The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Hi all, Happy New Year,
I have been asked by a client to build them a new website using a wavy style font which I will have to specially buy for her, a bit like lucida handwriting.
I usually do a: ....etc. Obviously if I build the site using a font which others may not have on there pc or mac it will default to the next one specified in html.
Is there any way to embed a font on a site, maybe place it on the server with the webpages and 'call it' when the page loads ???. I don't tend to use css as I've never really sat down to try, though it does appear that by the time I put the style id tags in I may as well have specified the font in html as above !!!
Any thoughts gratefully received, Dan
I have been asked by a client to build them a new website using a wavy style font which I will have to specially buy for her, a bit like lucida handwriting.
I usually do a: ....etc. Obviously if I build the site using a font which others may not have on there pc or mac it will default to the next one specified in html.
Is there any way to embed a font on a site, maybe place it on the server with the webpages and 'call it' when the page loads ???. I don't tend to use css as I've never really sat down to try, though it does appear that by the time I put the style id tags in I may as well have specified the font in html as above !!!
Any thoughts gratefully received, Dan
Page:
Hi all, Happy New Year,
I have been asked by a client to build them a new website using a wavy style font which I will have to specially buy for her, a bit like lucida handwriting.
I usually do a: ....etc. Obviously if I build the site using a font which others may not have on there pc or mac it will default to the next one specified in html.
Is there any way to embed a font on a site, maybe place it on the server with the webpages and 'call it' when the page loads ???. I don't tend to use css as I've never really sat down to try, though it does appear that by the time I put the style id tags in I may as well have specified the font in html as above !!!
Any thoughts gratefully received, Dan
I have been asked by a client to build them a new website using a wavy style font which I will have to specially buy for her, a bit like lucida handwriting.
I usually do a: ....etc. Obviously if I build the site using a font which others may not have on there pc or mac it will default to the next one specified in html.
Is there any way to embed a font on a site, maybe place it on the server with the webpages and 'call it' when the page loads ???. I don't tend to use css as I've never really sat down to try, though it does appear that by the time I put the style id tags in I may as well have specified the font in html as above !!!
Any thoughts gratefully received, Dan
There are some methods but none that work on all browsers. And none of them work in firefox as far as I remember.
I'd just explain to your client what a bad idea this is. :)
I'd just explain to your client what a bad idea this is. :)
Dan 777 wrote:
> ...Any thoughts gratefully received, Dan
Where I've had clients that needed a specific non-standard font to be used, my compromise (which they were happy with!) is to create a few GIFs that use the required font and use these on the site.
Not in large areas, but just for headings, navigation etc.
PS. Dan, I think you are 19-46..., if I'm right then you really should think about moving away from FRAMES - try a Google using site:www.yoursite.com to see the problems it causes...
> ...Any thoughts gratefully received, Dan
Where I've had clients that needed a specific non-standard font to be used, my compromise (which they were happy with!) is to create a few GIFs that use the required font and use these on the site.
Not in large areas, but just for headings, navigation etc.
PS. Dan, I think you are 19-46..., if I'm right then you really should think about moving away from FRAMES - try a Google using site:www.yoursite.com to see the problems it causes...
Thanks,
transparent gifs were what I had in mind as an alternative, just wondered if you could embed, always thinking to deeply.
Yes it is mine, I tend to use frames to ensure that the layout is strictly contained and in proportion. I build in 800 x 600 but obviously it has to be fine in 1024 x 768, I hate going to sites that you have to scroll left and right to find stuff. It's difficult to predict how it will appear on various monitors, browsers and platforms I cant test for all !!.
I'm mostly self taught so really have found the best way for me to acheive the layout I want. If it's navigation on each page I'll not use frames but do like just the one pane to change.
Any suggestions for alternatives welcomed,
Dan
transparent gifs were what I had in mind as an alternative, just wondered if you could embed, always thinking to deeply.
Yes it is mine, I tend to use frames to ensure that the layout is strictly contained and in proportion. I build in 800 x 600 but obviously it has to be fine in 1024 x 768, I hate going to sites that you have to scroll left and right to find stuff. It's difficult to predict how it will appear on various monitors, browsers and platforms I cant test for all !!.
I'm mostly self taught so really have found the best way for me to acheive the layout I want. If it's navigation on each page I'll not use frames but do like just the one pane to change.
Any suggestions for alternatives welcomed,
Dan
Hi Dan,
You don't need to use Frames to control your layout.
The favoured way at the moment is CSS. But I admit I still like to use Tables for my layout and CSS for Formatting.
You don't need to use Frames to control your layout.
The favoured way at the moment is CSS. But I admit I still like to use Tables for my layout and CSS for Formatting.
I understand that Google is indexing all 15 pages on my site, this may be hindered by placing it within a FRAMESET as the access point may not be index.htm.
Should I just redo all pages at 800 x 600 build res, table to 100% and have buttons / nav on each page.
Once they have loaded on page 1 (or whatever page is initially visited via search engines etc) buttons are then cached, the site then becomes accessible from any page.
It is Meta tagged to the 'hilt' and is indexed OK but I realise it is confusing for the robots / search results returned.
Is this the solution ?????
Thanks Dan777
Should I just redo all pages at 800 x 600 build res, table to 100% and have buttons / nav on each page.
Once they have loaded on page 1 (or whatever page is initially visited via search engines etc) buttons are then cached, the site then becomes accessible from any page.
It is Meta tagged to the 'hilt' and is indexed OK but I realise it is confusing for the robots / search results returned.
Is this the solution ?????
Thanks Dan777
Yep - that'll do it.
I don't use percentages but set the table width in pixels.
The BBC spend a lot of money on their website, so I often see what they do on their news site.
They set the table to 760 pixels wide and align the table to the left. If you centralise the table then you need to reduce the width a bit to ensure you don't get horizontal scroll bars.
As you say the navigation elements will only have to load once - that same goes for the logos etc. in your header.
I haven't got a problem with using tables, but as I said they are now often seen as 'old hat' with the general thinking that they should be replaced with CSS. So perhaps if you are going for a re-write you should take a look at CSS as well?
Getting away from frames will also allow you to use a different page title, meta tags and alt tags on your logo for each page - which will help you on the search engine front!
I don't use percentages but set the table width in pixels.
The BBC spend a lot of money on their website, so I often see what they do on their news site.
They set the table to 760 pixels wide and align the table to the left. If you centralise the table then you need to reduce the width a bit to ensure you don't get horizontal scroll bars.
As you say the navigation elements will only have to load once - that same goes for the logos etc. in your header.
I haven't got a problem with using tables, but as I said they are now often seen as 'old hat' with the general thinking that they should be replaced with CSS. So perhaps if you are going for a re-write you should take a look at CSS as well?
Getting away from frames will also allow you to use a different page title, meta tags and alt tags on your logo for each page - which will help you on the search engine front!
Thanks for the advice, have now re done site without frames (still no css). Tables set at 100% for title & nav, 740 pixels fixed for page contents.
Still looks ok in 800 x 600 and 1024 x 768.
Let me know what you think - Hmmm.
Dan
Hmmm... wrote:
> Yep - that'll do it.
>
> I don't use percentages but set the table width in pixels.
>
> The BBC spend a lot of money on their website, so I often see
> what they do on their news site.
>
> They set the table to 760 pixels wide and align the table to the
> left. If you centralise the table then you need to reduce the
> width a bit to ensure you don't get horizontal scroll bars.
>
> As you say the navigation elements will only have to load once -
> that same goes for the logos etc. in your header.
>
> I haven't got a problem with using tables, but as I said they
> are now often seen as 'old hat' with the general thinking that
> they should be replaced with CSS. So perhaps if you are going
> for a re-write you should take a look at CSS as well?
>
> Getting away from frames will also allow you to use a different
> page title, meta tags and alt tags on your logo for each page -
> which will help you on the search engine front!
Still looks ok in 800 x 600 and 1024 x 768.
Let me know what you think - Hmmm.
Dan
Hmmm... wrote:
> Yep - that'll do it.
>
> I don't use percentages but set the table width in pixels.
>
> The BBC spend a lot of money on their website, so I often see
> what they do on their news site.
>
> They set the table to 760 pixels wide and align the table to the
> left. If you centralise the table then you need to reduce the
> width a bit to ensure you don't get horizontal scroll bars.
>
> As you say the navigation elements will only have to load once -
> that same goes for the logos etc. in your header.
>
> I haven't got a problem with using tables, but as I said they
> are now often seen as 'old hat' with the general thinking that
> they should be replaced with CSS. So perhaps if you are going
> for a re-write you should take a look at CSS as well?
>
> Getting away from frames will also allow you to use a different
> page title, meta tags and alt tags on your logo for each page -
> which will help you on the search engine front!
Dan 777 wrote:
> Thanks for the advice, have now re done site without frames
> (still no css). Tables set at 100% for title & nav, 740
> pixels fixed for page contents.
>
> Still looks ok in 800 x 600 and 1024 x 768.
>
> Let me know what you think - Hmmm.
>
> Dan
Removing your FRAMES should help you in the SE front!
Don't forget to have different page titles for each page - you can do this now you have separate pages! SEs like page titles...
Careful you don't get too spammy with your main logo ALT tag - SEs don't like SPAM...
> Thanks for the advice, have now re done site without frames
> (still no css). Tables set at 100% for title & nav, 740
> pixels fixed for page contents.
>
> Still looks ok in 800 x 600 and 1024 x 768.
>
> Let me know what you think - Hmmm.
>
> Dan
Removing your FRAMES should help you in the SE front!
Don't forget to have different page titles for each page - you can do this now you have separate pages! SEs like page titles...
Careful you don't get too spammy with your main logo ALT tag - SEs don't like SPAM...
Hmmm... wrote:
> I haven't got a problem with using tables, but as I said they
> are now often seen as 'old hat' with the general thinking that
> they should be replaced with CSS. So perhaps if you are going
> for a re-write you should take a look at CSS as well?
Yes, some people actually are rather too evangelical about CSS and see anyone using tables as luddites who shouldn't be allowed to build websites.
In my opinion these people are just being unrealistic. Tables are simpl and layouts work near flawlessly across all major browsers. CSS layouts tend to rely on hacks to get round differences in browser engines. How is that progress?
CSS layouts are great in theory, but in the real world (ie. a world where most people use IE), a combination of tables and CSS styling works well and I see no compelling reason to ditch tables yet.
> I haven't got a problem with using tables, but as I said they
> are now often seen as 'old hat' with the general thinking that
> they should be replaced with CSS. So perhaps if you are going
> for a re-write you should take a look at CSS as well?
Yes, some people actually are rather too evangelical about CSS and see anyone using tables as luddites who shouldn't be allowed to build websites.
In my opinion these people are just being unrealistic. Tables are simpl and layouts work near flawlessly across all major browsers. CSS layouts tend to rely on hacks to get round differences in browser engines. How is that progress?
CSS layouts are great in theory, but in the real world (ie. a world where most people use IE), a combination of tables and CSS styling works well and I see no compelling reason to ditch tables yet.
Page: