something about webtypography and font-sizes

marcus@localhorst · Post by **marcus@localhorst** » Thu 14. Dec 2006, 21:51

The 100% Easy-2-Read Standard
Most websites are crammed with small text that is a pain to read. Why?

Post by **flip-flop** » Thu 14. Dec 2006, 22:42

And where will we land in the end?

useit.com: Jakob Nielsen's Website -> http://useit.com

gtz · Post by **gtz** » Fri 15. Dec 2006, 00:03

Hit me with your rhythm ...
http://24ways.org/2006/compose-to-a-vertical-rhythm

marcus@localhorst · Post by **marcus@localhorst** » Fri 15. Dec 2006, 08:27

@gtz - good additional to my post, I've read it some days ago.

@flip-flop - useit.com yeah -

I know these are maybe radical thesis but they are not totally wrong. it's on the hand of the webdesigner to find the best way to present the content.
there is no need to use only 16 px and above font-size and trash all pics from the site.
but I think for mainly textbased websites or long article it#s useful to have easy readable text.
and the point to NOT provide switches for font-size or other fancy stuff is interesting, because websites are made for users and users don't want to do the work for the designer (switching font-size, installing new browsers, special plugins etc)
I'm maybe far away to realize that on my work, but I keep it in mind and I will do some tests too on my own site.

take a look to several modern webapplications like del.icio.us. they use a easy to read text, only 5 pics and standard link colors.
And it's absolutly usable.
there is no need to no graphic design, but form follows function, in the most ways.

thats what I think...

best marcus

jsw_nz · Post by **jsw_nz** » Wed 20. Dec 2006, 03:33

Yes, I have been thinking about it - and so has OliG - thus the font-size options

Olig has a pulse of web design thinking - methinks - there are so many variables however - the screen res - antialising in Win and Mac (XP/Tiger) it is hard to get a grip - em's is a great place to start....
The real issue is angle of incidence - based on screen display - should be dynamic variable - based on display parameters....

I work on dual 1600x1200 displays - and often surprised when viewing on other clients argh - but not toooo large - just comfortable - should be comfortable - I have no problems scrolling - a good thing (scrolling == affordance - Nielsen-Norman)

I used to like small fonts - but am now leaning towards larger - in your face readability -

Fulvio Romanin · Post by **Fulvio Romanin** » Wed 20. Dec 2006, 22:41

BIG FONTS MUST DIE
JAKOB NIELSEN IS BORING
LONG LIVE FLASH

FULVIO REDDKAA ROMANIN
CEO of EVEREST COLLECTIVE for INACCESSIBLE SITES

("to navigate this site you will need the 1TB-heavy ZONTARM plugin, and you will need a windows vista v2009, 9 GB RAM, 1900TB HD, a 156' widescreen monitor, anatomical chair, 3d glasses, you must weigh no more than 110kgs or no less than 70, have brown eyes, a slightly turned-up nose and a 1982 Michael Jackson poster mouse mat")

DeXXus · Post by **DeXXus** » Thu 21. Dec 2006, 13:15

Fulvio Romanin wrote:("to navigate this site you will need the 1TB-heavy ZONTARM plugin, and you will need a windows vista v2009, 9 GB RAM, 1900TB HD, a 156' widescreen monitor, anatomical chair, 3d glasses, you must weigh no more than 110kgs or no less than 70, have brown eyes, a slightly turned-up nose and a 1982 Michael Jackson poster mouse mat")

Dang It!
My BLUE eyes are my only shortcoming...
LOL