> > -----Original Message from Brian Kelly-----
>
> > If we are referring to HTML resources (as implied by the subject of
> > this
> > thread) we should be using different stylesheets for
> onscreen reading
> > and printing.  This has been in CSS since the start.
>
> Should we?
>
> Most folks are familiar with WYSIWYG apps like Word. And
> predictability is a key aspect of usability. Getting
> something completely different from a printer when you hit
> the browser print button is IMHO sub-optimal. I only have
> access to shared printers, which makes instant recognition of
> what you've printed a desirable feature.
>
> So perhaps the issue is: Does using different, /marginally/
> more readable fonts in a CSS print style sheet outweigh the
> potential confusion of a user getting a printed page
> *different* to what they see on their screen/were expecting.
>
> IMHO, in most cases it doesn't, but I'm open to persuasion...
>
> (btw: "the w3c say so" is not a valid reason :-)
>
> Regards,
> Matt

Hi Matt
   Good question.
   Style sheets for print aren't needed; HTML resources can just use the
same style sheets for onscreen and printing - I'm pointing out that HTML
authors have the capability of providing a richer environment.
   Whether such richness *should* be used is an interesting question.  I
feel that most users will be aware that the hard copy with be different
from a screen display - for example background images, colours, etc
aren't normally included on the hardcopy.
   You can also use print style sheets to suppress display of elements
which might not be meaningful on hard copy - e.g. navigational bars,
...
   There may be minor changes which you might wish to make to overcome
browser defaults which are alo not relevant to the screen display
(margin settings, widows and orphans, etc.).
   There are also features such as watermarks which may be useful (e.g.
a watermark which says Confidential, Draft, Obsolete, etc.) on the hard
copy.
   I would agree that it would be possible to use print and screen style
sheets so that a completely different document is displayed on paper and
on screen - and this would be a bad thing, but minor changes which
aren't related to the screen display are OK.  There is an area between
these two extremes in which there are no simple answers.  I guess one
solution is to ask your users.
   I personally would prefer most documents to swap between fonts which
are most readable for screen and hardcopy.

Brian

PS Found the following page on this topic:
http://www.alistapart.com/stories/goingtoprint/

which (on the topic of font sizes in CSS) says:

Thus:

body {
background: white;
font-size: 12pt;
}

"Wait!" you're probably exclaiming. "Heretic! Everyone knows points are
evil! Todd Fahrner said so!" Well, yes, he did, and he was entirely
correct-for screen media, points are a horrible choice. In print, points
make just as much sense as they have for decades now. Since we are
styling for print, setting our body font size to 12 points is actually a
good thing.

---------------------------------------
Brian Kelly
UK Web Focus
UKOLN
University of Bath
BATH
BA2 7AY
Email: [log in to unmask]
Web: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/
Phone: 01225 38 3943