Forum Moderators: open
I don't even know how to change my font size! Other than IE's "View... Text Size" I can't find where to set what "Medium" is. In Netscape and IE/Mac I can find where to change the default size, but not in IE5/Win98.
Another excellent observation. You just brought up something I forgot all about. When I switched to 1024x768 a couple of years ago, the default font setting for windows was too small.
Right click your desktop and go to...
Properties > Settings > Advanced > General > Display > Font Size > Large Fonts
Note: You'll need to restart windows for the settings to take effect.
I have Large Fonts specified which are set at 125%, i.e. 10pt Arial at 120px per inch. If I had the setting at 100%, that makes 10pt Arial at 96 px which is the default setting for Windows. At 100%, the pages I view appear as I would guess the designer intended.
So, that now brings up the topic of user preferences. I can't imagine many people not adjusting their default font viewing size for windows when they go beyond the 800x600 resolution. Type is small and I'm so used to that 125% setting that I'm not switching back!
unless the site requires something fancy ;)
dazz
With the sites that were designed using px, there was no difference in viewing size (of course). So again, the Happy Medium comes into play. I'm convincing myself that px is the best alternative at this point.
The style and the usability. That content, is what they came for.
I like your site wilson, but the fonts are too small. Without even thinking about it, the first thing I did, was reach out and press the + key (opera, for enlarge).
My site is in desperate need of a redesign but you point about content must be a misinterpretation as 'content' has sod all to do with style. Hence the move to CSS and XHTML seperating the 2.
My point is that you should never dictate how someone views your information. It's futile. Better to suggest how to style it and let the user decide.
BTW my name is Nick, I really regret joining as nwilson but I think I'll have to unsub and join again to change right?
Pageone, px IS the most reliable sizing method across platforms and resolutions.
Oh, I'm convinced. I've been following your posts about css since you first showed up. I've gained 20 pounds eating it all up!
What percentage of people know how to adjust anything?
The flexible font argument is great if the majority of people make adjustments, otherwise you need to consider what brings greatest good to the unadjusted masses. i.e.
Flex. Font - unadjusted% + adjusted% (remaining% * adjustment%)
Fixed Font - unadjusted%
Example - (source = numbers pulled from the sky)
Flex. Font - 64% = (unadjusted) 60% + 4% (10% adjustment of remaining 40%)
Fixed Font - 80% = (unadjusted) 80% + 0% (no adjustment of remaining 20%)
my two pennies:
* a lot of flexible font sites have the equivalent of 6px for small text.
* people who need to resize often should consider using a browser with excellent support for resizing and zooming (flex, fixed, images, etc.).
That's an aesthetic value and a layout issue, but when it comes to delivering information it's also where the problem lies. You can still tell something valuable about an image at a rather small size. As screen res goes up, and long before an image loses aesthetic usefulness, the copy has shrunk down become unreadable for many.
To some degree, this font control discussion begins to fall into the Jakob vs. Joshua [webmasterworld.com] discussion. What's more important, the LOOK or the INFO?
This thread has convinced me to give ems a try on the next project. I already know that it's not going to be one of those tightly controlled high-design sites, so it's a perfect candidate.
>What percentage of users do you think know how to adjust their font sizes?
>40% to 60%
>Or do you think the number is higher?
I'd say lower, and by a lot. Browser font size is something that almost none of my clients or their staff have known about until I showed them. System font size has been something that even long time techies (even professional sys admins) haven't been clear about.
This is all about growing pains in a new medium. No, the web is not DTP, but many still want it to be and even assume that it SHOULD be - both designers and business owners fall in that camp.
Many people assume that a "beautiful" design and layout is important in achieving their business objectives. How many have ever tested that belief by operating a totally "functional" but bare bones website side by side against a tightly controlled high design beauty with the same copy?
I see talk of pushing the web forward and using new design elements, which is great for hobbies or special interests ... although I still visit at least a site a day that I just give up and leave.
What if you're selling a product to everyone from 10 year olds to 8o year olds, in all economic ranges... people in community centers and libraries to the latest dot.com wall street office?
At least 55% of my visitors are two versions or more behind in browser editions. When it comes to business I try to make my site look both functional and presentable to the largest number of people in all places. I don't give a darn (personal business wise) about pushing everybody elses web forward if it takes away from my customers.
Anyone else consider or do this when testing?
change the POV and the usability question is entirely separated from the aesthetics
Nick's question is an important one... and it's just as important for us the designers/developers to consider the user when making decisions. Regardless of the percentage of users who know how to adjust font size, if we use fixed sizes, we basically defeat built in browser functionality.
And what about impaired users who DO know how to adjust their fonts, and rely on that ability to use the web?
If it comes down to a question of print quality, why not use a print specific style sheet when needed?
Just curious... I would love to see some user stats though.
Mozilla/Netscape 6 users can choose a different style sheet if the designer has set up one (or two or three or more) and added the "alternate stylesheet" attribute to the bonus css-links. Example: <link rel="alternate stylesheet" type="text/css" media="screen" href="alternate.css" title="Big Fonts" />
Visually challenged users will know what browsers will help them most or use specially designed software.
There is also the possibility of letting the user deside what font size he/she'd like to see by using a styleswitcher (check this out at "a list apart").
But what I am also concerned a bit is the use of the same fonts all over the net. Of course we need to use fonts that are on the user's computer too (at least at the moment), but always Verdana, Arial a.s.o.?
I've been testing the various functions of css and font sizes and it hasn't been brought up that NS6 users can size their fonts up or down by going to View > Text Size or Ctrl+ or Ctrl-. Style sheets seem to be overidden in regards to font sizing.
I just haven't been able to bring myself to use relative sizing. I've tested under many different circumstances and I find that the fixed sizing seems to produce the best overall results. I realize the accessiblity issue and I want to be 100% accessible. But, its a give and take situation, px it shall be, for now.
The font size chosen by the user as a comfortable default (1 em) provides more truly useful information about the rendering environment than all the resolution-sniffing, window-querying, "open-this-wide" logic you can throw at the problem.Between CSS em units for resolution-independence, and percentages for aspect independence (like the margins on this page), you've got what you need to do rich, dynamic visual design that's highly degradable, maintainable, user-friendly, and fat-free!
The Amazing Em Unit [style.cleverchimp.com]
On another thread, rjohara gives a link to a helpful site created by a pro typographer.... There's a solid explanation of how "ems" work cross-browser....
I like the idea-- and his page looks fine on IE 5-6, NS 6 and Opera-- but it does not seem to work properly on NS 4.7x browsers (changing browser font size does nothing). So as long as we're taking account of the 10-15% still using that one, I don't see how his solution can truly be "cross-browser" and avoid sniffing, alternative stylesheets, etc.
http://www.alistapart.com/stories/fear4/index.html
I guess its just a control issue. With the ems, there is too much of a difference when adjusting font sizes. With percentages, they were not real consistent across the browsers I'm testing in. With px and the right sizing, at least you can appeal to the masses at 800x600, 1024x768 and even 1152x864. Again, I'm using 13px, 14px and 15px Verdana.
14px for all main content.
13px for navigation links.
15px for <h1> elements.
If layout control and consistency is a priority, setting your font-size using px is the best solution.
surely this is a case of using a tool to achieve a goal (consistency of appearance to achieve consistency of aesthetic appeal) and then getting fixated on the tool and its performance rather than how well it achieves the goal
Especially since the difference in page size after removing the font tags was about 2K. Not as big as the stylesheet will be when it's finished.
If you link to an external stylesheet, those let's say 2 or 3 kB are going to be loaded only once and will then be taken out of cache memory.
"Your" 2 or 3 kB of font-tags and other chunk code will be loaded with each and every page load.
With bigger files (like mine), this can make a heavy difference.
