|
From: | Max Nikulin |
Subject: | Re: [Worg] Proposing a few CSS changes |
Date: | Sun, 26 Sep 2021 19:12:46 +0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 |
On 26/09/2021 02:51, Timothy wrote:
I’m a big fan of the shift to a fixed em-based max width. However, I’m not quite sold on a few of the other changes, for instance the font change. While it does vary, I must say than in particular I find the default serifed font of browsers somewhat unattractive. Have you considered instead a sans-serif system font stack? For example, this is what I used on the homepage: ┌──── │ -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, San Francisco, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Ubuntu, Roboto, Noto, Segoe UI, Arial, sans-serif; └────
Sorry if it is a false alarm, I do not have enough experience with CSS.Since "Noto Serif" font exist, is just "Noto" enough to select namely "Noto Sans"?
Concerning "em" and "rem", I may be wrong, but Chromium on Linux may apply font settings from desktop theme to <body> element, while "rem" units are based on <html> element. So using rem for max-width and leaving font-size to user defaults may result in too narrow or too wide text column. Unsure if values like "larger" are more "portable" for font-size of header elements.
Modern browsers support light and dark themes. I can not suggest CSS snippets for that since I have never played with such selectors yet.
I do not know what is the proper balance of overriding of defaults. I consider default built-in styles as compatibility mode with old pages. That is why I do not think that relying on default styles only (even some users customize them) is a good idea. Absolute font size may be left as in user preferences.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |