Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #184545
| From | Joe <joe@jretrading.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.user |
| Subject | Re: Arial vs. Helvetica. |
| Date | 2017-08-02 17:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <ua3UC-3dS-27@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <ua2Yx-2AD-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | JRE Trading Ltd |
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 06:26:13 -0700 peter@easthope.ca wrote: > I want to specify a variable pitch font in a wiki. The font should be > widely available and acceptable to commonly used browsers. > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arial explains, "It [Arial] was created > to be metrically identical to the popular typeface Helvetica, with > all character widths identical, so that a document designed in > Helvetica could be displayed and printed correctly without having to > pay for a Helvetica license." That suggests that Arial is a good > choice. Conversely, font substitution appears to be handled well in > many contexts and licensing might no longer be a concern. > > What is the conclusion. Should I specify, Arial or Helvetica or > something else? > Does your wiki software require one specific named font, without allowing you to tweak the CSS for it if you wish? Does it not have a 'sans-serif' value available, which will call for a browser to use its default sans-serif font? If you can customise the CSS for the text elements, you can specify multiple font families in order of preference e.g. font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif; Incidentally, serifs were invented to make blocks of text easier to read, so Times or similar would be a better choice for paragraphs, with a sans-serif font more suited to bold headings. Newspaper sites (not surprisingly including The Times) use serif fonts. -- Joe
Back to linux.debian.user | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Arial vs. Helvetica. peter@easthope.ca - 2017-08-02 16:40 +0200
Re: Arial vs. Helvetica. <tomas@tuxteam.de> - 2017-08-02 16:50 +0200
Re: Arial vs. Helvetica. Joe <joe@jretrading.com> - 2017-08-02 17:40 +0200
Re: Arial vs. Helvetica. Martin Read <zen75502@zen.co.uk> - 2017-08-03 10:30 +0200
Fonts readability (was: Arial vs. Helvetica.) Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-08-03 14:30 +0200
Re: Fonts readability (was: Arial vs. Helvetica.) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-08-03 15:50 +0200
Re: Fonts readability (was: Arial vs. Helvetica.) Nicolas George <george@nsup.org> - 2017-08-03 17:40 +0200
Re: Fonts readability (was: Arial vs. Helvetica.) rhkramer@gmail.com - 2017-08-04 15:00 +0200
Re: Fonts readability (was: Arial vs. Helvetica.) Jude DaShiell <jdashiel@panix.com> - 2017-08-04 15:40 +0200
Re: Fonts readability (was: Arial vs. Helvetica.) Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@debian.org> - 2017-08-03 18:00 +0200
Re: Arial vs. Helvetica. Felix Miata <mrmazda@earthlink.net> - 2017-08-03 22:50 +0200
csiph-web