enclose font in website

[cwdjrxyz]

Truth is, I don't know what percentage of users have Flash or online PDF
readers.

Even in 1990 the w3c site gives:
"In September 2000, NPD Research, the parent company of MediaMetrix,
conducted a study to determine what percentage of Web browsers have
Flash preinstalled. The results show that 96.4% of Web users can
experience Macromedia Flash content without having to download and
install a player."

As of now, Adobe says it is about 99% for several of the most
developed nations. See: http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/
.. I would guess the more important question today might be how many
people have flash blocked. If blocked, it likely is much easier to get
people to turn flash on if they need it for the site than it is to get
them to download it.

Adobe likely has info somewhere about the penetration of their pdf
reader, but I did not have time to hunt through the huge Adobe site
for this. My impression that it likely is installed on a very high
percentage of computers that are used online, and Adobe even has
special edition of their reader for portable devices. I suppose some
might have pdf turned off, but I have seen no data concerning this.

The local newspaper I read, not a major one, now offers an online
subscription to their full newspaper on their web site, and I
subscribed to it. It is all in pdf. It is quite easy to read, and even
easier to read on a large screen HD TV I have connected to the
computer using a standard computer monitor conection - not a low
resolution s-video connection. With a wireless keyboard and mouse at
an easy chair, it is much easier to read than a print version of the
paper. It is easy to jump to different sections of the paper and to
individual pages within each section. Graphics are more than good
enough, considering the low resolution used for images in many
newspapers. The main thing missing, likely important to a few, is the
ability to fill in the crossword puzzle online, so one has to print
out the puzzle. However it is quite easy to allow adding text writing
ability to a pdf document. For example, the US federal income tax site
allows you to fill out many of the most needed forms online and print
out the completed form if you wish.

Many scientific journal now are published in online editions in pdf as
well as in printed editions. The online edition often is considerably
less expensive than the printed version.

No matter what you do, someone, somewhere, likely will not be able to
use it. Although I have not heard of it, it would not even surprise me
if someone wrote a program to block text. Perhaps that would be a hit
for avid porn viewers so they would not have to be bothered by text
and could concentrate only on images of the "hard stuff" .

 

[dorayme]

....
As of now, Adobe says it is about 99% for several of the most
developed nations. See:
http://www.adobe.com/products/player_census/flashplayer/
. I would guess the more important question today might be how many
people have flash blocked. If blocked, it likely is much easier to get
people to turn flash on if they need it for the site than it is to get
them to download it.

Good point.

....

[online PDF newspapers]...The main thing missing, likely important to a few, is the
ability to fill in the crossword puzzle online, so one has to print
out the puzzle.

Yes. Well that is better than my experience with the Sydney Morning
Herald online which do not publish the Sudokus. You have to buy the
paper for some of these things. If it was in PDF it would likely be a
true online version of the paper job.

The SMH, as no doubt many others, publish html/css website and selected
stories and things. At least in a PDF we might be free of incompetent
web designers, because newspaper layout at least is done competently
because they have a whole team of people schooled in the arts of
centuries.

Look at a huge company like the SMH's website and press the "Show the
site section" at top of

<http://www.smh.com.au/>

and see if with anything but a small text you can actually get all the
site menu items in view?

This site is probably run by a small team and managed by someone who has
not got enough clue, web design not having centuries behind it.

So, maybe there is more to be said for PDF than I thought. It cuts out a
lot of difficulties that many of the most prestigiously employed
webmasters seem unable to overcome because they don't read alt.html and
get a clue.

Excuse me for raving, Travis put me in a fierce mood during my first cup
of tea of the day and has unbalanced my usual impeccable sense of
relevance. Morning all! <g>

 

[dorayme]

I refuse to
read more than a line or two of sans-serif, and [my spouse] won't read more
than a line or two of Roman?

I trust that such absolute and opposite intransigence is an ingredient
rather than an obstacle to your union. <g>

 

[Joy Beeson]

When I wanted a particular font for my nameplate, I saved the
nameplate as a graphics file.

If you want a particular font for body type, how are you going to
create a page that my spouse and I can both read, when I refuse to
read more than a line or two of sans-serif, and he won't read more
than a line or two of Roman?

 

[asdf]

I know of _no_ legal jurisdiction that requires copyright to be based
on "art". There's a distinction between "creative" and mere "sweat of
the brow", but none go so far as to require "art" or "artistic merit"
to gain the benefit of copyright.

This is for two reasons: Firstly courts should be reluctant to rule on
what constitutes "art" (although US courts approach this, with issues
like Mapplethorpe's "Piss Christ"). Secondly why _should_ copyright be
restricted to "art"? It's generally accepted that much of the world's
creative labours are valuable and worthy of protection, but they're
mundane and not attempting to be art. Much of what I produce daily as
a commercial engineer deserves protection (it cost time, money and
effort to make it), but no-one claims it's art.

Robert Mapplethorpe did not create the "Piss Christ" image. That honour
belongs to Andres Serrano, I believe, though I can see why you might think
Mapplethorpe responsible )

 

[Joy Beeson]

I trust that such absolute and opposite intransigence is an ingredient
rather than an obstacle to your union. <g>

It's cool -- when we share a meal, I get the best parts of everything.
Joy Beeson
--
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://roughsewing.home.comcast.net/ -- sewing
http://n3f.home.comcast.net/ -- Writers' Exchange
The above message is a Usenet post.
I don't recall having given anyone permission to use it on a Web site.