Re: FONT STANDARDS

Subject: Re: FONT STANDARDS
From: "Mark L. Levinson" <nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il>
To: TECHWR-L <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2004 00:26:31 +0200

> Arial seems to be close enough to Tahoma not to matter.
> I seem to recall that Arial is a Microsoft clone of Helvetica,
> which is worth knowing if you're using Postscript fonts.

Look at the three together and you'll see that there's
a noticeable difference.

Basically, Helvetica is from the days of phototypesetting,
Arial is adapted for laser printers, and Tahoma is adapted
for screen display. But along with each adaptation there's
also an aesthetic update.


Mark L. Levinson
nosnivel -at- netvision -dot- net -dot- il





Previous by Author: Re: Common Errors in English
Next by Author: Re: Common Errors in English
Previous by Thread: Re: FONT STANDARDS
Next by Thread: Re: FONT STANDARDS


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads