Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 220.127.116.11
Forum Moderators: incrediBILL
I know they come with Win98. I also thought they were automatically included with MSIE downloads starting with 4.0, but I have not been able to verify this.
I've just inherited a site whose design really depends on the user having both Verdana and Arial, and they also are looking for pretty general compatibility. I'm trying to decide whether to allow this part of the design to stand, or to roll up my sleeves.
While we're on fonts, over the years I've moved away from using the H-tag in favor of the <FONT> tag, yet I'm seeing that H1 or H2 is the odds-on pick for optimization purposes. I guess I'll have to retool.
The MS initiative into embedded fonts seems stuck. Maybe their partnership with Adobe will move the whole area forward.
Back to my Verdana question, I guess it boils down to 1) How many NT systems have Verdana, and
2) How widespread is the Win95/ Netscape-only configuration.
I'm not worried about pre-version 4 browsers, since the stylesheet stuff on the site already rules out that compatibility.
The site I just inherited depends on a user having BOTH Verdana and also one of the narrower sans-serif faces. The original designer set up pages where the different character widths were an inherent part of the design. I already eliminated the dependence on "Impact", but that was not as widespread as the dependence on Verdana.
I'm certainly going to continue to list Verdana in the font family list, as appropriate. But I'm going to re-do the pages where Verdana was an absolute requirement for the layout to work.