Return to:

HTML Issues Dealing With Fonts Readability is traditionally measured by: The style of typeface - usually familiar styles are most readable. The size of the typeface - with in reason, the larger the better. The length of line - comfortably narrow columns are better than wide columns. Contrast between the type and the background - the more contrast the better. The relationship of the type with other elements on the page - it should be obvious at first glance. Finally, the suitability of type to content - an art director should be well founded in understanding the personality of types. Now, that's suitable when looking at magazines and newspapers. But, HTML does not offer the same luxuries as print. In fact, the choice of fonts is quite limited. As you see here, a list of default fonts for Windows and MacIntosh. As you may know, GIFs are a common solution for creating fancy logos. A good rule when doing so is to keep your titles to one line. The typeface you choose should be in the same family to the typeface of the body copy which is most commonly defined as serif and sans serif. There are other defining characteristics such weight and the x height, but for this exercise we will leave it at serif and sans serif. Choosing a typeface for body copy is pretty well limited to arial, helvetica or verdana from the sans serif realm. Times, Garamond or Palatino from the serif. Most print publications use a serif typeface because it is considered easier to read. This might be a good choice if your pages contain a lot of text. It's really what you prefer. Keep in mind, however, how your text is displayed differs between the two dominant platforms. Similar type in Windows has a different height and tracking or space between the letters than on a Macintosh.