On 06/04/12 19:14 (GMT-0400) Maziak, Peter (Tek Systems) apparently typed:
> ~davidLaakso wrote:
>> The uri is: <http://www.dlaakso.com/srb/>
> I like the idea of you using live text for some of the header text, but
> when it comes down to it--when it is on the screen, it just doesn't look
> optimum/professional due to aliasing.
That is a problem of your own choosing. . . .
> This is a frustration I have on my sites and am not sure of a best way
> to optimize text so that it doesn't get all jagged (even with common
> fonts like Arial), other than rendering it an anti-aliased graphic.
> Perhaps it is one of the cons of using percent-based font-size? Oh if
> only CSS/browsers could anti-alias...
I find no such problem: http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/SS/dlaakso-srb1.jpg (on
1792x1344). But, that's precisely one reason why one chooses to use high
resolution, which is just one way to describe _high quality_. High
enough pixel count per character, which is what _high_ resolution offers
when appropriately configured, eliminates the jaggies. IOW, when you
choose to retain a default or similarly low resolution, you're choosing
to retain least common denominator low quality, with the jaggies that go
OTOH, if he was using a typical unscaled variety of header image instead
of the pure CSS he's using now, hires users would be seeing a tiny
little header image instead of what his design intends.
"Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but
rather expose them." Ephesians 5:11 NIV
Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409
Felix Miata *** http://mrmazda.no-ip.com/auth/auth
IE7b2 testing hub -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/?page=IE7
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/