哪些网络安全字体作为正文更容易被眼睛阅读?不应使用哪些网络安全字体?
哪些网络安全字体作为正文文本更容易被眼睛阅读?不应使用哪些网络安全字体?
为了提高可读性,
正文
的最小字体大小应该是多少?
、
- 应该使用什么字体大小>,
?我们是否应该对
、
- 、
和 使用相同的字体大小;
?平衡的排版字体大小方案是什么?
Which web-safe fonts are more readable to eyes as a body text? Which web-safe fonts should not be used?
What should be the minimum font size of <p>body text</p>
for better readability?
What font size should we use for <H1/2/3/4/5/6>
, <p>
<ul>
, <ol>
? Should we use same font-size for <p>
, <ul>
, <ol>
and <th>
<td>
?
What would be the balanced typography font sizing scheme?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱,如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论,将不能在第一时间通知您!
发布评论
评论(8)
我发现 Verdana 对于大块文本来说非常舒服。
然而,仅字体系列不会带来重大改进。
您应该小心文本块的宽度。流行的用法表明,每行 12 到 16 个单词之间的任何位置都适合眼睛。
还要确保行高平衡,以便行之间的垂直距离提供足够的空白。将大块文本分成多个段落,这些段落的底部填充/边距至少是行高大小的两倍,可以使它们更好地脱颖而出。
我不相信有调整标题字体大小的灵丹妙药。我确实建议您对字体使用弹性大小(em而不是px)。这使得内容更容易适应各种屏幕尺寸和分辨率。
无论您选择什么,都应该注意标题大小以及字体粗细或颜色之间的明显区别。一般来说,让标题之间的差异变得非常微妙并不是一个好主意。
我建议 h6(最后一个标题)至少比通用文本块大一点,并采用粗体字体粗细。如果让它看起来与包裹在 STRONG 标签中的元素相同,将会令人困惑。
我认为使 P、OL、TH 和 TD 的字体大小相同部分是一个品味问题,但更重要的是一个范围问题。
如果您的表格显示定价选项,我肯定会为 TH 和 TD 元素使用更大的字体,以吸引用户的注意力。
I've found Verdana to be very easy on the eyes for large blocks of text.
However the font-family alone won't bring major improvements.
You should be careful with the width of your text block. Popular usage shows that anywhere between 12 to 16 words per line is comfortable for the eye.
Also be sure to have a balanced line-height so the vertical distance between rows gives enough whitespace. Breaking large blocks of text into paragraphs that have a bottom padding/margin that's at least twice the size of the line height makes them stand out better.
I don't believe there's a silver bullet for sizing fonts on headings. I do recommend you go with elastic sizing (em not px) for fonts. This makes the content more easily adaptable on various screen sizes and resolutions.
Whatever you pick you should pay attention to a clear distinction between heading sizes as well as font-weight or coloring. It's generally a bad idea to make differences between headings very subtle.
I'd recommend the h6, last heading, to be at least a bit larger than the generic text block and in bold font-weight. It would be confusing to make it look the same as an element that wrapped in a STRONG tag.
Making the font-size for P, OL, TH and TD the same I believe is partly a matter of taste but more importantly a matter of scope.
If your TABLE shows pricing options, I'd most definitely go with larger fonts for TH and TD elements in order to focus the user's attention.
威奇托州立大学的软件可用性研究实验室对字体进行了一系列研究,其结果可以使用根据您的目的选择正确的字体和大小。对于文本段落的原始可读性,12 点 Tahoma 似乎一致执行最好的。 Cambria 可能更擅长阅读单个字符(他们没有测试它的阅读能力)段落,并且没有直接针对 Tahoma 进行测试)。
一般来说,12 分比 10 分好,但 14 并不比 12 好 ,除非您谈论的是老年用户。
如果大小是区分标头的唯一方式,那么根据 MIL-STD 1472,每个级别应至少比下一个较低级别大 25%。因此,如果您使用 H1 到 H3 和 12 点段落,则 H3 = 15 点,H2 = 19 点,H1 = 24 点(最小值)。但是,如果您使用其他方式来指示层次结构,例如缩进、粗体或节编号方案(如#.#.#),则某些级别可能与其他级别具有相同的大小。
编号列表和未编号列表应使用 12 点,因为它们通常是句子。您也许可以为表格内容或数据字段使用较小的字体,可能小至 9 磅,因为用户通常一次只扫描和阅读一个单词或数字,但我不知道有什么研究实际上比较了扫描/滚动与可读性权衡。
Wichita State’s Software Usability Research Lab has done a series of studies on font whose results can be used to select the right font and size for your purposes. For raw readability of paragraphs of text, 12 point Tahoma appears to consistently perform the best. Cambria may be better at reading individual characters (they didn’t test it for reading paragraphs, and didn’t test it directly against Tahoma).
In general, 12 point is better than 10, but 14 is not better than 12, unless you’re talking elderly users.
If size is the only way you distinguish headers, then, according to MIL-STD 1472, each level should be at least 25% larger than the next lower level. So, if you use H1 through H3 and 12 point paragraphs, then H3 = 15 pt, H2 = 19 pt, and H1 = 24 pt (minimums). However, if you’re using other means to indicate the hierarchy, such as indenting, bold font, or a section number scheme (like #.#.#), then some levels may be the same size as others.
Number and unnumbered lists should use 12 point since they are typically sentences. You might be able to get away with a smaller font for table content or data fields, maybe as small as 9 point, since the user is generally scanning and reading only one word or number at a time, but I don’t know of any study that actually compared the scan/scroll vs. readability tradeoff.
尝试使用不同的字体制作网站的不同版本,并要求用户选择一种最易于阅读的字体。
关于字体的良好做法:
一页
可以放大浏览器中的字体大小
设置
界面中的“缩小字体”和
将用户设置保存在 cookie 中
字体选择本身就是一种美学选择,您无法在这里得到正确的答案 - 您自己喜欢的字体就会这样做。
至于网络安全字体,请尝试此链接:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_typography< /a>
Try making different versions of your site with different fonts and ask your users to choose one, that is most easy to read.
Good practices about fonts:
one page
can enlarge font size in the browser
settings
"reduce font" in your interface and
save user settings in cookie
The font choice it self is an aesthetic one, you can't get a correct answer here - the one you like your self will do.
As for web safe fonts, try this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_typography
http://bigital.com/english/files/2008/04/web_legibility_readability。 pdf
根据这项研究,Verdana 提供更好的速度、舒适度和理解力。此外,它还建议最佳行长度约为 60-80 个字符。
http://bigital.com/english/files/2008/04/web_legibility_readability.pdf
According to this study, Verdana gives better speed, confort and comprehension. Also, it suggests the optimal line length is around 60-80 characters.
IMO:避免使用 Comic Sans,使用 10+ pt 的字体大小。
IMO: avoid Comic Sans, use font size 10+ pt.
重新可读的正文:今天,最倾向于给出的答案是使用无衬线字体(参见例如这些 可读性指南)。这些指南似乎也回答了您的大多数其他问题。
五到十年后,只要显示容量不断增加,答案可能是衬线字体。
Re readable body text: today, the answer most tend to give is to use a sans-serif font (see e.g. these readability guidelines). The guidelines also seem to answer most of your other questions.
In five to ten years' time, the answer will probably be a serif font, provided display capacities keep increasing.
你试过这个吗?
这将强制浏览器使用您自己的字体。
Have you tried this?
This will force browsers to use your own typeface.
对我来说,这是一个由三部分组成的问题,所以让我将我的答案分为这三个部分:
To me this is a three part question so let me break down my answer into those three sections: