[thelist] fonts - ok not to define them?

[Diane Soini]

I haven't scaled the font size to 8pt. I don't use any points at all. I 
scaled it to 80%. Maybe that is too small, but I don't see how, since 
every Windows machine I've ever looked at the font sizes appear normal 
to me.

Somebody said that Times was the default Windows font. If so, perhaps 
80% is too small in Times. My questio now is if such a 
difficult-to-read font is the default on so many computers out there, 
is it bad form to not define a font in your stylesheet? I mean, is it 
better usability to define fonts rather than leave them undefined?

On Tuesday, July 13, 2004, at 01:48 AM, thelist-request at lists.evolt.org 
wrote:

> Subject: RE: [thelist] fonts - ok not to define them?
> Reply-To: Mark.Joslyn at SolimarSystems.com, "thelist at lists.evolt.org" 
> <thelist at lists.evolt.org>
>
>
> [snip]
> I didn't define a font-family (but I did scale down the size a bit) 
> for the
> site and I do
> not use any images as text. He said the contrast is ok, but the text is
> too jagged to read.
> [/snip]
>
> I have found that if you scale fonts under 8pt in IE, they are 
> unreadable.
>
> mj
***
Don't be afraid to try something new. An amateur built the ark. 
Professionals built the Titanic. -unknown