Re: Serif vs. sans serif? - resend
>Subject: Re: Serif vs. sans serif?
>At 12:57 PM -0400 6/21/01, Hart, Geoff wrote:
>>Serif fonts aren't inherently more legible than sans serif, despite myths
>>you may hear to the contrary; this is why many European and Nordic nations
>>standardize on sans serif and continue to read productively. The issue is
>>whether you've chosen a legible sans serif font, not whether the font is
>>sans serif; Arial, for example, is a lousy font in many sizes and styles
>Arial is not a lousy face when used as intended, which is on screen.
>Ditto Geneva, New York, Georgia and Verdana.
>There are studies which show that serif faces are easier to read
>When Printed than sans serif. However, at very small point sizes,
>sans serif is preferred. For the same reason that those faces are
>easier to read (for lots of text) on the screen -- the "muddying" of
>the serifs at small sizes is not unlike the "muddying" due to low
>rez of screen.
*** Deva(tm) Tools for Dreamweaver and Deva(tm) Search ***
Build Contents, Indexes, and Search for Web Sites and Help Systems
Available now at http://www.devahelp.com or info -at- devahelp -dot- com
Sponsored by Cub Lea, specialist in low-cost outsourced development
and documentation. Overload and time-sensitive jobs at exceptional
rates. Unique free gifts for all visitors to http://www.cublea.com
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
Search our Technical Writing Archives & Magazine