[dogscoff]

Thanks. The neo-standard pages were actually designed by the much-respected Mr John Beech of Universal Shipyards, and I admit I haven't done them justice: Among other manglations of his design, I forgot to upload the style sheets that define things like font styles and so on. (*Dogscoff slaps himself on forehead)

When I get round to uploading the necessary files (next week somewhen, I think), you should find it easier to read. I'll post here when that happens=-)

Let me know when your site is ready, I'd like to take a look.


By the way, (You probably already know this), you should be able to alter the default font used by your browser, so pages like mine that don't specify a font will always be displayd in Arial (or whatever). Obviously it depends on your browser but look through the "options" and "preferences" screens for a default font setting.

Interestingly, this is one of few remaining features on modern browsers that reflect the "true nature" of the web. HTML was originally intended to be an interpretted layout format, rather than the absolute layout languag it has become. The idea was that a page could be displayed according to each user's preferences and machine's capacity. Obviously, this meant that the same page might never look the same on two different machines, so HTML was a way of allowing the creator some control over how it would look. For example an early HTML tag was for "emphasis". Although this could be intrpretted in diffrent ways by different browsers, the page author could be confident that on way or another, that part of his page would be emphasised. This is one of the reasons I make my pages so "retro" in style.
Of course, as big businesses came onto the web, they decided that they couldn't trust the myriad web browsers to represent their precious corporate logos and livery correctly. It was decided that the general public, struggling with the new technology, couldn't handle this freedom of interpretation and gradually newer and less interpretative Versions of HTML were introduced and now there is very little scope at all for interpretation=-(

</soapbox>

[ 30 November 2001: Message edited by: dogscoff ]