TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Online fonts and sizes -- new usability study From:"Dick Margulis " <margulis -at- mail -dot- fiam -dot- net> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:14:36 -0500
Keith, stop being so defensive. We're not attacking you, your design sense, or your font preferences. We're attacking sloppy research with invalid conclusions presented as fact.
kcronin -at- daleen -dot- com wrote:
>In response to Dick and Bruce:
>While you both raise very valid points, I have to say that I've seen
>EXTREMELY thorough and scientific arguments for serif fonts being the most
>readable.
No you haven't. That's our point. These studies have never been well reasoned, thorough, or scientific. They have all been by well-meaning people who thought they knew what they were studying but never bothered to read the existing craft literature to find out what was really going on.
>I guess that's why the simplicity of this test appealed to me. Sit a bunch
>of people down at the same machine, have them read the same docs in
>different fonts and sizes, measure how fast they read them, and ask them
>which they think is prettier. Gives me a ballpark idea of what fonts I
>should try using on my online docs. Cool.
No. Repeat after Bruce and me: The results are invalid. The results are invalid. The results are invalid. The results are invalid.
>
>Yes, those highly subjective and poorly thought out responses will come
>from average untrained amateurs.
They aren't poorly thought out responses from the test subjects. It is a poorly designed experiment. Therefore the results are invalid. The results are invalid. The results are invalid.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Attention ForeHelp and Doc-to-Help Users! Upgrade your existing product to
RoboHelp for only $299, through January 31st. RoboHelp can import your
existing Help projects! Learn how else RoboHelp can benefit you. www.ehelp.com/techwr
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
