Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

joeclark

About

Username
joeclark
Joined
Visits
172
Last Active
Roles
Member
Points
79
Posts
117
  • Re: Low vision calendar company seeks a better font

    Looking at your layouts:

    1. Your heavy black lines are a problem and are not at all necessary even in a tabular calendar. Try light grey or dotted lines.
    2. The heavy black lines in what I take to be the notes field below each month’s calendar are not fit for purpose. If you absolutely positively have to produce guide lines (not “guidelines”) for this low-vision user group, use dotted lines with lots of vertical distance between them. Because remember: People are handwriting here, not printing out 12-point computer fonts.
    3. Too-tight spacing is another of Helvetica’s many deficiencies for legibility. For any substitute you would choose, increase letterspacing (not “kerning”) by a few units. I’m sure your designer knows how to do this in InDesign, which is, I’m further sure, the software he or she is using (and not banging things out in Word for Windows).
    4. I don’t think a strong black background is necessary for column headers. Why not very dark grey?
    5. Verdana isn’t a good option because it looks ridiculous in huge sizes. Many of the Microsoft fonts beginning with C, like Calibri, that are built into Windows have, first of all, been designed by members of this forum and look reasonable when set large.

    Have you tested any of these layouts or any of this typesetting with your actual users? Unless and until you do that, I don’t see the merit in low-vision persons’ buying your products.

  • Re: http:// is a big problem

    Another way Hrant is wrong.
  • Re: Changes To Reactions Redux

    In many ways, this vertical-market type-design forum is incompetently run, such incompetence being buttressed by severely nasty yet endlessly indulged members like Stewf, who himself didn’t do a better job when he was running the place.

    And yes, after 26 years online, I do know better. This forum is predicated on the expertise of its members, and some of us have expertise in more than one field.

    So again, kids: Which crime is greater – continuously permitting incorrect and intrusive (also lazy) Web-authoring practices or complaining about it and being right? Please make your selection now.

  • Re: BBC now publishing content in African pidgin

    I love how we aren’t just publishing raw, naked URLs anymore – we’re publishing raw, naked shortened URLs.

    If only writing the phrase “Typedrawers needs competent administrators” didn’t lead to recriminations levelled against that phrase, and whoever wrote it, rather than correction of the underlying error.

  • Re: Changes To Reactions Redux

    How about “Posts containing http:// or https:// will be placed in the moderation queue,” since those are dead givaways of somebody just dumbly pasting in an URL?

    Will Typedrawers ever solve its actual problems?