Re: Fonts?

Subject: Re: Fonts?
From: Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 09:56:38 -0700

Quoting Janet Swisher <swisher -at- enthought -dot- com>:

> The fonts that are most readable on screen are those designed for on-screen
> readability. Specifically, Microsoft's Verdana, Tahoma (both sans serif),
> and Georgia (serifed) are designed for readability at low resolutions.
> readers find sans serif text quite readable because they are used to it.
> Even "blackletter" typefaces (think of pre-war German texts) score as well
> as other styles for readers who are familiar with them.

Undeniably, Microsoft's on-screen fonts are one of the things that the company
has done right.

However, my own all-time favorites for on-screen readability were designed
before the rise of the computer: Adrian Frutiger's Frutiger and Univers. Both
have very regularly shaped letters, and could hardly be improved if they had
been designed for the screen. If you do a web search, you can easily find
samples of both and see why they work so well.

Bruce Byfield


ROBOHELP X5: Featuring Word 2003 support, Content Management, Multi-Author
support, PDF and XML support and much more!

WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT: New! Document review system for Word and FrameMaker
authors. Automatic browser-based drafts with unlimited reviewers. Full
online discussions -- no Web server needed!

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Re: Fonts?: From: Janet Swisher

Previous by Author: RE: Fonts?
Next by Author: RE: Anyone have experience with DjVu?
Previous by Thread: Re: Fonts?
Next by Thread: Re: Fonts?

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

Sponsored Ads