Re: Inappropriate interview....

[JoAnne Lagendyk <propage -at- VIDEOTRON -dot- CA>]

Pat Gantt said:

> Not really. According to research san serif fonting
> is far more readable. Afterall, in the main, we *are* shooting for
> simplicity. If the audience can't easily read the message...
> the message is lost.
>
> Serif merely "appears" to be more "business-like."
> Hang over from the typewriter mentality.

Colin Wheildon's great book "Type and Layout" presents hard research
data about, well, type and layout. His research shows that
"Body type must be set in serif type if the designer intends it to be
read and understood. More than five times as many readers are likely to
show good comprehension when a serif body type is used instead of a sans
serif body type."

"...(test subjects) complained strongly about the difficulty of reading
the type....said the task caused them physical discomfort..."

Wheildon backs up everything with hard numbers and explains his
methodolgy in detail. He also covers topics such as how dark a screen is
too dark; where should spot colour be placed; should text be justified
or ragged right; and many other things that designers debate until they
start calling each other nasty names.

I recommend this book most highly (ISBN 0-9624891-5-8).

JoAnne

 TECHWR-L (Technical Communication) List Information: To send a message
to 2500+ readers, e-mail to TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU -dot-  Send commands
   to LISTSERV -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU (e.g. HELP or SIGNOFF TECHWR-L).
  Search the archives at http://www.documentation.com/  or search and
browse the archives at http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html