John C wrote: > Well it is a very handsome site (much better looking than mine) but > like any site it can be improved. It does not appear that Scribus > was > used. The PDF file was put together with Photoshop and not Scribus. > IMO Scribus would set up the text better, given a fighting chance. > > Your html pages and their pdf version show that a lot of work went > into them. But they can be improved with a little attention to the > typography, including font selection. And if you use actual text > instead of images on your html pages your SEO will be improved. > First > people need to find your pages, then you can impress them with the > content. > > I note that in both versions the paragraphs are seriously gap > toothed. > Hyphenation is badly needed. Scribus can do an acceptable job of > hyphenation if you turn it on. Otherwise use ragged right. I would > suggest a serif face rather than non-serif. But whatever the > typeface > the questions of rivers of type and gap toothed lines need to be > addressed. > > On the html pages where presumably you used Verdana bold a bit > lighter > serif face would do better. Georgia (a Microsoft face) is designed > specifically for online viewing. In the paragraph titled > "Efficient" > the last four lines have a "river" of white space where the words > "processes" "seconds." "browse" and "source" end. The gaps after > these > words all line up, but some are wider than the others. Again > hyphenation will improve the situation. Some people shy away from > hyphenation but any professionally laid out document will use it > where > justification is in force. In my test document referenced below some > of > the text is set ragged right and some is set justified with > hyphenation. The Scribus examples are on page 11 and 17. > > http://wexfordpress.com/tex/compare2.pdf > > In short the problems I find with your site are not just the use of > a > sans-serif font like Verdana. The justification of the text is a > much > more serious problem. And on the pdf version at least I would have > used Scribus plus a nice serif font, and hyphenation. > > On the html version I would consider using some "real" text > somewhere > on the pages as well as tags etc. to give your offerings a chance > for > some search engine rankings. Right now the Alexa rank is not bad > (1,641,359) but the Google rank is nonexistent. My much cruder page > > http://wexfordpress.com > > is no thing of beauty but it gets a Google rank of 4. And if you use > the two search terms "typesetting" and "indexing" together in a > Google > search it comes up first. Try it and see.
Note that he said it's not his site. So suggesting Scribus should have been used is pointless. There is no "html version." The brochure itself is done in Flash, with HTML just in the parts before and after the Flash is invoked. Scribus does not create Flash documents, to my knowledge. I agree that justified text without hyphenation will almost inevitably result in irregular spacing in lines as well as rivers. I do not agree that the page should have used a serif font. It really doesn't matter. Please don't repeat the conventional but unproven assertion that "serif is better for text, sans serif for headings" as some sort of dogma. The studies that are cited to support this assertion can be, and have been, severely criticized. Other studies have shown that the type that's easiest to read depends on what the reader is used to. In some parts of the world, sans type is more commonly used than serif for text. It's also not necessary to use roman for text, bold for headings. You can make a perfectly lovely page using one font with or without boldface. Verdana is an excellent sans font that was designed with reading in a browser in mind. Both Verdana and Georgia (serif) were designed by Matthew Carter, one of the world's leading type designers. Of course, if Verdana were as ubiquitous as Arial, we'd be tired of it, too. --Judy M. USA Registered Linux User #397786 Being productive with VectorLinux 6.0 SOHO
