"Hrant H. Papazian" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Although we shouldn't ban the usage of Times forever (it is useful,
> after all), a temporary ban is a great way of removing the blinders
> so people can see the wonderful spectrum of type designs.
Hrant, you are too trusting! They might *see* the spectrum but they
can be depended on to make lousy choices from it.
The union minutes get circulated at work. Last issue had some
prefatory headlines in Lucida Casual (not too bad a choice), but the
main body was in <something reprehensible and unsuited to the task>.
The idjit responsible hadn't a clue that Lucida is pretty good for
Most of the schmoes running a word processor wouldn't know a good
font if it jumped up and bit them on the ass. They wouldn't have a
clue about what goes with what.
By analogy: I saw a brief squib on TV on the fact that most people's
*tastebuds* don't work very well, never mind their centres of higher
thought. Frosted brownies with cayenne pepper liberally sprinkled on
them, Coca-cola with Tobasco sauce added, both brought smackings of
the lips and expressions of delight.
What I'd like to see is a list of "recommended font combinations"
with definite suggestions for the type of work each is suitable for.
Canned recipes, by god, so the godless can at least have some
definite guidance, rather than depending on that badly distributed
personal character, "taste".
Some examples (not intended to be taken seriously):
Font recipe 1: MS Splodge
Times New Roman for body text, Arial for headings, Courier New for
Font recipe 2: Piss Elegant #1
Adobe Garamond for body text, Futura for headings, Arial monospace
for tabular material
Victoria, British Columbia
member, Typo-l peanut gallery