![]() | |
![]() |
| | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
| |||
| |||
|
#2
| |||
| |||
|
|
I have used CSS in HTML page (font-verdana size-8pt), looks fine in windows but in linux the fonts are corrupt and its too small. Kindly help me and tell what is the solution to correct this. |
#3
| |||
| |||
|
|
I have used CSS in HTML page (font-verdana size-8pt), looks fine in windows but in linux the fonts are corrupt and its too small. Kindly help me and tell what is the solution to correct this. |
#4
| |||
| |||
|
|
On 29 Apr 2004 05:00:52 -0700, minchu2000 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com (minchu) posted: I have used CSS in HTML page (font-verdana size-8pt), looks fine in windows but in linux the fonts are corrupt and its too small. Kindly help me and tell what is the solution to correct this. Well, congratulations. You now realise that many people will have a problem with your page, even if you think it's only going to be Linux users. I'll fill you in and let you know that MSIE users *will* have problems, too. And people using other browsers. The problem is specifying 8pt sized anything. It's inappropriate for a webpage to specify anything in fixed sizes, for various reasons. It's not a "fixed size" it's a proportional size to something that doesn't have a consistent size on the medium. (What is 8pts on your screen, my screen, his screen, screens at different sizes? There is no concrete answer.) Even if there was some way to determine that 8pts was always "yay big" on every screen, 8pts is going to be "too small" for many people. And since you'd fixed the size, there's no easy way for them to increase it to something readable. That's the font sizing problem in a nutshell (unavoidable inconsistency, and problematic results). Verdana's another problem in itself, that'll make things even worse. For people without Verdana, they'll get an even smaller font as a substitute (you'll have picked 8pt Verdana for it's size, and Verdana is bigger than most other fonts, therefor a substitute will look even smaller than you hoped). There's plenty of pages giving masses of details about those issues, just search for "what's wrong with fixed sizes," and "what's wrong with Verdana," you're bound to find plenty of them. The solutions are: "Don't specify fixed sizes," especially small fixed sizes. Better not to specify any sizes at all, unless you really really need to. You usually don't "need" to, and trying to fit text to images (as a common reason for thinking that), is fraught with its own problems because you can only test your own system. There might be some use to making some text a bit bigger on part of a page (e.g. "READ THIS" important type of comments), but picking a smaller than usual font often means its too small to read (why put something on a page if it's hard to read?). Let the browser display things in its usual font size, the one the reader is comfortable with. And, "don't use Verdana," at least not without due thought about the problems it causes, and if you're use of it is going to be one (e.g. Verdana in h1 elements probably isn't going to be a problem, because they're already quite big, bigger than the body text, so they're hardly going to look worse than some other font that's just a bit smaller but still very big). |
#5
| |||
| |||
|
|
I have another query. How do I make my keywords work better?. I have added some key words but when I search in Google my site is very far in the results (key words are also registered with search engines). Kindly tell me the solution for this. I want my page to appear in first few result pages. |

#6
| |||
| |||
|
|
Oh, spit - I should have checked your assertions more thoroughly before spending quarter of an hour on this. Try the "Find Us" page, you should see "St Giles is situated between Billericay and Mountnessing". And there are inbound links to the site that include "billericay". Examples: http://www.ubooty.co.uk/html/essex_links.html and http://www.chelmsford.anglican.org/links/parishes.html Those are two of the first four that I checked - didn't bother looking any further. |
#7
| |||
| |||
|
|
PeterMcC wrote: Oh, spit - I should have checked your assertions more thoroughly before spending quarter of an hour on this. Try the "Find Us" page, you should see "St Giles is situated between Billericay and Mountnessing". And there are inbound links to the site that include "billericay". Examples: http://www.ubooty.co.uk/html/essex_links.html and http://www.chelmsford.anglican.org/links/parishes.html Those are two of the first four that I checked - didn't bother looking any further. My apologies. I should have said "page" instead of "site". |

![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |