serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

[Alan J. Flavell]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Alan Illeman wrote:
[color=blue]
> Alan, do you have a website?[/color]

Do I have a web *site* ?

Not really. I'm server admin of a number of web servers, and I have a
miscellany of web *pages* of various ages and qualities, on topics
that happen to interest me - a few of which seem to have become the
canonical web resource on their various topics. But nothing coherent
and joined-up, and certainly nothing that I could put my hand on my
heart and say I couldn't do a great deal better if I had a free supply
of Round Tuits.

I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. If you really wanted the
answer to your question, you'd have used a search engine. So I'm
suspecting that you're just trying to make some of us look silly.
I'm sure that's easy enough to do, at any rate in my case.

You don't seriously expect to store Russets, do you? They're
excellent when new, but their keeping qualities are distinctly under
par.

best regards

[Alan Illeman]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?


"Alan Illeman" <illemann@surfb est.net> wrote in message
news:10ia3ji95t nfu76@news.supe rnews.com...[color=blue]
>
> "Neal" <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote in message
> news:opsczpcitg 6v6656@news.ind ividual.net...[color=green]
> > On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 11:08:28 -0400, Alan Illeman <illemann@surfb est.net>
> > wrote:
> >[color=darkred]
> > > Hello Neal,[/color]
> >
> > Hi.
> >[color=darkred]
> > > You nicely format your CSS but I have to scroll the file
> > > to see it all, for example the H2 rule is 261 characters
> > > wide.[/color]
> >
> > Odd. I wrote it with separate lines for each property. I'm now viewing[/color][/color]
it[color=blue][color=green]
> > off the server and it appears the way I expect. What are you using to[/color][/color]
view[color=blue][color=green]
> > it?
> >[color=darkred]
> > > This line and others are imo is unnecessarily bloated
> > > by e.g. defining padding separately for all 4 quadrants
> > > even though the value in each case is the same, whereas
> > > a simple "padding: 2px;" would have sufficed.[/color]
> >
> > Hmm? In the H2 line?
> >
> > h2 {
> >
> > color: #e0e0ff;
> > background-color: #000080;
> > font-size: 110%;
> > font-weight: bold;
> > font-family: Verdana, 'Arial Bold', 'Times New Roman', serif;
> > text-align: left;
> > margin-top: 0;
> > padding: 2px;
> >
> > }[/color]
>
> default.css, in a text editor . . .
>
> H2 {
> BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000080; COLOR: #e0e0ff; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, 'Arial
> Bold', 'Times New Roman', serif; FONT-SIZE: 110%; FONT-WEIGHT: bold;
> MARGIN-TOP: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2px; PADDING-LEFT: 2px; PADDING-RIGHT:[/color]
2px;[color=blue]
> PADDING-TOP: 2px; TEXT-ALIGN: left
> }[/color]

My apologies please. I've been designing pages using Pad (www.hds-pad.com)
and when I 'view source' in Pad, Notepad, or Pfe32, for some unknown reason
it expands all the rules!

[Alan Illeman]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?


"Spartanicu s" <me@privacy.net > wrote in message
news:8v3ai0duj8 kl40aeh65t4glvn rveo7scki@news. spartanicus.utv internet.ie...[color=blue]
> "Alan Illeman" <illemann@surfb est.net> wrote:
>[color=green][color=darkred]
> >> It's meant for my eyes, not anyone else's. I don't recommend my code as
> >> suitable for learning.[/color]
> >
> >That's certainly not the sort of reply I expected. You did after all[/color][/color]
offer[color=blue][color=green]
> >a url for my perusal.[/color]
>
> You asked if certain people had a website, you didn't mention that you
> were looking for sites who's code you could learn from.[/color]

What did you expect? - that I was going to eat them ;-)

[Alan Illeman]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?


"Andrew Thompson" <SeeMySites@www .invalid> wrote in message
news:1er49ymqdt j5l$.1paw7kwrdu 8m1.dlg@40tude. net...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:18:40 -0400, Alan Illeman wrote:[color=green]
> > "Spartanicu s" <me@privacy.net > wrote in message
> > [snip][color=darkred]
> >>
> >> It's meant for my eyes, not anyone else's. I don't recommend my code as
> >> suitable for learning.[/color]
> >
> > That's certainly not the sort of reply I expected.[/color]
>
> LOL.. That was the sort of reply I expected
> from *all* of them! I was more surprised
> that any attempted to defend any aspect of
> the code of their own sites, because..
>[color=green]
> >..You did after all offer
> > a url for my perusal.[/color]
>
> ..these people offer their code ideas up
> for everybody's perusal, in the single most
> exacting/gruelling forum for that purpose.
>
> comp.infosystem s.www.authoring.stylesheets
>
> Any code that can pass without a single
> negative comment when presented on his forum,
> has to be pretty damn undisputably good.
>
> In contrast their 'home sites' are intended
> to provide mostly content, and specifically
> designed 'self contained' examples.[/color]

I just expected them to practise what they preach,
I obviously expected too much.

The expansion of rules, when 'viewing source'
occurs with my pages too, I just hadn't
noticed it before - so my apologies to Neal, Jan
and Spart.

[Spartanicus]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

"Alan Illeman" <illemann@surfb est.net> wrote:
[color=blue][color=green]
>> You asked if certain people had a website, you didn't mention that you
>> were looking for sites who's code you could learn from.[/color]
>
>What did you expect? - that I was going to eat them ;-)[/color]

Look at them, stylesheets are after all for styling websites.

People who are starting out with CSS are often curious what can be
achieved with it by people who master CSS.

Paradoxically many of the people who are good with CSS have themselves
fairly bland looking web sites (mine are). This is the result of an
unfortunate situation: the problem of content/presentation separation
was identified by techies, the solution the techies devised has
unfortunately resulted in something highly technical. As a result
techies are best equipped to master it's usage. That's a real shame,
being a tool for styling web sites it should have been tailored for
designers.

Techies are almost always poor designers (I am), thus looking at the
websites the people in this group create is generally not a good way to
get an impression of what can be done with CSS design wise.

--
Spartanicus

[Neal]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:33:01 -0400, Alan Illeman <illemann@surfb est.net>
wrote:
[color=blue]
> default.css, in a text editor . . .
>
> H2 {
> BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000080; COLOR: #e0e0ff; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, 'Arial
> Bold', 'Times New Roman', serif; FONT-SIZE: 110%; FONT-WEIGHT: bold;
> MARGIN-TOP: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2px; PADDING-LEFT: 2px; PADDING-RIGHT:
> 2px;
> PADDING-TOP: 2px; TEXT-ALIGN: left
> }
>[/color]

Yeah, whatever that is, dump it. It's changing the CSS a bit.

As the site is coded with XHTML (was done before my present stand on
XHTML, and in time that will be corrected) H2 is incorrect, it has to be
h2. And only non-zero values need a unit. 0px is, frankly, idiotic.

I simply read the source code, find the name of the css file, and navigate
there in my browser. I see it just as it was uploaded that way. You can
then copy and paste it to a text editor.

If you do have any questions about practice, feel free to ask. If you do
find a problem in my CSS or HTML, I'll be better off too, as it's hard to
find issues when you're so close to the work.

[Alan Illeman]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?


"Neal" <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote in message
news:opsc0fuosc 6v6656@news.ind ividual.net...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 16:33:01 -0400, Alan Illeman <illemann@surfb est.net>
> wrote:
>[color=green]
> > default.css, in a text editor . . .
> >
> > H2 {
> > BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000080; COLOR: #e0e0ff; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, 'Arial
> > Bold', 'Times New Roman', serif; FONT-SIZE: 110%; FONT-WEIGHT: bold;
> > MARGIN-TOP: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2px; PADDING-LEFT: 2px; PADDING-RIGHT:
> > 2px;
> > PADDING-TOP: 2px; TEXT-ALIGN: left
> > }
> >[/color]
>
> Yeah, whatever that is, dump it. It's changing the CSS a bit.
>
> As the site is coded with XHTML (was done before my present stand on
> XHTML, and in time that will be corrected) H2 is incorrect, it has to be
> h2. And only non-zero values need a unit. 0px is, frankly, idiotic.
>
> I simply read the source code, find the name of the css file, and navigate
> there in my browser. I see it just as it was uploaded that way. You can
> then copy and paste it to a text editor.
>
> If you do have any questions about practice, feel free to ask. If you do
> find a problem in my CSS or HTML, I'll be better off too, as it's hard to
> find issues when you're so close to the work.[/color]

What browser do you use? I have to be able to logon with a name and
password for both my newsreader (currently Outlook Express 5.5) and
browser (currently Internet Explorer 5.0). Opera is ok but no logon.
The last time I tried Amaya, I found it terribly complicated. I've also
tried AlphaBrowser and years ago I was a Netscape (4.7) fan.
OS is Windows 2000 Pro (with a solid Kerio firewall).

Thanks,
Alan

[Alan Illeman]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?


"Alan J. Flavell" <flavell@ph.gla .ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.4 .61.04081922180 30.4886@ppepc56 .ph.gla.ac.uk.. .[color=blue]
> On Tue, 17 Aug 2004, Alan Illeman wrote:
>[color=green]
> > Alan, do you have a website?[/color]
>
> Do I have a web *site* ?
>
> Not really. I'm server admin of a number of web servers, and I have a
> miscellany of web *pages* of various ages and qualities, on topics
> that happen to interest me - a few of which seem to have become the
> canonical web resource on their various topics. But nothing coherent
> and joined-up, and certainly nothing that I could put my hand on my
> heart and say I couldn't do a great deal better if I had a free supply
> of Round Tuits.
>
> I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. If you really wanted the
> answer to your question, you'd have used a search engine. So I'm
> suspecting that you're just trying to make some of us look silly.[/color]

Silly? - hardly. I concluded that the people who seemed to know what
they were talking about in c.i.w.a.s would themselves have webpages
that showed their techical ability in this subject. That seems not to be
the case, for whatever the reason - but I still respect their ability and
will continue to monitor this ng and advance _my_ knowledge.

Cheers,
Alan

[kchayka]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

Alan Illeman wrote:
[color=blue]
> "Neal" <neal413@yahoo. com> wrote in message
> news:opsczpcitg 6v6656@news.ind ividual.net...[color=green]
>>
>> I wrote it with separate lines for each property.
>>
>> h2 {
>> color: #e0e0ff;
>> background-color: #000080;
>> ...[/color]
>
> default.css, in a text editor . . .
>
> H2 {
> BACKGROUND-COLOR: #000080; COLOR: #e0e0ff; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana, 'Arial
> Bold', 'Times New Roman', serif; FONT-SIZE: 110%; FONT-WEIGHT: bold;
> MARGIN-TOP: 0px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 2px; PADDING-LEFT: 2px; PADDING-RIGHT: 2px;
> PADDING-TOP: 2px; TEXT-ALIGN: left
> }[/color]

This looks suspiciously like what WinIE does to code when you save a web
page. It reformats it to what is presumably optimal for viewing in IE.

mozilla also does a bit of HTML reformatting on a "complete" page save,
but nothing on the scale of IE, and it doesn't touch the CSS.

If you really want the original code, I suggest View Source, then save that.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

[Neal]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:09:05 -0500, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:

[color=blue]
> If you really want the original code, I suggest View Source, then save
> that.
>[/color]


For CSS?

[kchayka]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

Neal wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 12:09:05 -0500, kchayka <usenet@c-net.us> wrote:
>[color=green]
>> If you really want the original code, I suggest View Source, then save
>> that.[/color]
>
> For CSS?[/color]

If you're using IE's "save page", then I'd say yes. If you're using
another browser or a tool like wget, then it probably doesn't matter.

--
Reply email address is a bottomless spam bucket.
Please reply to the group so everyone can share.

[Jan Roland Eriksson]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:02:03 -0400, "Alan Illeman"
<illemann@surfb est.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>"Andrew Thompson" <SeeMySites@www .invalid> wrote in message
>news:1er49ymqd tj5l$.1paw7kwrd u8m1.dlg@40tude .net...[color=green]
>> Any code that can pass without a single
>> negative comment when presented on his forum,
>> has to be pretty damn undisputably good.
>>
>> In contrast their 'home sites' are intended
>> to provide mostly content, and specifically
>> designed 'self contained' examples.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>I just expected them to practise what they preach,
>I obviously expected too much.[/color]

At least I for my self think that we have done just that.

Sue and I started out as happy loving amateurs (of CSS :-) in late 1997.

Sue was the driving force behind what was at that time a list of CSS
resource pointers that got posted into this newly formed NG on some
regular schedule.

Later that "pointer list" came to form a base for a first FAQ for this
NG and Sue and I went on to form a web based CSS site.

Since style rules was of importance we went on to create a minimal set
of style rules that could be acceptable to any one on either NS4x or
IE4x. Had problems for a short period with IE3 users that could not get
to our site.

(and there was an enthusiastic story before all that at the same time as
IE3 came on the market. Me and Tina [of WDG fame] got excited on what
looked like all possibilities with this new CSS thing that Chris Wilson
wrote for MS, as a follow up to the straight purchased SPYGLASS code
that they released as MSIE2. Luckily for both Tina and me, Liam Quinn
[WDG again] sent a "calm down" message to us both saying effectively
"you do not want to mess with CSS in IE3" :-)

I tried to calm Sue down for reasons that IE3 would be a "blow over" but
the net effect of the IE3 struggle is that we still have a <LINK...
element in most of our pages that links to a "dummy.css" resource.

The idea behind that was that IE3 would through away any previously read
style sheet if it found another one in the chain.

The HTTP transmission protocol and generic Internet procedures did put a
stick in that wheel at times but most of the time it did work, and today
it's redundant.

Today our CSS at css.nu is really "dated" and to some 99% based on CSS1,
but given the fact that all of our markup is valid from the start of it;
any one can get the info even if they don't get the "show".

So; Alan, get yourself a smaller horse so you don't fall so hard when it
decides to disobey your shanks. And there are nuances in "preaching"
too.

All the best...

--
Rex

[Jan Roland Eriksson]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?

On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:03:01 -0400, "Alan Illeman"
<illemann@surfb est.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>"Alan J. Flavell" <flavell@ph.gla .ac.uk> wrote in message
>news:Pine.LNX. 4.61.0408192218 030.4886@ppepc5 6.ph.gla.ac.uk. ..[color=green]
>> I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. If you really wanted the
>> answer to your question, you'd have used a search engine. So I'm
>> suspecting that you're just trying to make some of us look silly.[/color][/color]
[color=blue]
>Silly? - hardly. I concluded that the people who seemed to know what
>they were talking about in c.i.w.a.s would themselves have webpages
>that showed their techical ability in this subject.[/color]

You are trying to balance on the bad end of the line Sonny...

Of course you could rectify that situation here and now by your
contribution of that 110% CSS? compliant browser for us to use as a
teaching tool for all of our (hidden?) CSS tricks.

CSS with a question mark? Why would that be?

Fact is that as of today, and for some time to come, there is no but one
really stable CSS recommendation available.

CSS1 - yes, that one is valid.

CSS2 - is in a limbo

CSS2 errata - is what puts CSS2 in a limbo

CSS2.1 - CR today, I hope to God that it will become a solid REC.

CSS3 - Pastime for people with to much time on their hands.

CSS4 - Well there are those who wants to pay money to be on the next
space shuttle too.

--
Rex

[Alan Illeman]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?


"Jan Roland Eriksson" <jrexon@newsguy .com> wrote in message
news:mbtci0hpu8 23vc064c2nhcj9c rat0ou14i@4ax.c om...[color=blue]
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 08:03:01 -0400, "Alan Illeman"
> <illemann@surfb est.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >"Alan J. Flavell" <flavell@ph.gla .ac.uk> wrote in message
> >news:Pine.LNX. 4.61.0408192218 030.4886@ppepc5 6.ph.gla.ac.uk. ..[color=darkred]
> >> I'm not sure what you're trying to do here. If you really wanted the
> >> answer to your question, you'd have used a search engine. So I'm
> >> suspecting that you're just trying to make some of us look silly.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> >Silly? - hardly. I concluded that the people who seemed to know what
> >they were talking about in c.i.w.a.s would themselves have webpages
> >that showed their techical ability in this subject.[/color]
>
> You are trying to balance on the bad end of the line Sonny...[/color]

I have no idea what you're talkin about. Sonny? I thought your
name was Rex or Roland or Jan.
[color=blue]
> Of course you could rectify that situation here and now by your
> contribution of that 110% CSS? compliant browser for us to use as a
> teaching tool for all of our (hidden?) CSS tricks.[/color]

You've lost me there, again.

[Alan Illeman]

Re: serif and sans-serif fonts listing?


"Jan Roland Eriksson" <jrexon@newsguy .com> wrote in message
news:9pnci0th79 ljo7ecn4kq078nl spuvs0s66@4ax.c om...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 19 Aug 2004 19:02:03 -0400, "Alan Illeman"
> <illemann@surfb est.net> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >"Andrew Thompson" <SeeMySites@www .invalid> wrote in message
> >news:1er49ymqd tj5l$.1paw7kwrd u8m1.dlg@40tude .net...[color=darkred]
> >> Any code that can pass without a single
> >> negative comment when presented on his forum,
> >> has to be pretty damn undisputably good.
> >>
> >> In contrast their 'home sites' are intended
> >> to provide mostly content, and specifically
> >> designed 'self contained' examples.[/color][/color]
>[color=green]
> >I just expected them to practise what they preach,
> >I obviously expected too much.[/color]
>
> At least I for my self think that we have done just that.[/color]

You (perhaps)

[snip]
[color=blue]
> So; Alan, get yourself a smaller horse so you don't fall so hard when it
> decides to disobey your shanks. And there are nuances in "preaching"
> too.
>
> All the best...[/color]

You're way off base. If you're trying to get me rattled, it won't work. It
is
my experience, that an 'expert' puts his money where his mouth is, and
if 'heavies' here can't get off their collective butts and put some of their
expertise into their webpages, it's a sad day for this ng.

Warm regards,
Alan