Re: Serif v. sans serif online readability

Subject: Re: Serif v. sans serif online readability
From: Chris Morton <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:25:01 -0700

Already looking ahead to Friday, I would *not* recommend this typeface:

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 1:20 PM, <john -at- garisons -dot- com> wrote:

> One of the physicians I work with is looking into font and readability
> issues regarding a new electronic health record system we're implementing.
> If anyone has knowledge of recent studies on this, especially online at
> small sizes, I'd appreciate a link ... or three.
> JG

Use Doc-To-Help's XML-based editor, Microsoft Word, or HTML and
produce desktop, Web, or print deliverables. Just write (or import)
and Doc-To-Help does the rest. Free trial:

- Use this space to communicate with TECHWR-L readers -
- Contact admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com for more information -

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:

Serif v. sans serif online readability: From: john

Previous by Author: Re: Are there any active support forums for MS HTML Help?
Next by Author: Re: Snagit transparency feature
Previous by Thread: Serif v. sans serif online readability
Next by Thread: Re: Serif v. sans serif online readability

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

Sponsored Ads