<font> Coding Pitfalls
(Web development font problems and solutions)

[WWW Link]>>
Let Users Control Font Size
Including "Readability Guidelines for Websites".
* PC points? (1pt = 1.333px or 12pt = 16px.)
[WWW Link]>>
What's wrong with the font element?    
Issues caused by the HTML <font> tag.
[WWW Link]>>
Size Matters -- Making the CSS font sizes work

    Until at least late 2003, the simple solution to setting a change in font size is to use only the "always works" <small> and <big> tags. And while some consider it poor coding practice, <small> <small> or <big> <big> can be used to change the font size by two steps. (Is there really any need for more than that?)

    Notes: Some browsers, like Netscape 4, can require the display of a single character at the current font size, before the next change in font size is made. (Thus the space between tags-- both opening and closing.) Other browsers, like WebTV, will ignore <font> tags. So <font size="+2"> is "not an option". (The "strongly prefered" style sheet methods are supported instead.) And two size levels is the furthest nesting these should go. So any browser that shows the nested size tags as only <big> or <small> may not display things exactly as desired, but also won't really "break" the display of the page content.

[WWW Link]>>
Give Me Pixels or Give Me Death
What works, for specifying absolute font size.
* OK for real text used "as part of a graphic".
* Otherwise, do not use fixed font sizes.
[HTML format Notes]>>
Typefaces and other Cross platform issues
Study Notes for the Yale Web Style Guide.

[HTML format Notes]>>
Laura LeMay's Graphics and Web Page Design
Ch. 3 Notes: Anti-Alias (and Display Fonts)


Monitor this Webpage

E-mail the Webmaster
Page Content Updated: June 1, 2003

    "Above all the problem lies with clients who confuse the web with print. Who insist on pixel-perfect rendering of their sites in user agents incapable of such renderings except at the expense of interoperability, accessibility, and document structure. And who are so concerned with 'backward compatibility' that they neglect the far more important issue of forward compatibility."

 The Web Standards Project (archive)  
 See Also: Dan's Web Tips-- Introduction