Webmaster forum - Which font do you like best?

Author

Which font do you like best?

Ignoramus11475

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

I am trying to start playing with CSS a little bit. For my brand new
lesson writing system, which font do you like best:

this

http://dsl.algebra.com/tutors/quadr...ction=show_prod

or this:

http://www.algebra.com/tutors/quadr...ction=show_prod

Thanks!

i

Fat Sam

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:
> I am trying to start playing with CSS a little bit. For my brand new
> lesson writing system, which font do you like best:
>
> this
>
> http://dsl.algebra.com/tutors/quadr...ction=show_prod
>
> or this:
>
> http://www.algebra.com/tutors/quadr...ction=show_prod
>
> Thanks!
>
> i

My personal preference would be neither of them...I'm not a great fan of
serif fonts, and I find MS Comic Sans a tad *teenagers homepage*....

But that's just my personal taste....

From a design point of view, I think the serif font looks a lot more
professional and *text book*, which I'm assuming is the style you're
looking for....

For what it's worth, I think your sites are brilliant....An invaluable
service....I wish there had been something like that when I was at
school....For most of my school life, I hadn't even seen a computer, let
alone used one to help me....

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

Ignoramus11475

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:58:08 +0000 (UTC), Fat Sam <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> Ignoramus11475 wrote:
>
> My personal preference would be neither of them...I'm not a great fan of
> serif fonts, and I find MS Comic Sans a tad *teenagers homepage*....

Well, these lessons are for teenagers... In any case, if, after
considerng this, you still insist that my font is bad, I will abandon
it.

I am graphically challenged.

> But that's just my personal taste....
>
> From a design point of view, I think the serif font looks a lot more
> professional and *text book*, which I'm assuming is the style you're
> looking for....

What would be its name? Just "Sans Serif"?

> For what it's worth, I think your sites are brilliant....An invaluable
> service....I wish there had been something like that when I was at
> school....For most of my school life, I hadn't even seen a computer, let
> alone used one to help me....

FS, I appreciate the compliment, especially coming from you. To be
honest, I see way to many shortcomings to be happy about my website,
although, hopefully, I am moving in a good direction.

i

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:
> I am trying to start playing with CSS a little bit. For my brand new
> lesson writing system, which font do you like best:
>
> this
>
> http://dsl.algebra.com/tutors/quadr...ction=show_prod

Shows a text/plain page (no fonts <g> ) consisting only of:
"/data3/webdata/algebra.com/tutors/quadratics.lesson: lesson
quadratics not found."

> or this:
>
> http://www.algebra.com/tutors/quadr...ction=show_prod

Except for the Verdana on the unused .tab class, it's my default, or
... the whole page is my default font (and size). I like it!

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

John Bokma

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Fat Sam wrote:

> From a design point of view, I think the serif font looks a lot more
> professional and *text book*, which I'm assuming is the style you're
> looking for....

For screen: pick sans-serif, for a book serif. If you want professional
text book look: LaTeX :-D

> For what it's worth, I think your sites are brilliant....An invaluable
> service....I wish there had been something like that when I was at
> school....For most of my school life, I hadn't even seen a computer, let
> alone used one to help me....

Amen.

--
John PERL SEO tools: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Experienced (web) developer: http://castleamber.com/
Get a SEO report of your site for just 100 USD:
http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

Fat Sam

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2005 19:58:08 +0000 (UTC), Fat Sam <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> Well, these lessons are for teenagers... In any case, if, after
> considerng this, you still insist that my font is bad, I will abandon
> it.

Oh, I don't mean it's neccesarilly bad...Just not really my taste....But
then everybody's different...

>
>
> What would be its name? Just "Sans Serif"?

Well, the serif one you're using looks like Times Roman to me....

>
>
>
> FS, I appreciate the compliment, especially coming from you. To be
> honest, I see way to many shortcomings to be happy about my website,
> although, hopefully, I am moving in a good direction.

The important thing about your sites is that they work well, and they
provide a valuable service to potentially every child in the English
speaking world....
I think some of the shortcomings you percieve, may be entirely in your
imagination....We all have a tendency to be over-critical of our own
work....

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

Fat Sam

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

John Bokma wrote:
> Fat Sam wrote:
>
>
>
>
> For screen: pick sans-serif, for a book serif. If you want professional
> text book look: LaTeX :-D

Extremely good advice....

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

Ignoramus11475

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

On Wed, 25 May 2005 20:29:21 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> wrote:
> Ignoramus11475 wrote:
>
> Shows a text/plain page (no fonts <g> ) consisting only of:
> "/data3/webdata/algebra.com/tutors/quadratics.lesson: lesson
> quadratics not found."

It should work now, it is my development website.

>
> Except for the Verdana on the unused .tab class, it's my default, or
> .. the whole page is my default font (and size). I like it!

I see. The page on www. uses "default font" a lot, in other words, it
does not really specify font.

i

Ignoramus11475

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

On 25 May 2005 20:36:04 GMT, John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
> Fat Sam wrote:
>
>
> For screen: pick sans-serif, for a book serif. If you want professional

I tried sans-serif, it was kind of hard to read. I like the big bold
letters on the lesson, to be honest.

> text book look: LaTeX :-D
>
>
> Amen.
>

Ah, thank you guys, I honesty feel that I do not deserve the
compliment, I am not tryin got be cute.

i
--

Ignoramus11475

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

On Wed, 25 May 2005 20:44:56 +0000 (UTC), Fat Sam <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> John Bokma wrote:
>
> Extremely good advice....
>
>

do you mean some LaTeX font, or something else? If so, what font?

Sorry for being so dense.

i
--

Fat Sam

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:
> On 25 May 2005 20:36:04 GMT, John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I tried sans-serif, it was kind of hard to read. I like the big bold
> letters on the lesson, to be honest.
>
>
>
>
> Ah, thank you guys, I honesty feel that I do not deserve the
> compliment, I am not tryin got be cute.
>
> i

LOL, well, whatever you did mate...You did something right....

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

Fat Sam

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:
> On 25 May 2005 20:36:04 GMT, John Bokma <john@castleamber.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> I tried sans-serif, it was kind of hard to read. I like the big bold
> letters on the lesson, to be honest.

For Sans-Serif fonts, I tend to use Arial or Verdana...I know Verdana
isn't technically a sans serif font, but it's a good clear one and it's
pretty universal in it's dispersal across different systems....

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

Fat Sam

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:
> On Wed, 25 May 2005 20:44:56 +0000 (UTC), Fat Sam <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> do you mean some LaTeX font, or something else?

I thought it was some sort of kinky proposition ;-)

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

Disco Octopus

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

Fat Sam wrote :
> Ignoramus11475 wrote:
>
> Oh, I don't mean it's neccesarilly bad...Just not really my taste....But then
> everybody's different...
>
>
> Well, the serif one you're using looks like Times Roman to me....
>

To me its arial. I think there is just no font assigned in this page,
as my default font is arial in IE. when looking through firefox its
serif (of some kind).

--
a beef jerky web site : http://www.choicebeefjerky.com.au
not a beef jerky web site : http://mycoolfish.com/vote.cmks
dont pick your nose if it is sore

Martin Harran

2005-05-25, 7:59 pm

"Ignoramus11475" <ignoramus11475@NOSPAM.11475.invalid> wrote in message
news:d72n6t$c0t$0@pita.alt.net...

> I see way to many shortcomings to be happy about my website,
> although, hopefully, I am moving in a good direction.

The three key things for a succesful website are Content ... Content ... and
Content.

You've got great content for the audience you are aiming at, don't try to
over-embellish it, keep it simple and don't worry about fonts as long as you
don't use something ridiculous.

Sam is quite right, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, people here will
be looking at your site from a web designers point of view, the kids using
it won't give s**t about aesthetics, it's the answers they will be after.

John Bokma

2005-05-25, 11:27 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:

> On Wed, 25 May 2005 20:44:56 +0000 (UTC), Fat Sam
> <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> do you mean some LaTeX font, or something else? If so, what font?

Nah, it was a joke, and I mean in print. I personally don't consider LaTeX
output in books nice to read. It's a matter of taste.

OTOH, I can remember that the other thingy is some kind of a rule of the
thumb: serif fonts don't read nice on screens.

--
John PERL SEO tools: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Experienced (web) developer: http://castleamber.com/
Get a SEO report of your site for just 100 USD:
http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

John Bokma

2005-05-25, 11:27 pm

Ignoramus11475 wrote:

> Ah, thank you guys, I honesty feel that I do not deserve the
> compliment, I am not tryin got be cute.

Google is not trying to be cute either ;-). I even get the impression that
the maker of BitTorrent, was not trying to be cute, or is no longer trying
too :-)

--
John PERL SEO tools: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Experienced (web) developer: http://castleamber.com/
Get a SEO report of your site for just 100 USD:
http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

Ignoramus11475

2005-05-25, 11:27 pm

On Wed, 25 May 2005 23:48:49 +0100, Martin Harran <nospam@martinharran.com> wrote:
>
> "Ignoramus11475" <ignoramus11475@NOSPAM.11475.invalid> wrote in message
> news:d72n6t$c0t$0@pita.alt.net...
>
>
> The three key things for a succesful website are Content ... Content ... and
> Content.
>
> You've got great content for the audience you are aiming at, don't try to
> over-embellish it, keep it simple and don't worry about fonts as long as you
> don't use something ridiculous.
>
> Sam is quite right, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, people here will
> be looking at your site from a web designers point of view, the kids using
> it won't give s**t about aesthetics, it's the answers they will be after.

Thanks for the voice of common sense. I like to think in the same
direction, although from time to tim I try to do cutesy things.

i

Matt Probert

2005-05-26, 7:44 am

Once upon a time, far far away Fat Sam
<janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> spluttered

>My personal preference would be neither of them...I'm not a great fan of
>serif fonts, and I find MS Comic Sans a tad *teenagers homepage*....

It's also the font of choice of my daughter's school's web site. So
perhaps appropriate for a site aimed at children?

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

Els

2005-05-26, 7:44 am

Matt Probert wrote:

> Once upon a time, far far away Fat Sam
> <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> spluttered
>
>
> It's also the font of choice of my daughter's school's web site. So
> perhaps appropriate for a site aimed at children?

Yes, IMO.

--
Els http://locusmeus.com/
Sonhos vem. Sonhos vão. O resto é imperfeito.
- Renato Russo -
Now playing: The Kinks - (Wish I Could Fly Like) Superman

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

Martin Harran wrote:
> "Ignoramus11475" <ignoramus11475@NOSPAM.11475.invalid> wrote in message
> news:d72n6t$c0t$0@pita.alt.net...
>
>
>
>
> The three key things for a succesful website are Content ... Content ... and
> Content.

Even when the content is design. Content != text... Actually I think
even the term "content" is reguarly misused.

> Sam is quite right, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, people here will
> be looking at your site from a web designers point of view, the kids using
> it won't give s**t about aesthetics, it's the answers they will be after.

That's only partly true. On a concious level someone may not care about
aesthetics, but subconciously it can make or break a design. It's as
much about "feeling" as "functionality".

Charles Sweeney

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

SpaceGirl wrote

> Even when the content is design. Content != text... Actually I think
> even the term "content" is reguarly misused.

Call me old-fashioned, but for me, content is content. Content is what
your site *contains*. Usually that is words, but of course it can be
pictures, sounds etc.

I think when people refer to content, they usually mean words, but in
the case of a site that gives away buttons, then lots of buttons would
equal lots of content.

So I think I'm agreeing with you here.

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

Charles Sweeney wrote:
> SpaceGirl wrote
>
>
>
>
> Call me old-fashioned, but for me, content is content. Content is what
> your site *contains*. Usually that is words, but of course it can be
> pictures, sounds etc.
>
> I think when people refer to content, they usually mean words, but in
> the case of a site that gives away buttons, then lots of buttons would
> equal lots of content.
>
> So I think I'm agreeing with you here.
>

*wrinkles nose* hmmmm. Okay.

:)

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

"SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
news:3fleidF8ealkU1@individual.net...
> Martin Harran wrote:
>
> Even when the content is design. Content != text... Actually I think even
> the term "content" is reguarly misused.

Content is relevant to the the targeted audience.

If I am looking for a graphics/web designer and I go to their site, the
aesthetics of the site will probably matter more to me than the actual text
content.

When I go to Amazon, I don't give a damn about aesthetics, I only want to
quickly find if the article I want is available and how much it will cost
me. (I accept that the situation is a little bit different for a user just
browsing the site with nothing in particular in mind.)

In this site of Ignoramus11475, the user simply wants an answer to his/her
algebraic problem, functionality of the site in regard to making that answer
easy to find is all that matters.

I think I'm saying the same thing as Charles :)

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

Martin Harran wrote:
>
> Content is relevant to the the targeted audience.
>

Yeah

> If I am looking for a graphics/web designer and I go to their site, the
> aesthetics of the site will probably matter more to me than the actual text
> content.

Likewise

> When I go to Amazon, I don't give a damn about aesthetics, I only want to
> quickly find if the article I want is available and how much it will cost
> me. (I accept that the situation is a little bit different for a user just
> browsing the site with nothing in particular in mind.)

You dont THINK you give a damn, but really you do, which is why people
pick product XYZ over ABC most of the time. It's often very little to do
with the product itself. The "feel" factor comes in. If Amazon.com was a
god-awful pink site with red text, would it be so popular?

Design & aethetics go a long way to the "friendliness" of a site, which
in turn effectively makes it "feel" easier to use, even if it's not.

> In this site of Ignoramus11475, the user simply wants an answer to his/her
> algebraic problem, functionality of the site in regard to making that answer
> easy to find is all that matters.

Yep :)

>
> I think I'm saying the same thing as Charles :)

:D

Wow, we're all getting along today. Did Viper/Karim die?

Charles Sweeney

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

SpaceGirl wrote

> Wow, we're all getting along today. Did Viper/Karim die?

:o)

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

Blinky the Shark

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

Martin Harran wrote:

> If I am looking for a graphics/web designer and I go to their site, the
> aesthetics of the site will probably matter more to me than the actual text
> content.

But isn't that still style, however relevant, and not content?

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
Killing all Usenet posts from Google Groups
Info: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

"SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
news:3flj4tF8flvdU1@individual.net...

> If Amazon.com was a god-awful pink site with red text, would it be so
> popular?

Quite possibly :)

IMO, what would kill it more quickly as a site would be if it was very
difficult to navigate or if it was very slow with a lot of timeouts when
searching.

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

Martin Harran wrote:
> "SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
> news:3flj4tF8flvdU1@individual.net...
>
>
>
>
> Quite possibly :)
>
> IMO, what would kill it more quickly as a site would be if it was very
> difficult to navigate or if it was very slow with a lot of timeouts when
> searching.
>
>

Yep. But the layout of menus, and "traditional" navigation is as much
aesthetics as functional design. You can pack everything needed onto a
page, and even if it works it may fail your customers simply because it
doesn't look good. A better looking competitors site may win out. And
when I say "better looking", that doesn't mean "sexier"; It could mean
more simple, better colour use, cleaner layout... with exactly the same
functionality. Aesthetics are *really* important.

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

"Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
news:slrnd9b819.5cm.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net...
> Martin Harran wrote:
>
>
> But isn't that still style, however relevant, and not content?

Style *can* be relevant, in the example above for a designer's site, you
could say that style is actually the content.

In the case of Ignoramus's (sp? Wish he had a less offensive sounding name!
*) site, it's all about functionality in giving the user the answer to his
question and style is only relevant in how easy the site is to use - colours
and fonts are largely irrelevant unless they are so daft that they
discourage the user from even trying to use the site.

------------------------------------------------------

*OT: Found this the other day, a site about modern slang
http://www.djron.com/jokes/slang.html

My favourite on it is "Ignoranus: A person who’s both stupid and an
XXXXXXX." :)

Charles Sweeney

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

Martin Harran wrote

> IMO, what would kill it more quickly as a site would be if it was very
> difficult to navigate or if it was very slow with a lot of timeouts when
> searching.

Or a long Flash intro!

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:45 am

"SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
news:3flnh5F8diqrU1@individual.net...
> Martin Harran wrote:
[color=darkred]
> Yep. But the layout of menus, and "traditional" navigation is as much
> aesthetics as functional design. You can pack everything needed onto a
> page, and even if it works it may fail your customers simply because it
> doesn't look good. A better looking competitors site may win out. And when
> I say "better looking", that doesn't mean "sexier"; It could mean more
> simple, better colour use, cleaner layout... with exactly the same
> functionality. Aesthetics are *really* important.

I think that in regard to 'functional' sites i.e. those where someone
specifically wants to do something like make a purchase or get an answer to
a specific question, aesthetics have a negative contribution* - if they are
really bad they will put people off, but being really good will not give the
site any competitive advantage.

When was the last time you heard someone praising the aesthetics of Amazon
or Google?

* Just to wander off topic ever so slightly, this reminds me of Frederick
Herzberg's theories on motivation, very popular in the 60's and 70's, where
he described pay, for example, as a 'dissatisfier' - bad pay will
demotivate a person but good pay will not necessarily motivate them. IMHO
the same principle applies to aesthetics in web design.

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

"Charles Sweeney" <me@charlessweeney.com> wrote in message
news:Xns966278B95BAB6mecharlessweeneycom@130.133.1.4...
> Martin Harran wrote
>
>
> Or a long Flash intro!

**** News Alert *****

alt.www.webmaster has been struck today with the most serious epidemic of
Agreement ever known there! Early reports are that some of the usual
inhabitants who were absent when the outbreak happened are hastily making
their way back to deal with this.

Blinky the Shark

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Martin Harran wrote:

> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
> news:slrnd9b819.5cm.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net...
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
[color=darkred]
> Style *can* be relevant, in the example above for a designer's site, you

I know. That assumption is embedded in my question, not disputed by it.

> could say that style is actually the content.

I couldn't, no. Not and consider myself actually accurate. ;)

But I see a potentially fuzzy line, there, sure.

--
Blinky Linux Registered User 297263
Killing all Usenet posts from Google Groups
Info: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Martin Harran wrote:
> "SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
> news:3flnh5F8diqrU1@individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> I think that in regard to 'functional' sites i.e. those where someone
> specifically wants to do something like make a purchase or get an answer to
> a specific question, aesthetics have a negative contribution* - if they are
> really bad they will put people off, but being really good will not give the
> site any competitive advantage.
>
> When was the last time you heard someone praising the aesthetics of Amazon
> or Google?
>
>
> * Just to wander off topic ever so slightly, this reminds me of Frederick
> Herzberg's theories on motivation, very popular in the 60's and 70's, where
> he described pay, for example, as a 'dissatisfier' - bad pay will
> demotivate a person but good pay will not necessarily motivate them. IMHO
> the same principle applies to aesthetics in web design.

The fact that Google is very clean and simple IS aesthetic! There is
design/aesthetics in everything. The fact that it doesn't have a
colourful design is aesthetic, rather than functional - it wouldn't make
any functional difference either way, colourful or not.

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Martin Harran wrote:
> "Blinky the Shark" <no.spam@box.invalid> wrote in message
> news:slrnd9b819.5cm.no.spam@thurston.blinkynet.net...
>
>
>
>
> Style *can* be relevant, in the example above for a designer's site, you
> could say that style is actually the content.
>
> In the case of Ignoramus's (sp? Wish he had a less offensive sounding name!
> *) site, it's all about functionality in giving the user the answer to his
> question and style is only relevant in how easy the site is to use - colours
> and fonts are largely irrelevant unless they are so daft that they
> discourage the user from even trying to use the site.
>

No, they are both very important. The fonts you use give a feel to the
design, as well as making it more readable (or less!).

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

"SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
news:3flq45F8giu0U1@individual.net...

> The fact that Google is very clean and simple IS aesthetic! There is
> design/aesthetics in everything.

Fair enough, I just wish more designers would remember that clean and simple
can be aesthetically pleasing.

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

"SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
news:3flq6vF8giu0U2@individual.net...

> No, they are both very important. The fonts you use give a feel to the
> design, as well as making it more readable (or less!).

Going back to the OP, the two fonts he displayed were both perfectly
readable IMHO, either of them would do and he shouldn't waste time worrying
about it :)

Matt Probert

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Once upon a time, far far away SpaceGirl
<NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> spluttered

>Wow, we're all getting along today. Did Viper/Karim die?

Hmmmph!

Better put a stop to this <g>

What's wrong with pastel pink?

Allegedly, when that American Nazi prison governor dyed all the
inmates underwear pink in an attempt to belittle them, they took off
(sic) like hot cakes (even sicer) and flew round the black market!

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

Matt Probert

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Once upon a time, far far away "Martin Harran"
<nospam@martinharran.com> spluttered

>
>"SpaceGirl" <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> wrote in message
>news:3flj4tF8flvdU1@individual.net...
>
>
>Quite possibly :)
>
>IMO, what would kill it more quickly as a site would be if it was very
>difficult to navigate or if it was very slow with a lot of timeouts when
>searching.
>

Like elephant.co.uk, I gave up trying to get my car insurance through
them, the site was neither responsive nor functional (which upset me
because it reminded me of myself after a few pints of Tanglefoot).

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

Matt Probert

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Once upon a time, far far away "Martin Harran"
<nospam@martinharran.com> spluttered

>
>"Charles Sweeney" <me@charlessweeney.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns966278B95BAB6mecharlessweeneycom@130.133.1.4...
>
>
>**** News Alert *****
>
>alt.www.webmaster has been struck today with the most serious epidemic of
>Agreement ever known there! Early reports are that some of the usual
>inhabitants who were absent when the outbreak happened are hastily making
>their way back to deal with this.
>

Relax, the Yanks shall awaken shortly and then normal flaming will
resume.

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Matt Probert wrote:
> Once upon a time, far far away SpaceGirl
> <NOtheSpacegirlSPAM@subhuman.net> spluttered
>
>
>
>
> Hmmmph!
>
> Better put a stop to this <g>
>
> What's wrong with pastel pink?
>
> Allegedly, when that American Nazi prison governor dyed all the
> inmates underwear pink in an attempt to belittle them, they took off
> (sic) like hot cakes (even sicer) and flew round the black market!
>
> Matt
>
>
> --
> The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
> http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

Nothing wrong with pink... people who've known me for a while will know
I have a long history of pink web sites :D I was just using it as an
example.

There's nothing wrong with a web site with a black background and
straight white text... it'll do the job, but aesthetics?

Fat Sam

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Matt Probert wrote:
> Once upon a time, far far away Fat Sam
> <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> spluttered
>
>
>
>
> It's also the font of choice of my daughter's school's web site. So
> perhaps appropriate for a site aimed at children?

Good point....

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

Martin Harran

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

"Fat Sam" <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:d74jt8$isd$1@nwrdmz03.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> Matt Probert wrote:
[color=darkred]

The basic principles of web design, remind me of the rules of effective
public speaking:

1) Know exactly who your audience is and address their desires, not what you
would like their desires to be.

2) Start of with something startling or dramatic to catch their attention.

3) Tell them what you're going to tell them ... then tell them ... then tell
them what you have told them.

4) Don't try to tell them every possible thing in one speech, hint that you
have more to tell if they come back another day.

5) Use humour very sparingly, at best you are only half as funny as you
think you are.

6) End on a high note - people remember the start and end of things and very
little of the bit in between.

Fat Sam

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

SpaceGirl wrote:
> Martin Harran wrote:
>
>
> Yeah
>
>
>
> Likewise
>
>
>
> You dont THINK you give a damn, but really you do, which is why people
> pick product XYZ over ABC most of the time. It's often very little to do
> with the product itself. The "feel" factor comes in. If Amazon.com was a
> god-awful pink site with red text, would it be so popular?
>
> Design & aethetics go a long way to the "friendliness" of a site, which
> in turn effectively makes it "feel" easier to use, even if it's not.

To put all of this into a real world context, and to slightly dissagree
with your point (although not too much because on the whole I think I
agree with you too)

There are three guitar shops in Kings Lynn....

One of them is owned by a snooty shirt and tie wearer and has people who
follow you around the shop watching you and asking you if they can help
you every time you look at a price tag on something.....The staff are
all the kind of people who are classically trained and actually frown
upon things like electric guitars, claiming they're not real
instruments, even though they sell more of them than anything else....

The second shop is part of a large chain....It has a unified corporate
image, both inside and out....They've made great use of clever branding,
and graphics, and they've spent a fortune on brightly coloured, moulded
plastic signs, and all the decor inside matches and looks highly
professional....The staff however, are very badly informed about the
products they sell....Quite often, if you ask them a question, they have
to go away and look up the answer from a catalogue....And on more than
one occasion, I have heard them give out deliberately bad advice to
unsuspecting people just to fleece them out of more money (an old lady
came in with her grandsons new guitar and said it had gone out of tune.
they charged her £15 to tune it, and told her she would need to bring it
in every 2 to 4 weeks to be re-tuned. they didn't tell her that they
sell electronic tuners for £5 which would enable her grandson to tune
the guitar himself, but I told her)

The third shop is a dark little shop unit, about halfway between the
other two....It has no great corporate branding....Just a little hand
painted sign outside saying "Guitar Crazy" and you have to go up a back
alleyway and up a flight of stairs to get in there.....Once inside, the
stock isn't laid out in any particular order....It's all on display, but
often you have to move amplifiers to get to the guitar you want....The
staff are all very well informed about the products they sell....They're
all musicians themselves, who play in local bands....They all have a
passion about their subject and they'll stand and chat with you for
hours on end, and even make you a cuppa if you're cheeky enough to
ask....I always feel at home in that shop....

The interesting thing is, it's the third shop that does the best
business in the town....

The people and musicians of the town have voted with their feet and
decided that the service they provide is worth so much more than the
eye-candy offered by the others.....

--
www.fixaphoto.co.uk
for photographic restorations

SpaceGirl

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Fat Sam wrote:
> SpaceGirl wrote:
>
>
>
> To put all of this into a real world context, and to slightly dissagree
> with your point (although not too much because on the whole I think I
> agree with you too)
>
> There are three guitar shops in Kings Lynn....
>
> One of them is owned by a snooty shirt and tie wearer and has people who
> follow you around the shop watching you and asking you if they can help
> you every time you look at a price tag on something.....The staff are
> all the kind of people who are classically trained and actually frown
> upon things like electric guitars, claiming they're not real
> instruments, even though they sell more of them than anything else....
>
> The second shop is part of a large chain....It has a unified corporate
> image, both inside and out....They've made great use of clever branding,
> and graphics, and they've spent a fortune on brightly coloured, moulded
> plastic signs, and all the decor inside matches and looks highly
> professional....The staff however, are very badly informed about the
> products they sell....Quite often, if you ask them a question, they have
> to go away and look up the answer from a catalogue....And on more than
> one occasion, I have heard them give out deliberately bad advice to
> unsuspecting people just to fleece them out of more money (an old lady
> came in with her grandsons new guitar and said it had gone out of tune.
> they charged her £15 to tune it, and told her she would need to bring it
> in every 2 to 4 weeks to be re-tuned. they didn't tell her that they
> sell electronic tuners for £5 which would enable her grandson to tune
> the guitar himself, but I told her)
>
> The third shop is a dark little shop unit, about halfway between the
> other two....It has no great corporate branding....Just a little hand
> painted sign outside saying "Guitar Crazy" and you have to go up a back
> alleyway and up a flight of stairs to get in there.....Once inside, the
> stock isn't laid out in any particular order....It's all on display, but
> often you have to move amplifiers to get to the guitar you want....The
> staff are all very well informed about the products they sell....They're
> all musicians themselves, who play in local bands....They all have a
> passion about their subject and they'll stand and chat with you for
> hours on end, and even make you a cuppa if you're cheeky enough to
> ask....I always feel at home in that shop....
>
>
> The interesting thing is, it's the third shop that does the best
> business in the town....
>
> The people and musicians of the town have voted with their feet and
> decided that the service they provide is worth so much more than the
> eye-candy offered by the others.....
>

Ah, but you could look at it differently. The aethetic for the 3rd shop
is grungy, and perhaps more appealing to a particular audience?

My fave bookshop is a little one on Leith Walk, in a basement. You can
hardly move for books, with big shelves that tower above you and look
like they may topple on you any moment. It's old and musty and the
carpet is pealing. But I love it. Always discovering new caches of
goodies in there. Much prefer that over the slickness of Waterstones.
Not that I mind them much either, but I feel more comfortable in the
little shop.

Ignoramus30094

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Regarding amazon, I borrowed the tabbed design from amazon. I regerd
them very highly for making everyone able to navigate a very deep
website. With all these exercises with fonts etc, I am looking for
improved readability mostly. Aesthetics is a fuzzy notion to me,
although I do want the user to have a pleasant feeling.

i

Ignoramus30094

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

On Thu, 26 May 2005 14:18:34 +0000 (UTC), Fat Sam <janetandsam@beeteeinternet.co.uk> wrote:
> SpaceGirl wrote:
>
> To put all of this into a real world context, and to slightly dissagree
> with your point (although not too much because on the whole I think I
> agree with you too)
>
> There are three guitar shops in Kings Lynn....
>
> One of them is owned by a snooty shirt and tie wearer and has people who
> follow you around the shop watching you and asking you if they can help
> you every time you look at a price tag on something.....The staff are
> all the kind of people who are classically trained and actually frown
> upon things like electric guitars, claiming they're not real
> instruments, even though they sell more of them than anything else....
>
> The second shop is part of a large chain....It has a unified corporate
> image, both inside and out....They've made great use of clever branding,
> and graphics, and they've spent a fortune on brightly coloured, moulded
> plastic signs, and all the decor inside matches and looks highly
> professional....The staff however, are very badly informed about the
> products they sell....Quite often, if you ask them a question, they have
> to go away and look up the answer from a catalogue....And on more than
> one occasion, I have heard them give out deliberately bad advice to
> unsuspecting people just to fleece them out of more money (an old lady
> came in with her grandsons new guitar and said it had gone out of tune.
> they charged her £15 to tune it, and told her she would need to bring it
> in every 2 to 4 weeks to be re-tuned. they didn't tell her that they
> sell electronic tuners for £5 which would enable her grandson to tune
> the guitar himself, but I told her)
>
> The third shop is a dark little shop unit, about halfway between the
> other two....It has no great corporate branding....Just a little hand
> painted sign outside saying "Guitar Crazy" and you have to go up a back
> alleyway and up a flight of stairs to get in there.....Once inside, the
> stock isn't laid out in any particular order....It's all on display, but
> often you have to move amplifiers to get to the guitar you want....The
> staff are all very well informed about the products they sell....They're
> all musicians themselves, who play in local bands....They all have a
> passion about their subject and they'll stand and chat with you for
> hours on end, and even make you a cuppa if you're cheeky enough to
> ask....I always feel at home in that shop....
>
>
> The interesting thing is, it's the third shop that does the best
> business in the town....
>
> The people and musicians of the town have voted with their feet and
> decided that the service they provide is worth so much more than the
> eye-candy offered by the others.....
>

good story.

i
--

Matt Probert

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Once upon a time, far far away Ignoramus30094
<ignoramus30094@NOSPAM.30094.invalid> spluttered

>Regarding amazon, I borrowed the tabbed design from amazon.

Note to self....

Investigate Amazon tabbed navigation, possibly a way to improve
encyclopaedia navigation?

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com

Ignoramus30094

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

On Thu, 26 May 2005 15:21:06 GMT, Matt Probert <comments@probertencyclopaedia.com> wrote:
> Once upon a time, far far away Ignoramus30094
><ignoramus30094@NOSPAM.30094.invalid> spluttered
>
>
> Note to self....
>
> Investigate Amazon tabbed navigation, possibly a way to improve
> encyclopaedia navigation?

I like it a lot.

I have this site

http://www.cooldictionary.com/

that is a "marriage" between 1913 Webster dictionary, and Wikipedia
(and wiktionary). If a word is found in more than one source, tabs
appear that offer to browse those sources. Also, wikipedia articles
could be browsed in a "crosslinked" mode, where every word that is in
1913 webster, has a link to the explanation.

Tabs make navigation easy and they are relatively inobtrusive.

You also have a great encyclopedia, so it may have some relevance.

i

Mickey~

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Norman L. DeForest

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

NNTP-Posting-Host: chebucto.ns.ca
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Trace: News.Dal.Ca 1117132731 4949 192.75.95.75 (26 May 2005 18:38:51 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: postmaster@Dal.Ca
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 18:38:51 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <Xns9661C2883D4D7castleamber@130.133.1.4>
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.www.webmaster:423365

On 26 May 2005, John Bokma wrote:

> Ignoramus11475 wrote:
>
>
> Nah, it was a joke, and I mean in print. I personally don't consider LaTeX
> output in books nice to read. It's a matter of taste.
>
> OTOH, I can remember that the other thingy is some kind of a rule of the
> thumb: serif fonts don't read nice on screens.

One problem, if exact character accuracy is necessary (especially in
formulas), is that some sans-serif fonts make it hard to distinguish some
characters. I have seen fonts in which 'I' and 'l' are identical. In at
least one Microsoft font, '1' and 'l' are pixel-for-pixel identical. '0'
and 'O' can be hard to tell apart in some fonts. That could lead to
errors in any formula that uses those characters. Since the webmaster
doesn't know exactly which fonts a user will have installed or what the
browser will substitute if the specified font is not available, shouldn't
it just be left up to the viewer to select an appropriate font from those
on *his* or *her* machine?

A link to a page that tells users how to change their font settings
for various browsers and suggesting some fonts that are less likely to
lead to formula transcription errors (with some test formulas to view that
include the problem characters and a GIF of an unambiguous version) might
be a good idea.

Norman "sometimes strongly tempted to put 'go to
http://www.chebucto.ns.ca/~af380/IlllIlIl.html
for more information' on his website" De Forest
--
">> consider moving away from Front Page...."
">To what? Any suggestions?"
"Naked bungee-jumping. It's less humiliating <g>"
-- Matt Probert in alt.www.webmaster, March 20, 2005

Ignoramus30094

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

On Thu, 26 May 2005 18:39:33 GMT, Mickey~ <who.cares@dont.know> wrote:
> Ignoramus11475 wrote:
>
> I've been trying to figure out why both look the same to me and from
> BTS's reply, it must be because my default font is MS Comic Sans.
> Doesn't that mean that whatever you write will be viewed with
> individual's preferred font?

No, one website was development, and another was production.

I promoted my change from development to production, hence they both
look the same now.

i

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Ignoramus30094 wrote:
> No, one website was development, and another was production.
>
> I promoted my change from development to production, hence they
> both look the same now.

You have a number of CSS errors now. All these extry Q's.

QQQfont-family:Comic Sans MS;

Further, if the whole page is to be this font, you need specify it
only once in: body { } and multi-word names need quotes around them.

Oh, and you should list a fall-back for those without Comic Sans.

body { font-family: "Comic Sans MS", sans-serif; }

http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/csscheck/

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Ignoramus30094

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

On Thu, 26 May 2005 19:01:03 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> wrote:
> Ignoramus30094 wrote:
>
> You have a number of CSS errors now. All these extry Q's.
>
> QQQfont-family:Comic Sans MS;

That's how I disabled setting fonts on some of the tabs. :)

> Further, if the whole page is to be this font, you need specify it
> only once in: body { } and multi-word names need quotes around them.

Only the lesson is in that font.

> Oh, and you should list a fall-back for those without Comic Sans.
>
> body { font-family: "Comic Sans MS", sans-serif; }
>
> http://www.htmlhelp.com/tools/csscheck/
>

Thanks, that's helpful. I thought that the fallback font would be the
default browser font.

--

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Ignoramus30094 wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2005 19:01:03 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty
> <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> wrote:
>
>
> That's how I disabled setting fonts on some of the tabs. :)

It would disable it, true, but browsers then have the right to
disregard all of your CSS, or at least all of the settings for that
class. If you want to disable something, comment it out.

/* font-family: ... */

>
> Only the lesson is in that font.

Then can you surround the lesson part with a <div> and style that just
once.

>
> Thanks, that's helpful. I thought that the fallback font would be
> the default browser font.

It is. But my default font may be Times Roman, or .. WingDings. <g>

For fun, set your browser's default to a really odd font, and its
default background color to something obnoxious (I use aqua), and see
how bad some web pages look.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Ignoramus30094

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

On Thu, 26 May 2005 19:30:01 GMT, Beauregard T. Shagnasty <a.nony.mous@example.invalid> wrote:
> Ignoramus30094 wrote:
>
> It would disable it, true, but browsers then have the right to
> disregard all of your CSS, or at least all of the settings for that
> class. If you want to disable something, comment it out.
>
> /* font-family: ... */

I changed it to work properly.

>
> Then can you surround the lesson part with a <div> and style that just
> once.

Which is what I did, I believe.

>
> It is. But my default font may be Times Roman, or .. WingDings. <g>
>
> For fun, set your browser's default to a really odd font, and its
> default background color to something obnoxious (I use aqua), and see
> how bad some web pages look.
>

Logically speaking, whatever your choice of default font it, it ought
to be sensible...

i

Beauregard T. Shagnasty

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Ignoramus30094 wrote:
> Logically speaking, whatever your choice of default font it, it
> ought to be sensible...

But of course. ;-) That's why I said "for fun." Normally, I use
Trebuchet MS as a default sans-serif font.

--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.

Charles Sweeney

2005-05-26, 7:39 pm

Fat Sam wrote

> SpaceGirl wrote:
>
> To put all of this into a real world context, and to slightly
> dissagree with your point (although not too much because on the whole
> I think I agree with you too)
>
> There are three guitar shops in Kings Lynn....
>
> One of them is owned by a snooty shirt and tie wearer and has people
> who follow you around the shop watching you and asking you if they can
> help you every time you look at a price tag on something.....The staff
> are all the kind of people who are classically trained and actually
> frown upon things like electric guitars, claiming they're not real
> instruments, even though they sell more of them than anything else....
>
> The second shop is part of a large chain....It has a unified corporate
> image, both inside and out....They've made great use of clever
> branding, and graphics, and they've spent a fortune on brightly
> coloured, moulded plastic signs, and all the decor inside matches and
> looks highly professional....The staff however, are very badly
> informed about the products they sell....Quite often, if you ask them
> a question, they have to go away and look up the answer from a
> catalogue....And on more than one occasion, I have heard them give out
> deliberately bad advice to unsuspecting people just to fleece them out
> of more money (an old lady came in with her grandsons new guitar and
> said it had gone out of tune. they charged her £15 to tune it, and
> told her she would need to bring it in every 2 to 4 weeks to be
> re-tuned. they didn't tell her that they sell electronic tuners for £5
> which would enable her grandson to tune the guitar himself, but I told
> her)
>
> The third shop is a dark little shop unit, about halfway between the
> other two....It has no great corporate branding....Just a little hand
> painted sign outside saying "Guitar Crazy" and you have to go up a
> back alleyway and up a flight of stairs to get in there.....Once
> inside, the stock isn't laid out in any particular order....It's all
> on display, but often you have to move amplifiers to get to the guitar
> you want....The staff are all very well informed about the products
> they sell....They're all musicians themselves, who play in local
> bands....They all have a passion about their subject and they'll stand
> and chat with you for hours on end, and even make you a cuppa if
> you're cheeky enough to ask....I always feel at home in that shop....
>
>
> The interesting thing is, it's the third shop that does the best
> business in the town....
>
> The people and musicians of the town have voted with their feet and
> decided that the service they provide is worth so much more than the
> eye-candy offered by the others.....

Great analagy Sam. Number three sounds like the best by a mile, and
it's easy to see why it is popular. Very simple, understanding the
customer, and what he/she wants!

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

William Tasso

2005-05-26, 11:21 pm

Forging a path through the Usenet jungle, armed only with a rusty Forte
Free Agent 1.21/32.243, Matt Probert stumbled into alt.www.webmaster and
said:

> Once upon a time, far far away "Martin Harran"
> <nospam@martinharran.com> spluttered
>
> Relax, the Yanks shall awaken shortly and then normal flaming will
> resume.

Everyone deserves a playtime ;)
--
Whatever you do - do something.

William Tasso

2005-05-26, 11:21 pm

Forging a path through the Usenet jungle, armed only with a rusty Mozilla
Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317), SpaceGirl stumbled into
alt.www.webmaster and said:

>
> *wrinkles nose* hmmmm. Okay.
>
> :)

Samantha?

(bewitched)

--
Whatever you do - do something.

Charles Sweeney

2005-05-26, 11:22 pm

William Tasso wrote

> Forging a path through the Usenet jungle, armed only with a rusty
> Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Windows/20050317), SpaceGirl stumbled into
> alt.www.webmaster and said:
>
>
> Samantha?
>
> (bewitched)

Getting too spooky now, that was my first thought! (Mir's WAY too young
to remember Samantha!)

--
Charles Sweeney
http://CharlesSweeney.com

Matt Probert

2005-05-27, 4:31 am

Once upon a time, far far away "William Tasso"
<SpamBlocked@tbdata.com> spluttered

>
>Everyone deserves a playtime ;)

And it occurred, as predictable as the reaction of a neo-con at a
Mosque.

Matt

--
The Probert Encyclopaedia - Beyond Britannica
http://www.probertencyclopaedia.com