11–20 of 103 posts
The thing I'm curious to see is this font feature being used while typing. I feel like the characters kind of "jiggling" behind your cursor as you type is going to be kind of weird, no?
That's not to say it's bad at all, just that I think it wouldn't be right for how I'd mostly likely be using such a font.
The thing I'm curious to see is this font feature being used while typing. I feel like the characters kind of "jiggling" behind your cursor as you type is going to be kind of weird, no?
But I don't like the font, so no real tests ;)
I don't like how this article has no examples with a terminal window or a code window where monospace gives a nice grid layout to the text
Might as well be in this thread on the Monaspace fonts https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38210574
I'm not sure if the name “Texture Healing” is descriptive enough (perhaps I'm not that much of a typography nerd I think I am!), but I love the idea. Basically it resolves pairs or triplets of monospace letters to make some of them wider when adjacent letter can be made narrower instead. Another variation on that theme are “duospace fonts”, like iA Writer Duo [1]. Those use two character widths instead of one (i.e. w…
“Most of the type set in the past five hundred years is justified type, and most of it has been justified line by line, by the simple expedient of altering the space between the words. There are, however, better ways. Scribes justify text as they write by introducing abbreviations and subtly altering the widths of letters. Gutenberg replicated the feat by cutting and casting a host of abbreviations and ligatures along with multiple versions of certain letters differing modestly in width. In the early 1990s, Peter Karow and Hermann Zapf devised a means of doing much the same in the digital medium[.] [...] Another thing computer software can do – because Karow taught it how – is justify text by making subtle alterations in the spaces within letters as well as those between letters and words.”
The Elements of Typographic Style, fourth edition, by Robert Bringhurst, pp 191–192.
It bothers way me more that the same glyph can differ within the same word than it satisfies me that the glyphs are very slightly more proportional. The third "m" in the "minimum" example being narrower than the "m"s adjacent to the two "i"s makes my brain itch. Same for the "i"s in "miniature". Makes me feel like I'm looking through a fish-eye lens, or that my glasses prescription is off.
It bothers way me more that the same glyph can differ within the same word than it satisfies me that the glyphs are very slightly more proportional. The third "m" in the "minimum" example being narrower than the "m"s adjacent to the two "i"s makes my brain itch. Same for the "i"s in "miniature". Makes me feel like I'm looking through a fish-eye lens, or that my glasses prescription is off.