Type on the Web: Don't fight it, feel it.

Posted by Gavin Shinfield on May 06, 2008 at 08:15 PM

One perennial web design issue that continues to vex and frustrate designers and clients alike is the limited number of typefaces available for text when set in HTML (i.e. without resorting to images or Flash).

But please don’t struggle against the tide. Go with the flow.

The benefits of using plain ol’ HTML for text markup are self-evident. Pages load faster when not encumbered by unnecessary graphics, search engine results are improved and your valid HTML content can be resized and repurposed for whatever user, device or terminal it ends up at. But still, the seduction of slickly rendered type endures.

And so it should.

My beef is not with those who desire to make type look elegant online, far from it. The problem I have is when all usability and accessibility issues are ignored to achieve this. It’s just not worth it.

“But ah!” You say, “what about image replacement? What about Shaun Inman’s sIFR? It’s true that despite their limitations these superbly creative solutions to the problem have gone a long way to replying to the usability argument. But can you resize those graphics? sIFR is fine* for headlines but all those inline Flash movies are gonna slow your site down. Why bother?

If I could give one piece of advice it would be to work with your materials rather than fight against them. Go with the grain.

Honesty of materials

Use default font sets and use your design nouse to make them look good. Who knows, you may even be able to realise a piece of graphic design as well balanced and elegant as this lovely piece from Coudal Partners

So you can’t use the client’s ‘corporate’ font to set the body copy, so you can’t get the exact weight of Garamond to match the brochure strapline, that ace Klingon script download will have to find another home… who cares?

A true designer will assess the materials he has available to him and make best use of them to arrange and communicate the message. Designers and artists throughout the ages have created beautiful, impactful conceits with nothing but basic typefaces why should we complain how limited our options are?

Tags:
‹‹ Previous post, Next post ››

Visit our website kyanmedia.com

Comments

There are 3 comments on this post. Post yours →

  1. Oh yeah? commented on May 07, 2008 at 07:24 AM

    I strongly disagree with this post. It’s almost as if you don’t see the point in trying to push the boundaries of web design. Why should we be limited to standard fonts in HTML? We shouldn’t and we should complain. It’s too easy to say “it is the way it is and that’s that”.

  2. Paul commented on June 07, 2008 at 03:43 PM

    I think you missed the point of the post…

    Accessibility is more import than a font and should not be compromised. A good designer can balance the two and embrace the limitations of the medium.

    It would be great if there were more standard fonts in HTML but that’s another argument entirely.

    Until such time designers should work with what we have and not let aesthetics and brand guidelines break the web.

  3. Gavin commented on June 15, 2008 at 08:08 PM

    Thanks Paul. For the record I’m all for pushing boundries, just not at the expense of accessibility and usability. Another issue to bear in mind is the cost of maintenance, at Kyan we deal with increasingly larger websites and applications, the overheads of maintaining SIFr and/or text graphics that have to be created by a designer are not inconsiderable.

Post a comment