How does this site change Chrome url bar font? - html

Never seen before that url bar would change its font, but if you go to the following link in Chrome, you would see that "New Features" is written in different font:
Copying url into text file reveals some magic symbols:
http://g-wiki.net/wiki/Battlefield_3%EF%BC%9ANew_Features
Can anyone explain why it changes font and what else can I do with this technique (can I make red bold letters)?

That's a full-width colon character. The only difference should be that it takes more horizontal space; it's not supposed to affect the font and it doesn't do so for me. However, because it's missing from many fonts, some operating systems might switch to a different font or rendering mode in order to display that character, and may continue to apply this change to subsequent text.
I've noticed this before in instant messaging. I'll copy some Chinese characters into my message, and the rest of it will be displayed differently. It's the same effect and I'd consider this to be a bug in the the operating system/font routines. It's probably not been deliberately programmed.

Related

Chrome Rendering of unicode "Heavy Plus/Minus/Division Sign"

I'm experiencing an odd rendering problem in SOME versions of Chrome when trying to render the unicode characters U+2795 thru U+2797, the Heavy Plus/Minus/Division Signs. On some versions of Chrome, the sign will render as an ugly gray with some kind of black pseudo-outline, which does not respond to CSS color commands. Here is an image:
For a sample of how it looks on every other browser I've tried, see FileFormat.info - Unicode Character HEAVY PLUS SIGN
By SOME versions, I mean, I can't seem to narrow it down to a particular version of Chrome. The same version of Chrome on two different computers running Win10 will render differently, and I can't find where the difference is.
Is this a bug in Chrome? I can't seem to find where anyone else has run into this problem. I'm trying to include this on a website, but if certain versions of Chrome render it ugly, I need to find another solution.
-- edit --
XY Problem
My purpose is to use the +/- as the "expand/collapse" markers in a collapsible accordion box where the background may be light-colored or dark-colored. I was hoping to be able to color them to match the remainder of the text without needing to resort to images, but based on the comments below I'm starting to think it may be easier to throw together an .svg, recolor it in CSS, and be done with it.
The problem is that the browser is replacing the glyphs with emoji, which will be rendered differently for each browser. Emoji cannot be colored using CSS -- the best you can do is silhouette them and color the silhouette, as described in Color for Unicode Emoji. Unfortunately, this still means that the glyphs will appear differently on different browsers, as the emoji won't render using the font you specify.
There isn't currently a way to force browsers to render glyphs instead of emoji. Appending \FE0E (as described in How to prevent Unicode characters from rendering as emoji in HTML from JavaScript?) will sometimes work, but this is not consistent, not guaranteed, and therefore not recommended.
You can provide a web font which contain the glyphs you need, but this is also not guaranteed to work, as some browsers (especially on mobile devices) will still replace them with emoji.
If you require consistent rendering, the best way seems to be to use an image instead of trying to force the browser not to use an emoji.

Why does html code show up as different images in different browsers?

(Discaimer: I only learned to code alone and upload some contents.)
I retrieved a symbol for a running person and used the code to build an html file to upload. The problem is that the image appears in different ways in different browsers.
A temporary mwe example.
direct view in my site ramoneando.com
code snippet:
<h1><span style="font-family:'Segoe UI Symbol';color:black;font-size:40px;">🏃</span>runner</h1>
(Desired) Image on local browser.
Why does this happen and how can it be avoided?
I actually am OK with the variants. The worse thing is that some look to the right and others to left. I would prefer to remain with the first image, in dark filling and looking to the right.
The problem is that not every computer has the font Segoe UI Symbol installed, so the ones that don't just display the character with code 🏃 in the default font.
For example, this is what the snippet looks like on my computer
(It used the font Unicode Upper, if you're interested.)
So what you can do is any of the following:
Accept that the "Man running" symbol looks differently in different fonts and keep it the way it is
Use Segoe UI Symbol as a webfont (this may be overkill for displaying just one icon)
Or make a screenshot of the icon and turn it into a png file.

Use non-emoji version of unicode character (highcharts and plain html)

Please refer to this jsfiddle.
It includes text, both inside a highcharts chart and outside, where the text includes a "sun" character as shown in this page. I've also included variants both with and without variation selectors (see also here) to see what difference they make.
Outside highcharts:
<p>Embedded: ☼ ☼︎ ☼️</p>
symbols.innerHTML = '<p>Added: \u263C \u263C\uFE0E \u263C\uFE0F</p>';
Inside highcharts:
title: {
text: 'In highcharts: \u263C \u263C\uFE0E \u263C\uFE0F'
},
Now, it seems to depend on which browser you view this jsfiddle as to whether you get a coloured emoji version of the sun symbol, or a plain-text black version... or even both versions!
For example, in Chrome on a Windows desktop you get the plain version all round:
... while in Chrome on Android 7 you get part-plain and part-emoji:
I really don't like that the style of the emoji versions is completely out of my control, particularly when the style clashes horribly with the rest of the page (e.g. the sun symbol is bright orange and the equivalent moon symbol is bright blue).
So I'd like to force the page to use the plain version on all browsers in all contexts... any idea how?
It would seem completely crazy to have to resort to using images, because I want the symbols to have the same appearance as the surrounding text, including text colour (which the user can change at will). And isn't UTF-8 meant to be a character encoding rather than an emoji encoding? I have nothing against cute emojis per se, but only in the right context.
The symbols appearance depends on the font you use.
Please look at your updated jsfiddle.
I've just changed the font on all elements:
* {font-family:serif !important}
Any element can have its own font.
It's up to you which font to use. So choose the right one and tune it up.
Update
I have to clarify several points:
There are NO 'safe' or 'unsafe' fonts.
Basically font works like a key-value storage {code1 => glyph1, code2 => glyph2, ...}, input a code and get the corresponding glyph
Font may or may not contain any code-glyph pair
You can make your own font containing only desired symbols, having codes of your choice associated with glyphs of your choice e.g. \u263d can be any glyph you want, not always the moon
In css font-family: you can specify one or several font-families and/or generic-families (look here). When the style's being applied to the text the browser converts each symbol ('A', ' ' or '\u263d') to its code and tries to get the glyph from the specified font-families until the glyph has been found or no more fonts have left.
If the font contains the desired code-glyph pair we can see a glyph, if not - we can see a space, ?, an outlined rectangle, a rectangle with the code inside, etc. (depends on the browser).
In this case: {font-family:serif} for \u263d browser searches for the glyph for \u263d in all system fonts of generic-family serif. And on Android it firstly finds what you name the 'emoji'.
The solution is to find (see the jsfiddle) or to make (see the other jsfiddle) a font with the desired glyphs and apply it to the desired elements.
Hope it's helpful and clear.
The answer by Kosh Very has hit on something. Indeed, changing the font-family on all elements to serif does indeed result in the plain symbol being used in highcharts, even in Android 7. The trouble is, in actual use I cannot stick to a single "safe" font family... the font can be specified by the user, from any web font listed on Google fonts.
I've updated the jsfiddle to include loading and use of a web font:
// see https://github.com/typekit/webfontloader
WebFont.load({
google: {
families: ['Fresca:400']
}
});
And I use that font throughout, both inside and outside highcharts. The result on Windows Chrome is as before (plain text symbols all over), but now the result in Android 7 Chrome is:
So this now rather suggests that the issue isn't highcharts-specific after all, and more of a font issue as Kosh Very as indicated. Indeed in the original example, without any font stated explicitly, the font used in highcharts is different to that used outside... and probably hence the difference in symbol style.
But I've tried a couple of other completely different web fonts in the updated jsfiddle example, with the same result. In other words, the emoji sun symbol is not apparently coming from the font itself. Perhaps when a font is missing a particular character (these fonts probably don't have a character for every unicode value) then it reverts to using characters from the system font? From other discussions it seems that these coloured emojis might only show on Samsung devices, so maybe the system font on Samsung has these?
The solution (or workaround) seems to be use a "safe font" only where required (for the graphical characters), and your desired font elsewhere, as per this updated jsfiddle, which gives the following result on Android 7 Chrome:
BUT I've hit a snag with this solution... it works nicely for the sun symbol as above, but for the very next unicode character (moon symbol) it doesn't... so maybe that symbol is missing from the serif font family and it reverts again to system emoji.
jsfiddle with moon
So the solution is probably still very patchy... maybe only limited to certain symbols.
Even for a font like Cardo that apparently supports the moon character \u263d, this example doesn't work in Android Chrome... still get the coloured emoji version rather than the plain version.

Strange Google Fonts rendering issues

I'm trying to use the Oxygen font from Google Fonts in my website, but I'm having strange problems with it.
Firstly, it doesn't seem to want to render at certain sizes, like I can't make it 19px. It will do 18px or 20px, but not 19px.
I also notice that the heights of the letters are borked. Take a look at the attached pic, how the 'S' is out. That's a screengrab of the font at 19pt. However, everything is 18px tall except the 'S' which is the one thing that sticks out to 19px.
And at larger sizes to this, other letters start antialiasing oddly too.
Whether I try ems or pxs or pts, I'm getting these glitches.
If you go to Google Fonts and search for Oxygen at the left and type in some text at larger sizes, it does the same thing, strange S's, etc. But strangely, if you search for specimens of this font in Google Images, it seems to render and antialias much better than this (Oxygen specimens in Google Images). Any way to fix it or is this font broken at source?
I hate to tell you but the font is broken at the source. It was obviously made unprofessionally or designed to be exactly that way. I'd recommend just using a new font or dealing with it as a regular user wont exactly mind it. Maybe a web analyst would but it's a nice font to a normal user.

font problem CSS/html

Can someone look at this page carefully. I am trying to fix font on this page. I don't know what previous programmer has done to font. Can you look at service guarantee and service features headings in green panels, edges of text are like someone cut this font with seesaw. Similarly on other parts of page. They are supposed to look smooth.
viewing page on ff and ie8 (widows xp).
I think you mean that these sections aren't anti-aliased. This isn't something you can control when you display text on the browser -- it's actually browser- and OS-dependent.
If it's important to your users to have smooth fonts, then you could anti-alias them in an image program and use images instead of text, but this is extremely inefficient and makes your page a gigantic pain to update.
So, in short, there isn't anything you can do to fix this. See this SO question for more details.
use firebug which is a firefox plugin to see the styles and html tags used in the web page, you can even edit the css used in the web page through firebug.
Your page looks fine on my browser (Chrome under Windows).
Different browsers all render text differently. What you will find is that there are often sweet spots in font sizes that look better than others. In any case, what you are talking about is whether the browser is displaying fonts anti-aliased or not.
There is a CSS3 property, font-smooth, that you can adjust for this, but don't expect it to work on browsers that aren't smoothing their fonts anyway. You can read about it here: http://webdesign.about.com/od/styleproperties/p/blspfontsmooth.htm
In short, don't worry about it. If it is a big deal for you, then experiment with different fonts and sizes. A good tool for doing this is at http://www.typetester.org/
Don't forget to test your site at BrowserShots.org. It will do screen captures for you, so you can check these details on a wide range of platforms.
If you must have your font rendered in a specific way, then it must be done in an image. This is not recommended. Text should be text wherever possible. However, if you must do it this way, consider one of the many scripts that assist, so you can keep text for browsers that don't support the script, and SEO isn't a problem. Typeface.js is commonly used for this.