Posted by dorayme on 03/12/06 23:16

In article <Xns9783DA4546A9Barbpenyahoocom@69.28.186.121>,
Adrienne Boswell <arbpen2003@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> Gazing into my crystal ball I observed dorayme
> <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> writing in news:doraymeRidThis-
> ACC0AC.09384312032006@news-vip.optusnet.com.au:
>
> >> table {font-family: arial, verdana, sans-serif; font-size:100%;}
> >
> > Just a small side matter here, if I may...
> >
> > Should this suggestion not be:
> >
> > table {font-family: Arial, Verdana, sans-serif; font-size:100%;} ?
> >
> > On the ground that the font name does not "belong" to css (things
> > that do so "belong" are case insensitive)
> >
>
> Maybe. For me, it's a writing style. I write just about everything
> (markup/scripting) in lower case, with the exception of SQL keywords.

Well, I was wondering if, when we do this, it works fine only by
the grace of browsers (which might not be actually obliged to
recognise a font name in lower case? URLs are case sensitive and
occur in css, they will not always work well (online) if the
capital letters that are "supposed" to be in them are rendered as
lower case. In this latter, it would be unwise to adopt your
"writing style". But perhaps there is a different issue involved
in font names... perhaps the css somehow passes a request to the
system of the particular user's computer and the request is
"case-insensitive" (sensibly, what would be the chance of 2
fonts, verdana and Verdana)

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]