321–330 of 738 posts
I like serif fonts, but never liked Times New Roman too much. Printed, in high resolution, it is kind of ok, but I absolutely abhor it on displays. Which is where we read things 99% of the time nowadays.
Good thing the world is entirely stable and the United States have literally no more pressing issues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While you'll get no argument from me about the Biden government being fascist adjacent, no. The font was chosen by that government for accessibility reasons. The font has now been changed for purely aesthetic reasons, attaching the politics of anti-DEIA to a particular aesthetic (serifed fonts). As for the politics of that government, a history lesson; In 1930s Germany, Liberals did nothing to abort the rise of NSDAP…
Serif fonts are easier to read, so now I guess you have to invert your mind as to who is a fascist and who is a liberator?
Not. The problem is not even about which font is actually more accessible. It's the self proclaimed reasoning. Rubio, by his own words, states that the change is about aesthetics and anti DEIA politics.
However, if you want to argue about actual accessibility, which is not what is happening in the Dept. of State, the US government's own accessibility guidelines contradict the idea that Serif fonts are more accessible; https://www.section508.gov/develop/fonts-typography/
Do you happen to know anyone with a reading disability at all? A dear friend of mine has dyslexia, and I've seen first hand how important this stuff is for his comprehension.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While you'll get no argument from me about the Biden government being fascist adjacent, no. The font was chosen by that government for accessibility reasons. The font has now been changed for purely aesthetic reasons, attaching the politics of anti-DEIA to a particular aesthetic (serifed fonts). As for the politics of that government, a history lesson; In 1930s Germany, Liberals did nothing to abort the rise of NSDAP…
Serif fonts are easier to read, so now I guess you have to invert your mind as to who is a fascist and who is a liberator?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of the reasons Calibri was selected over Times New Roman was it has a lower rate of OCR transcription errors, making documents using it easier for people using screen readers.
That doesn't make much sense, since a typewriter will neither type Calibri nor Times New Roman. And OCR should only be needed for type written documents, because any document made with Calibri or TNR is already digital.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Calibri font has "I" and "l" the same, according to Wikipedia. A better font should avoid characters being too similar (such as "I" and "l" and "1"). Only when used in a context where they can be confused. This is a situation where HN is going to give bad advice. Programmers care deeply about that stuff (i.e. "100l" is a long-valued integer literal in C and not the number 1001). Most people tend not to, and there i…
It's not like the State Department would ever mention Kim Jong the Second in documents.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From the article: > The department under Blinken in early January 2023 had switched to Calibri
Times New Roman existed in 1950. Your comment does not in ANY way contest the parent comment.