When editing the page within FW, anything looks good. But in every browser the text is written in bold font style instead of (even in FW’s preview).
So it’s not an issue of FW, more just how rendering engines are handling this. Anyway, is there a way to get the text written non-bold while keeping the
This is one of those ‘you just need to know this’ things with Freeway.
H tags are bold by design so adding font-weight: normal simply removes
the bold style. I’d like to see Freeway be a bit more intelligent with
styles like this so that when you add an H style (for example) the
Edit Styles dialog automatically adds the Character Style block and
selects the bold style. Removing this bold style would then set the
font weight back to normal.
Regards,
Tim.
On 6 Dec 2009, at 12:56, tobiaseichner wrote:
That works… you never think at the easiest solutions first
Thank you for the hint. Now I just have to see how I can tell FW to
take this setting over.
Yes, I fully agree. This behaviour of FW is a bit “special”.
Anyway, once you know it, it’s not a big issue in the future. Guess I simply haven’t cared about in the past regarding this; just this time I had strict layout guides and so I noticed it.
Off topic:
Personally I really hope that the next major release of FW will have a built-in spell check feature. This is important. It’s so time consuming proof reading everything twice while the simplest text editor supports the built-in spell check of OS X… and a multi-level “undo” feature.
Sometime around 7/12/09 (at 19:25 -0500) tobiaseichner said:
Also according my experience the actual spell check seems not to be
able to access the user dictionary as well.
Hocus-pocus… oh, spelling check!
(Don’t get me started about Grandma Checkers either…)
I’m not arguing against this feature request in the slightest; I
support it wholeheartedly. I’d just like to mention that I turn OFF
all those sorts of features. I’m fairly well practised at this
writing lark, so practically the only things an automatic spelling
checker flags up are product and company names, technical terms, and
other perfectly correct but not ‘ordinary’ words. Those things figure
quite a lot in my writing and vary far too much to make a user
dictionary practical - so off that feature goes.
But hell, it is something that would be good to have in there - I
know it brings peace of mind as well as practical help to many.
