Re: Preferred way to size fonts

Discussion in 'HTML' started by Chris F.A. Johnson, Nov 5, 2008.

  1. On 2008-11-05, Cliff wrote:
    >
    > I've tried to follow this group for awhile now. I've noticed that
    > some of you have very preferred ways and reasons to size fonts on web
    > sites. HTML or CSS.
    >
    > It seems you don't like specific settings, but rather settings that
    > can vary with browser display size. I think you all have good
    > reasoning, but I can't remember which is best.
    >
    > Right now, on most of my font settings, I use "Font=2, or 3 or 4."
    > etc. in the cases where I need to set my font size. I've going to be
    > going over most of my html files soon and that would be a good time to
    > change those settings to the better version.
    >
    > What are your versions of the best way.


    Do not use <font> tags; set sizes in ems or percentages in your
    stylesheet.

    Always make the font size for your main text 100% (or 1em) in the
    <body> element and other sizes relative to that.

    body { font-size: 100%; }


    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Nov 5, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Chris F.A. Johnson

    C A Upsdell Guest

    Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > On 2008-11-05, Cliff wrote:
    >> I've tried to follow this group for awhile now. I've noticed that
    >> some of you have very preferred ways and reasons to size fonts on web
    >> sites. HTML or CSS.
    >>
    >> It seems you don't like specific settings, but rather settings that
    >> can vary with browser display size. I think you all have good
    >> reasoning, but I can't remember which is best.
    >>
    >> Right now, on most of my font settings, I use "Font=2, or 3 or 4."
    >> etc. in the cases where I need to set my font size. I've going to be
    >> going over most of my html files soon and that would be a good time to
    >> change those settings to the better version.
    >>
    >> What are your versions of the best way.

    >
    > Do not use <font> tags; set sizes in ems or percentages in your
    > stylesheet.
    >
    > Always make the font size for your main text 100% (or 1em) in the
    > <body> element and other sizes relative to that.
    >
    > body { font-size: 100%; }


    If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x
    C A Upsdell, Nov 5, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Chris F.A. Johnson

    dorayme Guest

    In article <getaqv$klk$>,
    C A Upsdell <> wrote:

    > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > > On 2008-11-05, Cliff wrote:
    > >> I've tried to follow this group for awhile now. I've noticed that
    > >> some of you have very preferred ways and reasons to size fonts on web
    > >> sites. HTML or CSS.
    > >>
    > >> It seems you don't like specific settings, but rather settings that
    > >> can vary with browser display size. I think you all have good
    > >> reasoning, but I can't remember which is best.
    > >>

    ....
    > >
    > > Do not use <font> tags; set sizes in ems or percentages in your
    > > stylesheet.
    > >
    > > Always make the font size for your main text 100% (or 1em) in the
    > > <body> element and other sizes relative to that.
    > >
    > > body { font-size: 100%; }

    >
    > If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x


    No, the seven people in the world using IE5 happen to be very old and
    use very thick glasses and will appreciate it. Trust me.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Nov 5, 2008
    #3
  4. On 2008-11-05, C A Upsdell wrote:
    > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    >> On 2008-11-05, Cliff wrote:
    >>> I've tried to follow this group for awhile now. I've noticed that
    >>> some of you have very preferred ways and reasons to size fonts on web
    >>> sites. HTML or CSS.
    >>>
    >>> It seems you don't like specific settings, but rather settings that
    >>> can vary with browser display size. I think you all have good
    >>> reasoning, but I can't remember which is best.
    >>>
    >>> Right now, on most of my font settings, I use "Font=2, or 3 or 4."
    >>> etc. in the cases where I need to set my font size. I've going to be
    >>> going over most of my html files soon and that would be a good time to
    >>> change those settings to the better version.
    >>>
    >>> What are your versions of the best way.

    >>
    >> Do not use <font> tags; set sizes in ems or percentages in your
    >> stylesheet.
    >>
    >> Always make the font size for your main text 100% (or 1em) in the
    >> <body> element and other sizes relative to that.
    >>
    >> body { font-size: 100%; }

    >
    > If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x


    Better that than too small to be readable in browsers that the
    other 90+% of viewers use.

    If a font is too large, it is still readable; if it is too small,
    it is not.

    I think that IE5.x had also better means for adjusting the default
    font-size than IE6.

    --
    Chris F.A. Johnson, webmaster <http://Woodbine-Gerrard.com>
    ===================================================================
    Author:
    Shell Scripting Recipes: A Problem-Solution Approach (2005, Apress)
    Chris F.A. Johnson, Nov 6, 2008
    #4
  5. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    "C A Upsdell" <> wrote in message
    news:getaqv$klk$...
    > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    >> On 2008-11-05, Cliff wrote:
    >>> I've tried to follow this group for awhile now. I've noticed that
    >>> some of you have very preferred ways and reasons to size fonts on web
    >>> sites. HTML or CSS.
    >>> It seems you don't like specific settings, but rather settings that
    >>> can vary with browser display size. I think you all have good
    >>> reasoning, but I can't remember which is best.
    >>> Right now, on most of my font settings, I use "Font=2, or 3 or 4."
    >>> etc. in the cases where I need to set my font size. I've going to be
    >>> going over most of my html files soon and that would be a good time to
    >>> change those settings to the better version.
    >>>
    >>> What are your versions of the best way.

    >>
    >> Do not use <font> tags; set sizes in ems or percentages in your
    >> stylesheet.
    >>
    >> Always make the font size for your main text 100% (or 1em) in the
    >> <body> element and other sizes relative to that.
    >>
    >> body { font-size: 100%; }

    >
    > If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x


    Yeah but who gives a shit about IE5.x? Pretty much nobody uses it anyway...
    if all of my content appears and is readable with nothing overlapping then I
    consider a site "working" in IE5.x, even if things are in strange places,
    text is too big, background images aren't working properly etc.

    Starting to feel that way about IE6 too TBH
    Nik Coughlin, Nov 6, 2008
    #5
  6. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Bergamot Guest

    C A Upsdell wrote:
    > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    >>
    >> body { font-size: 100%; }

    >
    > If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x


    Why penalize everybody else because one antique browser does something
    differently?

    Might as well not use CSS at all because there might still be a Netscape
    4.x user out there somewhere.

    :-\

    --
    Berg
    Bergamot, Nov 6, 2008
    #6
  7. Chris F.A. Johnson

    C A Upsdell Guest

    Bergamot wrote:
    > C A Upsdell wrote:
    >> Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    >>> body { font-size: 100%; }

    >> If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x

    >
    > Why penalize everybody else because one antique browser does something
    > differently?


    No need to penalize someone with IE 5.x. It just has to be taken into
    account if enough visitors use it ... and for my site, 2.2% do, which is
    more than enough for me to care about them. Other sites may indeed have
    too few to worry ... and other sites have far more. The OP should IMO
    consider this issue.
    C A Upsdell, Nov 6, 2008
    #7
  8. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Bergamot Guest

    C A Upsdell wrote:
    > Bergamot wrote:
    >>
    >> Why penalize everybody else because one antique browser does something
    >> differently?

    >
    > No need to penalize someone with IE 5.x.


    Catering to them at the expense of the huge majority of visitors seems a
    wrong action to take. There is also a law of diminishing returns that
    makes it a pretty wasted effort these days.

    > It just has to be taken into
    > account if enough visitors use it ... and for my site, 2.2% do, which is
    > more than enough for me to care about them.


    For that low a number, I'm in 100% agreement with Nik Coughlin - who
    cares if the visuals aren't perfect? As long as it's still readable and
    usable, that's good enough.

    > Other sites may indeed have
    > too few to worry ... and other sites have far more.


    If a site has a high volume of ancient browsers, seems they'd have more
    pressing considerations than font size.

    > The OP should IMO
    > consider this issue.


    I couldn't disagree more.

    --
    Berg
    Bergamot, Nov 6, 2008
    #8
  9. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    "Cliff" <HiJack-at-fidnet-dot-com> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Thanks to the 2 people that supplied helpful hints so far. You gave
    > me a place to start.
    >
    > I'm sorry that the rest of the 9 replies so far in this thread turned
    > into an argument about browsers.


    Don't be sorry. You probably learnt something. Also, please don't top
    post.
    Nik Coughlin, Nov 6, 2008
    #9
  10. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    On Nov 6, 11:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:
    > C A Upsdell wrote:
    > > Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:

    >
    > >> body { font-size: 100%; }

    >
    > > If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x

    >
    > Why penalize everybody else because one antique browser does something
    > differently?
    >
    > Might as well not use CSS at all because there might still be a Netscape
    > 4.x user out there somewhere.
    >
    > :-\
    >

    Funny you should say that. The stats for one of my sites shows
    Netscape 4 users still around.
    I also have another site (for a client of mine) where we had 13 users
    still on IE 5. But well over 100 for both IE6 /7 and Firefox (a range
    of versions).
    Oh and IE8 had more views then IE5.
    --
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.org
    Chaddy2222, Nov 7, 2008
    #10
  11. Gazing into my crystal ball I observed Cliff <HiJack-at-fidnet-dot-com>
    writing in news::

    At the risk of sounding like the Usenet police, please do not top post.
    See below

    >
    > On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 22:49:28 +0000, "Chris F.A. Johnson"
    ><> wrote:
    >
    >>On 2008-11-05, Cliff wrote:
    >>>
    >>> I've tried to follow this group for awhile now. I've noticed that
    >>> some of you have very preferred ways and reasons to size fonts on

    web
    >>> sites. HTML or CSS.
    >>>
    >>> It seems you don't like specific settings, but rather settings that
    >>> can vary with browser display size. I think you all have good
    >>> reasoning, but I can't remember which is best.
    >>>
    >>> Right now, on most of my font settings, I use "Font=2, or 3 or 4."
    >>> etc. in the cases where I need to set my font size. I've going to

    be
    >>> going over most of my html files soon and that would be a good time

    to
    >>> change those settings to the better version.
    >>>
    >>> What are your versions of the best way.

    >>
    >> Do not use <font> tags; set sizes in ems or percentages in your
    >> stylesheet.
    >>
    >> Always make the font size for your main text 100% (or 1em) in the
    >> <body> element and other sizes relative to that.
    >>
    >>body { font-size: 100%; }


    > Thanks to the 2 people that supplied helpful hints so far. You gave
    > me a place to start.
    >
    > I'm sorry that the rest of the 9 replies so far in this thread turned
    > into an argument about browsers.


    Remember, this _is_ Usenet, which is for discussion of topics. If you
    happen to get an answer to your initial question, that is a good thing.
    You will find that even though it seems that there might be an argument,
    often you will find pearls or wisdom in that argument that you can use
    at a later time.

    >
    > I have IE6 and FF3 on my pc right now. I have already downloaded IE7
    > and plan on installing it soon.
    >


    You might want to think about Googling for multiple IE's. That way you
    can test in both IE6 and IE7 (AFAIK there is no stand alone IE8). IE6
    still has a large share of users, and has many more bugs than IE7.

    --
    Adrienne Boswell at Home
    Arbpen Web Site Design Services
    http://www.cavalcade-of-coding.info
    Please respond to the group so others can share
    Adrienne Boswell, Nov 7, 2008
    #11
  12. Chris F.A. Johnson

    C A Upsdell Guest

    Chaddy2222 wrote:
    > On Nov 6, 11:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:
    > Funny you should say that. The stats for one of my sites shows
    > Netscape 4 users still around.


    This *could* be search spiders, not browsers.
    C A Upsdell, Nov 7, 2008
    #12
  13. Chris F.A. Johnson

    rf Guest

    "C A Upsdell" <> wrote in message
    news:gf0jjo$s7v$...
    > Chaddy2222 wrote:
    >> On Nov 6, 11:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:
    >> Funny you should say that. The stats for one of my sites shows
    >> Netscape 4 users still around.

    >
    > This *could* be search spiders, not browsers.


    Trap one and count it's legs.

    Or, look at the logs. It it GETs any Javascript it's probaby a browser. I'm
    guessing here (having never checked my logs in such detail) but that guess
    is that a SE spider won't be interested in the contents of a Javascript
    file.
    rf, Nov 7, 2008
    #13
  14. Chris F.A. Johnson

    C A Upsdell Guest

    rf wrote:
    > "C A Upsdell" <> wrote in message
    > news:gf0jjo$s7v$...
    >> Chaddy2222 wrote:
    >>> On Nov 6, 11:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:
    >>> Funny you should say that. The stats for one of my sites shows
    >>> Netscape 4 users still around.

    >> This *could* be search spiders, not browsers.

    >
    > Trap one and count it's legs.
    >
    > Or, look at the logs. It it GETs any Javascript it's probaby a browser. I'm
    > guessing here (having never checked my logs in such detail) but that guess
    > is that a SE spider won't be interested in the contents of a Javascript
    > file.


    Search spiders often have userAgent strings which are similar enough to
    those of browsers that log analyzers can easily mistake the spiders for
    browsers. See, for example:

    http://www.user-agents.org/index.shtml?moz
    C A Upsdell, Nov 7, 2008
    #14
  15. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Chaddy2222 Guest

    On Nov 7, 5:17 pm, Ed Mullen <> wrote:
    > Chaddy2222 wrote:
    > > On Nov 6, 11:03 am, Bergamot <> wrote:
    > >> C A Upsdell wrote:
    > >>> Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
    > >>>> body { font-size: 100%; }
    > >>> If you do that, you may find that the fonts are too big with IE5.x
    > >> Why penalize everybody else because one antique browser does something
    > >> differently?

    >
    > >> Might as well not use CSS at all because there might still be a Netscape
    > >> 4.x user out there somewhere.

    >
    > >> :-\

    >
    > > Funny you should say that. The stats for one of my sites shows
    > > Netscape 4 users still around.

    >
    > What percentage?  What number?  Can you say something meaningful about
    > this?  I mean, otherwise, it's kind of like:  "Gee!  I saw someone
    > driving an Edsel yesterday!  I sure hope we're still making parts for
    > that car!"
    >

    It was FA mate. About .04%!.
    - -
    Regards Chad. http://freewebdesignonline.net
    Chaddy2222, Nov 8, 2008
    #15
  16. Jack wrote:

    > I prefer to read and reply by top post. It is more convenient for me.


    Then we prefer to ignore you. It is much more convenient to us. Please do
    not stop using your apparently forged email address before you have a clue.
    TIA.

    --
    Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Nov 8, 2008
    #16
  17. Chris F.A. Johnson

    dorayme Guest

    In article <>,
    Jack <> wrote:

    > I prefer to read and reply by top post. It is more convenient for me.


    Well it is not so convenient for the rest of us. Numbers do count in
    some things, especially when they are backed by arguments.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Nov 8, 2008
    #17
  18. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Guest

    The <font> element is deprecated, like many other
    HTML elements and attributes used for visual formatting,
    where stylesheets are used instead.
    Test your web pages with a Strict doctype, like

    <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/strict.dtd">

    (if you are using HTML)
    and run them through the W3C validator
    validator.w3.org
    to see if you have other deprecated HTML stuff.
    , Nov 8, 2008
    #18
  19. Chris F.A. Johnson

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    "Jack" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > I prefer to read and reply by top post. It is more convenient for me.


    In my country most people drive on the left hand side of the road. However,
    I have an American car, so I prefer to drive on the right hand side. It is
    more convenient for me.
    Nik Coughlin, Nov 8, 2008
    #19
  20. Jack <> writes:

    > I prefer to read and reply by top post. It is more convenient for me.


    Ignoring rude people is more convenient for me.

    *plonk*

    > 'Nuff said.


    Indeed.

    > Thanks for your help.


    Good luck getting more help with that attitude.

    sherm--

    --
    My blog: http://shermspace.blogspot.com
    Cocoa programming in Perl: http://camelbones.sourceforge.net
    Sherm Pendley, Nov 8, 2008
    #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. Shiperton Henethe
    Replies:
    117
    Views:
    2,104
    Andy Dingley
    Dec 22, 2004
  2. Jason Cavett

    Preferred Size, Minimum Size, Size

    Jason Cavett, May 23, 2008, in forum: Java
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    12,502
    Michael Jung
    May 25, 2008
  3. dorayme

    Re: Preferred way to size fonts

    dorayme, Nov 5, 2008, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    414
    dorayme
    Nov 5, 2008
  4. richard

    Re: Preferred way to size fonts

    richard, Nov 6, 2008, in forum: HTML
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    451
    Acmeous
    Nov 10, 2008
  5. sam
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    350
Loading...

Share This Page