On 22 Oct 2006, at 5:46 PM, David W. Fenton wrote:
On 22 Oct 2006 at 15:41, Darcy James Argue wrote:
I *hate* numbers with ascenders and descenders. It's just an instant,
visceral "ugh." They may be more legible (though I don't know if
there's data on this -- people often use "legible" as shorthand for
"what I like"), but I think they look ugly as sin.
But it's the numbers *without* descenders, and that all have the same
width that are the aberration in the history of typesetting,
You're conflating two different things. Most (all?) proportional
fonts do not have fixed-width numbers, but they do have numbers that
are a uniform height, and that's the look I'm defending.
To me variable-height numbers are a godawful anachronism, like, say,
the New York Time's insistence on inserting periods between the
letters of F.B.I., C.I.A., etc.
Cheers,
- Darcy
-----
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://secretsociety.typepad.com
Brooklyn, NY
_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
