via flickr.com
April 30, 2011
Key
More Vintage Web Font Typography
Téléchargez les typographies du Commodore, de l’Apple, de l’Atari 400, de Acorn BBC Micro, du Sinclair ZX Spectrum, du Commodore 64, de l’Amstrad CPC et MSX… :-)
Bonjour à toutes et tous
Ce matin on commence ce mercredi par un retour typographique dans les années 70-80 avec les polices bitmap qui ont marqué nos logiciels et nos interfaces de ces 30 dernières années. Mises en ligne par Damien Guard, il est possible de les télécharger (à la fin de l’article) pour ajouter un peu de 8-bit à vos compositions graphiques ou à vos ouvrages sur écrans !
Téléchargements :
Commodore PET (1977)
Regular semi-serif
5-7 pixels
7 pixels
PETSCII
320×200 (40×25 text)
Unknown
Download in TrueTypeApple ][ (1977)
Regular condensed sans
3/5 pixels
7 pixels
ASCII
280×192 (40×24 text)
Signetics+?
Download in TrueTypeAtari 400/800 (1979)
Bold sans
4-6 pixels
6 pixels
ATASCII
320×192 (40×24 text)
Unknown
Download in TrueTypeAcorn BBC Micro (1981)
Bold sans
4-7 pixels
7 pixels
ASCII only
320×256 (40×32 text)
Unknown
Download in TrueTypeSinclair ZX Spectrum (1982)
Regular sans
6 upper, 5 lower
6 pixels
ASCII + own
256×192 (32×24 text)
Nine Tiles
Download in TrueTypeCommodore 64 (1982)
Bold sans
6 pixels
6 pixels
PETSCII
320×200 (40×25 text)
Unknown
Download in TrueTypeAmstrad CPC
Bold serif
6-7 pixels
6 pixels
PETSCII
320×200 (40×25 text)
Locomotive Software
Download in TrueTypeMSX
Regular condensed sans
5 pixels
6 pixels
ASCII Extended
320×200? (40×25 text)
Microsoft?
Download in TrueType
via graphism.fr
Déjà l'HTML5 | L'Cinque
Déjà les parodies du logo pour le HTML5 :-)
Allez ce matin on ouvre les yeux tout doucement sur les toutes nouvelles parodies du logo HTML5. Hier je vous parlais de la création de ce logo par le W3C, et déjà ce matin je vois fleurir des parodies. Ce qui est intéressant avec ces parodies c’est qu’elles nous éveillent parfois sur la vision du logo, ses références et le replace dans son contexte visuel. On appréciera donc ici la référence aux Autobots des Transformers, à la forme de bouclier, au sigle de Superman ou même, au Dieu dans le film Tron
Le logo officiel
Les logos parodiques
Si j’ai raté d’autres logos parodiques, n’hésitez pas à me les envoyer
via graphism.fr
&
via simplebits.com
w3c
via ab-c.com.au
Westminster
Westminster
Select font to view more information.
Westminster
- Purchase & Download Westminster font
for personal, professional or business use on workstations.
- License Westminster font
In the mid-1960s after banks began printing machine-readable account numbers on checks, a British font designer made an entire typeface along the same lines. No one took this typeface seriously, however, until Photoscript produced it, naming the typeface after the bank that helped Photoscript fund the font's production. Westminster was an instant hit, and the very font makers who had previously rejected the idea rushed out to commission alternative designs. This is the first of those designs, and it's the best. Although you're welcome to use only the numbers (perhaps you run a bank), the rest of the face can provide a number of interesting uses at both large and small sizes.
via microsoft.com
Re:placed [in]lines [was: ]content-generated image] fantasai
Re: replaced inlines [was: vertical-align content-generated image?]
From: fantasai <fantasai@escape.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2001 22:47:29 -0400
Message-ID: <3B394941.7E94183B@escape.com>
To: www-style@w3.org
Ian Hickson wrote: | | On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, fantasai wrote: | > Ian Hickson wrote: | > | fantasai wrote: | > | > So I ask, what is the difference between [''] and nothing? | > | | > | The same as the difference between: | > | <inline></inline> | > | ...and | > | <none></none> | > | ...when the following stylesheet is applied: | > | inline { display: inline; } | > | none { display: none; } | > | > But you're changing the display here--this is the content | > property we're talking about, remember. | | I was merely using that as an example. In the context of the | content property, the same applies: |content: ''| takes up | room (just like an empty inline) and |content: none| or | whatever it ends up being called just doesn't exist in the | rendering tree. The fact that you're taking the box itself out of the rendering tree means you're fiddling with something other than the box's content. ========================================================== | [...] | > | This is what my proposal (given above) does, except | > | with one property, by making it possible to say: | > | | > | content: replaced(lala), 'some-content'; | > | | > | ...where "lala" is used if possible, and otherwise | > | 'some-content' is used instead. The working group | > | generally feels that it is better to not add new | > | properties if that can be avoided. | > | > Avoided by what, making function notation modify the | > meaning of the ~property~? | | Well it doesn't change the meaning of the property itself. Then how come a url causes two different results based on whether it's in the url() notation or the replaced() notation? | > As I've pointed out in English above, the values for | > replacing content and replacing elements mean different | things. | | I'm confused. | | Here are the cases I see need supporting for replacing | the content of elements: | | 1. Don't replace anything, let the DOM determine what | is used. | | 2. Replace all the children of the element with a new | set of content with its own formatting rules, for | example mixed text and images. ("generated content") | | 3. Replace all the children of the element with a | single item that is out of the scope of the | stylesheet. ("replaced content") | | None of these replace the element itself. When I've said | "replaced element" I have always meant "replaced content" | (and I apologise for not being clear). In the first two instances, 'content' (auto or explicit) only affects the stuff inside the element's CSS box. In the last instance, 'content' would not only affect the stuff inside the element's CSS box, but also change the nature of the CSS box. Ok. Suppose I'm given a colander with vegetables in it. _m,#.__ \:::::/ <- colander with veggies ----- The contents of the colander are the vegetables. The content of the CSS box is its document content. Now, if I put the colander in a sink full of water, the water will flow through the holes and soak its contents (my vegetables). Now, if I put the CSS box in an HTML document, the style rules will inherit through the box and affect its content (the document content). I can replace the vegetables in my colander with some other vegetables. I can replace the document content in the CSS box with some other content. The water still flows through the holes in the colander. The rules still inherit through the CSS box. Now, suppose I decided to replace the colander with a Tupperware(R) of some lettuce. Now, suppose I decided to replace the CSS box with another document (like what happens with IFRAME). The water doesn't flow through the Tupperware(R) box, and my lettuce doesn't get wet. The rules don't inherit through the replaced CSS box, and they don't affect the inserted content. Do you see what I'm getting at?
via lists.w3.org
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)