At 00:28 9-10-2002, Colin Viebrock wrote: > >> Log: > >> don't define fonts ... use the browser defaults > > > > Reason being? > >Yasuo Ohgaki's post earlier today said: > > > > First problem, CSS should not contain specific font > > > name. Otherwise, characters may be broken under some > > > browsers when font does not have type faces needed.
I've had this discussion with respect to the euro-sign also. Apparently, there are 2 different standards, which define different places for the euro sign in fonts - one on the 'international currency' glyph, and the 'microsoft' way, in unicode, with an OS-hack for non-unicode fonts. [1] I lack the specifics right now, but can look them up if you're interested. >Although, to be honest, I think his problem is more with the character >set that is being sent with phpinfo pages. I'm guessing he has a >Japanese version of Arial, that's missing some of the characters like >&eactue; etc.. Since the page is probably outputting >charset="shift-JIS" or whatever, the page looks broken. Agreed, as [1] is a problem with the font implementation and should be taken up with the vendor of either the font or the OS. 'The web' cannot be held responsible for how the browser interprets € (or a charset header and bytes from a different one for that matter). >I'm waiting to hear a response from him on this issue, which might >affect my changes to the css page. > > > > The definitions end in generic font families. There's no shame in > > defining a __readable__ __preference__. > > Especially Andale Mono, since it is one of the few monotype fonts, > > that has a readable difference between the l and a 1 and the O and 0. > > > > I've seen more people fiddling with their fonts, because "they're pretty" > > than because they're readable. Docs should aim to be readable. > >Agreed. Which is why the default fonts on people's browsers should be >set to be readable already, no? For a sysadmin yes. For a designer (large group of new users, since articles on flash+php seem to emerge everywhere) that's questionable :-) The CSS mechanism was however designed to express preferences and fallback. >Also, some people have emailed suggesting I remove them because of the >CSS styling that they apply themselves to the phpinfo() output, using >their own font defs. Ehm - that is what user-defined stylesheets on the client are for. And settings like 'always use my fonts'. But anyway - not worth a long discussion - just a tiny bit worried about bogusing bug reports like 'phpinfo page suddenly looks weird'. And it's already much better than deprecated font-tags :-) > > What's more problematic in the css code below, is the 75% default on td/th. > > > > If you nest that, the inner td, is 75% of 75% of the body. > >But there is no nesting of tables in phpinfo()'s output. yet :-) >- Colin > > >-- >PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> >To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php Met vriendelijke groeten / With kind regards, Webmaster IDG.nl Melvyn Sopacua -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
