. The text then becomes way too small if your viewer does
    not have verdana

    > I was trying to avoid to set font sizes because I've never liked Times
    > New Roman.


    If you don't like it then don't use it :). My preference is not times new
    roman for non-monospaced fonts as well.

    > And other fonts, 12pt, are definitely bigger than Times New Roman.


    Sure you weren't looking at verdana?

    > I don't think that many people are adjusting size of letters in the
    > browser,


    Er, how do you know?

    > Or... somewhere I'm terribly wrong.


    Nope. This subject is almost continuousle discussed. Opinions vary either
    way. My opinion leans towards the viewer setting the font size, not the
    author.
    rf, Oct 14, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Henry

    brucie Guest

    brucie, Oct 14, 2004
    #3
  4. On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:56:56 +0000, rf wrote:

    > If you choose to change it in any way you will only be changing it away from
    > your viewers preferences. You don't see (or rather hear) radio stations
    > adjusting the volume of the music for us do you? :)


    As a matter of fact, I do. Or, advertisers do, anyways.

    I'll leave the parallels as an exercise. Cheers!

    --
    Some say the Wired doesn't have political borders like the real world,
    but there are far too many nonsense-spouting anarchists or idiots who
    think that pranks are a revolution.
    Owen Jacobson, Oct 14, 2004
    #4
  5. Henry

    rf Guest

    Owen Jacobson
    > On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:56:56 +0000, rf wrote:
    >
    > > If you choose to change it in any way you will only be changing it away

    from
    > > your viewers preferences. You don't see (or rather hear) radio stations
    > > adjusting the volume of the music for us do you? :)

    >
    > As a matter of fact, I do. Or, advertisers do, anyways.


    <grin> I actually had that in mind when I wrote the above </grin>

    > I'll leave the parallels as an exercise. Cheers!


    I guess the adverts correspond to those in-your-face popups :)

    --
    Cheers
    Richard.
    rf, Oct 14, 2004
    #5
  6. Henry

    Toby Inkster Guest

    rf wrote:

    > You don't see (or rather hear) radio stations adjusting the volume of
    > the music for us do you? :)


    Though in fact they probably ought to do so. Much modern music is mixed in
    such a way to reduce the overall dynamics of the sound, allowing the
    mixers to maximise the volume without clipping.

    If you listen to an older recording (e.g. The Beatles - Sgt Pepper's) and
    a newer one (e.g. Coldplay - Rush of Bood) back to back without adjusting
    the volume in between, you'll notice that the newer one sounds a bit
    louder.

    --
    Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
    Contact Me ~ http://tobyinkster.co.uk/contact
    Toby Inkster, Oct 14, 2004
    #6
  7. Henry

    Henry Guest

    brucie wrote:

    > In alt.html Henry said:
    >
    >
    >><p><font face="Arial">And now the same text in Arial.</font></p>

    >
    >
    > the <font> element was deprecated just over 7 years ago in the first
    > html4 working draft.
    > http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-html40-970708/present/graphics.html#edef-FONT
    >
    > please try to keep up.



    I meant, when I used css to make fonts, their colours, types and sizes.

    As soon as I removed the font size while using font Verdana, my <p> were
    much to big.

    p {
    font-family: Verdana, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif;
    font-size: 0.8em;
    margin: 8px;
    padding: 8px;
    text-align: center;
    }

    Changing to Tahoma or Arial didn't make to much difference and I don't
    like other fonts.

    I was trying to avoid font-size as many here has suggested, but... I've
    decided to use it anyway because that size sux IMHO so I'm forced to use
    font-size.

    I think it sux in a big way that different fonts have different sizes
    while the same font size.

    But I've checked the page I've made and IE6 and latest Firefox do allow
    an user to change font' size.

    http://www.touchofeternity.com/home.htm

    So... what the fuss about not using a font-size?

    I don't think that is possible to make *everybody* happy.

    ;)
    Henry, Oct 14, 2004
    #7
  8. Henry

    Philip Ronan Guest

    Henry wrote:

    > I was trying to avoid font-size as many here has suggested, but... I've
    > decided to use it anyway because that size sux IMHO so I'm forced to use
    > font-size.


    So let's get this straight...

    You've set up your browser so that your default font size is too large and
    it "sux". So instead of changing your own browser settings, you've decided
    it's a better idea to provide fonts at 80% of the default size for everyone
    else.

    Is that right?

    --
    Philip Ronan

    (Please remove the "z"s if replying by email)
    Philip Ronan, Oct 14, 2004
    #8
  9. Henry

    SpaceGirl Guest

    rf wrote:

    > If you choose to change it in any way you will only be changing it away from
    > your viewers preferences. You don't see (or rather hear) radio stations
    > adjusting the volume of the music for us do you? :)


    Nor can you increase the size of the text on your morning newspaper, or
    the size of subtitles on your fave movie.

    >>I don't think that many people are adjusting size of letters in the
    >>browser,

    >
    >
    > Er, how do you know?


    How do you know they do?

    >>Or... somewhere I'm terribly wrong.

    >
    >
    > Nope. This subject is almost continuousle discussed. Opinions vary either
    > way. My opinion leans towards the viewer setting the font size, not the
    > author.


    Agreed, but there are no hard and fast rules.


    --


    x theSpaceGirl (miranda)

    # lead designer @ http://www.dhnewmedia.com #
    # remove NO SPAM to email, or use form on website #
    SpaceGirl, Oct 14, 2004
    #9
  10. Henry

    Henry Guest

    Philip Ronan wrote:


    > Henry wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I was trying to avoid font-size as many here has suggested, but... I've
    >>decided to use it anyway because that size sux IMHO so I'm forced to use
    >>font-size.

    >
    >
    > So let's get this straight...
    >
    > You've set up your browser so that your default font size is too

    large and
    > it "sux".



    Default size of Times New Roman is correct or... acceptable for me.
    others like Tahoma, Verdana and Arial are not the same in their default
    sizes and that sux.


    > So instead of changing your own browser settings, you've decided
    > it's a better idea to provide fonts at 80% of the default size for

    everyone
    > else.




    Of course!!! If I would change my own browser settings, fonts size would
    not change for the user. I would cheat myself.

    Is that not logical? ;-P



    > Is that right?




    Absolutely correct.


    When I browse on the net, majority fonts are in size of Times New Roman
    and that is IMHO right size.

    So, to force Tahoma, Arial or Verdana to be displayed in the same size
    as Times NR I've decided to use size 0.8em.

    That way Verdana size 0.8em looks the same size as Times New Roman in 100%.

    Also, some smart css guys have decided that font-size is needed and
    should be used.


    So... where you see the problem?
    Henry, Oct 14, 2004
    #10
  11. Henry

    Philip Ronan Guest

    Henry wrote:

    > So... where you see the problem?


    Somewhere between your keyboard and your chair.

    This issue has already been discussed at length elsewhere, so I won't bother
    continuing this discussion.

    It's your site. Do whatever the hell you like with it.

    --
    Philip Ronan

    (Please remove the "z"s if replying by email)
    Philip Ronan, Oct 14, 2004
    #11
  12. Henry

    Neal Guest

    On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:18:24 +0800, Henry <> wrote:

    > Of course!!! If I would change my own browser settings, fonts size would
    > not change for the user. I would cheat myself.
    >
    > Is that not logical? ;-P


    It's not.

    Think about it.

    Each user's browser is set up to render text at a particular size if not
    told to do otherwise. At least some users have set that size to their
    preferred size. The others either have no problem reading at that size, or
    they have difficulties reading many, many sites.

    If you serve text at their preferred size, then most users will be able to
    read it, with the exception of those few who have it set to smaller than
    they would prefer.

    If you set it smaller, then more and more users cannot read the text as
    served. This necessitates more and more users to take an extra step to
    resize your page, and that's a barrier to your content you don't need.

    Now, what's the default font used in browsers? It can vary, but normally
    it's TNR. One important facet of readability is aspect - the comparison of
    the x-height to the total font height. TNR is about .5 and you'll find
    that nost fonts used as a default are about .5 as well.

    This is critical, because if the font you prefer is NOT on the system,
    that's what will be used. So let's say you use Verdana, with an aspect of
    about .8 . At the same font-size, it looks bigger because of the large
    x-height. So authors commonly serve it at 80%. BUT - what happens when TNR
    or Arial is replaced for it due to it not being available? Yep, it's TNR
    or Arial served at 80% - too small.

    Therefore, to ensure you are serving fonts and sizes that are readable:

    1) Whenever possible, do not defeat the user's preferred font size. Doing
    nothing is best, if you must make changes somewhere setting body
    {font-size: 100%} is recommended (by me and others).

    2) If you want to suggest a font, compare it to the default fonts and be
    sure the aspect is about .5 - otherwise, the font will not appear
    readable. Avoid fonts with large x-heights, and if you use them, never
    serve them below 100%.

    3) Accept that a .5 font at 100% is what the user prefers. You can change
    the font, but not the aspect. So only use fonts which are about .5 and
    serve them at an appropriate size.

    > That way Verdana size 0.8em looks the same size as Times New Roman in
    > 100%.


    But what many users will end up with is TNR at 80%. See the problem? You
    can't set a different font-size based on the font. So you're stuck with
    your current thinking.
    Neal, Oct 14, 2004
    #12
  13. Henry

    Neal Guest

    On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 07:50:36 +0100, Toby Inkster
    <> wrote:

    > rf wrote:
    >
    >> You don't see (or rather hear) radio stations adjusting the volume of
    >> the music for us do you? :)

    >
    > Though in fact they probably ought to do so. Much modern music is mixed
    > in
    > such a way to reduce the overall dynamics of the sound, allowing the
    > mixers to maximise the volume without clipping.
    >


    One issue we are neglecting is that devices used to playback recordings or
    display broadcasts have easy-to-use volume controls which can be set
    perfectly. We're actually discussing rendering visual content in browsers
    which cannot so simply set the perfect size, as it's done incrementally,
    not linearly.

    A better analogy - what if every record was pressed with a different
    turntable speed? Some are 30, some are 35, some are 40. You have a switch
    which allows 16. 33.3, 45 and 78. None are correct to playback the record
    correctly. You may have a fine-tuner, but isn't it simpler to press the
    record so that it can be played back at a standard speed?
    Neal, Oct 14, 2004
    #13
  14. Henry

    Wÿrm Guest

    "Henry" <> wrote in message
    news:416e8ab0$...
    <snip>
    > So, to force Tahoma, Arial or Verdana to be displayed in the same size
    > as Times NR I've decided to use size 0.8em.
    >
    > That way Verdana size 0.8em looks the same size as Times New Roman in

    100%.

    Anda do YOU have any idea what size they do look in my 10.4" 1280x1024
    resolution laptop? Or someones 21" monitor with 800x600 resolution (he has
    bad sight)?


    > Also, some smart css guys have decided that font-size is needed and
    > should be used.


    And some smart guy assumes each of us use same size screen and tries to
    judge what is "proper" size for us? ;)
    Wÿrm, Oct 14, 2004
    #14
  15. SpaceGirl wrote:

    >> If you choose to change it in any way you will only be changing it away
    >> from your viewers preferences. You don't see (or rather hear) radio
    >> stations adjusting the volume of the music for us do you? :)


    > Nor can you increase the size of the text on your morning newspaper, or
    > the size of subtitles on your fave movie.


    Actually I can, since I read my morning newspaper online and rip the
    subtitles off DVD.

    However, you can't (unless you stand outside the print room) receive a
    newspaper within a minute of it being printed, but do online new services
    delay putting content online to simulate that? One media having a
    limitation is not a good reason to artificially impose the same limitation
    on another media.


    --
    David Dorward <http://blog.dorward.me.uk/> <http://dorward.me.uk/>
    Home is where the ~/.bashrc is
    David Dorward, Oct 14, 2004
    #15
  16. Henry

    Henry Guest

    Neal wrote:


    > But what many users will end up with is TNR at 80%. See the problem? You
    > can't set a different font-size based on the font. So you're stuck with
    > your current thinking.



    Many thanks Neal. Now I do understand the whole issue. So Verdana is not
    the best font to use for the web, because the way is displayed.

    But... I'm a little smart cookie and my line of thinking is such.

    I'll follow the biggest and the most popular web page in whole world and
    that way I can't go wrong, correct?


    So I've checked source of... Google. :)


    Here we are.... (after typing something in search field)


    <style>
    body,td,div,.p,a{font-family:arial,sans-serif }
    div,td{color:#000}
    ..f,.fl:link{color:#6f6f6f}
    a:link,.w,a.w:link,.w a:link{color:#00c}
    a:visited,.fl:visited{color:#551a8b}
    a:active,.fl:active{color:#f00}
    ..t a:link,.t a:active,.t a:visited,.t{color:#000}
    ..t{background-color:#e5ecf9}
    ..k{background-color:#36c}
    ..j{width:34em}
    ..h{color:#36c}
    ..i,.i:link{color:#a90a08}
    ..a,.a:link{color:#008000}
    ..z{display:none}
    div.n {margin-top: 1ex}
    ..n a{font-size:10pt; color:#000}
    ..n .i{font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold}
    ..q a:visited,.q a:link,.q a:active,.q {color: #00c; }
    ..b{font-size: 12pt; color:#00c; font-weight:bold}
    ..ch{cursor:pointer;cursor:hand}
    ..e{margin-top: .75em; margin-bottom: .75em}
    ..g{margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em}
    //-->
    </style>


    I think that Google is the most popular page in the whole world and have
    to be displayed properly in... every possible browser in the world and
    possible in every OS from Win 3.11 to Longhorn, Linux and many others.

    I figure that if I'll follow their setup, I would be safe.


    And they are not using Verdana.

    :)
    Henry, Oct 15, 2004
    #16
  17. Henry

    Neal Guest

    On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 08:11:45 +0800, Henry <> wrote:

    > So I've checked source of... Google. :)


    Oh no.

    > Here we are.... (after typing something in search field)


    Holy crap. Don't emulate them too much.

    > div.n {margin-top: 1ex}
    > .n a{font-size:10pt; color:#000}
    > .n .i{font-size:10pt; font-weight:bold}
    > .q a:visited,.q a:link,.q a:active,.q {color: #00c; }
    > .b{font-size: 12pt; color:#00c; font-weight:bold}



    Try to resize the page in IE, see what happens to text in div classed "n"
    and when classed "b". I could point out other problems, such as not using
    color without background-color, but I'm tired.

    > I think that Google is the most popular page in the whole world and have
    > to be displayed properly in... every possible browser in the world and
    > possible in every OS from Win 3.11 to Longhorn, Linux and many others.


    Well, guess again. Popular != good. Look at McDonald's. You'd similarly
    think their food must be the best of all restaurants.

    Google and McDonald's offer services that are in high demand. They don't
    need to be good.

    > I figure that if I'll follow their setup, I would be safe.


    Eee.

    > And they are not using Verdana.
    >
    > :)


    Thank goodness for that!
    Neal, Oct 15, 2004
    #17
  18. Henry

    Neal Guest

    On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:51:25 -0400, Neal <> wrote:

    > Try to resize the page in IE, see what happens to text in div classed "n"


    Example: the bit that goes "Result Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next".
    Won't change size, it's class=n.
    Neal, Oct 15, 2004
    #18
  19. Henry

    Mr Bean Guest

    Neal wrote:
    > On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 22:51:25 -0400, Neal <> wrote:
    >
    >> Try to resize the page in IE, see what happens to text in div classed "n"

    >
    >
    > Example: the bit that goes "Result Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next".
    > Won't change size, it's class=n.



    I've checked Google on IE6 Firefox 1.00 and Opera and I can resize fonts
    any way I want.

    However, IE6.0 is set up with msn.com as home page.

    I've tried running IE401 and on some links is showing TNR fonts and they
    are unreadable!!! Mainly in MNS news links.

    Exactly as you have described!

    M$ sux!!!!!

    Their own page in their own older browser is unreadable...

    Hahahahahahahahaha...
    Mr Bean, Oct 15, 2004
    #19
  20. Henry

    Andy Dingley Guest

    On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 12:51:30 +1000, brucie <>
    wrote:

    >the <font> element was deprecated just over 7 years ago in the first
    >html4 working draft.


    As Henry's example has skipped any doctype, then he's using HTML 2.0.
    In such a case, <font> is perfectly correct.

    HTML 2.0 is certainly obsolete, but was it (or HTML 3.2) ever formally
    deprecated ?
    --
    Smert' spamionam
    Andy Dingley, Oct 15, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Andreas Klemt
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    11,066
    Peter Theill
    Nov 28, 2004
  2. dave richards
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    610
    Paul Furman
    Feb 19, 2004
  3. Wongod
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    709
  4. wial
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    819
  5. mttc
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    2,387
    Roedy Green
    Jul 3, 2009
Loading...

Share This Page