aesop

The long way around is your safest bet: re-size the images to the exact size, /and/ provide that size in the markup as well.

The alternative that has been proposed to size the images in the CSS is faulty and bug prone. And attempting to re-size them only in the markup is a similar waste of time.

Let’s hope no one looks under the hood.

JMHirst>I’m really puzzled about the problems you’ve had Aesop.

Aesop>Do not be puzzled about the problems I’ve had. Concentrate on the problem /you/ have in all versions of Win/IE at text-size largest. Please see these screen shots:
https://www.dlaakso.com/hirst-1.jpg
https://www.dlaakso.com/hirst-2.jpg
The fix I gave will solve /your/ problem.

— luxx: Time is a clock without hands. Fix what /you/ feel needs to be fixed when you feel you have time to do so. No one is holding a stop-watch…Either way, keep up the fine work.

— cregy: Rich, nice to see you here. ~dL

Your fonts go goofy on zoom in ie. Adding font-size: 100%; in the body declaration will correct this(if you size fonts with em’s you need to set percent on the body for ie– otherwise it triggers an ie font scaling bug).

The size of your content text is tiny for those at 1280 and up. I am at 1600+ and get the layout starting to break when I bring that text up to a readable level.

Print typographers avoid setting sans justified as though it would cause some sort of plague. On the Web neither serifed nor sans justified works well. The spaces between words/letters does not adjust properly at different screen resolutions. If you zoom your font 3 clicks in FF, and squint at the blocks of text, you’ll see the ‘rivers.’ Text-align: left; will do better for you and your users.

You are an *exceptionally* talented young woman.
Do not let this long list scare you. Trust me, you are doing far better than some of the folks on this forum who “think” they know what they are doing.
1/ #ooo on the content text does read better.
2/ Tweak the the contrast on the other font colors, too. No need to go crazy with it– just experiment a little. Color adjustment can be made over a long period of time.
3/ You had 0.9em on the body declaration. I suggested 90%. You made it 100%. This is good!!! Brings it up to user default.
Some versions of Opera have a rounding error. Change 100% on the body to: 100.01% to be even nicer to Opera.
4/ #rap{/*font-family: Georgia ,serif; font-size: 95%;*/}
You have already declared the font-family in the body. Not necessary to repeat it. Delete the font-size as well.
5/ my error here–just forget 5.
6/ letter-spacing, unlike line-height it requires a measurement unit:
acronym, abbr, span.caps {letter-spacing: .07;}
the unit for letter-spacing is either px or em. Personally, I see no need to letter-space that stuff, but– it is your call.
7a/ Content-text is controlled with this ruleset:
.post-content, .page-content {
font-family: Georgia;
font-size: 90%;
}
You can delete Georgia as it is inherited from the body declaration.
Now comes a tough one:
***Do you want the content text letters to be 10% smaller in both the heigth /and/ width of what any user in the world has declared as their default? If your answer is ‘yes,’ leave font-size: 90%;(you will now be declared as being *very* cool).
***Or do you instead want relinquish your ‘coolness’ and practice typography(basically typography is about making content readable). If so, delete font-size: 90%; and replace it with font-size: 109%;(or whatever just before Georgia trips to a display font). If so you will no longer be cool. But then you won’t be a control freak either.

Your Call!

7b/ line-height for content text:
You have
p {line-height: 1.5;}
Typographers think of blocks of content text as though it were a piece of fabric or fine tapestry. Try to think that way, too. Squint your eyes at the blocks of content text. You will see its color(I am talking about the black-whiteness of it, not its hue). You can adjust the color of the tapestry by adjusting the leading. Leading is like sort of the the space above and below the lines of text. CSS uses line-height to adjust the lead and half-lead. Experiment with gently tweaking the line-height to subtly alter the color of the fabric. Clue: you may be just a tiny bit light right now…
See the leading/half-leading specs: https://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/visudet.html#line-height
8/#sidebar stuff:
Experiment with these– your call:
a/font-weight: 200 rather than bold on h2.
b/font-size: 95% rather than 90%on #sidebar ul
9/same on the font-size here: .post-info, .page-info
And not necesary to repeat Georgia– it’s in the body declaration.
10/ .page-title {font-size:1.0;}
No big deal– you need a percent unit here (font-size)
11/ .post-date
No need to repeat Georgia.
12/ .commentlist {font-size:1;}
Hmmm…
13/ #comments,#respond {font: 90% Georgia;}
Re-write to read:
14/ #topnav
Delete Georgia.

You are looking good and standing tall!

Hi, I think you did not understand– or I did not make myself clear. To avoid the IE font-scaling problem, the font-size on the /body/ needs to be a percent. You had font-size: 0.9em; That should change to font-size: 90%; The font-sizes throughout the remainder of the stylesheet should then be expressed as /either/ percent or em.

Only line-height is a raw number, and it is so whether it is in the body declaration, but also throughout the style sheet.

So to review;
1/ font-size on body expressed in percent unit
2/ font-sizes on individual selectors in percent /or/ em’s
3/ line-height in the body declaration and throughout the style sheet is a raw number(no percent or em unit is used).

Freak yourself out. Try #000 for the content text.

Nice site. Couple of suggestions.
1/ The horizontal navigation at the top is very light– bumping the contrast a little will make it more obvious and easier to use.
2/ The fonts scale well. However, for those of us at 1400 and up, the initial start-size of the content text might be better a little larger.

Thanks so much for the screen shot’whooami.’ That shot shows how the thumbs are intended to be rendered. FF 1.5 rc3 on some OS is rendering them stacked vertically. I have not as yet been able to determine if this is, or is not, a software bug.

Your summation of the font question is on target and appreciated.

Thanks.

First off, neither my son nor I are vision impaired.

Second, it really does not matter what font-size one sets.

What does matter is providing the user the ability to scale the fonts up /or/ down in /any/ browser. And ensuring that the layout will not break, nor the text overlap. One test to check this is setting a minimum font size of 28 pixels. Or zooming the fonts to 200%. It is only a test. I am not advocating that everyone run around and change all their settings. Nevertheless, the number of sites that fail that test is sad.

The font-size I am using is difficult for you, there is no question about that in my mind. That to some extent is based on what you have come to accept as a standard. But ‘your’ standard does not necessarily represnt what is user friendly. It is rather a trend to use tinytype and mousetype. I can deal with that. I zoom it. If your layout breaks, or if I can’t zoom it, I go to your competitors site.

Typography is very simple to understand: it is about making content easy to read. Nothing more and nothing less. Some people are better at it than others. It is a minor art. The Web makes the practice of traditional tyography difficult. The user has control over what she believes is easy to read. This complicates matters. Particularly if she is not willing to excercise that control because of a preconceived ideal.

But then you know more about typography than me…

Nice job.
Suggestions:
1/setting the font size in em on the body triggers a bug in ie that causes fonts to go goofy on zoom. Change the body declaration to:
font-size: 90%;
and use a raw number for line-height(no unit after it)
line-height:1.3;
2/ the content text readability will improve if you could see your way clear to bump the contrast a little. It is kind of too light now.
3/More important: keep up the good work!!!

jwurster>Why did you build the blog for your son?

aesop>Because he asked me too.

kickass>…things should be designed, so that people don’t have to make adjustments to view YOUR particular website-

aesop>Then why did I need to zoom the fonts on YOUR particular site to read it?

The thumbnails should be horizontal. If you are seeing them vertical, it is a software bug in the version of FF that you are using. I will lay them out differently so as not to trigger that bug.

I had hoped that those who found the fonts too large would reduce them in their browser– in the same sense one might increase fonts that are too small by zooming them up.

Thanks so much for the feedback. It is helpful. And appreciated.

Yes, Moshu, that may work for me.
Many thanks.

Thanks, TechGnome. <!–put msie in quirksmode–> above doctype does the trick.