|
27 Apr 06 - 09:00 AM (#1728707) Subject: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Keith A of Hertford I would love to be able to use itallics and such as the old hands do. How is it done please? Keith. |
|
27 Apr 06 - 09:07 AM (#1728711) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: MMario html stuff more Newcomer Guide/FAQ which has some stuff and links to others. |
|
27 Apr 06 - 09:21 AM (#1728720) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Keith A of Hertford Wow, thanks MM.! Keith. |
|
27 Apr 06 - 09:24 AM (#1728721) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: MMario non fa niente. I was around when that was all happenning, so I knew where to look. |
|
27 Apr 06 - 11:06 AM (#1728804) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Jim Dixon I have a request: Although italics and boldface are OK, used in moderation, please don't use colors, flashing text, scrolling text, varying sizes, or odd typefaces. I just find them annoying. They're usually a sign of someone screaming for more attention than he/she deserves. |
|
27 Apr 06 - 11:18 AM (#1728815) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Agreed, Jim. Also note that especially flashing text and scrolling text may simply not be seen with different browsers than the one you use to post. There's little sense in being clever if nobody notices. While you can specify a type face, readers will see it as you specify it only if they have that typeface on their machines. The substituted typeface that those without your "pretty one" will actually see can be really ugly - making you look like an idiot to at least a small percentage of your audience. With most browsers, users can also specify a background color (other than white), and if you use a color that's a close match to the background chosen by a reader, your message will be invisible. (Highlight from "Forum Home" just below the Reply box - to the bottom of the page for an example.) John |
|
27 Apr 06 - 12:11 PM (#1728850) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Joe Offer If you want to fool around and see what you can do, use an existing HTML Practice thread, or start a new one. In threads like that, feel free to experiment with
Try some (click). -Joe- |
|
27 Apr 06 - 12:20 PM (#1728858) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Clinton Hammond " I just find them annoying" Awwwww... poor little muffin...... |
|
27 Apr 06 - 12:26 PM (#1728860) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Joe Offer I'd agree with Jim that it's obnoxious to use them in regular discussion threads - but heck, when people are goofing around, why not? -Joe- |
|
27 Apr 06 - 03:56 PM (#1729051) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Stilly River Sage Saved me some typing time, Joe. Thanks! |
|
28 Apr 06 - 10:47 AM (#1729171) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Bill D besides different fonts, there are many times you might want to type a foreign word with accents.... cedillá...schön... Here is a site which show 'most' of the special characters that you can use on a PC machine. http://www.theworldofstuff.com/characters/ it allows me to ☺☻♥ ♦ ♣ ♠• ◘ ○ ∞ Ầ Ç Ø etc (I can either use the code or copy & paste FROM the chart) I have saved a copy of the chart to my own machine so that I do not have to access that site every time I want to see the chart. I have my browsers...(both Opera and Firefox) set up to load my previous list of open pages, so whatever I had open when I shut down will be there when I re-start. (Opera has this ability built in...Firefox requires you to get an 'extension' called "session saver".) Thus, when I start, Mudcat, my wood collectors site, the character chart, a freeware site, and whatever else I had that I might want to go back to are available without searching thru bookmarks, etc. |
|
28 Apr 06 - 03:57 PM (#1729415) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: GUEST,Jack Campin I doubt if *any* of Bill D's characters came out on my browser the way he saw them. You *don't* want to just paste PC or Mac special character into what you're writing - use the HTML special-character notation instead (what that site calls "name codes"), or make sure your software is doing it for you. Bil''s attempt at writing "schoen" the German way came out as s-c-h-caret-n on my screen. This is the standard HTML way: schön. A lot of things simply won't work with simpleminded web-forum software. Beyond French and German, you're pretty much screwed. |
|
28 Apr 06 - 05:30 PM (#1729486) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Bill D hmmm...for schoen I used a program that DOES use those codes....and for all but two of the other characters, I also used to codes. And I see them in the post the way I entered them. Does this show an infinity? ∞ and this? ∞ (used two different systems) |
|
28 Apr 06 - 07:38 PM (#1729575) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Bill D - Neither of your infinities shows in my IE. Both of them posted to the page code as ∞ for the first, and with the closing ";" omitted on the second. If you post HEX codes, most sites will automatically convert to decimal - although sometimes it's the other way around. At char code 8734 you're getting w.a.y..u.p..t.h.e.r.e in the Unicode pages. Anything outside the ANSI range 30 thru 256 is likely to be "unpredictable" as to what it will look like to randomly chosen readers. There are a few isolated characters that will appear for reasonable numbers of viewers, but the web "just ain't fully modern" for most users. Of course it's preferred that you code unusual characters. Those who can't see your characters can always right-click and look at the page code, and go to the Unicode standard to see what you meant(???). For those who just can't handle the "real methods," among the "safest" ways to compose things with "strange" characters is to type them in Word, using standard Word shortcuts. YOU SHOULD NOT USE THE "INSERT SYMBOL" METHOD. You can also copy and paste from the Windows "Character Map" if you use only the "normal" character sets. If you set for Unicode char set, you'll find that a couple of the extended fonts may have virtually all (well- maybe half?) the Unicode characters, but the high ones are unlikely to work on the web. If you can enter the characters "by typing them" and see what you expect in Word, you usually can copy and paste to a post and expect most people to see it as intended, although there may still be some "failured glyphs." The one reading the post is where it's decided whether an individual glyph will be presented properly, so you can't force anybody to see languages they haven't chosen to install for. When you paste or post, you don't send "letters," you send character codes, and filtering them through a standard Word Processor will usually filter out most of what won't work reasonably well. Most wp programs will work similarly (although it's been noted by some, for example, that Mac Word is a little less successful than Windows Word. It's not a large difference.) John |
|
28 Apr 06 - 08:07 PM (#1729582) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Bill D fascinating...I had originally posted using Opera....so I opened up IE for the 1st time in months, and those infinities showed up fine in it! Then I opened Firefox and they were there also...then I opened K-Meleon and saw the same thing...both infinities displayed just as I posted them, even without the closing ; I'll confess I'm at a loss...is it the browser of the computer that makes the difference? (I know that it is 'sometimes' the display font that makes the difference as to what you see, but the code ought to at least give one the option) maybe someday they'll standardize things... |
|
28 Apr 06 - 08:41 PM (#1729600) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Bill D - It sometimes depends on what font/encoding you've got set in your browser. I've been able to see numerous such "high numbered" characters in previous trials, but my settings may have slipped back into something conventional. If you really need full Unicode character representation, you can get the "International" utilities for Win2K and WinXP; but the last time I checked they are only available if you buy Server 2003 or later. I know you had to have a Server version; but I dont' recall whether the International stuff came with it, or was an "extra cost add-on." If your webmeister has a recent Server version of Windows that has the "kit," you might talk him into installing it on your machine - and then nobody would understand anything you type. Or would that make a difference for either of us? John |
|
28 Apr 06 - 11:32 PM (#1729715) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Bill D My webmeister? talk 'him' into something? Now you have truly lost me..*grin*...I have Comcast cable, and I have an enormous bureaucracy as a webmeister. I'm not sure how setting 'slip', John, but you use computers and deal with settings everyday, I gather, so you may have occasion to re-set things more than I would. I don't 'need' anything more than I have, at least I don't think so...I was just trying some 'different' characters now & then....and often I get conformation that others see them too. The first time I tried it was when 'Giok' MacKenzie used the little smiley face ☺ (do you see it? )....so I did 'view source' and saw the code he had used(Alt-1 or 9786)....I did a search on that code, found the web page I mention above, and made myself a copy and learned a few of them. It is my understanding that if you post a character that is not in the default font for someone else, it just wont show....but that most browsers set a default font that DOES have most characters available. I have 'Palatino Linotype' set as the display font in one browser..(kinda pretty), but I get the same results when I use good old Times New Roman or Georgia (a standard Microsoft issue). (and you know, I'm not sure anyone understands anything I type anyway...*wry grin*) --------------------------------------------------- pause while I explore the web page: but, now, I see that several of those characters do NOT show...either in my 'saved' copy, or the original web page....so that may mean that Palatino is NOT reproducing everything.....but I just used it the other day to post the male & female characters - I thought. Well...I shall do some tests with several different fonts (not posting by specifying them, but just as display in the browser.) I love interesting fonts, but I need to explain to myself what is happening, so I don't foolishly expect others to see characters they can't handle. Technology! When I lived in Wichita, I acquired an old platen press in working order, and used to buy type at the Missouri Central Type Foundry..(like..on 9th St?)...when I discovered TTF on computers, I was in heaven...but it seems a mixed blessing..*grin*....still fun to print with, whether I can show them to others or not. |
|
29 Apr 06 - 03:26 AM (#1729779) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Bill D - By "webmeister" of course I was referring to the master of your local network, said genius being the person in charge of providing "IT" resources, furnishing appropriate programs, and assuring they're properly installed on your individual machine. The real point is that all the bells and whistles for full use of Unicode coding can be installed on WinXP or Win2K, but you can't get it unless you have access to a Server version of Windows. It doesn't come packaged separately - at least as far as I can tell. An indication of how complex it is to actually use a Unicode equipped setup may be had from the little known(?) fact that when Microsoft Press made the newest edition of the "Bible" on International Character usage, [Developing International Software, 2d ed, ISBN 0-7356-1583-7, © 2003, USA $69.99/Canada $99.99] they did NOT set up any of the layout people or editors to actually use Unicode. ONE artist retrieved individual glyphs for each "foreign" character or bit of "non-Latin" text required in the book, and made .jpg graphics for insertion and printing of the book. (or so I'm told) WinXP supposedly contains, in the default setup, at least two "extended fonts" that contain many more characters than in the usual Latin 1 setup. I don't remember for sure, but I believe that Tahoma TTF may be one of them (sans-serif) and Times New Roman TTF may be the serif version - but don't quote me, since I haven't looked it up recently. In addition, "Arial Unicode MS font is a full Unicode font." I don't know if this font comes with standard WinXP or Win2K installations, or whether it's one of those "get it from the Server version" things. I don't have it installed. It's HUGE, and additional utilities are required to use the right-to-left char order for some of the glyphs. Typefaces with exactly the same name may or may not include extended characters. I have at least 7 or 8 "versions" of "Times New Roman," in TTF and Type 1/Type 2, (and possibly in one or more of those multi-use strange styles). Each has a slightly different selection of characters. For the technical purists, the "name" is the name of the typeface. The "font" is the selection of characters from that typeface that are in your box of character glyphs, waiting to be smeared onto a page. Each typeface has a standard "default glyph" that it "prints" - to the screen or on paper - if you call for a character that is not contained in the font you have loaded. The correct character code should actually be present in your "document," so if someone who has a font - for the typeface they're using - that knows how to "draw" the glyph for that character, they should see it correctly even though you couldn't. Conversely, if you use a character that works fine on your machine and/or your printer, another person who has a different font, even of the same typeface, that doesn't include that particular character, will see only the "default glyph" for "undefined character." Nearly all US and Western Euro people will see the "Latin 1" typefaces, for characters from 031 to 255 (decimal codes, the ANSI set) correctly. These are really the only ones you can (usually) assume that anyone will be able to see. Common fonts may contain many more characters, so there are fairly large selections of additional characters that can usually be used, that most but not necessarily all people will see rendered correctly. Figuring out which characters these are is a DIY process best carried out among a small user group consisting only of people who really need to be "fully legible" to each other. John |
|
29 Apr 06 - 06:09 AM (#1729806) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe Years ago I set up my PC - and kept that thru OS upgrades - to use Arial as the 'default' font - it's easiest on my eyes. An amusing but highly rememberable tip I recently heard from a graphic designer - don't use more than 2 typefaces (fonts) in a document, or it starts to look like a ransom note ... :-) |
|
29 Apr 06 - 04:41 PM (#1730116) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Foolestroupe - Most publishing houses have quite specific standards for each book or other publication. Books issued as part of a "Series" are subjected to very close control of the "Series Style" in addition to controlling via the basic "book stylesheet." Simple "word books" like novels, biographies, or histories may use very few typefaces, but usually titles, body text, quotes, captions, and perhaps a few others will each be different enough to make it obvious what they are. Usually, two or rarely three typefaces is enough, with size and/or italic variations (technically different fonts of the same typeface) to separate additional specific usage distinctions. When you get into "technical" publishing, usages still are strictly controlled, but proliferation of typefaces and fonts is likely. When you need all of the above, but in addition must have obvious DANGER, WARNING, CAUTION, and NOTICE styles, and in addition must indicate what's "Mandatory Code," "Generic Code," "Optional Code," or "Comments on Code," and sometimes need one set for code from each of several "Languages," it gets messy - for the editors and layout people. The reader, if all is successful, should be completely unaware of how many messes there are, because each separate style must "look right" each time it appears and must look the same each time it has the same "meaning." Self-published *amateur authors are usually easy to spot by their excessive and inconsistent use of tooo maaaany fonnnnts. Random indents, ragged margins, and a few other "pretty bits" are often also seen. It's far less offensive (or less pitifully humorous) to professionals to see the lack of "distinct styles" where they would help the reader, than to see capricious, inconsistent, meaningles "decorations" (deviant behaviours?) that an amateur thinks will "make it pretty." It never really works. (* Note that this doesn't mean that every self-published author has to be in this category.) John |
|
29 Apr 06 - 06:37 PM (#1730201) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe JiK She had been just talking on a radio program about some famous designer who had worked on big advertising campaigns, and at a public display of his work, she noticed that since they all used the same 4 fonts, all the companies looked as if they were the same. BTW, Telstra commissioned a famous font designer to create a new font called 'Harmony', based on a previous font. It is supposed to be a 'privately owned by Telstra' font used in their advertising to make it look friendly. |
|
29 Apr 06 - 07:33 PM (#1730225) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas All the common fonts do look pretty much the same, but it's surprising how many there actually are. Very subtle differences can also have pretty significant effects on readability, or on those "subconcious influence parameters" that the ad shops try so hard to manipulate. In most cases, without side-by-side comparison on enlarged samples you'd think they were all one or two faces. Creating a new font/typeface isn't really too difficult, and nearly all companies "commission a new font" for their logos and sometimes for ad text. Often a "font" created and copyright protected may consist of only those characters used in the company name. I do know that there's a "Boeing" typeface, and that the copyright statement says that "only the word 'Boeing' may be legally written using this typeface." A dozen or so "logos" are also individually copyrighted, and even company employees technically are prohibited from "creating a new one." Unfortunately, I can't show examples unless you've also stolen the ©font(s), but your local bookstore probably has dozens of books of samples. The shapes of the glyphs cannot be patented or copyright protected (in the US). Only the name of the font can be subject to copyright protections. If you "steal" someone's font and change the name, there's little they can do about it - if you can stand the possible threats from their attorneys. CorelDraw for years had a "font converter" that would take any font you had, and "rewrite" the font files under a new name, and I haven't heard of a successful challenge to the practice. The "converted" fonts actually were somewhat inferior to the originals in many cases; but were good enough for many uses. (I don't know if that's still a CorelDraw "feature.") John |
|
13 Nov 06 - 12:59 PM (#1884807) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: SINSULL The Fair One just doesn't work well in black, does it? |
|
13 Nov 06 - 04:53 PM (#1884982) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Rowan Any Mac OSX users who've read the above messages wil know this already but Jim's and Joe's stuff came through fine on Safari, with one exception. Joe's |
|
13 Nov 06 - 05:07 PM (#1884993) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Bill D ummm..Rowan...that is tedious! |
|
13 Nov 06 - 05:45 PM (#1885036) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Rowan Yup! Which is why I don't let it bother me. But there's another story about testamurs you might find amusing. At Melbourne Uni the engineering students' social group was the Society for the Confinement of Immoral Impulses Among Engineering Students (SCIIAES); I'm sure they had other, more positive, attributes but in the 60s they were regarded by the non engineers as an excuse for drinking to excess. SCIIAES offered 'Degrees in Imbibition', requiring candidates to complete a pub crawl visiting every hotel in a route from the campus, down Swanston St to Flinders St, along Flinders St to Elizabeth St and up Elizabeth St and Royal Pde to the campus. At that time there would have been at least 30 pubs; I never counted and it may have been a lot more. A Bachelor of Imbibition (BI) required the candidate to drink a standard (7 oz) glass of beer in every pub in the one day and a BI (Hons) required them to drink a 10 oz glass of beer at each pub; MI required a 7 oz glass of fortified wine and a PhD required a tot of top-shelf at each pub. I knew of these by repute only and never realised any of my friends bothered with the activity until I'd left uni. On my return from Antarctica I visited an engineering graduate friend of mine in his office and he had the usual collection of framed testamurs on the wall. Most were the multicoloured cornflakes packets but one stood out as different. It was a proper academic production, with beautiful copperplate properly presented, even a proper seal. It was his BI. And he commented that almost everyone who visited his office commented on that testamur as though it was the most esteemed; they only ever looked at it from a distance and didn't actually read the script. Cheers, Rowan |
|
13 Nov 06 - 06:57 PM (#1885093) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe Rowan The QUT[*1] (which was only the QIT[*2] when I went there early 70s) is at the end of George St - a loooong street that ends at Roma Street. There were no actual non-academic Diplomas (although in Qld, Hons. Refec. was fairly common, especially at QU[*3])... but there were something close to 30 pubs along George St - a victim?! started at QIT and went down one side, and returned the other - a 7 oz was the only category. I did try to suggest a 5 oz for a 'Diploma', but was laughed at... [*1] Qld University of Technology - "A University for The Real World" (as their advertising claims). [*2] Qld Institute of Technology - converted into a University (as were many other Institutes of Technology) by Legislative Fiat sometime after the 70s. [*3] Qld University - "A Real University" (a political satirical response to QUT advertising!). Readers should note that the Federal Govt now wants to start up new Institutes of Technology, as there are too many Universities, and not enough concentration on 'The Trades'... I'm not making this up, you know.... |
|
13 Nov 06 - 07:42 PM (#1885125) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas And for "proper" footnotes: <sup>1</sup> will give 1 Also handy for en type constructions. And: <sub>2</sub> will give 2 for the ubiquitous H2O. There seems not to be a useful "array" tag which would allow placing a superscript directly above a subscript for a proper tensor notation, although I suppose one could "construct" one with table functions - but that seems far too much work for the few who could read it(?). John |
|
13 Nov 06 - 07:46 PM (#1885129) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Peace Is posting in fonts like speaking in tongues? |
|
13 Nov 06 - 08:21 PM (#1885152) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe If you don't all have the correct stuff at each end - pretty much! :-) |
|
13 Nov 06 - 09:09 PM (#1885180) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Don Firth I use underlines and italics a fair amount, but I tend to write like I speak. But with all of the different fonts that became available with computers and word processing, some folks are tempted to go MAD!! A friend of mine who was head of a peace organization started putting out a newsletter. He pulled out all the stops, using all kinds of fonts, and the flamin' thing looked like a ransom note (the kind where letters are cut out of a magazine and pasted onto a piece of paper). Cooler heads sat him down and talked to him, and now he uses just a couple of different fonts (headlines, body-text, blockquotes from articles, and such). Much more readable. Don Firth |
|
13 Nov 06 - 10:47 PM (#1885233) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Maybe we should have a "Mudcat Style Sheet" to show people a best practice. But of course some then would scream about "REGIMENTATION!" while the other half would want to add new fancy stuff and would be screaming "REPRESSION AND CENSORSHIP." The main point is that it makes no difference what fancy tricks you use and/or how many fonts you splatter around. The one reading your If we're interested in communication (????) we're forced to stick to what works for the majority, and play games with the rest of it only when it's not critical. John |
|
13 Nov 06 - 10:52 PM (#1885234) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Or should I have said REPRESSION AND CENSORSHIP ? John |
|
13 Nov 06 - 10:58 PM (#1885237) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Bill D Yup...John has it right. You can print in any font you want....but reading it online depends on your (And I have tried for years to promote that trick for putting chords in posted songs...DownD in the valleyG, valley so lowD, ...it is pretty good.) |
|
13 Nov 06 - 11:55 PM (#1885259) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe That looks very good Don. I started using HTML to format song word pages I wanted to print - in MSIE you could decide the percentage fit to the page, and fiddle around with font sizes and types etc... and your idea would work well there too. But the consequent uneven spacing between the words reminds me .... I remember playing with Stan - and his printed cheat sheets used to have one line above each line in the 1st verse and the chorus that had the chords. Problem was... the chord names would sorta 'drift around a bit' from the correct rhythm spots - not a problem if you already KNEW the tune, but much of the stuff he used to generously print up and hand around to us |
|
14 Nov 06 - 12:03 AM (#1885262) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Artful Codger Another consideration is that people often cut-n-paste to plain-text files (etc.), where any special formatting you used gets lost. For example, Bill's chording string would end up looking like "DownD in the valleyG, valley so lowD". (Note also that, by intuitive convention, chords should precede words: "DDown in the Gvalley, valley so Dlow.") A possible solution Here would be to enclose the chords in parentheses as well as superscripting. In general, though, one should not rely on special formatting, but rather, ensure text will still appear correct without it. |
|
14 Nov 06 - 12:41 AM (#1885274) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe Ok Bill and AC, how about DDown Gin the valley, Dvalley so low, ? :-) |
|
14 Nov 06 - 12:47 AM (#1885277) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe ...ooops ... put something in the wrong spot (make haste slowly in future!), but you get the idea. You can also surround things with 'font size=' bits if you want to too... |
|
14 Nov 06 - 01:00 AM (#1885279) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Don Firth This seems to work pretty well. Clear, anyway. [C]As I walked [G7]out in the [C]streets of La[G7]redo. . . . Don Firth |
|
14 Nov 06 - 04:02 AM (#1885326) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas
???? Jon |
|
14 Nov 06 - 04:13 AM (#1885330) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Recommended that you "compose" in Word. It's much easier. Select a monospaced font. Courier is most common. start with a <pre> tag and end with a </pre> end tag. Use spaces in the upper (chord line) to space the chords to match the verse. Within a "pre" tag, the html reader will not collapse spaces like it does in ordinary text. Type the verse, with appropriate spacing, insert dashes "-" to separate syllables when there's a chord change on the syllable rather than the beginning of the word. The pre tag forces the html reader to render "as typed." It should always use a monospaced font even if you typed it in a proportional one, so you need to type it in mono if you want to see how it will line up. That's easier to do in Word than in an input box. Preview before hitting submit highly recommended. <pre> John |
|
14 Nov 06 - 04:45 AM (#1885339) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas When you copy from the html reader (your browser), and paste into Word, it will paste in whatever normal font you use, which probably won't be monospaced. If you just highlight the whole thing and change it back to a monospaced font (Courier), it should look the same as in the post. Copy/paste to and from html sometimes inserts a space or two, and may change the line spacing, but these are usually pretty consistent and easily repaired in Word. A little trickier: If you want raised numbers on the chords, you can use the superscript tag. Typed: G<sup>7</sup> Should give you a G7 The problem is that the code (G<sup>7</sup>) for the chord takes more than the two spaces the chord will occupy when rendered by the html reader, so you have to "count spaces," and likely will need to preview, and adjust to get it right. In Word, using Courier, type it out. John |
|
14 Nov 06 - 05:15 AM (#1885344) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: GUEST,Geoff the Duck Actually, I prefer Don Firth's [G]Square brackets for [F]chords and [A7] don not find that [C]brackets get in the way. my [G]brain filters them out from [G]the reading. I recall some time back jOhn from Hull doing some formatting which consisted of writing stuff such as (BIG) before his text. Who needs HTML codes - we all understand what he meant and it worked on EVERY computer. Quack! GtD. |
|
14 Nov 06 - 05:35 AM (#1885351) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas GtD - If you type it in your word processor, using a monospaced font such as Courier, and get it so that it lines up the way your want it, the only html needed is the <pre> tag just in front of it and the </pre> tag at the end. It will display in ALL browsers just the way you typed it. If someone copies it from the web page and pastes it into their word processor, it may revert to their default font, which may not be monospaced. All that's usually required is to highlight it all and change it to Courier, and it should look just like it did on the screen. The "pre" stands for "preformatted" and all browsers should display it as intended. But of course you should use whatever works best for you. John |
|
14 Nov 06 - 06:07 AM (#1885368) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: GUEST,Geoff the Duck John - I'm not disputing the technical issues. What I'm actually pointing out is that i prefer the square brackets as a way of indicating the chord changes. I find a single In-line indication less of a mental strain than having to look at a line above the text for the chords. Quack! GtD. |
|
14 Nov 06 - 06:59 AM (#1885382) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe Geoff, as a Classically trained pianist (no, I did spell that right) I learnt to play many popular tunes from music which had the guitar chords and tab above, so it seems natural to me. I do admit that the [] pre-inline method is probably very easy too though. |
|
14 Nov 06 - 10:33 AM (#1885489) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: leeneia Someone posting here said he used Arial as his default font. I believe that's a sans serif font. Most people would prefer a more traditional font, such as this one you're reading right now. If you study a magazine, you will find that blocks of text in the ads are almost always in a traditional font with serifs. The ad people determined long ago that most people prefer it. That's because the serifs (fat little blocks at the bottom and tops of letters) keep our eyes on track. Italics are nice for emphasis, but I refuse to read more than a couple sentences in italics. It's just too uncomfortable. |
|
14 Nov 06 - 10:42 AM (#1885494) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Bill D well, obviously there are several ways to make it work so folks can at least know what the intended chords are. Since I almost never use Word, I had not educated myself in its various possibilities....but it and other good word processor programs can, I see, help a lot. I think that John's refinement using the 'pre' format would probably be the clearest for general use and for doing something like printing out sheets for your notebook. I do prefer the G7 Em way of showing the chords with superscripts....just makes 'em stand out. GtD and others could always reformat it to suit..... |
|
14 Nov 06 - 03:12 PM (#1885674) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas leenia - In most cases it doesn't make any difference what font one uses to post. The site only sends the "nummers" for the characters, and the person who gets it - in his/her browser - selects what font it will be displayed in. You can "code" a particular font in your posting, if it's really necessary, and many websites do that. A website can "embed" a font so that it will be sent with the page for anyone who doesn't have it; but if you do it the one who reads it has to have that font installed or the browser will pick another one. The one reading the page can choose which one to substitute, so it's still the reader's choice on what font they see. The only exception that I can think of off hand is the when you put something between a <pre> - </pre&bt; pair of tags the reader's browser is supposed to use a monospaced font. That's usually Courier, but there are several others and the one receiveng the page can select a different one. A similar result happens with the tags <cite> - <'/cite>. The font isn't changed, but it will all be italicized. The font someone prefers to use to read things may depend on the kind of monitor the person is using, or might be affected by lighting where the monitor is located and on the "vision abilities" of the reader. A person with a weird mouse/pointing device or with different coordination limitations might need a special to make it easier to hit things to make selections or to cut-'n-paste, so it really is, usually, best to leave the choices with the viewer. a more traditional font, such as this one you're reading right now - - I just clicked three times and am now reading this right now in a sans-serif font: Tahoma. It shouldn't affect what you see. John |
|
14 Nov 06 - 03:16 PM (#1885678) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Well - I did preview but missed the </pre&bt;. b = g sometimes on my keyboard? "between a <pre> - </pre> pair of tags" John |
|
14 Nov 06 - 03:30 PM (#1885689) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Snuffy
|
|
14 Nov 06 - 04:19 PM (#1885729) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas True Snuffy. You can specify a specific font almost anywhere. If you don't specify it there are "different" defaults for the cite and pre tags. It remains that the font you specify has to be one each individual who reads it has installed or it doesn't do anything. And I can easily remove Arial from my machine if I don't like it. I can tell my browser to use "BeesKnees" whenever you specify Arial. It's the viewers' choice, not the writer's. In this case, where you've specified the font and size, the use of the <pre> tag is redundant, since you've overridden what the tag does. Without the font spec, the tag will always display in a monospace, so your chords will line up with your verses - which was, in what's above, the whole point of suggesting its use. If you really have a reason, then calling for a different font is pretty easy and may occasionally be justified. As long as you use fonts that most people have, it shouldn't cause problems. It won't always work for all viewers, so random use should be minimized. John |
|
14 Nov 06 - 05:53 PM (#1885815) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Rowan Useful stuff! Arial has been the default font for Micro$oft Office in the various versions I've used but I'm told that, for all new versions, Micro$oft has changed its default font to one (apparently sans serif) that they regard as easier to read on screens, as most people they're interested in do most of their reading on screens rather than on paper. So it may be that some of the discussion above will be repeated in the future. And my apologies to Joe Offer. This morning I saw my first posting above and it read "Jim's and Joe's stuff came through fine on Safari, with one exception. Joe's just sat there, blankly, on the screen." When I wrote "Joe's just sat there, blankly" I had inserted his word "blink", with its html bits, after his name, but it all disappeared from my posted text. All the rest of his stuff worked (as far as I can see) as he intended but nothing blinked. I suppose this is yet another example of what the most recent postings have emphasised. Cheers, Rowan |
|
14 Nov 06 - 06:27 PM (#1885855) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe I just got so used to Arial - after years of having no choice*** - and Arial Narrow allows LOTS of stuff to be squeezed legibly onto my screen - I now set it as my Windows Screen defaults too. With the exception of Snuffy's post above, almost (John and other tech geeks will know just what I mean!) everything else at Mudcat (and on the web) is seen by me as Arial. Which makes some of those 'authorities' on how to write (and format for clarity!) web pages in certain pedantically precise ways seem to be speaking mostly inconsistent garbage to me. The WHOLE POINT of the original web designers was that MINIMUM specs on behalf of the 'poster' are needed - the 'reader' decides what happens anyway! (also needs less bandwidth too!) - Micro$oft and other technically ignorant w...... not withstanding... :-) *** The Telstra Spec was for WRITTEN documents - including those to be posted or emailed, but I set up my PC THEN to use the Arial - as the differences between the 'Windows standard' desktop and the documents annoyed me... |
|
14 Nov 06 - 08:38 PM (#1885997) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas Actually html is largely a "spinoff" of SGML. SGML = "Standard General Markup Language" if I remember it right. SGML provided for "tags" that would indicate the usage of text and of things within it, so that format could be applied to the tag and everything with that tag would look the same, and so that searching "by tags" could make it easier to find and/or organize what's relevant. Being an attempt to be logical, it naturally faded away, although it still remains in use in a few places, and the Standards Committee still tries ... HTML, or hypertext markup language, continues to use the tags to indicate "classes" of "objects" but the emphasis has shifted away from classification by use in the direction of classification by intended appearance. It remains an abominable "language" for controlling "format" and "appearance" but people keep trying to push it in that direction. The "invention" of nonstandard tags "to provide cuteness" by browser makers, and their varying application, is one of the reasons that some browsers can see Scrolling Lines while others can see Blinks, a few can see either, and some can see none of the above. Syle Sheets were an integral part of SGML, but the CSS sheets used on the web are another extension more for display, format, and action than for logical structure. An XML "extension" of the HTML bastard child of SGML extends the kinds of tags even further toward permitting one to define things that have no logical significance and contribute nothing to "information" but provide movement and annoyance (and lots of malware). One supposes it will all evolve into something helpful someday ... John |
|
14 Nov 06 - 11:22 PM (#1886050) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Artful Codger I prefer chord changes embedded inline, since it often makes the difference whether a song will fit on a single page or not. The move in HTML standards is away from explicit formatting directives (like bold and italic) and toward functional tagging (class="chord"). Defaults for explicit formatting are placed in separate style sheets, which can be overriden according to user preferences or the device or application used to handle the document. This gets back to the conceptual purity and flexibility of SGML. But no one has yet explained how the average person is expected to adapt to this. Learning HTML tags has been challenging enough. Do they seriously expect the average user to understand style sheets, much less XML? What happens when all the tags become functional (and thus context-specific), and change from one site to another, one document type to another? HTML violated the SGML separation between function and format precisely in order to specify such things universally and simply. |
|
15 Nov 06 - 09:16 AM (#1886083) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: GUEST,Jon Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxys Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxys Abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz |
|
15 Nov 06 - 04:04 PM (#1886115) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: GUEST,Hairy Belly Font MERRY CHRISTMAS TO YOU!!! |
|
15 Nov 06 - 04:17 PM (#1886127) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: Howard Kaplan Shouldn't this thread be titled "Fonts in posting" rather than "Posting in fonts"? |
|
16 Nov 06 - 02:17 AM (#1886163) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe Well... you certainly can't have Fonts in the Title... :-) .. but you can have "Fonts"... |
|
18 Nov 06 - 04:57 AM (#1887458) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: JohnInKansas As a sidenote to "Posting in Fonts" I just suffered an inadvertent switch to Internet Explorer 7. (I didn't notice that it was bundled with some other useful updates.) A NEW FEATURE(?) in Tools|Internet Options allows the reader to set IE7 to "ignore page fonts" - i.e. to display everything in the fonts, and with colors, specified by the user in user's own browser, instead of displaying a font specified by the website. I believe this setting could be made in older IE versions, but with the new v7 it's "in your face" when you go to the Fonts setting. John |
|
18 Nov 06 - 07:27 AM (#1887519) Subject: RE: Tech: Posting in fonts. From: The Fooles Troupe The Church strongly disapproves of misusing Fonts... |