Next XML changes

Jeroen Coumans jeroen at
Sun May 16 15:15:51 PDT 2004

Archaic said the following on 16-05-2004 03:06:
> On Sat, May 15, 2004 at 01:31:09PM +0200, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
>>That actually was about font size, not font type. The reasoning for 
>>choosing a font type is that while many users have good fonts available, 
>>they won't be taken advantage of unless you configure your browser to 
>>use them by default.
> No offense intended, but if someone doesn't like default fonts, he
> should change them. I did, but now I have a problem. I have the fonts
> you chose so Moz displays them. I don't like them, but now I cannot
> change them because there are explicit. If I tried aliasing them, it
> screws up all other packages. Before, I could change them without
> affecting anything else negatively.

No offense taken; please, I have pretty thick skin and always respond to 
reasonable arguments :-)

Ok, I respect your choice of font-type, but let's try to solve this with 
a solution that fits most people.

Few people set their default preferred font-size, even fewer people set 
their default preferred font-type. You're actually the first which I've 
ever heard complain about the setting of a font-type. Are you the 
exception to the rule?

Most websites set a preferred font-type. Do different rules apply 
because you're reading an electronic book? Should we allow greater 
freedom because it's HTML, as opposed to PDF? Or should we provide a 
sensible default rendering while allowing advanced users to plug in 
their own stylesheet? Remember, the use of CSS for presentation allows 
you to easily override settings in your user stylesheet. See eg. 
and <>.

>>>It is in Moz-1.6. Wanna test putting "Up" on the top? :)
>>I don't understand what you mean?
> The Home/Up links are both on the bottom of the page, but only Home is
> on the top. Of course, I put the smiley because I know you don't like it
> that way. I'm just into symmetry. :)

I'd rather not have a top navigation bar at all, but there are too many 
people who like it. Now that I think about it, there would be a way to 
compromise a bit (although I'm not sure it's specifically to your 
liking, since it's not symmetric):

	Linux From Scratch - Version CVS-20040507
Prev	Chapter 6. Installing basic system software	Next

Linux From Scratch: link to site
Version CVS-20040507: link to home (same as bottom "home" link)
Prev: previous page
Chapter 6. Installing basic system software: link to chapter six (same 
as bottom "up" link)
Next: next page

This reduces the number of links for text browsers in the navigation to 
tab through and needs less header space necessary :-)
And once you're used to this, you'll find it a lot easier and wish there 
were more links like this throughout the book! For example:

Less installation depends on: Bash, Binutils, Coreutils, Diffutils, GCC, 
Glibc, Grep, Make, Ncurses, Sed.

Each dependency should ideally directly link to the installation page. I 
believe BLFS already does it like this.


Jeroen Coumans

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list