Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 08:20:42 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block <wblock@wonkity.com> To: Erich Dollansky <erichsfreebsdlist@alogt.com> Cc: freebsd-doc@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: Changing the documentation's font style. Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1304120812200.91723@wonkity.com> In-Reply-To: <20130412180742.3f2b220a@X220.ovitrap.com> References: <CAF%2BkLDS-HHpQxRn=FT78bnCc7s=kWfOZ7T7AU0kpPBzfwNYv7w@mail.gmail.com> <20130412180742.3f2b220a@X220.ovitrap.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 12 Apr 2013, Erich Dollansky wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:41:46 +0100 > Isabell Long <issyl0@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> I sent this idea to the #bsddocs IRC channel a few days ago and no-one >> there objected, but here you go. I'd like to know your opinions on the >> documentation font being changed from serif to sans-serif. This would >> only affect the web-based docs, not the ones being prepared for print. >> >> An example of this is at >> http://tau.devrandom.co.uk/issyl0/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/ , >> and a diff of my very simple changes is at >> http://tau.devrandom.co.uk/issyl0/docs_font.diff >> >> In my opinion, it makes a hugely positive difference and modernises >> the look of the documentation set. >> > how old are you? > > The serif fonts are easier to read for older people. > > I agree, it looks more modern. But what is the idea behind a > documentation? Look good or being read by people for the content. Try viewing the two versions in side-by-side windows. The serif fonts were a lot blobbier and less sharp for me. Aliasing and antialiasing at work with limited resolution. Serif is easier to read in print, but that's much higher resolution.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.1304120812200.91723>