Need help? Check out our Support site, then

ugly font appears now in HTML version

  1. Hahahaha! Sorry, macmanx, I've visited those WP forums you offered links to and they are completely alien worlds written entirely in geekspeak. I wouldn't even know how to contribute. And I doubt those people would understand what i mean by the word "readability".

  2. @ludusnaturae - a good programmer or software person ALWAYS gets feedback from the end users even if they are as some might refer to them as the great unwashed huddled masses.

    I used to do industrial software on processing equipment where putting a button on a screen in the wrong place could literally cause an explosion or result in breaking of equipment or people being hurt or killed - yes I paid very close attention to what the operators on the plant floor thought about everything in the operator interface.

  3. @macmanxx
    I would like to see a shift in the tenor and tone of the thread towards a problem solving approach that could create inclusion for users and parity with WordPress.ORG users.

    When the 2.5 upgrade was in development and being BETA tested by WordPress.ORG bloggers there was a demo site set up that we WordPress.COM bloggers could use and post feedback to. Is it possible that Staff and the our developers would consider doing the same for bloggers prior to upgrades in the future?

    I'm suggesting this because most WordPress.COM users are not to my knowledge conversant in coding and geek speak. In fact WordPress.COM has always emphasized that we do not need to be conversant in code we can just blog. WordPress. ORG also emphasizes one click installs and implies one does not need to be code conversant to run a WordPress.ORG install. I think it's unlikely that most WordPress.COM users would be inclined to set up and run a WordPress.ORG install site simply for BETA testing purposes of upgrades in development.

    If WordPress.COM users were provided with a demo site they can "test drive" what's proposed and provide feedback from their non-coder POV. I think that would be valuable feedback that would create party between the different types of users. Then the claim that the core WordPress upgrades are built on the feedback of millions of WordPress users will have more integrity, because at present the feedback from millions of WordPress.COM users is not being facilitated.

    Thanks, in advance, for considering taking what I propose to TPTB.

  4. Excellent summary, timethief. I have been blogging on WordPress about two years and don't use most of the features I see around the dashboard and discussed in the forums because I simply don't know what they actually do - or why I should need them. I took a deep breath coming here from Blogger because the basic WP dashboard with all its options is, for a non-geek like me who is concerned with writing and photography, extremely daunting. I still have no idea when uploading media what the results will be when asked to "Enter a link URL or click above for presets" and you have three options to decide between. Well, I leave them blank.

    Even those WP blogs offering techie tips can take an age to understand what they're driving at. Since the new Coraline theme replaced my original choice, the editing interface becomes very temperamental, and can fill with junk HTML when you do try some of those tips - at your peril!

  5. photographybynicblog

    I posted an "idea" thread at for us to vote on.

    The thread I started is called... Return the html editor back to a sans font instead of the new consolas font

  6. consolas font :-D
    This is that I suspected. Sure it's the favorite one among geeks!

  7. @ludusnaturae
    Correct but we users are not expected to be coders and geek speakers whether or not we are using software or software. If that's changing then the emphasis in the "public relations" documentation and wherever the ease of using WordPress is boasted about requires alteration.

    The Microsoft Consolas Font Family is a set of highly legible fonts designed for ClearType. It is intended for use in programming environments and other circumstances where a monospaced font is specified.

    "Consolas is intended for use in programming environments and other circumstances where a monospaced font is specified. All characters have the same width, like old typewriters. Consolas is intended for use in programming environments and other circumstances where a monospaced font is specified. All characters have the same width, like old typewriters, making it a good choice for personal and business correspondence. Optimizing the font specifically for ClearType allowed a design with proportions closer to normal text than traditional monospaced fonts like Courier. This allows for more comfortable reading of extended text on-screen."


  8. Great, thanks, Squirrel. I've added my tuppence over on the Ideas forum. To be honest, I don't think the HTML typeface needs to be sans (though the shortlived example we enjoyed last week was terrific). It needs to be calmer and more consistent than Consolas which has far too much distracting character! If WP want a fixed-width typeface, an alternative would be a typewriter-style font such as Courier because it has a consistent x-height and slab serifs to enable quick reading.

  9. But there is an important difference:
    Consoles have a pure white font on a pure black background, and not that light grey over white, without contrast enough for anybody, geek or no-geek.

  10. Well timethief those Microsoft claims are sheer tosh! Only a geek could say Consolas has "proportions closer to normal text" and gives "more comfortable reading of extended text on-screen." It is an erratic and bizarre typeface. A readable typeface must be kerned to allow the letters to hang together in easily recognisable word-shapes. That's the traditional way we read, after all!!! Not letter by letter.

  11. If I'm not dreaming ...Thousands of thanks!
    Good night!

  12. @Everyomne
    I gave up on trying to convince the developers to revert this yesterday. I am focused on the future approach that could create inclusion for users and parity with WordPress.ORG users re: BETA testing.

    I would appreciate hearing what others thoughts are on my suggestion made here

  13. Image illustrating ontheliner's excellent point:

    I find it hard to believe that in 2011 we revert to the typewriter era.
    (But I don't find it surprising that the only "official" reply so far is: this is it, it's based on feedback from millions, and if you have complaints we don't want them here.)

    And of course I second timethief's suggestion.

  14. Hi all
    Sleepless ...
    I have just now a nice HTML editor. Do not you?
    (sorry for the misspelling)
    Firefox 4.0.1 on Ubuntu 11.04

  15. @Panos
    As this is not the venue for complaints, I began to consider the lack of millions of users contribution to the development process and how it could be enabled. Thanks.

    P.S. I appreciate your sharing the image.

  16. The font I have currently in HTML editor is thicker than yesterday, well contrasted, and easy readable.

    I don't care if it is courier or console or whatever usual one.
    Now I'm satisfied with the font of HTML editor, and for my taste the issue is fixed.

    Perhaps it was an issue with the browser?

  17. Seems I was writing about a different issue then the others. My problem was mainly the thinness and the very light color.

  18. photographybynicblog

    @ludusnaturae, I think you were writing about the same issue as the rest of us. The font was hard to read, both a light gray and a font that was hard to skim.

    I too have a better html editor font today. Not sure what the font is called, but it looks better than it did yesterday. I too am a happy user today.

  19. Thank you, @theauspiciousquirrel.

    I'm full happy with the new font now. I have no worry with the difficult in see the text at a glance.

    >personal opinion<
    HTML is code, and code must be write and read letter by letter. For reading text between code tags, I use the preview.
    >personal opinion<

    Have a good day!

  20. @ludusnaturae: HTML is code, but in most cases the content of your HTML post editor isn't code, it's the text of your post, with some code. What you're saying is valid for the CSS editor, not the HTML post editor.

  21. OK, X, but this isn't the main problem I wanted to report in previous posts. I just want to make this clear, mainly for 'macmanx' ((and for you all, and for all readers of this discussion, of course)

  22. I'm sorry, I published a draft!
    I meant: OK, Panos ... etc. Apologies, Panos!

  23. If you use Firefox, the following GreaseMonkey script allows you to change the font back to Helvetica/Arial on your computer:

  24. The font change was discussed in the WordPress open source community as a small but meaningful improvement. Paraphrasing: Arial isn't meant for HTML code. Monospace fonts which are the ones already used in code blocks in the visual editor should be used instead.

    Here's the background for those who are interested:

    To use, you don't have to know how to code, but if you want to be a part of beta testing WordPress, learning enough to participate in the open source project is the way to do it. Decisions about the WordPress software like this font change are made by the open source community and everyone is welcome to participate!

  25. Thank you for this information,'designsimply'!
    I guess 'theauspiciousquirrel' and me could read the HTML editor comfortably from the removing of Courier.
    In my case with Firefox on Ubuntu, latest versions both.

  26. Thanks all round in this debate...

    timethief - Thanks for moving the issues on. And I second your proposal in this conversation (above: Jun 3, 2011, 7:15 PM)

    airodyssey - Brilliant! Your Greasemonkey script is exactly the miracle cure I'm seeking, but your link doesn't say where we can get the override and how to apply it to Firefox.

    panaghiotisadam - Consolas on its own may look serviceable. But my own rant against it in the HTML editor is that the code is all run-on amid the text without any visual differentiation. In most cases you can't even have a line space between paragraphs to help identify them, because these will publish as double line-spaces. So the view in HTML is of a post area of solid type, without any easy visual signposts to locate specific parts of the text at a glance, or to find a detail in the HTML you want to adjust. Copy-editing in the past few days has become a seriously time-consuming pain.

    ludusnaturae - I too use Preview for the only realistic view of a post before publishing. And it's a complete pain to constantly toggle with the dashboard to resend another Preview. Unlike its predecessor Cutline, in Coraline the Visual Editor in dashboard has never remotely given a WYSIWYG view, either in terms of colour, spacing, line-breaks or font changes. Copyediting in the Visual Editor introduces unwanted white space and junk code which has a mind of its own.

    designsimply - Your link to the discussion about Monospace font leads off with a post from somebody who says "if I'm writing HTML". Well we bloggers (the end-users) are not *writing* code in our posts (though we may want to tweak the HTML). Almost all of our time we're trying to write and edit the plain English text. Why on earth does the developer's need take preference over the blogger's?!

  27. @deisgnsimply
    Perhaps I have overlooked something. If free hosted members wish to fully participate in BETA testing of WordPress versions in development stages, then I don't see any way for them to do that, without setting up a install any using the plugin the others use.

  28. I agree that this font is not only hideously ugly but also very difficult to read and edit. I literally cannot edit the html when it appears this way. I will now have to copy and paste it into another editor and paste it back. I have a problem with the vision in one of my eyes that makes it difficult to read certain fonts -- even making the size larger on this does not help. If I were a machine, perhaps I could read it just fine. Sadly, just a flawed human here!

    If this were 20 years ago, I likely would have thought this "OCR look" was just fine, but screens and fonts have improved since then -- and my eye damage occurred since then, also.

    It definitely looks like a "mistake" or a glitch, not something intentional. I kept waiting for it to fix itself, then came looking on the forum for the fix. Since there is no fix forthcoming, I am going to have to figure out how to use greasemonkey, I guess, or do my html editing in a different editor, and hope for a time when perhaps users are offered participation in beta testing.

    Thanks for the info here, and I'm glad I'm not alone in finding it a giant step backward, not to mention aesthetically displeasing.

  29. @airodyssey: Thanks very much for the greasemonkey script. It worked like a charm! You have saved me a lot of time and frustration! :-)

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Topic