Re: Standard font for technical documentation
Syed said: Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc. I missed this discussion but I'm not surprised. I've read in more than one place in the typographical literature that Arial was a cheap knock-off of Helvetica that Microsoft cobbled together to avoid paying royalties (to Herman Zapf or Linotype?). (This story may be false but it *sounds* true!) Apparently there is no way that font designers can protect their work -- anyone with the right software can copy what may have taken months of effort, change the name, and sell it or give it away. Graeme Forbes ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Standard font for technical documentation
To set the record straight, whether you like Helvetica and/or Arial or not ... Arial and Helvetica are totally different san serif fonts from different foundries. Arial is from Monotype and not from Microsoft. Microsoft licensed a special version of Arial from Monotype for bundling with Windows and other software (notably, Office). Helvetica was not designed by Herman Zapf. What was special about the version of Arial licensed by Monotype to Microsoft was that the set widths of the glyphs in Arial were made to match the set widths of corresponding glyphs in the version of Helvetica that Adobe licensed from Linotype, thus providing a host-based substitution font for the printer-based Helvetica in Adobe PostScript printers. Similar hackery was performed by a number of CloneScript providers to provide printer-based work-alike fonts to substitute for Helvetica, one example being BitStream's Swiss 721 SWA family (where SWA is set width adapted to correspond to the set widths of PostScript base-35 fonts) which was admittedly and unabashedly a knock-off of Helvetica and specifically the Helvetica used in Adobe PostScript. Ironically, for Windows users, the fact that Microsoft used a work-alike font to substitute for Helvetica (and did similarly for other Adobe PostScript base-35 fonts), eliminated a major source of problems that plagues Macintosh users to this day. Apple chose to license Helvetica, Times, Palatino, and ITC Zapf Dingbats with compatible set widths to those in the Adobe PostScript base-35 font set and then convert same to TrueType format and then bundled same with MacOS. Unfortunately, those fonts aren't quite the same as the Adobe PostScript base 35 fonts, but do share identical names. Macintosh users who wish to use any of those base 35 fonts still need to choose whether to use the host-based Apple TrueType fonts (and not install the Adobe Type 1 fonts, simultaneously making sure to always download those fonts to the printer and/or embed same in PDF files) or to install the Adobe Type 1 versions of the fonts and totally blow away the MacOS TrueType versions. You have no idea how many prepress and PDF problems we run into due to this particular conflict due to identical font names. - Dov PS: Remember that font is a four letter word beginning with an 'f'. -Original Message- From: Graeme R Forbes Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:22 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation Syed said: Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc. I missed this discussion but I'm not surprised. I've read in more than one place in the typographical literature that Arial was a cheap knock-off of Helvetica that Microsoft cobbled together to avoid paying royalties (to Herman Zapf or Linotype?). (This story may be false but it *sounds* true!) Apparently there is no way that font designers can protect their work -- anyone with the right software can copy what may have taken months of effort, change the name, and sell it or give it away. Graeme Forbes ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
SV: Standard font for technical documentation
Thanks, Dov !!! Actually, neither Helvetica as most people know it nor Arial nor the Swiss XXX variants offer the original Helvetica type face. The original Helvetica was developed in 1957 with the aim to create a neutral, grotesk typeface that had great clarity, no intrinsic meaning in its form, and could be used on a wide variety of signage. In 1960, the typeface's name was changed to Helvetica (derived from Confoederatio Helvetia, the Latin name for Switzerland) in order to make it more marketable internationally (therefore also the Bitstream Swiss named variant). See Wikipedia for further details. The version Adobe adopted as a ROM resident font in base 13, base 14 or base 35 PostScript printers (or whichever base XX) actually wasn't as good as the ones implemented by cathode tupe based imagesetters (i.e. the generation before the laser technology). The type 1 hinting was good at that time, but not as good as we can get it today with TrueType outlines. Spacing, ligatures and some other things wasn't optimized (and TrueType didn't exist). Hence, in 1983 Linotype released a refined version called Helvetca Neue via it's daughter company Stempel AG. Helvetica Neue is MUCH better than Helvetica in all of its variants for any purpose, but it's not a free font and MUST be embedded in electronic documents such as PDF. Anyway, it's worth every cent in display previews and print, I believe. And it offers a LOT of more faces than the standard four, 51 to be precise. Best regards / Med venlig hilsen Jacob Schäffer | Chief Developer Grafikhuset (House of Graphics) Paradis Allé 22, Ramløse DK-3200 Helsinge, Denmark Phone: +45 4439 4400 Email: j...@grafikhuset.dk Web: www.grafikhuset.net -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] På vegne af Dov Isaacs Sendt: 22. juli 2009 17:56 Til: framers@lists.frameusers.com Emne: RE: Standard font for technical documentation To set the record straight, whether you like Helvetica and/or Arial or not ... Arial and Helvetica are totally different san serif fonts from different foundries. Arial is from Monotype and not from Microsoft. Microsoft licensed a special version of Arial from Monotype for bundling with Windows and other software (notably, Office). Helvetica was not designed by Herman Zapf. What was special about the version of Arial licensed by Monotype to Microsoft was that the set widths of the glyphs in Arial were made to match the set widths of corresponding glyphs in the version of Helvetica that Adobe licensed from Linotype, thus providing a host-based substitution font for the printer-based Helvetica in Adobe PostScript printers. Similar hackery was performed by a number of CloneScript providers to provide printer-based work-alike fonts to substitute for Helvetica, one example being BitStream's Swiss 721 SWA family (where SWA is set width adapted to correspond to the set widths of PostScript base-35 fonts) which was admittedly and unabashedly a knock-off of Helvetica and specifically the Helvetica used in Adobe PostScript. Ironically, for Windows users, the fact that Microsoft used a work-alike font to substitute for Helvetica (and did similarly for other Adobe PostScript base-35 fonts), eliminated a major source of problems that plagues Macintosh users to this day. Apple chose to license Helvetica, Times, Palatino, and ITC Zapf Dingbats with compatible set widths to those in the Adobe PostScript base-35 font set and then convert same to TrueType format and then bundled same with MacOS. Unfortunately, those fonts aren't quite the same as the Adobe PostScript base 35 fonts, but do share identical names. Macintosh users who wish to use any of those base 35 fonts still need to choose whether to use the host-based Apple TrueType fonts (and not install the Adobe Type 1 fonts, simultaneously making sure to always download those fonts to the printer and/or embed same in PDF files) or to install the Adobe Type 1 versions of the fonts and totally blow away the MacOS TrueType versions. You have no idea how many prepress and PDF problems we run into due to this particular conflict due to identical font names. - Dov PS: Remember that font is a four letter word beginning with an 'f'. -Original Message- From: Graeme R Forbes Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:22 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation Syed said: Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc. I missed this discussion but I'm not surprised. I've read in more than one place in the typographical literature that Arial was a cheap knock-off of Helvetica that Microsoft cobbled together to avoid paying royalties (to Herman Zapf or Linotype?). (This story may be false but it *sounds* true
Standard font for technical documentation
Syed said: "Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc." I missed this discussion but I'm not surprised. I've read in more than one place in the typographical literature that Arial was a cheap knock-off of Helvetica that Microsoft cobbled together to avoid paying royalties (to Herman Zapf or Linotype?). (This story may be false but it *sounds* true!) Apparently there is no way that font designers can protect their work -- anyone with the right software can copy what may have taken months of effort, change the name, and sell it or give it away. Graeme Forbes
Standard font for technical documentation
To set the record straight, whether you like Helvetica and/or Arial or not ... Arial and Helvetica are totally different san serif fonts from different foundries. Arial is from Monotype and not from Microsoft. Microsoft licensed a special version of Arial from Monotype for bundling with Windows and other software (notably, Office). Helvetica was not designed by Herman Zapf. What was "special" about the version of Arial licensed by Monotype to Microsoft was that the "set widths" of the glyphs in Arial were made to match the "set widths" of corresponding glyphs in the version of Helvetica that Adobe licensed from Linotype, thus providing a host-based substitution font for the printer-based Helvetica in Adobe PostScript printers. Similar hackery was performed by a number of CloneScript providers to provide printer-based "work-alike" fonts to substitute for Helvetica, one example being BitStream's "Swiss 721 SWA" family (where "SWA" is "set width adapted" to correspond to the set widths of PostScript base-35 fonts) which was admittedly and unabashedly a knock-off of Helvetica and specifically the Helvetica used in Adobe PostScript. Ironically, for Windows users, the fact that Microsoft used a work-alike font to substitute for Helvetica (and did similarly for other Adobe PostScript base-35 fonts), eliminated a major source of problems that plagues Macintosh users to this day. Apple chose to license Helvetica, Times, Palatino, and ITC Zapf Dingbats with compatible set widths to those in the Adobe PostScript base-35 font set and then convert same to TrueType format and then bundled same with MacOS. Unfortunately, those fonts aren't quite the same as the Adobe PostScript base 35 fonts, but do share identical names. Macintosh users who wish to use any of those base 35 fonts still need to choose whether to use the host-based Apple TrueType fonts (and not install the Adobe Type 1 fonts, simultaneously making sure to always download those fonts to the printer and/or embed same in PDF files) or to install the Adobe Type 1 versions of the fonts and totally blow away the MacOS TrueType versions. You have no idea how many prepress and PDF problems we run into due to this particular conflict due to identical font names. - Dov PS: Remember that "font" is a four letter word beginning with an 'f'. > -Original Message- > From: Graeme R Forbes > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:22 AM > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation > > > Syed said: > > "Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown > (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes > (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc." > > > I missed this discussion but I'm not surprised. I've read in more than one > place > in the typographical literature that Arial was a cheap knock-off of Helvetica > that > Microsoft cobbled together to avoid paying royalties (to Herman Zapf or > Linotype?). (This story may be false but it *sounds* true!) Apparently there > is no > way that font designers can protect their work -- anyone with the right > software > can copy what may have taken months of effort, change the name, and sell it or > give it away. > > Graeme Forbes
SV: Standard font for technical documentation
Thanks, Dov !!! Actually, neither "Helvetica" as most people know it nor "Arial" nor the "Swiss XXX" variants offer the original Helvetica type face. The original Helvetica was developed in 1957 with the aim to create a neutral, "grotesk" typeface that had great clarity, no intrinsic meaning in its form, and could be used on a wide variety of signage. In 1960, the typeface's name was changed to Helvetica (derived from Confoederatio Helvetia, the Latin name for Switzerland) in order to make it more marketable internationally (therefore also the Bitstream "Swiss" named variant). See Wikipedia for further details. The version Adobe adopted as a ROM resident font in base 13, base 14 or base 35 PostScript printers (or whichever "base XX") actually wasn't as good as the ones implemented by cathode tupe based imagesetters (i.e. the generation before the laser technology). The type 1 "hinting" was good at that time, but not as good as we can get it today with TrueType outlines. Spacing, ligatures and some other things wasn't optimized (and TrueType didn't exist). Hence, in 1983 Linotype released a "refined" version called "Helvetca Neue" via it's daughter company Stempel AG. "Helvetica Neue" is MUCH better than Helvetica in all of its variants for any purpose, but it's not a free font and MUST be embedded in electronic documents such as PDF. Anyway, it's worth every cent in display previews and print, I believe. And it offers a LOT of more faces than the standard four, 51 to be precise. Best regards / Med venlig hilsen Jacob Sch?ffer? |? Chief Developer Grafikhuset (House of Graphics) Paradis All? 22, Raml?se DK-3200 Helsinge, Denmark Phone: +45 4439 4400 Email: js at grafikhuset.dk Web: www.grafikhuset.net -Oprindelig meddelelse- Fra: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com] P? vegne af Dov Isaacs Sendt: 22. juli 2009 17:56 Til: framers at lists.frameusers.com Emne: RE: Standard font for technical documentation To set the record straight, whether you like Helvetica and/or Arial or not ... Arial and Helvetica are totally different san serif fonts from different foundries. Arial is from Monotype and not from Microsoft. Microsoft licensed a special version of Arial from Monotype for bundling with Windows and other software (notably, Office). Helvetica was not designed by Herman Zapf. What was "special" about the version of Arial licensed by Monotype to Microsoft was that the "set widths" of the glyphs in Arial were made to match the "set widths" of corresponding glyphs in the version of Helvetica that Adobe licensed from Linotype, thus providing a host-based substitution font for the printer-based Helvetica in Adobe PostScript printers. Similar hackery was performed by a number of CloneScript providers to provide printer-based "work-alike" fonts to substitute for Helvetica, one example being BitStream's "Swiss 721 SWA" family (where "SWA" is "set width adapted" to correspond to the set widths of PostScript base-35 fonts) which was admittedly and unabashedly a knock-off of Helvetica and specifically the Helvetica used in Adobe PostScript. Ironically, for Windows users, the fact that Microsoft used a work-alike font to substitute for Helvetica (and did similarly for other Adobe PostScript base-35 fonts), eliminated a major source of problems that plagues Macintosh users to this day. Apple chose to license Helvetica, Times, Palatino, and ITC Zapf Dingbats with compatible set widths to those in the Adobe PostScript base-35 font set and then convert same to TrueType format and then bundled same with MacOS. Unfortunately, those fonts aren't quite the same as the Adobe PostScript base 35 fonts, but do share identical names. Macintosh users who wish to use any of those base 35 fonts still need to choose whether to use the host-based Apple TrueType fonts (and not install the Adobe Type 1 fonts, simultaneously making sure to always download those fonts to the printer and/or embed same in PDF files) or to install the Adobe Type 1 versions of the fonts and totally blow away the MacOS TrueType versions. You have no idea how many prepress and PDF problems we run into due to this particular conflict due to identical font names. - Dov PS: Remember that "font" is a four letter word beginning with an 'f'. > -----Original Message- > From: Graeme R Forbes > Sent: Wednesday, July 22, 2009 1:22 AM > To: framers at lists.frameusers.com > Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation > > > Syed said: > > "Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown > (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes > (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc." > > &
RE: Standard font for technical documentation
Hi, My _personal_ preference leans to the new MS fonts (Cambria, I think it was) that were released with Vista, based on having edited two papers that used them and from an IEEE Spectrum article about the research involved in their creation. I have not personally used the fonts (not available on my older system), but the two documents did seem especially clear on screen without being distractingly different. Yesterday I read that some applications might have kerning problems with Cambria. This was noticed with old applications such as Word 2003 or Word 2007 (in compatibility mode) or FrameMaker. See here for an example: http://www.ernst-line.de/test/nanotruck.pdf The information is here (in German): http://www.typografie.info/typoforum/viewtopic.php?f=25t=3137 Michael Müller-Hillebrand pointed this out in his (German) blog: http://cap-studio.de/wp/index.php/2009/07/calibri-cambria-candara-consolas-constantia-corbel/ I did not test this myself. Best regards Winfried ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Standard font for technical documentation
For standard typefaces embedded in print PDF documents, I use Palatino Linotype for serifs, the new (free) Inconsolata-dk for monospaced, and any of a number of sans-serif typefaces--usually Arial, Verdana, Calibri., etc. Hi, Gary. Did you mean Inconsolata-dk or Incolsolata-dz? I have not seen the former ... just found the latter and will do some comparisons to my current favorite (see below). My fonts for printed technical documentation - these are always sent to customers in PDF files: 1. Palatino Linotype for all body text. I used to use Palatino and discovered an unusual spacing problem with copyright, registered and trademark letters. The space after these characters is insufficient and they are too close to the first character of the next word. I don't know if others see it too and it is just a problem with the Palatino font I have - I can provide a PDF sample if anyone wants. 2. Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc. 3. Consolas for monospaced code examples, etc. I used to use Courier, but after I discovered Consolas (in Word 2007) some years ago, I have not looked back! Z ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Standard font for technical documentation
syed.hos...@aeris.net wrote: For standard typefaces embedded in print PDF documents, I use Palatino Linotype for serifs, the new (free) Inconsolata-dk for monospaced, and any of a number of sans-serif typefaces--usually Arial, Verdana, Calibri., etc. Hi, Gary. Did you mean Inconsolata-dk or Incolsolata-dz? I have not seen the former ... just found the latter and will do some comparisons to my current favorite (see below). My fonts for printed technical documentation - these are always sent to customers in PDF files: 1. Palatino Linotype for all body text. I used to use Palatino and discovered an unusual spacing problem with copyright, registered and trademark letters. The space after these characters is insufficient and they are too close to the first character of the next word. I don't know if others see it too and it is just a problem with the Palatino font I have - I can provide a PDF sample if anyone wants. 2. Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc. 3. Consolas for monospaced code examples, etc. I used to use Courier, but after I discovered Consolas (in Word 2007) some years ago, I have not looked back! Z My bad, as it was Inconsolata-dz. Helvetica is a Mac font for most systems--not on my XP Pro system. A couple years ago, somebody ran a comparative study on various typefaces, including the seven or so new MS C typefaces. Palatino Linotype fared the best of the serifs. Forget TNR, unless a narrow newspaper-type typeface is desired for narrow columns. Consolas may appear poorly unless ClearType is enabled, I understand. Gary ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Standard font for technical documentation
Hi, > My _personal_ preference leans to the new MS fonts (Cambria, > I think it > was) that were released with Vista, based on having edited two papers > that used them and from an IEEE Spectrum article about the > research involved > in their creation. I have not personally used the fonts (not > available on > my older system), but the two documents did seem especially > clear on screen > without being distractingly different. Yesterday I read that some applications might have kerning problems with Cambria. This was noticed with "old" applications such as Word 2003 or Word 2007 (in compatibility mode) or FrameMaker. See here for an example: http://www.ernst-line.de/test/nanotruck.pdf The information is here (in German): http://www.typografie.info/typoforum/viewtopic.php?f=25=3137 Michael M?ller-Hillebrand pointed this out in his (German) blog: http://cap-studio.de/wp/index.php/2009/07/calibri-cambria-candara-consolas-constantia-corbel/ I did not test this myself. Best regards Winfried
Standard font for technical documentation
Reng, Dr. Winfried wrote: > Hi, > > >> My _personal_ preference leans to the new MS fonts (Cambria, >> I think it >> was) that were released with Vista, based on having edited two papers >> that used them and from an IEEE Spectrum article about the >> research involved >> in their creation. I have not personally used the fonts (not >> available on >> my older system), but the two documents did seem especially >> clear on screen >> without being distractingly different. >> > > Yesterday I read that some applications might have kerning > problems with Cambria. This was noticed with "old" applications > such as Word 2003 or Word 2007 (in compatibility mode) or > FrameMaker. See here for an example: > http://www.ernst-line.de/test/nanotruck.pdf > > The information is here (in German): > http://www.typografie.info/typoforum/viewtopic.php?f=25=3137 > > Michael M?ller-Hillebrand pointed this out in his (German) blog: > http://cap-studio.de/wp/index.php/2009/07/calibri-cambria-candara-consolas-constantia-corbel/ > > I did not test this myself. > > Best regards > > Winfried > For standard typefaces embedded in print PDF documents, I use Palatino Linotype for serifs, the new (free) Inconsolata-dk for monospaced, and any of a number of sans-serif typefaces--usually Arial, Verdana, Calibri., etc. Gary
Standard font for technical documentation
> For standard typefaces embedded in print PDF documents, I use Palatino Linotype for serifs, the new (free) Inconsolata-dk for monospaced, and any of a number of sans-serif typefaces--usually Arial, Verdana, Calibri., etc. Hi, Gary. Did you mean Inconsolata-dk or Incolsolata-dz? I have not seen the former ... just found the latter and will do some comparisons to my current favorite (see below). My fonts for printed technical documentation - these are always sent to customers in PDF files: 1. Palatino Linotype for all body text. I used to use Palatino and discovered an unusual spacing problem with copyright, registered and trademark letters. The space after these characters is insufficient and they are too close to the first character of the next word. I don't know if others see it too and it is just a problem with the Palatino font I have - I can provide a PDF sample if anyone wants. 2. Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc. 3. Consolas for monospaced code examples, etc. I used to use Courier, but after I discovered Consolas (in Word 2007) some years ago, I have not looked back! Z
Standard font for technical documentation
Syed.Hosain at aeris.net wrote: >> For standard typefaces embedded in print PDF documents, I use Palatino >> > Linotype for serifs, the new (free) Inconsolata-dk for monospaced, and > any of a number of sans-serif typefaces--usually Arial, Verdana, > Calibri., etc. > > Hi, Gary. > > Did you mean Inconsolata-dk or Incolsolata-dz? I have not seen the > former ... just found the latter and will do some comparisons to my > current favorite (see below). > > My fonts for printed technical documentation - these are always sent to > customers in PDF files: > > 1. Palatino Linotype for all body text. I used to use Palatino and > discovered an unusual spacing problem with copyright, registered and > trademark letters. The space after these characters is insufficient and > they are too close to the first character of the next word. I don't know > if others see it too and it is just a problem with the Palatino font I > have - I can provide a PDF sample if anyone wants. > > 2. Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown > (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes > (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc. > > 3. Consolas for monospaced code examples, etc. I used to use Courier, > but after I discovered Consolas (in Word 2007) some years ago, I have > not looked back! > > Z > My bad, as it was Inconsolata-dz. Helvetica is a Mac font for most systems--not on my XP Pro system. A couple years ago, somebody ran a comparative study on various typefaces, including the seven or so new MS "C" typefaces. Palatino Linotype fared the best of the serifs. Forget TNR, unless a narrow newspaper-type typeface is desired for narrow columns. Consolas may appear poorly unless ClearType is enabled, I understand. Gary
Standard font for technical documentation
Dear all, is there any standard font for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better reading quality than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! Téléchargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Standard font for technical documentation
Hi Mathieu, If your readers are going to view your documents online, go for Arial. Arial offers a very good reading quality on computer monitor. If you are going to provide hard copies of your guides, you can go for Verdana. Hope this helps! ___ Smile can make you immune to stress Regards, N. Jain http://www.neerajjain8.com From: mathieu jacquet bobi...@hotmail.com To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 12:27:19 PM Subject: Standard font for technical documentation Dear all, is there any standard font for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better reading quality than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! Téléchargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as neerajja...@yahoo.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/neerajjain8%40yahoo.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Standard font for technical documentation
I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate look, or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google font readability research Cheers, Art Art Campbell art.campb...@gmail.com ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:57 AM, mathieu jacquetbobi...@hotmail.com wrote: Dear all, is there any standard font for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better reading quality than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! Téléchargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campb...@gmail.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Standard font for technical documentation
Art Campbell wrote: I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate look, or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google font readability research Good advice, except for the serif / sans serif confusion. Serifs are the little embellishing strokes, usually more or less horizontal, at the tops and bottoms of letters. They help to guide your eye along a line of text as you read. Palatino is indeed a serif font, but Avant Garde, Verdana, and Arial are all sans serif fonts. Most people agree that sans serifs are preferable for the comparatively low resolution of a computer screen. Oh, yeah -- and among serifs, Palatino rules! Anyone who doesn't agree is an uncouth barbarian! ;-) Richard Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 -- ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Standard font for technical documentation
For printed books the prevailing wisdom and studies show that serif font is easier to read. On the other hand, for display devices (electronic viewing) the prevailing studies and wisdom say that non-serif font is easier for humans to decode. Look at the books on your shelf. Check how many of these books have arial or helvetica font for the body text. The number should be few or zero. Now look at your copy machine user interface or your cell phone --these devices normally do use helvetica, arial, or verdana (san-serif font). Most tech docs tend to favor the printed media wisdom (serif font for body text) and use non serif for headings because they stand out. Aside from following the the prevailing wisdom, this combination has always looked good to me. There have been numerous studies in Human Computer Interaction (long before Google or Microsoft ever existed) they reveal that: - Non serif fonts are easier read on display devices - Using more than five typefaces (where color, weight, and italics all count as a new typeface) for a particular display increases human processing time. Art is right. This topic can create a fair amount of pointless and lively bike-shed-phenomenon-like discussion. So, be prepared for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_Parkinson's_Bicycle_Shed_Effect Reid From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com on behalf of Art Campbell Sent: Mon 7/20/2009 8:22 AM To: mathieu jacquet Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate look, or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google font readability research Cheers, Art Art Campbell art.campb...@gmail.com ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:57 AM, mathieu jacquetbobi...@hotmail.com wrote: Dear all, is there any standard font for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better reading quality than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! Téléchargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campb...@gmail.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as rg...@interactivesupercomputing.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/rgray%40interactivesupercomputing.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Re: Standard font for technical documentation
Uh, no, no confusion. ;- ) I said: I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. So that would mean: serif for body = Palatino sans-serif for heads = Avant Garde Art Campbell art.campb...@gmail.com ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Combs, Richardrichard.co...@polycom.com wrote: Art Campbell wrote: I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate look, or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google font readability research Good advice, except for the serif / sans serif confusion. Serifs are the little embellishing strokes, usually more or less horizontal, at the tops and bottoms of letters. They help to guide your eye along a line of text as you read. Palatino is indeed a serif font, but Avant Garde, Verdana, and Arial are all sans serif fonts. Most people agree that sans serifs are preferable for the comparatively low resolution of a computer screen. Oh, yeah -- and among serifs, Palatino rules! Anyone who doesn't agree is an uncouth barbarian! ;-) Richard Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 -- ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Standard font for technical documentation
Hi Mathieu- There has been a whole lot of research on this. If you are looking at reading quality, more important factors are kerning, leading, and line length. Also, the age and background of the readers has a significant effect. (For example, in a study published in the early 1990s, researchers found that European readers generally preferred sans serif and North American (probably just USA) readers preferred serif, all other things being equal.) That said, all the companies (admittedly, large ones) have specified the type faces to be used. Generally it has been Times or Times New Roman for print, with Arial or Helvetica for headings. I can't recall what my prior employer used online, but my current one specifies Helvetica and Arial for online help, with Courier (a fixed-width font) for the code examples. For PDF (we don't really do paper any more) the default font is Times at 12 pt. Given our readers average 40+ years old, have high-resolution displays, generally are working on a Unix-based computer, and are accustomed to lots of reading, the choice is appropriate. I sure wouldn't use it for something meant for a younger audience, though. My _personal_ preference leans to the new MS fonts (Cambria, I think it was) that were released with Vista, based on having edited two papers that used them and from an IEEE Spectrum article about the research involved in their creation. I have not personally used the fonts (not available on my older system), but the two documents did seem especially clear on screen without being distractingly different. Regards- Sam. -Original Message- From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of mathieu jacquet Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 1:57 AM To: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Standard font for technical documentation Dear all, is there any standard font for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better reading quality than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! Téléchargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as samantha_li...@mentor.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/samantha_lizak%40mentor.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
RE: Standard font for technical documentation [RESOLVED]
Well, for the good of mankind (we're talking about nuclear safety here :o) ), I close this topic. Thank you all for the valuable piece of information you provided me with! Cheers, Mathieu. Subject: RE: Standard font for technical documentation Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:44:59 -0400 From: rg...@interactivesupercomputing.com To: art.campb...@gmail.com; bobi...@hotmail.com CC: framers@lists.frameusers.com Re: Standard font for technical documentation For printed books the prevailing wisdom and studies show that serif font is easier to read. On the other hand, for display devices (electronic viewing) the prevailing studies and wisdom say that non-serif font is easier for humans to decode. Look at the books on your shelf. Check how many of these books have arial or helvetica font for the body text. The number should be few or zero. Now look at your copy machine user interface or your cell phone --these devices normally do use helvetica, arial, or verdana (san-serif font). Most tech docs tend to favor the printed media wisdom (serif font for body text) and use non serif for headings because they stand out. Aside from following the the prevailing wisdom, this combination has always looked good to me. There have been numerous studies in Human Computer Interaction (long before Google or Microsoft ever existed) they reveal that: - Non serif fonts are easier read on display devices - Using more than five typefaces (where color, weight, and italics all count as a new typeface) for a particular display increases human processing time. Art is right. This topic can create a fair amount of pointless and lively bike-shed-phenomenon-like discussion. So, be prepared for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_Parkinson's_Bicycle_Shed_Effect Reid From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com on behalf of Art Campbell Sent: Mon 7/20/2009 8:22 AM To: mathieu jacquet Cc: framers@lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate look, or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google font readability research Cheers, Art Art Campbell art.campb...@gmail.com ... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl. -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:57 AM, mathieu jacquetbobi...@hotmail.com wrote: Dear all, is there any standard font for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better reading quality than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! Téléchargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campb...@gmail.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as rg...@interactivesupercomputing.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/rgray%40interactivesupercomputing.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. _ Téléphonez gratuitement à tous vos proches avec Windows Live
RE: Standard font for technical documentation [RESOLVED]
Yeah, but what about the bike shed? Rick Quatro Carmen Publishing Inc. r...@frameexpert.com 585-659-8267 Well, for the good of mankind (we're talking about nuclear safety here :o) ), I close this topic. Thank you all for the valuable piece of information you provided me with! Cheers, Mathieu. ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Font availability (was RE: Standard font for technical documentation)
Hello, While everyone is on the subject of font usage and availability, I thought I would add some text about my experiences with having a corporate font style. The new Microsoft fonts [Calibri, Candara, Consolas, Cambria, Constantia, and Corbel] are available in Office 2007 installations, but is also available with Microsoft's office compatibility pack. Alternatively, the files can be extracted from the PowerPoint 2007 view package and installed manually [without needing to install PowerPoint] While the new Office fonts look good, we have to support customers in non-English locales which necessitates using fonts that can support native language character sets, such as Greek, Eastern European, etc. As a result, we typically use Arial which can support most of the characters we require. We would use Arial Unicode MS, as it supports a greater range of characters, but the implementation is rather limited. It's rather disappointing that there is no single Unicode font that can support *all* locales. So, if you have other languages to consider, you may be limited with your choices of fonts. Regards // Simon BUCH -- eAIP consultant at Managed-AIS ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as arch...@mail-archive.com. Send list messages to fram...@lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscr...@lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/archive%40mail-archive.com Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Standard font for technical documentation
Dear all, is there any "standard font" for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better "reading quality" than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ T?l?phonez gratuitement ? tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger? !? T?l?chargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp
Standard font for technical documentation
Hi Mathieu, If your readers are going to view your documents online, go for?Arial.?Arial offers a very good reading quality on computer monitor. If you are?going to provide hard copies of your guides, you?can go?for Verdana. Hope this helps! ? ___ Smile can make you immune to stress Regards, N. Jain http://www.neerajjain8.com ? ? From: mathieu jacquet <bobi...@hotmail.com> To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 12:27:19 PM Subject: Standard font for technical documentation Dear all, is there any "standard font" for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better "reading quality" than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ T?l?phonez gratuitement ? tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger? !? T?l?chargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as neerajjain8 at yahoo.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/neerajjain8%40yahoo.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Standard font for technical documentation
I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate "look," or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google "font readability research" Cheers, Art Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:57 AM, mathieu jacquet wrote: > > Dear all, > is there any "standard font" for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals > and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find > that some fonts offer a better "reading quality" than others? > Thank you very much in anticipation. > Yours sincerely, > Mathieu. > > > _ > T?l?phonez gratuitement ? tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger? !? > T?l?chargez-le maintenant ! > http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campbell at gmail.com. > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > or visit > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. >
Standard font for technical documentation
Classification: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED My personal faves are Palatino for text and Arial/Helvetica for headings. Cynthia Milton - 0773 889 5991 Technical Documentation Classification: NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED This e-mail and any attachments may contain sensitive and/or privileged material; It is for the intended addressee(s) only. If you are not a named addressee, you must not use, retain or disclose such information. Serco cannot guarantee that the email or any attachments are free from viruses. The views expressed in this email are those of the originator and do not necessarily represent the views of Serco. Nothing in this email shall bind Serco in any contract or obligation. Please note that all email messages sent to Serco are subject to monitoring/interception for lawful business purposes. Serco Group PLC. Registered in England and Wales. No: 2048608 Registered Office: Serco House, 16 Bartley Wood Business Park, Bartley Way, Hook, Hampshire, RG27 9UY
Standard font for technical documentation
Art Campbell wrote: > I think it depends on the application, how the documents are > delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate > "look," or branding, are). > > The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts > amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So > you're unlikely to get one good answer. > > If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer > http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf > > For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to > be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif > heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If > the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif > fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for > on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. > Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. > > If you want more detail, on why, Google "font readability research" Good advice, except for the serif / sans serif confusion. Serifs are the little embellishing strokes, usually more or less horizontal, at the tops and bottoms of letters. They help to guide your eye along a line of text as you read. Palatino is indeed a serif font, but Avant Garde, Verdana, and Arial are all sans serif fonts. Most people agree that sans serifs are preferable for the comparatively low resolution of a computer screen. Oh, yeah -- and among serifs, Palatino rules! Anyone who doesn't agree is an uncouth barbarian! ;-) Richard Richard G. Combs Senior Technical Writer Polycom, Inc. richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom 303-223-5111 -- rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom 303-777-0436 --
Standard font for technical documentation
For printed books the prevailing wisdom and studies show that serif font is easier to read. On the other hand, for display devices (electronic viewing) the prevailing studies and wisdom say that non-serif font is easier for humans to decode. Look at the books on your shelf. Check how many of these books have arial or helvetica font for the body text. The number should be few or zero. Now look at your copy machine user interface or your cell phone --these devices normally do use helvetica, arial, or verdana (san-serif font). Most tech docs tend to favor the printed media wisdom (serif font for body text) and use non serif for headings because they stand out. Aside from following the the prevailing wisdom, this combination has always looked good to me. There have been numerous studies in Human Computer Interaction (long before Google or Microsoft ever existed) they reveal that: - Non serif fonts are easier read on display devices - Using more than five typefaces (where color, weight, and italics all count as a new typeface) for a particular display increases human processing time. Art is right. This topic can create a fair amount of pointless and lively "bike-shed-phenomenon-like" discussion. So, be prepared for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_Parkinson's_Bicycle_Shed_Effect Reid From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com on behalf of Art Campbell Sent: Mon 7/20/2009 8:22 AM To: mathieu jacquet Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate "look," or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google "font readability research" Cheers, Art Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:57 AM, mathieu jacquet wrote: > > Dear all, > is there any "standard font" for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals > and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find > that some fonts offer a better "reading quality" than others? > Thank you very much in anticipation. > Yours sincerely, > Mathieu. > > > _ > T?l?phonez gratuitement ? tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! > T?l?chargez-le maintenant ! > http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campbell at gmail.com. > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > or visit > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. > ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as rgray at interactivesupercomputing.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/rgray%40interactivesupercomputing.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Standard font for technical documentation
Uh, no, no confusion. ;- ) I said: "I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde." So that would mean: serif for body = Palatino sans-serif for heads = Avant Garde Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Combs, Richard wrote: > Art Campbell wrote: > >> I think it depends on the application, how the documents are >> delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate >> "look," or branding, are). >> >> The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts >> amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So >> you're unlikely to get one good answer. >> >> If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer >> http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf >> >> For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to >> be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif >> heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If >> the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif >> fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for >> on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. >> Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. >> >> If you want more detail, on why, Google "font readability research" > > Good advice, except for the serif / sans serif confusion. Serifs are the > little embellishing strokes, usually more or less horizontal, at the > tops and bottoms of letters. They help to guide your eye along a line of > text as you read. Palatino is indeed a serif font, but Avant Garde, > Verdana, and Arial are all sans serif fonts. Most people agree that sans > serifs are preferable for the comparatively low resolution of a computer > screen. > > Oh, yeah -- and among serifs, Palatino rules! Anyone who doesn't agree > is an uncouth barbarian! ;-) > > Richard > > > Richard G. Combs > Senior Technical Writer > Polycom, Inc. > richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom > 303-223-5111 > -- > rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom > 303-777-0436 > -- > > > > > >
Standard font for technical documentation
Hi Mathieu- There has been a whole lot of research on this. If you are looking at reading quality, more important factors are kerning, leading, and line length. Also, the age and background of the readers has a significant effect. (For example, in a study published in the early 1990s, researchers found that European readers generally preferred sans serif and North American (probably just USA) readers preferred serif, all other things being equal.) That said, all the companies (admittedly, large ones) have specified the type faces to be used. Generally it has been Times or Times New Roman for print, with Arial or Helvetica for headings. I can't recall what my prior employer used online, but my current one specifies Helvetica and Arial for online help, with Courier (a fixed-width font) for the code examples. For PDF (we don't really do paper any more) the default font is Times at 12 pt. Given our readers average 40+ years old, have high-resolution displays, generally are working on a Unix-based computer, and are accustomed to lots of reading, the choice is appropriate. I sure wouldn't use it for something meant for a younger audience, though. My _personal_ preference leans to the new MS fonts (Cambria, I think it was) that were released with Vista, based on having edited two papers that used them and from an IEEE Spectrum article about the research involved in their creation. I have not personally used the fonts (not available on my older system), but the two documents did seem especially clear on screen without being distractingly different. Regards- Sam. -Original Message- From: framers-bounces at lists.frameusers.com [mailto:framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com] On Behalf Of mathieu jacquet Sent: Monday, July 20, 2009 1:57 AM To: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Standard font for technical documentation Dear all, is there any "standard font" for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find that some fonts offer a better "reading quality" than others? Thank you very much in anticipation. Yours sincerely, Mathieu. _ T?l?phonez gratuitement ? tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger? !? T?l?chargez-le maintenant ! http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as samantha_lizak at mentor.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/samantha_lizak%40mentor.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.
Standard font for technical documentation [RESOLVED]
Well, for the good of mankind (we're talking about nuclear safety here :o) ), I close this topic. Thank you all for the valuable piece of information you provided me with! Cheers, Mathieu. Subject: RE: Standard font for technical documentation Date: Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:44:59 -0400 From: rg...@interactivesupercomputing.com To: art.campbell at gmail.com; bobitch at hotmail.com CC: framers at lists.frameusers.com Re: Standard font for technical documentation For printed books the prevailing wisdom and studies show that serif font is easier to read. On the other hand, for display devices (electronic viewing) the prevailing studies and wisdom say that non-serif font is easier for humans to decode. Look at the books on your shelf. Check how many of these books have arial or helvetica font for the body text. The number should be few or zero. Now look at your copy machine user interface or your cell phone --these devices normally do use helvetica, arial, or verdana (san-serif font). Most tech docs tend to favor the printed media wisdom (serif font for body text) and use non serif for headings because they stand out. Aside from following the the prevailing wisdom, this combination has always looked good to me. There have been numerous studies in Human Computer Interaction (long before Google or Microsoft ever existed) they reveal that: - Non serif fonts are easier read on display devices - Using more than five typefaces (where color, weight, and italics all count as a new typeface) for a particular display increases human processing time. Art is right. This topic can create a fair amount of pointless and lively "bike-shed-phenomenon-like" discussion. So, be prepared for it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Avoid_Parkinson's_Bicycle_Shed_Effect Reid From: framers-boun...@lists.frameusers.com on behalf of Art Campbell Sent: Mon 7/20/2009 8:22 AM To: mathieu jacquet Cc: framers at lists.frameusers.com Subject: Re: Standard font for technical documentation I think it depends on the application, how the documents are delivered, and what the company's stanard fonts (part of the corporate "look," or branding, are). The other thing you should know is that for some reason, picking fonts amounts to a religious war with odd fervor among the participants. So you're unlikely to get one good answer. If I were you, I'd start with Adobe's Type Primer http://www.adobe.com/education/pdf/type_primer.pdf For material that will be printed or delivered via PDF and likely to be printed by the customer, I usually use a serif body font and serif heads. The one I'm working in now uses Palatino and Avant Garde. If the material will only be on-screen and/or web, I'd go with serif fonts for both body and heads, and I'd pick one that was designed for on-screen display -- very few are, or were. Verdana is one of them. Arial is not Most type foundries today will have a few. If you want more detail, on why, Google "font readability research" Cheers, Art Art Campbell art.campbell at gmail.com "... In my opinion, there's nothing in this world beats a '52 Vincent and a redheaded girl." -- Richard Thompson No disclaimers apply. DoD 358 On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 2:57 AM, mathieu jacquet wrote: > > Dear all, > is there any "standard font" for writing Getting Started guides, User Manuals > and other technical documents? Which one do you personnally use? Do you find > that some fonts offer a better "reading quality" than others? > Thank you very much in anticipation. > Yours sincerely, > Mathieu. > > > _ > T?l?phonez gratuitement ? tous vos proches avec Windows Live Messenger ! > T?l?chargez-le maintenant ! > http://www.windowslive.fr/messenger/1.asp > ___ > > > You are currently subscribed to Framers as art.campbell at gmail.com. > > Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. > > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com > or visit > http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/art.campbell%40gmail.com > > Send administrative questions to listadmin at frameusers.com. Visit > http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info. > ___ You are currently subscribed to Framers as rgray at interactivesupercomputing.com. Send list messages to framers at lists.frameusers.com. To unsubscribe send a blank email to framers-unsubscribe at lists.frameusers.com or visit http://lists.frameusers.com/mailman/options/framers/rgray%40interactivesupercomputing.com Send administrative questions to listadmin at fr
Standard font for technical documentation [RESOLVED]
Yeah, but what about the bike shed? Rick Quatro Carmen Publishing Inc. rick at frameexpert.com 585-659-8267 Well, for the good of mankind (we're talking about nuclear safety here :o) ), I close this topic. Thank you all for the valuable piece of information you provided me with! Cheers, Mathieu.
Font availability (was RE: Standard font for technical documentation)
Hello, While everyone is on the subject of font usage and availability, I thought I would add some text about my experiences with having a corporate font style. The new Microsoft fonts [Calibri, Candara, Consolas, Cambria, Constantia, and Corbel] are available in Office 2007 installations, but is also available with Microsoft's "office compatibility pack". Alternatively, the files can be extracted from the PowerPoint 2007 view package and installed manually [without needing to install PowerPoint] While the new Office fonts look good, we have to support customers in non-English locales which necessitates using fonts that can support native language character sets, such as Greek, Eastern European, etc. As a result, we typically use Arial which can support most of the characters we require. We would use Arial Unicode MS, as it supports a greater range of characters, but the implementation is rather limited. It's rather disappointing that there is no single Unicode font that can support *all* locales. So, if you have other languages to consider, you may be limited with your choices of fonts. Regards // Simon BUCH -- eAIP consultant at Managed-AIS
