W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2003

Re: Best font family for accessibility? / site check request

From: John Britsios <webmaster@webnauts.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 21:57:13 +0200
Message-ID: <008a01c36c0c$3f7eae60$0100a8c0@webnauts>
To: <carl.myhill@ps.ge.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

Dear Carl!

I guess your fonts choices are the best!

Though you should begin thinking about "Readability".

Here is an interesting link:
http://www.humanfactors.com/downloads/jun02.asp

Kind regards,

John

P.S. If you have a minute, please visit the "Webnauts Net Accessibility and
Usability Initiative" forum at: http://www.webnauts.net/phpBB2/index.php A
lot of valuable links there....

---
John S. Britsios,
Web Accessibility and Usability Consultant

Webnauts Net
Web Accessibility & Usability Consultants
Wilbrandstr. 77
D-33604 Bielefeld
Germany
----- Original Message ----- 
From: <carl.myhill@ps.ge.com>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 7:35 PM
Subject: RE: Best font family for accessibility? / site check request


>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks all for your responses.
>
> I understand that for accessibility users own choices of fonts should be
> respected, and that's fine, their own style sheet of browser settings can
> presumably force that.
>
> My website is not specifically designed for disabled people, I just think
> good design practice should just be accessible, without the fuss. So, my
> users are just regular web users and I wont be expecting them to install a
> font to look at the page.
>
> It does seem like my choice perhaps isnt too bad after all, from what I
skim
> read in Jim's article but it doesn't look great on IE 5.5.
>
> font-family: verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif;
>
>
> I just thought I might be missing something. I personally don't much like
> Jacob's Nielsen's font choices.  I thought there might be guidelines as to
> which are the clearest and most accessible commonly installed fonts on
> people's computers. I guess The BBC and RNIB have made some sensible
choices
> so I'll perhaps go take a peak there.  I just thought there might be a
> definative answer from this group (am still a bit of a newbie!).
>
> Having been an interaction designer 11 years I still struggle with the
> answers the colleagues in my community offer on the subject of which
colours
> work best. The answer is invariably 'it depends'. Rather than being a
> template set of colours that work quite well for most people. The latter I
> can use immediately, the former is an interesting idea but doesn't lead me
> away from my bad taste and ignorance!  I fear this font issue is similar.
> 'It Depends' is my pet hated expression over-used by Interaction
Designers!
>
> Cheers
>
> Carl
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Clark [mailto:joeclark@joeclark.org]
> Sent: 26 August 2003 17:53
> To: WAI-IG
> Subject: Re: Best font family for accessibility? / site check request
>
>
>
> Unfortunately, the answer to the question "What is the best font for
> a visually-impaired person?" is "Whatever that person prefers." Some
> people will choose poorly (I've read evidence that people read faster
> with a font slightly smaller than the size they consider optimal),
> but in general people know their own needs better than designers do.
> That's why we've got user stylesheets and font selectors in browsers.
>
> Cf., inter alia,
> <http://joeclark.org/design/print/readingthetube.html>. The issues
> are similar.
>
> -- 
>
>      Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
>      Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
>      Expect criticism if you top-post
>
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2003 15:55:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:10 GMT