Dave Crossland wrote:
Hi,
At the LGM2009 Nicolas and I had some discussions about the OFLB
terminology, and I thought I'd raise these points on the list for
wider discussion.
One of the terms was the Fonts/Typefaces distinction.
Nicolas felt that the current v2 site uses the term
We do have a mixed usage at the moment
Hi,
Christopher Fynn wrote:
And this:
http://jontangerine.com/log/2008/08/typeface--font
Thanks. John puts it very well.
For languages other than English, the question remains open. But as I
meant to imply yesterday, I think for English we have it right.
Cheers,
Ben
--
Ben Weiner |
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Sounds solved. Next. :)
Jon Phillips
+1.415.830.3884 (global)
+86.132.6817.8381 (beijing)
j...@rejon.org
On May 13, 2009 7:01 AM, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
We do have a mixed usage at the moment
Hi,
At the LGM2009 Nicolas and I had some discussions about the OFLB
terminology, and I thought I'd raise these points on the list for
wider discussion.
One of the terms was the Fonts/Typefaces distinction.
Nicolas felt that the current v2 site uses the term typefaces too
much (I hope you can
I will just say that most people think of is fonts. So good to use right
terms, but also important to consider commaner.
Jon Phillips
+1.415.830.3884 (global)
+86.132.6817.8381 (beijing)
j...@rejon.org
On May 12, 2009 5:27 PM, Ben Weiner b...@readingtype.org.uk wrote:
Hi
Dave Crossland wrote:
