Re: [WSG] avoid Verdana -> I cant get the whole point.

[Buddy Quaid]

Yea, I agree with you on all of those issues...I myself love the use of css layout and try to choose the best fonts possible. But I guess what i'm trying to get at; is that there is a threshold on how far a group should take things in any direction. It seems that the big picture of web standards is great and makes sense and I try my best to use whats available. Do I sit up all night reading DTD's? Not a chance...I just don't have the time. I wish I did and I admire those that can read it and understand and retain all that they read about it. I dont use the accronym and cite and q tags like I should.  But like a tree, some of these discussions go out on a long limb and lose focus of the big picture. Buddy Q. Joshua Street wrote: -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] on behalf of Buddy Quaid Sent: Tue 4/10/2005 13:32 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: Re: [WSG] avoid Verdana -> I cant get the whole point. I think there's something fundamentally wrong when a discussion about what font you should and shouldn't use is brought up in the context of web standards. Why? Discussion of that allows us to make informed design/typography decisions that would otherwise result in a less-than-optimal user experience for "minority" user groups. Actually... I agree, web standards is wrong. Best practices and accessibility/usability, however, fit this discussion (IMHO) quite nicely. "Web standards" (as this whole quagmire is unfortunately known) aren't really about standards at all. Shock, horror. Go stick that in a validator. We occasionally lose sight of the reasons for pursuing these "standards" (technically "recommendations", sometimes not even that) -- namely, catering for a wider audience irrespective of browsing technology (IE, Lynx, PDAs, Google); future-proofing information through semantic markup; and (this is true in a professional context, at least) improving ROI for businesses websites. If the second reason there was our only cause, you're right, discussion about design and typography would be irrelevant. But the first and third reasons mean it's something we should worry about: firstly because we want to deliver the best possible experience (I know this sounds like marketing crap, sorry!) for all platforms -- and this means using the best fonts wherever possible (or relevant -- it's not for Google or JAWS, etc.) --, and secondly because (subject to the same condition of relevance) image _does_ matter for a number of websites out there... and CSS("standards")-based design can help achieve this, because you've got more than one shot at specifying fonts to target different platforms... amongst other things, like handheld stylesheets, etc. </rant> Josh -- Joshua Street base10solutions http://www.base10solutions.com.au/ ****************************************************** The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/ See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm for some hints on posting to the list & getting help ******************************************************