Specify one font for a many-celled table

Is there a way to tell CSS to specify one font for a table that has many
cells in which the font is being used? As in, one font that represents the
table itself (rather than specifying in every cell)

Thanks! :-)

Yeah schreef:

Is there a way to tell CSS to specify one font for a table that has many
cells in which the font is being used? As in, one font that represents the
table itself (rather than specifying in every cell)

Thanks! :-)

There are many possibilities:

table{font-family: Verdana;}

or...

table#idName{font-family: Verdana;}

or...

table th{font-family: Verdana;}
table td{font-family: Arial;}




--
Niek

'sNiek wrote:

Yeah schreef:
Is there a way to tell CSS to specify one font for a table that has
many cells in which the font is being used? As in, one font that
represents the table itself (rather than specifying in every cell)

There are many possibilities:

table{font-family: Verdana;}

or...

table#idName{font-family: Verdana;}

or...

table th{font-family: Verdana;}
table td{font-family: Arial;}

Please don't recommend Verdana. Thanks.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

Beauregard T. Shagnasty schreef:

'sNiek wrote:

Yeah schreef:
Is there a way to tell CSS to specify one font for a table that has
many cells in which the font is being used? As in, one font that
represents the table itself (rather than specifying in every cell)
There are many possibilities:

table{font-family: Verdana;}

or...

table#idName{font-family: Verdana;}

or...

table th{font-family: Verdana;}
table td{font-family: Arial;}

Please don't recommend Verdana. Thanks.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

Come on man, we had a discussion on that months ago.
(http://tinyurl.com/mzeek)

It's just an example by the way to show the difference in the type used
for TH's and the TD's.

--
Niek

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, 'sNiek wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty schreef:

Please don't recommend Verdana. Thanks.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

I had the same thought, indeed.

Come on man, we had a discussion on that months ago.

So you're telling us, in public, that you knew all about the point of
contention - and deliberately chose to ignore it? That's not nice.

It's just an example [...]

So - don't you have any ambition to make it a *good* example?

Alan J. Flavell schreef:

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, 'sNiek wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty schreef:

Please don't recommend Verdana. Thanks.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

I had the same thought, indeed.

Come on man, we had a discussion on that months ago.

So you're telling us, in public, that you knew all about the point of
contention - and deliberately chose to ignore it? That's not nice.

I just named a typeface everybody kwows, and yes: I deliberatly
'ignored' it. Your point of view is not a law, IMO

It's just an example [...]

So - don't you have any ambition to make it a *good* example?

It's a good examle, I didn't scale the verdana did I?


--
Niek

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

Please don't recommend Verdana. Thanks.

I had the same thought, indeed.

Verdana in itself is not evil®. It is the combination with
"font-size: 80%" that is evil®.

--
Evil® is a registered trademark of the President of the United States.

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Andreas Prilop wrote:

On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Alan J. Flavell wrote:

Please don't recommend Verdana. Thanks.

I had the same thought, indeed.

Verdana in itself is not evil®.

I don't think anyone has said it is. There are plenty of (off-topic)
situations where it does a fine job. The point ("no pun intended") is
that it does not go well with author-specified fonts on the WWW.

It is the combination with "font-size: 80%" that is evil®.

The root cause is the fact that Verdana is perceived to be so much
larger than typical fonts at a given nominal size.

The resulting temptation on authors to reduce it in size is really a
secondary effect.

*If only* the idea of font-size-adjust had been taken on board, and
developed into something practical, this need not have been a problem.

But, as it is, the same nominal size is applied to all the available
fonts, which is where Verdana goes wrong. Poley's sampler
http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmat...erdanacomp.png
surely makes that clear?

'sNiek wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty schreef:
Please don't recommend Verdana. Thanks.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~sbpoley/webmatters/verdana.html

Come on man, we had a discussion on that months ago.
(http://tinyurl.com/mzeek)

Why, yes we did. <g> (I've already forgotten what I had for breakfast.)

It's just an example by the way to show the difference in the type
used for TH's and the TD's.

Sure, I understood that.

--
-bts
-Warning: I brake for lawn deer

Wed, 15 Mar 2006 18:12:11 +0100 from 'sNiek <niekemmen (AT) netscape (DOT) net>:

Alan J. Flavell schreef:
So you're telling us, in public, that you knew all about the point of
contention - and deliberately chose to ignore it? That's not nice.

I just named a typeface everybody kwows, and yes: I deliberatly
'ignored' it. Your point of view is not a law, IMO

Well, there _is_ Flavell's Law, but that's not relevant here. Alan's
point of view is usually right, and never worth dismissing out of
hand.

*plonk*

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com/
HTML 4.01 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/
validator: http://validator.w3.org/
CSS 2.1 spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/
validator: http://jigsaw.w3.org/css-validator/
Why We Won't Help You:
http://diveintomark.org/archives/200..._wont_help_you