Next XML changes

Bryan Kadzban bryan at
Mon May 17 10:06:45 PDT 2004

On Mon, May 17, 2004 at 04:37:51PM +0200, Jeroen Coumans wrote:
> But I'm willing to compromise. What is it about my font definitions that 
> you don't like? Do you have other suggestions for font types?

I can't speak for Archaic, but personally, I think if you change the
font-family CSS to "sans-serif" and leave it, that might be a little
better.  Then people that want it to be "Bitstream Vera Sans" can map
their browser's sans-serif font to that using their browser's
preferences, instead of having to hack in a CSS override manually.

Though I've never used Opera, for example, so I don't know how easy it
is to change which system font Opera uses to render sans-serif.  I have 
used Konqueror, but I never looked into that (and I don't have it
installed anymore).  I know that in Mozilla and Firefox, it's as easy as
opening the preferences, going to fonts, and selecting a different font
family in the sans serif dropdown.

This may make the default rendering slightly uglier if the user has not
bothered to change the font that sans-serif maps to, but that's where
the IE font size comment comes into the picture: IMO, it's much better
to let the users change the font {family,size} in their browser than to
fix the {family,size} to something that supposedly looks good, but not
everybody wants, and isn't as easy to change.

Of course, this is only my opinion.  I have been known to be wrong, and
I have not always thought everything through, so I'm willing to
reconsider.  ;-)

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list