Bug 14196 – font-weight:normal looks bold

• Status: CLOSED
• Resolution: INVALID
• Component: CSS

[Tore B. Krudtaa]

Hi.

font-weight:normal looks bold

Why is that? 

...and will it be fixed any time soon?

[David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)]

Thanks for the bug report, Tore!  Which URL (web page) did you see this on?  Was it a particular font that this occurred on, or every font that you tried?

[Mark Rowe (bdash)]

I cannot reproduce this at all.  Can you please provide more information about your configuration, and the page on which you experienced this?

[Tore B. Krudtaa]

Created attachment 15086 [details]
Example on how normal and bold fonts look like in Safari 3 beta on windows

[Tore B. Krudtaa]

Created attachment 15087 [details]
Firefox normal and bold font look example

[Tore B. Krudtaa]

Created attachment 15088 [details]
IE7 normal and bold font look

[Mark Rowe (bdash)]

There is a substantial difference in weight between the normal and bold examples in your Safari screenshot.  The slight difference in weight between Safari and Firefox/IE is likely due to Safari using a different algorithm for on-screen font antialiasing.

[Tore B. Krudtaa]

Please see attached images on how different the
fonts are rendered on Safari 3 beta for windows than it is in Firefox and IE(7).

In Safari 3 beta for windows the normal fonts are thicker than normal fonts in Firefox and IE(7).
The bold fonts are also thicker than the same bold fonts in Firefox and IE.
I see this on every page I visit on the web.

What is the reason for that?
Is this something that will be fixed?

I would expect same fonts (normal, italic and bold) to look pretty much the same in different browsers. 

[David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)]

(In reply to comment #7)
> What is the reason for that?

Safari 3.0 Beta on Windows has better font anti-aliasing than MSIE or Firefox.

> Is this something that will be fixed?

No.  Don't you think it's easier to read the fonts as rendered in Safari?

[David Kilzer (:ddkilzer)]

(In reply to comment #7)
> Please see attached images on how different the
> fonts are rendered on Safari 3 beta for windows than it is in Firefox and
> IE(7).

BTW, thanks for taking the time to create these screenshots!

[Tore B. Krudtaa]

(In reply to comment #8)
> (In reply to comment #7)
> > What is the reason for that?
> 
> Safari 3.0 Beta on Windows has better font anti-aliasing than MSIE or Firefox.
> 
> > Is this something that will be fixed?
> 
> No.  Don't you think it's easier to read the fonts as rendered in Safari?
> 

Nope! 
Reading fonts in Safari beta for windows are just ugly.
The fonts look blurry and unsharp compared to how the fonts look like in:
IE, Firefox, Opera, Netscape. Where they all look the same.

And then WHAT IS THE REASON for Safari developers to make the fonts look different in Safari than in the other browsers?
Why do you make it so hard for web-developers to make web-pages look the same 
in most used browsers out there.
You just made it pretty much impossible!

How can you state that those blurry unsharp looking fonts are better than how
they are rendered in the other browsers?
Take a look at 
http://discussions.apple.com/forum.jspa?forumID=1188
and see all the complaints about the blurry looking fonts.
Why do you think there is so many complaints? Definitely not because people like them!

(In reply to comment #7)
> Is this something that will be fixed?

This is expected behavior. Safari uses Core Graphics to render text on both the Mac OS and Windows platforms, and changing that is outside the scope of the WebKit open source project.

The Windows port of WebKit used in Adobe's AIR uses Cairo to render text, and I believe that uses ClearType, which is the same look as in IE7 and Firefox (see <http://opensource.adobe.com/adobe_apollo.html>). Hopefully Adobe and/or others will contribute a Cairo layer to the Windows port maintained at webkit.org.

[Adam Roben (:aroben)]

*** Bug 15894 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

[Anders Jenbo]

I do not agree that my bug is a dublicate of this bug, maybe the other way around if any thing, but ill go along.

By default text looks fat and blury, this has been reported by meny, but it is ofthen dismissed by safari fans as superior, this seams ironic as it's also fater then on a mac if my memory serves. I have found that setting text-shadow:0; fixes this so i belive text-shadow is some how always on by default. This seams to fit in with the repport of blury-ness as that is preaty much the definition of shadow.

[Dave Hyatt]

That is not what is going on.

[Anders Jenbo]

Feal free to elaborate or pring some proff on to the table, thers no way a white shadow could make somthing on white background more sharp in any logical way.

[Anders Jenbo]

Further investigation shows that when you specify shadow (even text-shadow:0px 0px 0px #FFF;) Safari will change to a different AA methode (not clear-type). And as clear type is a bit thicker then regulare AA that decreases the font slightly but the font is still fater then in othere browsers using the same AA methodes.

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17142 [details]
Firefox on Mac using ClearType AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17143 [details]
Firefox on Mac using Standard AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17144 [details]
Firefox on Windows using ClearType AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17145 [details]
IE on Windows using ClearType AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17146 [details]
Opera on Windows using ClearType AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17147 [details]
Safari on Mac using ClearType AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17148 [details]
Safari on Mac using Standard AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17149 [details]
Safari on Windows using Cleartype AA

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17150 [details]
Safari on Windows using Cleartype AA lite

[Anders Jenbo]

Created attachment 17151 [details]
Safari on Windows using Standard AA

[Mark Rowe (bdash)]

As has been mentioned, this is not a bug.

[Anders Jenbo]

Mark Rowe (bdash), you are not helping by being ignorant. As i mentioned this bug report does not explain why shadow might change the look of the font just that it dosn't use the Windows font rendere. If you want to contribute you should bring some new or details on the table.

[Anders Jenbo]

I made an extensive list of comparisons of the font rendering in different browsers on different systems with different system.

One thing to note is that Safari on windows ignores that i have a BGR and not a RGB screen, if you find the Opera, IE and Firefox shots to looko a little odd then remember that is is the othere way around for me.

The conclusion here is that Safari renderes the same on Mac and Windows as it brings the Mac OS X rendere with it in the Windows port, where as Firefox uses the native font rendere on both systems. This causes Safari to look different then all othere Windows programs and can is probably the source of people thinking it is fater on Windows then on Mac witch is not the case.

Please also note that in contrast to the original 3 images i have uses AA on all renderes and regardless Safari still renderes a fater font then other Windows based browsers (as mentioned this is not a bug but a choice of style).

The disregard for BGA monitors looks to be the reason why the font look blurry in Safari compared to othere browsers, since you closed this bug I am going to open a new on for this issues.

[Mark Rowe (bdash)]

Please do not open a new bug on webkit.org related to the subpixel antialiasing.  As was mentioned in comment #11, WebKit on Windows relies on the CoreGraphics library for text rendering support.  CoreGraphics is not part of the WebKit project, so your bug report should be filed at http://bugreporter.apple.com/.

[Anders Jenbo]

Ok sorry, but isn't it Safaris responsible to tell CoreGraphics the settings of the system, Safari is the only applications known to me that uses CoreGraphics in Windows and I am not in to the internal workings of it or Safari/WebKit.

[Mark Rowe (bdash)]

No, but even if it were the bug report would still belong at bugreporter.apple.com as Safari is also not part of the WebKit open source project.

[Anders Jenbo]

Thank you for the info, I have registred there and submitted the bug.