Slashdot Mirror


US Govt Makes Times New Roman 14 Official Font

pollux03 writes "According to ABC news, 'In an internal memorandum distributed on Wednesday, the department declared "Courier New 12" - the font and size decreed for US diplomatic documents for years - to be obsolete and unacceptable after February 1. "In response to many requests and with a view to making our written work easier to read, we are moving to a new standard font: 'Times New Roman 14'," said the memorandum. ' The report goes on to cite a few exceptions to the rule including official telegraphs."

811 comments

  1. Exceptions by Joe+U · · Score: 5, Funny

    There are only three exceptions to the draconian new typographical rules: telegrams, treaty materials prepared by the State Department's legal affairs office and documents drawn up for the president's signature, it said.

    As those will all be done in the MS Comic Font.

    1. Re:Exceptions by (startx) · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      it was the first post, and it wasn't a troll, so it'll get modded up without your help or mine :-)

    2. Re:Exceptions by Drathus · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't forget about the "Super Secret" communications.

      'Encrypted "Super Secret" communications will be done with Wingdings 16'

    3. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with DC Bold Dark Oil Font?

    4. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 5, Funny

      Don't forget about the "Super Secret" communications. 'Encrypted "Super Secret" communications will be done with Wingdings 16'

      This message is in violation of the DMCA for circumventing encryption techniques.

    5. Re:Exceptions by Ilgaz · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, the private communications are made with wingdings+rot13

      Oh wait

    6. Re:Exceptions by dasmegabyte · · Score: 4, Funny

      And all documents from the Department of Homeland Security should be formatted in 16 point "Spooky" font. Preferrably in red.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    7. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      heh heh. actually ms comic sans has been my default browser font ever since W was elected. it's somehow easier to take all the bad news that way.

    8. Re:Exceptions by Jim_Maryland · · Score: 5, Funny
      I think the color for DHS will be different depending on the document importance:

      Regular - Green

      Limited Distribution - Blue

      Post-It Notes - Yellow

      Secret - Orange

      Top Secret - Red

    9. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >>There are only three exceptions to the
      >>draconian new typographical rules: telegrams,
      >>treaty materials prepared by the State
      >>Department's legal affairs office and documents
      >>drawn up for the president's signature, it
      >>said.

      >As those will all be done in the MS Comic Font

      ITYM "BitStream Old Dreadful No. 7".

      AC

    10. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Might I suggest Barf Bold?

    11. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      tytrycgfhrm6 n7wa4jiow4hj34nj6i 9kym ;2345]aw4op5aw3hio i[t5nmjyiop n4wop4nmjydgr uipt6 hw4t6 lhyu riop e4jio[io df0gtj'psxv 5t0i[segj[ nmdryj7dtru6sm 5yw3 4r

    12. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, how exactly is this pointless political troll "insightful"?

    13. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not insightful per se. It merely represents the viewpoint of a large number of people, and thus requires no special insight. "Representative" might be a better word.

    14. Re:Exceptions by GreggBert · · Score: 2, Funny
      No, the private communications are made with wingdings+rot13...

      rot13, twice (for good measure) !

      --


      If you don't understand anything I post, please accept that I ate paste as a small boy...
    15. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous+Custard · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Well, thanks to the Internet, I'm now bored with sex. Is there a place on the web that panders to my lust for violence?
      Chack out what George W Bush is doing.


      lol :-)

    16. Re:Exceptions by torpor · · Score: 1, Funny
      You forgot, erm... one more:

      • - White - Bullshit

      --
      ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
    17. Re:Exceptions by dedalus2000 · · Score: 1

      it's an old joke... but I like it.

      --
      My keyboads not woking popely.
    18. Re:Exceptions by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > It merely represents the viewpoint of a large number of people

      Viewpoint or not, it is technically wrong and has no bearing on the current discussion (which is the important bit).

    19. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly wrong...

      Re-Elect Gore in 2004!

    20. Re:Exceptions by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 1

      You know the old conspiracy theory about "NYC" in Wingdings? Check it out. (Note: I am just the messenger, I surely don't endorse that kind of thinking, although I bet I will get a bunch of purile comments to this).

    21. Re:Exceptions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How appropriate... the decline of the American Empire will be conducted using a font named for another empire that crumbled due to greed, complacency and decadence. I bet the ancient Romans didn't think the rest of the world mattered either, until the walls started falling.

    22. Re:Exceptions by offpath3 · · Score: 1

      Personally, I use the 2-time pad. Twice as effective as the 1-time pad!

    23. Re:Exceptions by zhenlin · · Score: 1

      I suppose that the Top Secret documents are printed on red paper, to maximise secrecy.

  2. Funny Fonts by danknight · · Score: 0

    How about Comic Sans, Bols,Italic and 20PT

    --
    wanted: one clever sig,apply within
  3. Damn. by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 5, Funny

    I had my money on 20 point Dingbat.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:Damn. by buckinm · · Score: 5, Funny

      Only if Dean gets elected.

      --
      This isn't any ordinary darkness. It's advanced darkness.
    2. Re:Damn. by Caeda · · Score: 0

      Nah, got enough Dingbats in office already...

      --
      ~~ Please keep your arms, legs, and outright stupidity inside the ride at all times. Thank You ~~
    3. Re:Damn. by sik0fewl · · Score: 1

      Me, too. I just lost 10 bucks.

      --
      I remember when legal used to mean lawful, now it means some kind of loophole. - Leo Kessler
    4. Re:Damn. by Tassach · · Score: 5, Funny

      The 20 point dingbat, with any luck, will be voted out of office this November.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    5. Re:Damn. by Tassach · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      OOOh I'm so chastened: a dittohead moderated me as a troll for calling his beloved Shrub a dingbat. Bring it on, bushbaby... I've got karma to burn.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    6. Re:Damn. by Gareman · · Score: 1

      We now call it "Deeper Darkness." Deeper Darkness Evocation [Darkness] Level: Clr 3 Duration: One day/level (D) This spell functions like darkness, except that the object radiates shadowy illumination in a 60-foot radius and the darkness lasts longer. Daylight brought into an area of deeper darkness (or vice versa) is temporarily negated, so that the otherwise prevailing light conditions exist in the overlapping areas of effect. Deeper darkness counters and dispels any light spell of equal or lower level, including daylight and light.

    7. Re:Damn. by dedalus2000 · · Score: 1

      realy not 1000 points? oh sorry that was a few administrations ago.

      --
      My keyboads not woking popely.
    8. Re:Damn. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The 20 point dingbat, with any luck, will be voted out of office this November.

      Hopefully the 20 point dingbat named Tassach will be voted out of slashdot before his IQ drops even further.

      Stupid whiny liberals...

  4. Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by The+One+KEA · · Score: 3, Informative

    Instead of actually doing something useful, they sit around and argue over the right font to use.

    Dear God.

    --
    SCREW THE ADS! http://adblock.mozdev.org/ Proud user of teh Fox of Fire - Registered Linux User #289618
    1. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by badasscat · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Instead of actually doing something useful, they sit around and argue over the right font to use.

      And we sit around arguing over their arguments. Which is worse?

    2. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Wateshay · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's a jobs program, to help out all of the unemployed fontographers, put out of work by the dot-com bust.

      --

      "If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for everyone else."

    3. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by HMA2000 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Be thankful. It is a good thing we don't get all the government we pay for. :)

    4. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Taxpayers are not paying for us to argue.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    5. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by quantaman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Instead of actually doing something useful, they sit around and argue over the right font to use.

      Yeah, imagine making sure everyone is using a standard font people can read so they can be assured that people will have it on their computer and can view the documents properly!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    6. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The government uses a lot of OCR - more than you would believe. Standardizing on one exact font description makes it far easier to build an OCR engine optimized for speed and accuracy, which in turn saves time and taxpayer dollars. It doesn't seem that unreasonable.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    7. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by kippy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This was a memo, not a $3 million case study. Don't overreact just because it has to do with the government. I'll bet you anything this cost about an hour of someone's time and the cost of emailing their workers and handing out some paper copies.

      If you want to start bitching about where your tax money is going, do some research first.

    8. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by TykeClone · · Score: 1

      Good point - it's better that they waste their time with useless stuff instead of poking their noses into the business of hard working people.

      --
      A fine is a tax you pay for doing wrong and a tax is a fine you pay for doing all right.
    9. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by pointbeing · · Score: 5, Informative
      I work for the federal government. Since not every federal employee can be trusted not to use a magenta scribble font for official correspondence, there needs to be a standard.

      Sad, but true.

      Also, most large corporations have a standard font for official correspondence.

      --
      we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
      -- anais nin
    10. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Since some slashdotters (including myself) work at public university IT departments, and others work for NASA, the taxpayers do indeed pay for us to argue.

    11. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by b17bmbr · · Score: 2, Funny

      actually, i am typing this on the school's computer in my classroom, so, technically, yes, taxpayers are paying me to argue!!

      --
      My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
    12. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are paying me... But I'm not arguing.

    13. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speak for yourself, I work for the Canadian Federal Government. ;)

    14. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by ceeam · · Score: 1

      And Times, 14 uses more toner when printed! Another hit on taxpayers!

    15. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They are subsidizing you to argue.

      The student's tuitions are more or less the ones that are paying you.

    16. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by TopShelf · · Score: 1

      Au contraire - I'm sure a good deal of effort went into this. You have to check with various departments to examine the benefits & liabilities of making such a change, which isn't easy work. It may well have cost plenty, but it's probably well worth the effort as one poster already noted relating to OCR.

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    17. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Jameth · · Score: 1

      It's actually quite important, especially for diplomatic documents. Times is far more readable than courier, and causes less strain on the eyes after prolonged reading. If you are sending these things to people to convince them, you want them to enjoy the experience as much as possible.

      Also, they might not have sat around and argued that long. They might have just decided and done it.

    18. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Mr+Smidge · · Score: 1

      Of course, would it not be better to keep as much correspondance in digitally-stored form as possible?

      I can see sometimes that wouldn't always be possible (slow tech, stubbornness, archiving purposes, all those other rubbish reasons), but what's wrong with Courier New for those other departments? The only advantages making the decision that the article cares to offer is that Times New Roman is "crisper, cleaner, more modern".

    19. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by k98sven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The government uses a lot of OCR - more than you would believe. Standardizing on one exact font description makes it far easier to build an OCR engine optimized for speed and accuracy, which in turn saves time and taxpayer dollars.

      Wait a second.. are you saying that the government is spending lots of time OCRing their own computer documents??

      Now that is a waste of time and money!

    20. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      The little things are important. Standardised fonts make the government look better, make their correspondance easier to read and identify, amongst lots of other small niggling issues. As long as no real time was spent on this, then it's worth changing.

    21. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by lobsterGun · · Score: 5, Informative

      When I was in the military we were required to use a font called OCR-A. It was optimised for the OCR readers they had at the time (the late 80's early 90's). I was nearly 100% accurate when OCR'd - pretty good when you consider that we were OCRing text that was being produced by typewriters that had been in near constant use for 20 years.

      You can see an example of OCR-a it here.

    22. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by romanval · · Score: 1

      I've OCR'd some stuff, believe me, Times isn't as easily OCR-able (is that a word?) as one would believe, especially if the source text has been faxed or copied a few generations.

      But I'm using consumer grade OCR software (Xerox Textbridge), so I dunno what the .gov uses; TMMV.

    23. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I work for the federal government.


      I'm sorry to hear that. You have my condolences.

    24. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Research at whitehouse.gov - blech - whitehouse.com is far more interesting...

    25. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Instead of actually doing something useful, they sit around and argue over the right font to use.

      It's a lot better for all of us. You know the saying: "nobody's safe when the congeres is in session".

    26. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by jshift2work · · Score: 1

      Correct me if i am wrong but arent theese the same people who spent thousands of dollars on hamemrs?

    27. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by NixLuver · · Score: 1

      Oh, you mean the important things like the (later unfunded) "No Child Left Behind"? Or the Social Security SCAM that was run on the American people? Those examples of the wise expenditures of our money you'd like us to research?

    28. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Wateshay · · Score: 3, Funny

      Interesting!?!?!?

      It's not Interesting. It was a freakin' joke!! Geez...

      Sorry for replying to my own post...

      --

      "If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for everyone else."

    29. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by DemoLiter3 · · Score: 1

      But Times is a proportional font! It will be much harder to do ASCII art with it!

    30. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by joebok · · Score: 3, Funny

      When my dad was in the Navy there was a cost-cutting initiative to reduce wasted paper. Somebody noticed that there was a lot of blank space around the edges of typed text and decided that the best way to reduce these margins was to use 8 x 10 1/2 inch paper.

      It was abandoned when they figured out the special sized paper was more expensive. My dad still has a ream of the stuff.

    31. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by happyfrogcow · · Score: 2, Funny

      The big question is, What font did the memo use?

    32. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      Not really. If you can scan in a document sent from across the country in a minute and save a couple hours requesting and/or hunting down the original file, you've increased overall productivity.

      After all, we don't want a universally accessible document store -- that's just begging to be hacked. And moving things on floppys or CDs is too uncertain for government work.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    33. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by jkubecki · · Score: 1
      I was nearly 100% accurate when OCR'd

      Um.... does that mean you can read?

    34. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by BlowChunx · · Score: 2, Funny

      It was probably a bunch of government employees doing the moderation...

    35. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by NickFitz · · Score: 1

      Did they use wider typewriters instead?

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
    36. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I agree with you in principle, but you have to understand that the one thing the US government is tremendously experienced with is moving around massive volumes of paper. They've spent 200 years building a huge infrastructure around the idea of paper trails.

      Now, in the last 10-15 years it's become reasonable to use electronic means to move around large amounts of data between normal sites - that is, those not custom-built around mainframe systems like the original ARPAnet. The government seems to be making strides toward adapting to the new technology, but you have to understand that those giant traditional paper distribution networks can't just be replaced overnight. I'm sure that there are a lot of instances where, at this exact moment in time, it's actually cheaper and more efficient for office "A" to transmit information to office "B" using paper as a carrier medium.

      Remember, "Rome" wasn't built in a day (Heh! An on-topic pun! Ain't I the clever one?). It'll take a while to remodel it to suit the current technology.

      --
      Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    37. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by kippy · · Score: 1

      I don't think you're aware but you agree with me. What I meant was that if you are worried about government waste, read about where the money is going. It's pointless to latch on to stories about little bits of money going here and there while there are big expendures to worry about like the $400 billion defense budget and your aforementioned No Child and Social Security problems.

      Don't worry about the ticks until you've gotten rid of the vampires.

    38. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Instead of actually doing something useful, they sit around and argue over the right font to use.

      And we sit around arguing over their arguments. Which is worse?

      And you sit around arguing over him arguing over their arguments. Which is worse?

      -AC
      --
      Recursive: Adj. See Recursive.

    39. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by kippy · · Score: 1

      You are wrong. That was the department of defense.

    40. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by a1englishman · · Score: 1
      Who is more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows him?

      --Obiwan

    41. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Tree131 · · Score: 0, Troll

      "If English was good enough for Jesus, it's good enough for everyone else."

      Actually, he probably spoke Hebrew, since after all, the bastard lived and was crucified in Israel.

    42. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Tassach · · Score: 1

      I'd rather having them arguing about what fonts to use than arguing about what freedom to curtail today. The more time they spend on useless naval-gazing busywork is less time they spend fouling things up. Inefficiency limits the amount of evil government can do.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    43. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Knowing the government, it's probably consumer grade but a lot more expensive and proprietary.

    44. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we sit around arguing over their arguments.

      No we don't. I'll have you know I'm standing.

    45. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Tassach · · Score: 1

      Considering where and when he allegedly lived, he would probably have spoken Aramaic and Latin as well as Hebrew. IIRC Aramaic was the predominant everyday language used in the middle east & north Africa under the Romans.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    46. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by 4of12 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The government seems to be making strides toward adapting to the new technology

      I'm sure.

      If they're like most corporations in the United States, they'll adopt some official records retention policy that prescribes periodic deletion of old emails and electronic documents.

      The Netscape trial illustrated Microsoft's mistake in keeping old emails around.

      Monica Lewinsky's old emails likewise proved to be an embarrassment for the administration.

      And given Dick Cheney's penchant for secrecy, I'm sure that a lot of historically interesting and relevant emails and documents will be going through an e-shredder in short order.

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    47. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by mirio · · Score: 1

      Or you could check out the 2004 budget.

    48. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 1, Funny

      we work all day, to pay their salaries, we do this on our spare time, they do it on work hours.

      ok,ok, i am at work too :]

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    49. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by gryphokk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      TNR is still a bad font for OCR. Serifs are the greatest obstacle to clean OCR reads, especially when the letters run together, as they tend to do in only one generation of photocopying.

      At 14 point, however, hoepfully it won't be a problem.

      If OCR were a consideration, they should have picked Arial, or some other sans-serif font. (I would recommend Helvetica, but it's not included on the default windows install.)

      But no letters with serifs (feet), please!

      --
      And you, madam, are very ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober.
    50. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by leenoble_uk · · Score: 1

      Sod the font. Have they chosen the border decoration?

    51. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You've never had to talk with the customer's PHB about some program spec yet, have you?

      The tech stuff is easy. They just want the program to do everything _and_ the kitchen sink.

      But what really causes weeks or months of meetings is

      - "should the logo in the corner be exactly 120 pixels or 121 pixels?... no, wait, 119 pixels is just right."

      - Then the fonts which _must_ be 7 pixel Sevenet (or some other non-standard font which is guaranteed not to even be installed on someone's computer, when they point their browser at the site. Bonus points if it's a pain to read.)

      - And it all _must_ comply with some nighmarish corporate scheme that wasn't designed for the net to start with. Actual examples from actual projects I've worked on, include cyan on blue, and light orange on orange-ish yellow. Literally. I'm not making it up.

      - And all the text _must_ always be limited into a 491 pixel wide area, to look the same on everyone's screen as it does on the PHB's laptop, with whatever default non-maximized position his IE remained set as. (God forbid that someone who uses 1600x1200 be actually able to use all that area to read the text.)

      And so on and so forth. It's the stuff managers' dreams are made of. I'm guessing that if you stopped them from spending weeks debating the exact font size and exact logo size and hue, you'd suck all the fun out of management.

      So, well, given that the government's job _is_ to manage... now why am I not surprised? ;)

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    52. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by FaasNat · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dammit! You're right. We should also get paid for this.

      --
      There's never enough when you have too little
    53. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by ThosLives · · Score: 2, Informative

      Aramaic, yes. Latin, no. The other predominant language was Greek.

      --
      "There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
    54. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by kippy · · Score: 1

      Actually, I should have linked to this.

    55. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by visgoth · · Score: 1

      Always two there must be, a master and an apprentice...

      --Yoda

      --
      My patience is infinite, my time is not.
    56. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you seriously suggesting that it's faster to print out a document in the US embassy in, say, New Delhi, FedEx it to Washington, and OCR it there than to encrypt and email the original file?

    57. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Welcome to America. :)

    58. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by tbone1 · · Score: 1
      Look, I'd rather have them doing this than something important. To paraphrase P.J. O'Rourke, the government is an appendix: wasteful when inert, deadly when active.

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
    59. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by bonch · · Score: 1

      Why is it when someone makes a particular announcement, people assume it's all they've done?

      Just because someone decided to make things easier and more readable for all those vast amounts of documents going around doesn't mean all they do is sit around talking about font size, wasting our taxpayers dollars. Give me a break.

    60. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by jrockway · · Score: 1

      Years of research went into Computer Modern for TeX. It's probably the most beautiful and readable font available. Not surprisingly, it's Free, too :)

      And if you look hard there are TT* versions.

      * TrueType AND Teletype :)

      --
      My other car is first.
    61. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by tbone1 · · Score: 1
      I work for the federal government.

      Uh, no. You might draw a paycheck and have an office there, but work for the federal government? Do you seriously expect me to believe that the laws of physics have been sent to /dev/null, Satan has formed a luge team, and that the Cubs just won the World Weries? Hm?

      --

      The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
    62. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Ingolfke · · Score: 1

      Interesting, because in The South we listen to a lot of CCR. Coincidence? I think not.

    63. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by dasmegabyte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, I'm suggesting that if a guy brings a printed document (say, a permit or tax document) into another government office, and you need a digitized version, it's far easier to OCR it than hunt down the original. The government employs a LOT of people, and the fewer people you have to tap to get a specific task done, the more efficient that task becomes. It is easier for citizens to get in and get out of offices if a particular clerk is empowered to do everything they need to do. Even if, occasionally, work is getting done twice.

      Besides, what happens when a file gets corrupt or lost? The price you pay for the efficiency of digital representation is that bits are more delicate than letters. That's why we keep hard copies, after all.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    64. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by phorm · · Score: 1

      Ummmm, we're not being paid taxdollars to do it... and it's our money that's being wasted (well, yours, I'm Canadian so my gov't wastes money in other ways).

    65. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by waif69 · · Score: 1

      For readablity, which is another consideration, a Serif font is much easier to read then a sans-serif font. At least when more than one line is being read.

    66. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by pointbeing · · Score: 1
      Uh, no. You might draw a paycheck and have an office there, but work for the federal government? Do you seriously expect me to believe that the laws of physics have been sent to /dev/null, Satan has formed a luge team, and that the Cubs just won the World Weries? Hm?

      Yes, I expect you to believe it.

      You see that person waving at you from the black helicopter circling above your house? That's me.

      ;-)

      --
      we see things not as as they are, but as we are.
      -- anais nin
    67. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they're like most corporations in the United States, they'll adopt some official records retention policy that prescribes periodic deletion of old emails and electronic documents.

      The government is not a like a corporation. All documents generated by the government, from the annual budget to the deputy chief of staff's grocery list, are the property of the National Archives and Records Administration.

      Nothing is deleted or destroyed. Ever. It's history.

    68. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by nilenico · · Score: 1
      On a slightly related note, on the other side of the world -

      Also, this was the font we were required to print our Swedish giros in, for the Swedish banking system, if we wanted them to be...yes - OCR'ed and handled automatically!

      And we did. It's a lot simpler and a lot faster and we gets our money in a lot quicker.

      I remember having to buy the font to get it to our Norwegian (don't ask) printers.

      --
      .sig? No.
    69. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by LetterJ · · Score: 1

      You might want to install Humor Service Pack 1. It's a joke because so many Christian fundamentalists are also really big on English as the "official" language and this is the exact statement many of them make.

    70. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by C10H14N2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is nothing absurd about setting documentation standards. Half of all policies and procedures sound silly until you imagine an organization running without them. Suddenly your legislation turns up on perfumed pink antique laid with MS Script type instead of Times Roman on white bond.

    71. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by 4of12 · · Score: 1

      Nothing is deleted or destroyed. Ever. It's history.

      I'm glad that's the official policy, anyway. Accountability is served when government officials can not revise history (as authoritarian governments have been wont).

      Nevertheless, this FCW article says:

      "Electronic files that qualify as records, particularly in the form of e-mail, and also word processing and spreadsheet documents, are not being kept at all as records in many cases," NARA reported.

      The use of e-mail for official business "has increased exponentially," according to the report, but "e-mail is generally not captured" in recordkeeping systems.
      Use of email and electronic documents has really boomed since about 1990 or so.

      The side effect, apart from saving trees and increasing efficienc, has been to allow government operations to become even more hidden, (verbal communications have provided a largely hidden channel since before the advent of electronic documentation).

      --
      "Provided by the management for your protection."
    72. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      Besides, what happens when a file gets corrupt or lost? The price you pay for the efficiency of digital representation is that bits are more delicate than letters. That's why we keep hard copies, after all.

      No - that is why you keep offsite backups...

      I always am amazed when companies are hesitant to spend money on backup tapes and off-site storage, and yet they spend lots of money to put up buildings so they can fill them with closet-loads of hard-copies for all eternity.

      Which takes up less space, a backup tape, or the equivalent hard-copies? Sure, the backup tape is more fragile, so you make 25 of them in put them in different places. It would still take less space than the hardcopies...

    73. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by PudriK · · Score: 1

      Being currently a govt employee, I can say, "he speaketh the truth." Being a computer type person, I am very good about keeping all my files in electronic format on the computer, and my file cabinets are mostly empty.

      However, many of my older colleagues are not as familiar or comfortable with using electronic documents, and they prefer to have paper copies. Also, there are many old documetns which were not migrated from our legacy computer systems when we switched to a MS based platform. So if I need to edit a dcument from 1995, OCR is likely the only option.

      In addition, we frequently receive documents from other agencies or contractors in paper form without accompanying CD or disk. OCR is the only way to incorporate these documents into another document for distribution.

      It doesn't happen often. So infrequently that we actually got rid of our OCR scanner recently, so I have had to use my own scanner. Which reminds me, the reason I got the scnaner in the first place. My boss at my first unit wanted me to make electronic a 400 page manual from c. 1982. He expected my to type it all in by hand... that lasted about two pages before I shelled out for a scanner and OCR software.

      Of course, being green at the time, I didn't realize I could have brought the document into where I currently work and had it scanned. Live and learn.

    74. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Tassach · · Score: 1

      It was my understanding that middle and late period Romans used Greek the way Medieval Europeans used Latin. That is to say, it was used primarly by literate and educated people for formal and scholarly works, not as an everyday converstational language. I could be mis-remembering -- my Ancient History coursework is, well, ancient history.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    75. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by kabocox · · Score: 1

      It's government. We are attempting to reduce our paper work our selves. We are a local police department with a "newly purchased" (2-3 years old) RMS. We have one individual that gets paper copies of all the police reports. Why? So she can look through them and put UCR data into an Access database! Arrgg. We can query off that RMS. She also sorts those papers for 3 others. All the accident reports get sent to the front desk sec. to be typed into another access database. We are required to use the state form and aren't currently using accident reporting. She sends off all juv. stuff to the Jun. Corre. Facility, after she is finished with all these papers she sends them all to 2 guys that are working under a grant. They look through all reports for anyone arrested or involved in several areas send them on to some one else, the rest they goes to the trash. Most of these people have full access to the RMS! There was a project bejore the RMS to scan most of the reports as JPGs and leave it at that. I'm amazed government works as well as it does.

    76. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      The government uses a lot of OCR - more than you would believe. Standardizing on one exact font description makes it far easier to build an OCR engine...

      True enough, but they already had a standard font (Courier). And Courier, being monospaced, and with no fiddly serifs (it has thick square-edged ones) is much easier to OCR than Times -- when I've done it (not frequently, I admit) I get zero errors with Courier, vs at least a few percent in any other font -- and if it's gone through a fax machine, the error rate goes up more.

      Humans, OTOH, do generally read Times more easily than Courier.

    77. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      But what really causes weeks or months of meetings is
      - "should the logo in the corner be exactly 120 pixels or 121 pixels?... no, wait, 119 pixels is just right."
      You got it. We're currently doing a redesign of some pages targeted at PDAs to conform to this year's corporate design. And once again, we get a beautiful piece of HTML from corporate design that looks superb on the desktop, and is unusable on the PDAs, so we have to darken the fill colors, adjust the fonts, get rid of CSS, etc.

      I think this is what someone (Prof Parkinson, of the eponymous Law, perhaps?) characterised as the bycycle-stand syndrome: the big issues get nodded through because only a few people understand them, but get down to the little things that everyone can have an opinion on, and (OMG) everyone does.

      Oh well, let's see if making that background a little bluer will make people happier... I took a degree to spend my time on this?

    78. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Enahs · · Score: 1

      Actually, English at the time of King James. Some Baptists are deluded into thinking that King James is the one and only true translation. I've heard Baptists call the King James translation of the Bible the "Real Bible."

      --
      Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
    79. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      Whoa. You can offsite as much as you like. The government does. But the fact is, you can't beat a good filing system and hard copies for pure redundancy. What if the power goes out? What if your computers are compromised and you can't trust them to restore your data? What if there's a problem with your backup tape head sync, and all the tapes can only be read by the unit that made them -- which is slowly dying (I've had this happen to me).

      I used to work in the hard copy repository for the NY criminal justice system...so many file folders in so many filing cabinets that the floor was caving in. All of the data was digitized, and yet there was enough work in maintaining the digitized database's accuracy and integrity to employ 20 file runners, plus summer help to purge unneeded records (duplicates, records of people that have been dead for three years or longer, etc).

      A database is a beautiful thing, but it is not yet able to replace paper. They have only been around in government for about 10 or 15 years...hardly long enough to prove their reliability.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    80. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by geoffspear · · Score: 1
      Well, classical Greek (primarily Attic, the language of all of the Athenian works of literature and philosophy) was still used by the educated people for scholarly works. The common people used the Koine dialect of Greek, which is what the New Testament was written in.

      Jesus almost certainly would not have known either Latin or the scholarly dialects of Greek.

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    81. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by geoffspear · · Score: 1

      Wow, how much did it cost your department to buy Richard Stallman?

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
    82. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell, this is because PHB's can't understand many, many technical issues. However, minor formatting issues provide an almost unlimited source for work that an almost completely unskilled person can criticize and understand -- i.e. them. Hence, massive amount of effort is blown on formatting efforts.

    83. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by NixLuver · · Score: 1

      LOL! Ok, then, you're probably right, we do agree, sort of, except that I'll gladly pick ticks off when there aren't any vampires within reach.. :)

    84. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by kippy · · Score: 1

      In that case be sure to write your congressman and senators soon. the budget for '05 is being debated and unless you make yourself heard, the ticks and the vamipres will both go to town. Without participation, complaint is useless.

    85. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by mysticgoat · · Score: 1

      dasmegabyte, you have a strange and subtle sense of humor.

      I like it.

    86. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by NixLuver · · Score: 1
      I agree, but I think we need to shoot all the lobbyists and reform campaign finance before letter-writing campaigns can become truely effective.

      But I still agree, and am, in spite of the sense of futility.

    87. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Marduk45 · · Score: 1

      On once contract we had with the government, we automated all communications between our employees, but if when we presented the final reports, we'd e-mail them to our employee who was working in one of their buildings, and he'd have to print out each piece (which was a Word DOC, some images of court documents that had been faxed to us, and some images of handwritten statements), then take the report to one desk, and the attachments to another desk, where they would be scanned back into their system. So, yes, they OCR a lot, but they also re-scan printed images that were already submitted in the correct format to be imported into their systems, therefore making them even harder to read, if they ever found their way back into the original report to begin with. I can see using TNR 14 as an improvement in legibility for documents that are going to be printed, scanned, printed, scanned, faxed, printed, and scanned again.

    88. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To be really picky, I'd point out that the AV is in fact deliberately archaic; the language it uses reflects that of fifty or sixty years before the accession of James VI of Scotland/I of England.

    89. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Years of research went into Computer Modern for TeX. It's probably the most beautiful and readable font available. Not surprisingly, it's Free, too :)

      Personally I find Computer Modern looks clunky and naive. But maybe I just don't have a very good eye for fonts. (I hate Times New Roman too... Palatino all the way!)

    90. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by EverDense · · Score: 1

      Dammit! You're right. We should also get paid for this.

      You mean, you don't?
      I factor Slashdot reading into my project estimates.

      --
      http://jesus.everdense.com/
    91. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by the_2nd_coming · · Score: 1

      well, since we pay the taxes with our incomes, and by our sitting around, we are being less productive, we cause a slump in the tax revenue so yes, tax payers are getting hurt by us not being productive.

      --



      I am the Alpha and the Omega-3
    92. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >

      Actually, there's good reason for that. You ever wonder why newspapers have columns? Because after a certain width the reader begins losing their place, which results in re-reading or skipping lines. Most professional websites also limit the width of their text for the same reason. It's easier to read, and more aesthetically pleasing, which results in a "better web experience" or whatever buzzword you might use.

      Same reason people use paragraphs; so you're not lost in a sea of text.

      Also, I've asked this before: what's someone with their resolution set at 1600x1200 doing running fullscreen web browsers? Unless you're doing design work, there's no reason to put that real estate to waste.

    93. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, retrying this, because I'm retarded.

      - And all the text _must_ always be limited into a 491 pixel wide area, to look the same on everyone's screen as it does on the PHB's laptop, with whatever default non-maximized position his IE remained set as. (God forbid that someone who uses 1600x1200 be actually able to use all that area to read the text.)

      Actually, there's good reason for that. You ever wonder why newspapers have columns? Because after a certain width the reader begins losing their place, which results in re-reading or skipping lines. Most professional websites also limit the width of their text for the same reason. It's easier to read, and more aesthetically pleasing, which results in a "better web experience" or whatever buzzword you might use.

      Same reason people use paragraphs; so you're not lost in a sea of text.

      Also, I've asked this before: what's someone with their resolution set at 1600x1200 doing running fullscreen web browsers? Unless you're doing design work, there's no reason to put that real estate to waste.

    94. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by aamcf · · Score: 1
      You ever wonder why newspapers have columns? Because after a certain width the reader begins losing their place, which results in re-reading or skipping lines.

      That is why browser windows are adjustable: that way I can set my browser window to display the text at the width I find most convenient for me, rather than the width that is on average best for everyone.

      Also, I've asked this before: what's someone with their resolution set at 1600x1200 doing running fullscreen web browsers? Unless you're doing design work, there's no reason to put that real estate to waste.

      I used to work with a huge monitor set at some insanely high resolution. However, I had to set the (logical) pixels per inch to something non-standard so I could read text. Web pages that had nice fluid designs adapted easily. Web pages that had fixed pixel width designs ended up with one or two words per line.

      Yes, I probably could have reconfigured my machine some other way to read web pages, but the beauty of HTML and CSS is that, when used correctly, they adapt to the users needs, not vice versa.

    95. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by FurryFeet · · Score: 1


      Perhaps they found it interesting that you considered that a joke?
      A car wreck IS interesting, after all...
      </troll>

    96. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Frizzle+Fry · · Score: 1

      It was moderated way too quickly for that. If it were a government job, we'd have to wait months before that comment received its +1 Interesting.

      --
      I'd rather be lucky than good.
    97. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by UserGoogol · · Score: 1

      Perhaps, but wouldn't Courier New have been easier to OCR? Monospaced fonts probably make that sort of thing much easier.

      --
      "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." -- Hanlon's Razor
    98. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by dasmegabyte · · Score: 1

      ah thanks. it's nice to know somebody's listening.

      --
      Hey freaks: now you're ju
    99. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      Mod you up!! Every body knows the Real Bible was the words of Jesus written by King James!!! How dare you suggest it was written by a bunch of arabs.... that's unamerican and unpatriotic...you may hope the televangelist is willing to bless your soul for any amount of money.

      Note: that was just for fun... The majority of the OT is written in Hebrew starting with the first books by Moses. The NT is primarily Aramaic, greek and perhaps Latin. They were just letters written by Galiean fishermen [northern Israel/southern Lebenon] who primarily spoke aramaic..except for Paul who was a roman citizen so knew greek [macedonia] and latin [Rome] and wrote letters specifically to those areas in their own language.

    100. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      Duh, it would use Courier! Because you have to type out and send the memo in offical format. Of course memo is immediately obsolete and would need to be retyped in TNR...so would they distribute the original version, or the TNR version? Which gets stored for posteity?

      Now what would happen if the original memo also mentioned putting a cat in a sealed box? I'm getting dizy...

    101. Re:Yeah, nice use of taxdollars. by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Aamcf already said it, but here goes again: don't decide for me what I should do to my eyes.

      I run in 1600x1200, yes, but I also have the fonts set to large fonts. Also because, unlike so many people dead set on ruining their eyes, I like to keep a good 3 ft between my eyes and the monitor, instead of having to squint from half a foot away to read tiny text.

      Sometimes it's not about "screen estate", it's about comfort. About being able to read that site without getting an eye sore.

      Unlike paper or farm land, "screen estate" is _not_ some limited resource that gets consumed or "wasted", or which you pay for by square foot used. Unlike paper, where each square inch costs and once printed it's "wasted", here we're talking a resource which is reused 85 times per second. Plus on the same screen I can stack 200 windows on top of each other, if I so choose, effectively multiplying that screen estate by 200.

      So, no offense, but you can get out of the mentality that "ooh, must not waste pixels. There are hungry children in Elbonia who'd die for those tasty pixels."

      Either way, _I_ will use all that screen estate to make my life more comfortable. "Maximize my web experience", if you want the buzzword version of it.

      Also unlike paper, here you actually have no control over the size of the fonts on _my_ screen. When you print a book or brochure in 10 point Garamond, everyone sees the exact same 10/72 inch letters. On a screen it's not the case. What you see is _not_ what the user gets.

      Here's some simple maths: if you're running 800x600 on a 17" CRT (about 15" visible), and I'm running 1600x1200 on a 21" CRT (about 19" visible), those 7 pixel fonts will be 1/2 * 19/15 = only 63% as big on my screen as they are on yours.

      I.e., all those retards who insist on fixed pixel sizes for their tiny fonts (which usually goes hand in hand with limitting the column width), actually inflict discomfort upon me. Far from being a "better web experience", it's an experience which I'd rather avoid if I have a choice.

      So here's an idea: let _me_ decide how big I want my fonts to be. Let _me_ decide how wide a column I want that text in. As was said, there's a reason why browser windows are resizable, _and_ why Internet Explorer has the CTRL-Scrollwheel functionality. Let me use them to fit _my_ taste and needs.

      Or to put it otherwise: it's my screen estate, not yours. If you want to save your pixels for the starving kids in Elbonia, go ahead. But let me take care of mine, as _I_ see fit.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  5. in further news, by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Funny

    the government declared- thumbtwiddling is now the offical activity to perform when you cannot think of useless directives.

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:in further news, by sbowles · · Score: 1

      The use of a thinner font has caused Pulp and Paper stocks to plummet.

      --
      You sly dog: you got me monologuing! - Syndrome
    2. Re:in further news, by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      A government mandate decrees that all thumbtwiddling shall be done in a reverse-polish motion. (yeah, just try to figure that one out).

      :)frogMOO!
  6. Wow! This is coming from "the department" by HMA2000 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Does this department have a name or can we assume that this is THE department?

    1. Re:Wow! This is coming from "the department" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      From the article we can see it is STATE or rather the "US State Department".

      As an aside it is nice to see them standardizing on a font that is modern and is just as OCR friendly as courier if not more so. Perhaps soon they will standardize SGML as their across the board typed file format, just as most of the world has for a decade. I do wonder though if 14pt is just a tad too big. Hmm guess it is time to buy some stock in printing supply companies.

  7. Yes by 0x54524F4C4C · · Score: 1, Funny


    It's time for the new rome to fall.

    1. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      This is a Troll. Overseas, the US is oft referred to as the "New Roman Empire". Please mod down.

    2. Re:Yes by jiffah · · Score: 1

      "Never mind." said Ford. "Rome wasn't burned in a day."

    3. Re:Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice to see pundits like you invoking so promptly the moderation rule that sets as TROLL any message that bashes the us or americans. Keep doing the good job, and keep selling your body for karma.

  8. 14 point? by ed.han · · Score: 5, Interesting

    why so big? isn't 10 the default standard for most written communication?

    ed

    1. Re:14 point? by SILIZIUMM · · Score: 4, Funny

      Old guys don't see very well anymore.

    2. Re:14 point? by bucket74 · · Score: 1

      why so big? isn't 10 the default standard for most written communication?

      RTFA - it said one of their goals was to "increase readability." All that dishonesty must be bad for the eyes....

    3. Re:14 point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Diplomats are usually older persons and the size 14 is good for reading even if you forget your glasses.

    4. Re:14 point? by mlensenm · · Score: 1

      10 point type is a little small for older eyes. Once in the dreaded '40's, the eyes don't like small type like they once did. People I work with like 12-point type. I agree with some others that 14 seems a little large, but they claim it takes up just about the same space as Courier 12.

    5. Re:14 point? by Otter · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I'd propose changing this to 12 point New Roman and saving probably millions of dollars of paper per year.

    6. Re:14 point? by MarkGriz · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Re:14 point? why so big? isn't 10 the default standard for most written communication?"

      Most likely aggressive lobbying by the pulp and paper industry.

      --
      Beauty is in the eye of the beerholder.
    7. Re:14 point? by Stalus · · Score: 1

      14 seems a little large, but they claim it takes up just about the same space as Courier 12

      My first reaction was that they this was another effect of people not sticking to font standards. 12 points = 1 pica = 1/6 of an inch height, which I have often seen ignored. Surprisingly enough, in Word, these two fonts are about the same height.. the difference is that Times is narrower. So I guess they went with a taller version to maintain about the same amount of info per page, and perhaps make it easier to read in the process.

    8. Re:14 point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Their desktop size is set to 1600x1200 on a 15" monitor.

    9. Re:14 point? by Glassbear · · Score: 1

      You laugh, but this is, in all likelihood a big part of the actual reason. A few years back, for example, they amended the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure to require 14-point type in all legal briefs filed with the federal courts of appeals. Federal judges = old guys (and a few old gals) = deteriorating eyesight.

      --
      [insert randomly selected declaration of absolutist meta-moderation philosophy here]
    10. Re:14 point? by hankwang · · Score: 4, Informative
      12 points = 1 pica = 1/6 of an inch height, which I have often seen ignored.

      The point size of a font refers to the height of the ancient lead type, where every letter is sitting on a rectangular piece of lead. Some fonts are designed to never reach the borders of that rectangle, i.e. a parenthesis "(" in a 12-point font can actually be a bit less than 12 pt high. Only if a "(" is more than the specified 12pt, then something is really wrong.

      Furthermore, 12 points are NOT the same as 1/6 inch. There are actually 72.27 (American printer's) points in an inch, but someday, Adobe decided that for digital typesetting, a round number such as 72 points per inch was easier. (The number 72.27 pt/in is easy to remember, but that is pure coincidence. See point units.)

    11. Re:14 point? by MissMarvel · · Score: 1

      At first I wondered at the rather large font size too, but after giving it some thought I decided it must be because of all the politicians who are of advanced age. Think about it. How many members of the legislature are over 60? Can't have a bunch of senators reading their correspondance with magnifying glasses, now can we?

    12. Re:14 point? by bkhl · · Score: 1

      I'd say it is, since it's the norm for books and most newspapers.

    13. Re:14 point? by smchris · · Score: 1

      I say "Thank Goodness". Somehow, years after the fact, the 800x600 standard is working its way through the ranks of web designers and creating web pages that have absolutely and totally unreadable type.

      Special award to those who frame the main body text so the Mozilla "minimum font" setting can't touch it. You hate your company and want it to fail? Congratulations. You've created a worthless site.

      And, yes, I blame Microsoft a little for setting 10 pt. as the default. "Look, Word is better! More words per page with Microsoft!" What could be better than Microsoft? Well, even smaller of course! Darn pretty layout of totally unreadable lines of fly droppings you got there, Rube.

    14. re:14 point? by ed.han · · Score: 1

      well, at least the median age dropped since strom thurmond's retirement a while back... :>

      ed

    15. Re:14 point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      dude, wellesley 85-86?

    16. Re:14 point? by PsychoKick · · Score: 1

      There Is No Lumber Cartel. :P

    17. Re:14 point? by westlake · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be of "advanced age" before your eye doctor mentions the dreaded word "bifocals!" This from someone who took a lot of kidding when they were first prescribed.

    18. Re:14 point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      why so big? isn't 10 the default standard for most written communication?

      No, but 10 is the default size for Microsoft Word, unless you change the default.

      I prefer 12 point for ordinary text.

    19. Re:14 point? by Sir_gout · · Score: 1

      I was always told size 14 was for special needs. Oh hold on a minute, that sounds about right.

    20. Re:14 point? by jsebrech · · Score: 2, Funny

      why so big? isn't 10 the default standard for most written communication?

      I find it kind of ironic that the only people using times new roman 14 will be government employees and high school students trying to fill at least two pages with text.

    21. Re:14 point? by halo8 · · Score: 1

      Ya.. thats what theyd like us to think

      OR.. thats what YOUD Like us to think!!!

      im watching you PsychoKick

      --
      The More Knowledge you have the Luckier you Get- J.R. Ewing
    22. Re:14 point? by jeepmeister · · Score: 1

      Mind sending me an email? Linotype, Intertype, old school newspaper guy.

      craig.m.swanson@kp.org.

      --

      I don't need no estinkin' .sig
      Jeepmeister
    23. Re:14 point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not just the old guys who don't like the 10 point....it's frickin hard to read, even for some of us young folk. Beyond that, most of us aren't reading government documents, so why do we care which font they are in? Again, this is just another way in which the government abuses its power and gets us thinking about the pointless stuff, so we are unable to think about the real issues. The street crime, the sex scandals and the font we use,it is all just stuff to numb our minds to the things that matter: economics, corruption, foreign policy...

    24. Re:14 point? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean old white guys.

    25. Re:14 point? by gluckmac · · Score: 1

      As a DOD Contractor I can tell you that we print a draft document over and over until it is ready to be submitted in hard or soft copy formats.

      A larger font size means more paper will be used, and that means more paper will be bought for the "paperless office."

      After all, they have to do something with the timber from all the trees on the new firebreaks and access roads. Not to mention the underbrush.

      There may not be a timber or lumber cartel, but what about a paper cartel. Obviously we are not using enough TP.

  9. Slow news day? by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not to be petty or anything, but just how slow of a news day does it have to be when a font change is considered newsworthy?

    --
    In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
    1. Re:Slow news day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, really, couldn't they at least figure out a way to construe this as some evil plot by Microsoft? What's the matter, /.? You're slipping!

    2. Re: Slow news day? by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > Not to be petty or anything, but just how slow of a news day does it have to be when a font change is considered newsworthy?

      Think of the children!

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:Slow news day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Times New Roman is an evil Microsoft embrace-n-extend font. The industry standard is "Times".

      Why isn't everyone here using this as opportunity to flame Microsoft? What's wrong with you people!?

    4. Re:Slow news day? by R.Caley · · Score: 1
      Just how slow of a news day does it have to be when a font change is considered newsworthy?

      That depends how quickly SCO move to point out they own the copyright on TNR (because someone once found it installed on a Unix machine).

      --
      _O_
      .|<
      The named which can be named is not the true named
    5. Re:Slow news day? by kindbud · · Score: 1

      Yeah, no kidding. Why, I just submitted a story about how TiVo measured the most rewinds evber when Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunctioned during the SuperBowl halftime show, but they rejected it.

      Raise your hand if you'd rather read a story connecting Janet's bare boob to record-breaking TiVo demographics, or a font change at the government. Sheesh!

      --
      Edith Keeler Must Die
    6. Re:Slow news day? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are assuming that a font change is trivial. HA! I am editing a 11MEG document and about 8 others as part of a contract with a Federal agency. Have you experienced the problems with MS-word when doing such a massive change?

    7. Re:Slow news day? by Rary · · Score: 1
      At first glance it may not seem like "stuff that matters", but it's attracted more comments than any other item on the main page at this point in time.

      In case you needed proof that geeks are an odd bunch.....

      --

      "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." -- Albert Einstein

  10. some liberial reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    "New Roman Times"
    Long live the empire.

  11. What else is news? by shlomo · · Score: 0, Troll

    I'm not sure I get why this is posted on slashdot?
    is switching fonts some type fo huge technilogical leap for the government?

    --
    sorry officer, left my sig in my other computer.
    1. Re:What else is news? by tommck · · Score: 1

      Yes! The spell checker was also a huge teknillogikal leap :-)

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  12. 14? by Abit667 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    God, thats gigantic, are these guys blind or something? Think of how much paper they would save going to 10.

    1. Re:14? by Akasha · · Score: 1

      It's the AARP, attempting to force the world to conform to their expectations. In a few years, the font size will go to 20, 4 o'clock dinner times will be federally enforced, and Matlock will be the official TV show of the nation.

      --
      --Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. -Arthur C. Clarke
    2. Re:14? by Trolling4Columbine · · Score: 1

      A lot of the old bats and goats that the government communicates with (Medicare forms, anyone?) can't see 2 feet in front of themselves. Documents HAVE to be in large font; otherwise they can't read them!

      --
      Socialism: A feeling of discontent and resentment caused by a desire for the possessions or qualities of another.
  13. Times New Roman? Yuck. by adamvjackson · · Score: 5, Funny

    I would think Verdana or Tahoma would be a much better solution. Times New Roman is SOOO Windows 3.1! :)

    1. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Ilgaz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Verdana and Tahoma are screen fonts. Georgia, Times, Arial are print fonts.

    2. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by adamvjackson · · Score: 1

      Thank you for the clarification, I wasn't aware of any difference.

    3. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by kiwimate · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sorry, but not true. Both Verdan and Tahoma are sans serif fonts, whereas Times New Roman is a serif font. A very common guideline for readability is that body text should use a serif font; sans serif fonts are better for titles.

    4. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by afree87 · · Score: 1

      No, Windows 3.1 is MS Sans Serif.

    5. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by DMCBOSTON · · Score: 1

      And all this time I thought they were using webdings...

    6. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by MCZapf · · Score: 1

      I've heard that, generally, serif fonts are easier to read on paper, and sans-serif fonts are easier to read on screen. This may be less of an issue with today's high-resolution displays and edge-smoothing of fonts (or whatever it's called).

    7. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by akgoel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Serif fonts offer increased readability for native English speakers. People who have picked up English as a second language do better with sans serif fonts.

    8. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by dara · · Score: 1
      Verdana and Tahoma are screen fonts.

      It is true that these fonts are optimized for the screen (see e.g. http://www.will-harris.com/verdana-georgia.htm), but I don't believe that makes them a bad choice for paper also. Some claim that serif fonts (e.g. Times New Roman) are a bit easier to read on paper, but I print everything in Verdana and I find it easier to read on paper as well.

      Government users send a lot of electronic documents as well, they may as well settle on a font that does both well.

      Georgia, Times, Arial are print fonts.

      I hate Georgia for the misaligned numbers and I hate all these fonts for the poor one, 'el' and 'oo', zero differentiation. (Nonmono Bitstream Vera fonts have the same problem.)

      It's too bad the STIX fonts project isn't ready (is it dead? the webpage is very old). It might have been a good choice also.

      Dara

    9. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Ivan+Karamazov · · Score: 1

      Actually, Georgia is also a screen font. Verdana (sans serif) and Georgia (serif) were specifically designed to be easy to read on-screen. Georgia does not look good on paper, it comes out too dark. Verdana looks like crap on paper but great on-screen. Tahoma is actually just Verdana Narrow. Both Times New Roman and Arial are designed for print. Unfortunately they are both overused and ugly. Can't we get anything new?

      --
      "The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy." Albert Camus,
    10. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 0

      I Don't Use X11, You insensitive Clod!

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    11. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A very common guideline for readability is that body text should use a serif font; sans serif fonts are better for titles.

      Yes and no. That's true for high resolution media such as print media, but low resolution media such as a typical computer screen will not be able to render serifs clearly enough for small text to be anything other than counter-productive - which means that larger text such as headings are the only pieces of text that serif fonts should be considered for.

      Having said that, I hope this guideline doesn't apply to the web. If no font is specified whatsoever, it appears in the typeface and size I have configured my browser to use, and so any fiddling with the font is going to be counter-productive.

    12. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an utter crock of shit, and you know it. I double-dog-dare you to produce one piece of solid evidence that supports that claim.

      It has nothing to do with English. It has to do with being able to recognize letterforms quickly. In fact, serif type is easier for people who don't even speak the language. Compare a serif Traditional Chinese font to a sans-serif one. The serif one is easier to "read" even though you have no idea what the symbols mean.

    13. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by kisielk · · Score: 1

      That sounds like an interesting theory, do you have any links to back that up?

    14. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by TKinias · · Score: 1

      scripsit akgoel:

      Serif fonts offer increased readability for native English speakers. People who have picked up English as a second language do better with sans serif fonts.

      Huh? That's certainly a new one. Perhaps you mean people whose native language uses a non-Western writing system do better with sans serif fonts? I can see how that might be the case, but only for a real beginner. When I taught ESL to Arabs, all but the most remedial students (who probably had literacy problems in Arabic, too) had enough exposure to the alphabet that it was pretty much second-nature to read it, unless they got dealt very weird fonts or handwriting.

      English is my first language. I sure as hell don't want to read French in Arial, though, any more than I want to read English in it. I don't see why the reverse wouldn't be true for a Frenchman reading English.

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    15. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      we can use helvetica, the pretty font that arial ripped-off

    16. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      What do you mean by this? I used to do type support and both Tahoma and Verdanna have actual printer outlines...

    17. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm partial to Lucida Sans (with or without Unicode, but the Unicode version looks better both on the screen and on paper, IMO), myself. I'm no graphic artist, but that and Garamond are my favorite fonts.

      Mmmm... Apple Garamond... mmm... lawsuit...

    18. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Przepla · · Score: 1

      I hate Georgia for the misaligned numbers.
      As a matter of fact I use Georgia everywhere except programming mostly because of those misaligned (old-style) numerals. They are blend with lowercase letters perfecly and give this cute pre-computer touch to text. In fact I am reading Slashdot in Georgia.

      --
      When in doubt, go to the library. - Ron Weasley in Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets
    19. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by why+cant+i+get+the+n · · Score: 1

      HEY!! I happen to like Windows 3.1

      It's the only Windows I like.

    20. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HUH?
      What are you on?

    21. Re:Times New Roman? Yuck. by tunah · · Score: 1

      Is this true for screen as well as print? I always change the default browser fonts to sans serif, I (think I) find it easier to read.

      --
      Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
  14. Sounds like somebody was slacking on their essays. by Manhigh · · Score: 1, Funny

    Are they using 1.1 inch margins and 1.5x line spacing too?

    --
    "Open the pod by doors, Hal" > "I'm afraid I can't do that, Dave" sudo "Open the pod bay doors, Hal" > alright
  15. 12 pt. by Chess_the_cat · · Score: 0, Redundant

    That's pretty large type. I'd suggest buying stock in pulp and paper because the government will be buying stacks of it to accommodate type that large.

    --
    Support the First Amendment. Read at -1
    1. Re:12 pt. by eples · · Score: 1

      Actually, it's the same paper area for both fonts. Courier New is a fixed width font, which means it runs a lot wider than Times New Roman and takes up more paper area.

      Try it yourself - it's much more readable.

      --
      I'm a 2000 man.
    2. Re:12 pt. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually not as much as you would think. Courier is a fixed font and Times New Roman is proportional, which makes up for the point size change somewhat. I pasted a bunch of English text into Word in each font size and trimmed it down to one page. Courier New 12 gave me 1918 characters on the page; Times New Roman 14 gave me 1941.

    3. Re:12 pt. by vasqzr · · Score: 1


      The real reason for using Times is that its easier to read, because it's proportional.

      As far as characters per page, it depends. What was the text?

      WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
      WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

      llllllllllllllllll
      llllllllllllllllll

  16. How appropriate by jxs2151 · · Score: 5, Funny
    "...are moving to a new standard font: 'Times New Roman..."

    How appropriate since we are apparently the New Rome .

    1. Re:How appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and we all know what happened to the roman empire don't we.....

    2. Re:How appropriate by HeridFel · · Score: 1
      That is a VERY scary website... I wonder what percentage of Americans actually believe that sh*t.

      The bit that really got my head shaking was the "Imagine being tried in a foreign country by an international court". (pot, kettle and black?)

      What planet are these yahoos from?

      Tell me this stuff isn't taught in schools but is rather the sort of sectarian nonsense that people pick up from parents...

    3. Re:How appropriate by Mortgage.ysp · · Score: 1

      ROFLMFAO

    4. Re:How appropriate by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      And what points do you think are incorrect?

    5. Re:How appropriate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not bad ... considering that the modern civilization as we know it can be tracked back to Rome...

    6. Re:How appropriate by dustmite · · Score: 1

      Yes, they had probably one of the world's most successful empires that lasted about 1000 years.

    7. Re:How appropriate by dustmite · · Score: 1

      That isn't the point, the incredible hypocrisy is the point. (The apparent belief of that group that the US has the right to do unto others what those others should definitely not have the right to do to them).

    8. Re:How appropriate by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > one of the world's most successful empires that lasted about 1000 years.

      Sweet, that gives us at least another 700 years!

  17. Re:What about by PhotoBoy · · Score: 1, Funny

    Shhh, Wingdings is the new crytographic encoding method for top secret documents, replacing the good old double-ROT13 encoding used during the Cold War.

  18. The real reason by ArcticPuppy · · Score: 5, Funny

    The word "Oil" is often misintepreted as "Weapons of Mass Destruction" when written in Courier New 12.

    1. Re:The real reason by afree87 · · Score: 0

      As opposed to your post, which is -1 Troll

    2. Re:The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      looks to be +5 funny, to me...

    3. Re:The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > As opposed to your post, which is -1 Troll

      What was the point of posting that comment?

      Operation Iraqi Liberation "dead grunt" update: 543
      (http://cryptome.org/mil-dead-iqw.htm)

      "Shall we send out military taps for dead grunt #543?"
      "No need - there are millions more where he came from"

      (Apologies to Gilbert Shelton)

    4. Re:The real reason by jshift2work · · Score: 1

      speaking of that pot and the kettle

    5. Re:The real reason by Zeinfeld · · Score: 5, Funny
      The word "Oil" is often misintepreted as "Weapons of Mass Destruction" when written in Courier New 12.

      Ever wondered why the Bushies did not use the name 'Operation Iraqi Liberation'?

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    6. Re:The real reason by TR0GD0RtheBURNiNAT0R · · Score: 1
      So, what gets misinterpreted into "weapons of mass destruction-related program activities"?

      --
      This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    7. Re:The real reason by scarolan · · Score: 1

      You may laugh, but my company received a bid request from Halliburton, for project RIO. Project RIO stands for:

      "Recover Iraqi Oil"

      Just in case anyone had doubts about the real purpose behind dubya's war.

    8. Re:The real reason by whovian · · Score: 1

      Opportune Imperialism Landgrab.

      --
      To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
  19. Fontifier by SamSeaborn · · Score: 1
    The official font should be George W. Bush's own printing run through www.fontifier.com.

    Sam Seaborn

  20. New Plan by trp642 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    1. Patent technology for adding serifs to fonts.
    2. Sue government & the world for buckets of money.
    3. ???
    4. Profit!!!

    1. Re:New Plan by Darken_Everseek · · Score: 1

      3. Lose entire net worth in lawsuits, however, with cash from the resulting book deal

  21. Copyright? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Who owns the copyright to Times New Roman? Are there any licensing issues involved in this decision?

    1. Re:Copyright? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      I always thought Times New Roman was a font that MS recreated based on the classic "Times" font, to avoid trademark issues with the name.

      Font intellectual property is a sticky morass of trademark, patent, and copyright issues, and I sure don't have a good grasp of all of it, so don't take my word for it.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Copyright? by WillAdams · · Score: 5, Informative

      Times New Roman is owned by Monotype Corporation.

      There's a ``gentleman's agreement'' w/ Linotype Corporation which allows them to use / produce ``Times'' (For the backstory on this, look up an article published in the APHA's journal and Walter Tracy's wonderful book _Letters of Credit_).

      However, URW did a clone of Times (Nimbus Serif, I believe it's provided as), which they've since made freely available (see the link to this at www.tug.org) and which can be easily used in free systems such as TeX, and is readily installable w/ XFree86 so that one may use it w/ Linux, Gnome, KDE &c.

      For those who're curious on the specifics of typeface copyright &c., www.typeright.org is a good starting point.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    3. Re:Copyright? by jefu · · Score: 1

      I was wondering the same thing and googled for information. Here's one article on the subject that gave me some good info.

    4. Re:Copyright? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      That typeright site... It's very unrealistic I think. They make it sound so clear cut.

      fonts may just seem like another file on your hard disk, but they're "intellectual property." Just as you wouldn't steal a real item from a store, you shouldn't steal a font -- it really is the same thing.

      OK, fine. But what about when I need to send you a PDF that uses a font that isn't on your system. The PDF must embed that font (and not just a rasterized image of the particular point size/DPI I used) if I want it to render correctly, at various resolutions.

      How is that anything like an item in a store? A font is a unique sort of work, it's something that you use to render your own written works, and it becomes part of your work. In effect, their argument makes every document written with a font a "derivative work", which is completely not practical, unless the fonts are all released with BSD type licenses.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    5. Re:Copyright? by typhoonius · · Score: 1

      Windows users can download Microsoft's font properties extension and view many fonts' metadata. For Times New Roman, for instance:

      Description: This remarkable typeface first appeared in 1932 in The Times of London newspaper, for which it was designed. It has subsequently become one of the worlds most successful type creations. The original drawings were made under Stanley Morison's direction by Victor Lardent at The Times. It then went through an extensive iterative process involving further work in Monotype's Type Drawing Office. Based on experiments Morison had conducted using Perpetua and Plantin, it has many old style characteristics but was adapted to give excellent legibility coupled with good economy. Widely used in books and magazines, for reports, office documents and also for display and advertising.

      Copyright: Typeface The Monotype Corporation plc. Data The Monotype Corporation plc/Type Solutions Inc. 1990-1992. All Rights Reserved

      Trademark: Times New Roman Trademark of The Monotype Corporation plc registered in the US Pat & TM Off. and elsewhere.

    6. Re:Copyright? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      No, ostensibly Times New Roman was created by Stanley Morison for _The Times_ of London w/ the assistance of Times draughtsman Victor Lardent --- it's pretty much ``a narrowed, sharpened Plantin'' (see Walter Tracy's _Letters of Credit_ for that ref).

      Linotype then filed for a trademark on Times in the US (see Dr. Bigelow's post to comp.fonts on this)

      _However_ there's since been a claim that the design was actually by Starling Burgess, the American yacht designer, not used by Monotype and then appropriated by Morison. This is based on fairly circumstantial evidence (matrices bearing the same series numbers), and AFAIK, there was never a follow-up to the article in the APHA on it.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    7. Re:Copyright? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      That's what licenses are for.

      Most font licenses explicitly allow one to embed (a subset) of the font into a .pdf (Emigre and Castle Systems are notable exceptions).

      If one has to do a fully GPL system though, use Latin Modern, the fonts donated to the X Consortium or some other completely free font (or hire someone to create something which you then make freely available --- I'm available for this, e-mail me).

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    8. Re:Copyright? by alech · · Score: 1
      URW made quite a number of nice clones which are available freely, some GPLed, some under the AFPL (included with the AFPL GhostPCL). They are IMHO much nicer than the standard Microsoft fonts. Here is a link to the Base45 Truetype Fonts from URW.

      Enjoy, ALeX

    9. Re:Copyright? by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I'll file your website.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    10. Re:Copyright? by Schnapple · · Score: 1

      Doesn't copyrighting fonts seem kinda overkill anyway? I mean, yeah copyright it since it's a piece of work, but this draconian licensing scheme they've come up with is probably the reason everyone uses the fonts that come on their system and no others.

    11. Re:Copyright? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the reason everyone sticks to the fonts bundled with their system and nothing else is because there's no reasonable way to market fonts which people will accept while still paying enough to decently reward a typeface designer.

      Because of this, one has the ``big game hunter'' effect where the big names in the typeface design business are able to directly market to systems manufacturers so as to provide so many faces that the typical user isn't inclined to purchase anything else.

    12. Re:Copyright? by Teach · · Score: 1

      Quick-wafting zephyrs vex bold Jim.

      --
      Graham "Teach" Mitchell, computer science teacher, Leander HS
  22. Roman? Irony. by joshua404 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    What a fitting font for an empire in danger of collapsing under the weight of its own arrogance..

  23. bureaucracy by bef126 · · Score: 1

    I can only imagine how much time and money went into that decision.

  24. Linux official OS by scumbucket · · Score: 0

    When the US Govt makes Linux it's official OS, then I'll start believing in politicians again.

    --
    CMDRTACO CHECK YOUR EMAIL!
  25. US State Department by mekkab · · Score: 4, Informative

    US State Department

    I guess RTFA is too much to ask on a slow news day.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    1. Re:US State Department by HMA2000 · · Score: 1

      I mention there are words left out of the headline (you know, that thing that entices one to RTFA) and you tell me to RTFA.

      God bless slashdot.

    2. Re:US State Department by mekkab · · Score: 2, Funny

      You expect information from the headline.

      wait no, scratch that;

      You read the headline.

      God bless slashdot.

      Actually, I don't read the headline, NOR the actual article. I just come to post some smarmy tripe.

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    3. Re:US State Department by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You SUCCEED!

  26. This is more significant then you think by peripatetic_bum · · Score: 1, Funny

    Think about it, up until now it was courier but now it is times New ROMAN. This fits with the new view of the US as the Roman empire and sends a subtle but unmistakable message to everyone exactly how the US is to be addressed and in what way. Dont think that the word courier was originally french has nothing to do with it.

    --

    Sigs are dangerous coy things

    1. Re:This is more significant then you think by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In other news, Aluminum futures are up, as conspiracy nuts worldwide stock up...

  27. Interesting... by CrazyTalk · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That they are going from a fixed-width font (courier) to a variable-width font (Times). Columns of numbers, etc. won't line up as nice with Times, especially if the people creating the documents don't know what they are doing.

    1. Re:Interesting... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      That they are going from a fixed-width font (courier) to a variable-width font (Times). Columns of numbers, etc. won't line up as nice with Times, especially if the people creating the documents don't know what they are doing.

      Brings to mind a certain group of civilians I had to deal with who were employed by the Department of the Army. It was like the bureaucratic equivalent of a "holler" in W.Virgina. They had MS Word, but they treated it like a "TV typewriter" sort of thing. I recall one woman asking if anyone knew how to make stuff line up without twiddling with the space bar and backspace constantly and, before I could say anything about the "Table" menu or other formatting tricks, another woman said "just use the tab key; there's fancy ways to do it in the menus, but they never work". I just finished my wiring job and left.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    2. Re:Interesting... by mysticgoat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, the change from fixed to proportional strikes me as the significant thing.

      It means that government employees who have to use a word processor are now going to have to learn how to do tab stops. And (Horrors!) maybe even tables. Many of these astute public servants-- secretaries to heads of departments and so forth-- have been abusing the spacebar for 10+ years.

      This is going to disrupt the work of a lot of staff. They'll be spending their time learning about left justified tabs, right justified tabs, and the strange behaviors of the mysterious decimal point tab. And some will be forced to learn how to insert rows and columns in tables, and even perhaps how to merge adjacent cells in a table. This is going to be very stressfull in some areas, and will cause some early retirements and probably some medical retirements. I ain't kidding. I've worked with a goodly cross section of these astute public servants, and I know about the limitations that are behind the bright smiles.

      The March Monthly Report On The SW Antarctic Penguin Census And Pollen Count will have to be rewritten from scratch rather than simply copying last month's file and changing the numbers. All businesses that rely on such reports from the US State Department should be advised that these may be late, due to unexpected technical problems with the computers.

      Noted in passing: IIRC, both Courier New and Times New Roman were introduced at the same time, as two of the three core fonts of TrueType, about 1991, as part of Widows 3.1 (maybe another geezer can confirm this). Both are native Windows fonts. (The third core font was Arial.)

      There is nothing particularly newer or more modern about TNR vs CN. Both are computer implementations of fonts that were developed to meet limitations of earlier technologies. Courier is a very open font that does not gum up quickly on the electric typewriters of the 1960s. Times is a complex font designed to retain readability at small sizes with newsprint stock and linotype machines, where smearing, dropouts, and voids frequently damaged the letterforms.

      It is always good to see that the US government is improving itself, and moving ahead with the Times.
      </rant>

    3. Re:Interesting... by bgspence · · Score: 1

      (The third core font was Arial.)
      Yes, MS had to use the name Arial because the font they copied, Helvetica, had a copyrighted name. So much for respect of other people's IP.

    4. Re:Interesting... by Nexx · · Score: 1

      If anything, Arial is a derivative work on Helvetica. If you look closely, though they are both sans-serif fonts, Arial looks different from Helvetica. However, the number of Arial derivatives I saw before Windows 3.x was popular makes me believe it's older than that.

    5. Re:Interesting... by toby · · Score: 1
      Columns of figures will still line up nicely, because almost all post-digital fonts (including Times Roman, one of the core 13 fonts in the first PostScript printers) use tabular figures - where the digits are all the same width.

      However, as a consequence, the spacing all figures in non-tabular setting (that is, in run-on text - which is most setting) looks worse. As a typographer I spend time nearly every day manually fixing bad spacing caused by this unfortunate decision by the PostScript architects at Adobe - perhaps Warnock himself.

      Other early digital font blunders by Adobe, mostly uncorrected, include:

      • poor quality digitisations;
      • short font families (missing weights);
      • incomplete glyph sets (e.g. lacking ligatures, small caps, non-lining figures);
      • bizarre glyph substitutions (e.g. Adobe Univers ampersand);
      • distorted, misshapen and badly weighted glyphs (Adobe Futura);
      • inadequate or incorrect kerning pairs;
      • etc.

      The Bitstream type library avoids many of these problems, and I strongly recommend it over Adobe's if you care about quality type.

      --
      you had me at #!
  28. Verdana by wimbor · · Score: 1

    And this while every graphic designer knows that Verdana 10pt is one of the most easy to read fonts, both on paper and screen. (That is why so many websites use it as font.)

    1. Re:Verdana by Assaulted_Peanut · · Score: 1, Informative

      A few folks have a contrary opinion on the use of Verdana and fixed font sizes when applied to the web:

      A popular article on the differences in designing for printed media and the web at Web Pages aren't Printed on Paper. Check out the global comp.infosystems.www.authoring.stylesheets for further resources.

  29. Telegrams? by freshmkr · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know why we still have official telegrams? Seems a little obsolescent.

    --Tom

    1. Re:Telegrams? by jfengel · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Believe it or not, Western Union.com. Mind you, it costs fifteen bucks. But it definitely makes an impact.

    2. Re:Telegrams? by nuffle · · Score: 1

      You can still place telegrams. Western Union still delivers. They use Airborne personel to do the deliveries, and it takes one business day.

    3. Re:Telegrams? by WillAdams · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Same place one has always gone, Western Union &c.

      The problem is, the service is so little in demand in the US that when one sends it, they phone the message in initially, then send the printed copy by mail --- not quite the same effect. YMMV in other countries where the telecommunications system isn't so saturating.

      William
      (who convinced his brother-in-law to spend a small fortune to send the traditional congratulatory telegram to his father-in-law --- at least he kept it)

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    4. Re:Telegrams? by tommck · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seems a little obsolescent.

      Or even obsolete! ;)

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    5. Re:Telegrams? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can think of something you can send your Congresscritter from WesternUnion.com that would have almost certainly have a greater impact than a telegram.

      Convenient that it lets you send both!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    6. Re:Telegrams? by Chagatai · · Score: 4, Funny
      Telegrams would also have more of an impact because of the use of "STOP" to terminate lines of messages.

      Dear Senator. STOP.
      Please consider the following things that should be changed. STOP.
      -The RIAA. STOP.
      -Microsoft. STOP.
      -The war in Iraq. STOP.
      -The Patriot Act. STOP. No, stop. STOP. I mean seriously, stop it now. STOP.

      --
      --Chag
    7. Re:Telegrams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Goatse.cx Man?

    8. Re:Telegrams? by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is the State Department. You know, embassies and stuff? Telegrams are a good basic, fast, communication system.

      A diplomat may be at the mercy of the local communication system, and I know of countries where modems are outlawed. (They mess up the cheap bugs the local law enforcement has on all the phones. Not that the phones work...) If you need something to go faster than a letter, a telegram may be your only choice.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    9. Re:Telegrams? by illuminatedwax · · Score: 1
      It makes this letter much funnier, too:

      Dear Mister President STOP
      There are too many states nowadays STOP
      Please eliminate three STOP
      P S I am not a crackpot STOP
      END

      --Stephen
      (lameness filter won't let me do all caps like it should be)

      --
      Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
    10. Re:Telegrams? by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      I'm sure a telegram to a Senator might get more attention than a letter and certainly more than an email.

      And I'm sure you're wrong.

      Email is the way to get your feelings to your representative (house or senate). Ever since the anthrax mailings in 2001 mail has been deprecated since it has to go through a ton of security checks both in the mail room and by staff when opening. And while you may think that your email will just get lost in all of the others, why do you think snail mail is any different? Do you have any idea how much mail a rep gets on a daily basis? Consider how quick and easy it is to go through email as compared to snail mail as well (you have to open the envelope, etc -- all of that's done by some low level flunky, sure, but it still takes more time), not to mention that most email is far more readable than hand-written snail mail.

      Ok, yeah, a telegram will probably get a bit more notice, but unless it has good content then it'll go the same place most of the mail and email goes -- the circular file.

    11. Re:Telegrams? by Syberghost · · Score: 1

      Maybe you can convince a staffer to put yellow paper in the printer and print the emails so they look like telegrams.

    12. Re:Telegrams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      'STOP' doesn't end a line, it's used in place of a period because telegrams don't have punctuation. Or capitalisation. So your message would read:

      dear senator stop please consider the following things that should be changed stop the riaa stop microsoft stop the war in iraq stop the patriot act stop no stop stop i mean seriously stop it now stop

      The point about impact is very true, though.

    13. Re:Telegrams? by TKinias · · Score: 1

      scripsit Daniel Staal:

      I know of countries where modems are outlawed. (They mess up the cheap bugs the local law enforcement has on all the phones. Not that the phones work...)

      Um... for example? Barring N. Korea, which seems to be just a bit beyond the pale, where on earth have you heard of modems being totally banned?

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    14. Re:Telegrams? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Um... for example? Barring N. Korea, which seems to be just a bit beyond the pale, where on earth have you heard of modems being totally banned?

      Burma.

    15. Re:Telegrams? by BoneFlower · · Score: 1

      Sometimes shit happens and email/phone/fax just won't get through. Telegram is the fastest method after those to get ahold of someone.

    16. Re:Telegrams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This gets my nomination for Most Retarded Use of the Internet Ever.

    17. Re:Telegrams? by amplt1337 · · Score: 1

      So here's my question:

      Since when do telegrams use fonts? I mean, last I heard, Morse code didn't encode letter forms...

      --
      Freedom isn't free; its price is the well-being of others.
    18. Re:Telegrams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a "Black Dragon" at the Department, the font change is a little bizarre. Add routings through the layers, and 1.25 inch margins, and it is quite difficult to get a one-pager out.

      On the telegram (cable) issue - it still makes sense for a far-flung organization, accountable to the public, to have a mechanism for creating "record" traffic. Govt policy and what-not.

      Powell is trying to replace it with SMART, which is still to be defined. Until three years ago, this was also all done via paper copies - Now we use Lotus notes (a version from 1997) as "CableExpress" to send and receive cable traffic. Oh what the hell, you would not understand anyway......

    19. Re:Telegrams? by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 1

      (Hmm. I thought I had replied earlier to this...)

      Sudan, at least the last time I was there.

      As for beyond the pale... If they were at an embassy they wouldn't need to send a telegram: they could use the satellite hookup. But not all diplomats operate out of an embassy: sometimes they need to deal with, say, N. Korea. (How else do you discuss the latest peace treaty, or whatever?)

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    20. Re:Telegrams? by TKinias · · Score: 1

      scrispit Daniel_Staal:

      Sudan, at least the last time I was there.

      That's curious. I wasn't aware of that. I wouldn't have expected many countries to implement such a law, mostly because even a place like Iraq (pre-invasion) recognized the benefits of having people on line. Places where things are out of control enough to have the rulers think banning modems seems like a good idea would not, I would think, have the technical base or the organization to enforce such a ban. (I've not been to Sudan, but when I lived in Egypt in the '90s I got the impression that it was only about one step above Somalia in terms of effective government... We sure had a lot of refugees from there.)

      Another poster mentioned Burma; that one actually doesn't surprise me too much, I guess.

      As for beyond the pale... If they were at an embassy they wouldn't need to send a telegram: they could use the satellite hookup. But not all diplomats operate out of an embassy: sometimes they need to deal with, say, N. Korea. (How else do you discuss the latest peace treaty, or whatever?)

      By `beyond the pale' I simply meant that virtually nothing would surprise me coming from DPRK. I don't imagine there's any type of communication technology they allow free use of there.

      That made me wonder if I've ever seen a DPRK TLD. I just checked, and even the official site of the DPRK is a .com, of all things (www.korea-dpr.com). They look like they're in Vancouver, from a traceroute, and Netcraft says the netblock is owned by the CBC (!). So I'm guessing there's pretty much no Internet at all in DPRK.

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
  30. Sign of the Beast by burgburgburg · · Score: 2, Funny
    Of course, in it's efforts to create it's counterfeit kingdom here on earth, the Beast has given further evidence of his attempt to reconstitute the Holy Roman Empire, using the Times New Roman font.

    No wonder the 5 evil acolytes selected him.

  31. Symbolic by Henry+V+.009 · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Roman Font. Just in time for Empire.

  32. national safety first! by benson+hedges · · Score: 1

    in accordance with the national defense act and various others, all new documents have to be made terrorist-proof. therefore, the standard font for printed material from now on will be wingdings. you bet osama can't read that!

    --
    Karma : Soylent Green (Mostly due to eating junk food and mocking religion)
  33. Telegrams? by illuminatedwax · · Score: 5, Funny
    There are only three exceptions to the draconian new typographical rules: telegrams

    Telegrams?! They still use telegrams? If so, where can I still send one from? I'm sure a telegram to a Senator might get more attention than a letter and certainly more than an email. Plus sending telegrams sounds cool.

    --Stephen

    --
    Did you ever notice that *nix doesn't even cover Linux?
  34. I'll bet... by dubdays · · Score: 1

    ...it only took about a $5 million research-study to tell these idiots this. Besides, who really cares anyway? I mean, just choose a font that can be read. And, with 14pt being the standard, the Russians/French/British will think we're all half blind.

  35. might as well be by NoGuffCheck · · Score: 1

    might as well be Windings, probably easier to understand and a whole lot more entertaining! I know of at least one unnecessary war it would of stopped.

    --
    serenity now!
  36. Eye strain by carlcmc · · Score: 1

    I would much rather read TNR then courier. But why 14???

  37. Think about the tree's... by John+Seminal · · Score: 0, Redundant
    14 point font is going to take up more paper than 12 point font. Lots more. I remember doing this kind of crap in high school to make my papers X pages long.

    Not suprising that Bush is the one making this change. LOL.

    --

    Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."

    1. Re:Think about the tree's... by q-the-impaler · · Score: 1

      I doubt Bush had anything to do with this. I mean, Dude doesn't even use email.

      --
      Sierra Tango Foxtrot Uniform
  38. Real motive by Mieckowski · · Score: 1

    The real reason why they are using a bigger font is the same reason I 2.1 space my essays: It looks like you did more work. Oh well, I guess they will have to reprint every document made before Feb 1, as they are "unacceptable."

  39. Bad by Samuel+Duncan · · Score: 0, Troll

    I heard that the Bush goverment push 14pt size after the Paper & Wood pulp industry donated 10 bn to his electoral fund.

    --
    Over 90 years and counting !
  40. Study by savagedome · · Score: 1

    with a view to making our written work easier to read

    Any stud{y,ies}/research to indicate that 'Times New Roman 14' is easier to read than 'Courier New 12'?

    1. Re:Study by fhmiv · · Score: 1

      Why, yes. Try this:
      http://www.google.com/search?q=font+readability&ie =UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

  41. Won't somebody please think of the trees!!! by miroth · · Score: 1

    I wonder how much paper (and, in turn, our tax dollars) would be saved each year if the government decided to use size 12 Times New Roman, or better yet, size 10.

    1. Re:Won't somebody please think of the trees!!! by AnonymousComrade · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not to mention the vast amount of disk space that would be saved by using a smaller font!

  42. This just in. by jghiloni · · Score: 5, Funny

    In related news, the US Government changes the official resolution of all desktops to 640x480, 256 colors.

    1. Re:This just in. by happyfrogcow · · Score: 1

      Hey now, thats the desktop you're talking about. Separation of Church and State please!

    2. Re:This just in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oddly enough, most government employees that I've seen tend to leave their monitors at the default resolution....640x480, 16 bit, @60 Hz. They then complain that they can't see enough, and are given 21" monitors...that they continue to run at 640x480 @60 Hz...

    3. Re:This just in. by jghiloni · · Score: 1

      Wrong administration for THAT argument, bucko.

    4. Re:This just in. by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      Fans of CGA up in arms. Film at 11.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    5. Re:This just in. by blankmange · · Score: 1

      This is true -- I have to change my screen resolutions every time I change workstations...

      --
      ...we are from the government - we are here to help...
    6. Re:This just in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...in accordance with the governments new $5 billion Pixel Conservation Program.

    7. Re:This just in. by MrAngryForNoReason · · Score: 1

      Oddly enough, most government employees that I've seen tend to leave their monitors at the default resolution....640x480, 16 bit, @60 Hz.

      1.Get a job with the government.
      2.Run desktop at 640x480@60hz
      3.Go blind from awful refresh
      4.Sue government
      5.Profit!!!

      No need for any question marks here.

    8. Re:This just in. by lildogie · · Score: 1

      > official resolution of all desktops to 640x480, 256 colors

      Sixteen colors should be enough for anybody.

    9. Re:This just in. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like where I work:
      Most people have their resolutions at 800x600.
      IT people have theirs at 1600x1200.
      All apps are designed for 1024x768.
      Result: IT people think the design is too small, everyone else thinks it's too big, and nobody bothers to look at the app at the correct resolution.

    10. Re:This just in. by akgoddess · · Score: 1

      In my federal workplace, it's the elders with bad eyesight running low resolution -- generally management.

      So when they come into my office to peer at my 1920x1440 display, I get, "How can you READ that?"

      They're missing the point. I don't want THEM to read it!

  43. Is Times New Roman an open font? by drywater · · Score: 1

    I know that Microsoft kindly lets people use True Type fonts for free (I use some on my Linux system) but is this a case where Microsoft can suddenly say that it's no longer free to use and in order for the government to create official documents they must use Microsoft products?

    1. Re:Is Times New Roman an open font? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have TNR on My Mac so I assume it's an open font or at least available to the non MS crowd.

    2. Re:Is Times New Roman an open font? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      is this a case where Microsoft can suddenly say that it's no longer free to use

      There are many versions of "Times" from different type foundries. Microsoft licensed one of them.

  44. Standard points or Microsoft points? by ewg · · Score: 1

    Is that 14 point at 72 points per inch? or 96 points per inch?!

    --
    org.slashdot.post.SignatureNotFoundException: ewg
    1. Re:Standard points or Microsoft points? by pclminion · · Score: 1
      You're confused. A point will always be 1/72nd of an inch. Yes, even in Microsoft land.

      The number 96 you seem to be remembering is the assumed dots-per-inch resolution of a CRT output device. That is, in the absence of information to the contrary (such as info from the video driver) Windows assumes that the CRT display device is a 96 DPI device.

      It's quite irritating that the word "point" is used to refer both to a physical unit (1/72 inch) and a logical unit (a pixel on a screen).

    2. Re:Standard points or Microsoft points? by WillAdams · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, no, a point isn't / wasn't always 1/72nd of an inch.

      That was set by John Warnock (you may know him better as the founder of Adobe Systems) when he wrote a little program called PostScript. He chose to do this for efficiency's sake since he knew all fonts would have to be re-created for use in his system.

      Prior to that there were two different types of points, English points (72.27 to an inch) and Cicero / Didot points (some funny number to a meter).

      So, when one specs points in publishing, one should always ascertain whether one means the DTP point (72 to an inch), or Printer's points or something else.

      The original Mac OS set the screen dpi to be 72 pixels per inch, but Apple hasn't made a screen which matches that for a long while AFAIK. Windows sets the default logical screen dpi to 96 by default, but allows one to change it. Unfortunately a lot of programs are Mac ports which are hard-wired to 72 dpi, so it's actually better to set to that.

      For those who need more on this, I'd suggest www.schaedler-rulers.com --- also look up Victor Eijkhout's spiffy TeX ruler (should be on CTAN).

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  45. Language? by DaHat · · Score: 3, Insightful

    and yet we still do not have an official language!

    1. Re:Language? by IANAAC · · Score: 1

      Isn't that decided at the state level? It is at least in California.

    2. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because an official language would hurt the feelings of all the illegal aliens in the country. And the Democrats don't want that! That might interfere with getting them registered to vote!

    3. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they tried to make the official language german back in the 20' or 30's. even try a constitutional amendment for it.

      the fact is we don't need an oficial language. english seems to be the language of money and prosperity, those that don't know it (or speak and understand it just suffer)seem to get all the shit jobs that nobody else wants to do. we need cheap laber like food service workers, farm workers picking crops by hand, and gas station attendant or even carwash and lawnmawing boys.

      the quality of life in america would go down alot if we had an oficial language (english) and everyone spoke it. i for one would hat to have to pay more than the already high $10 to get my car washed and waxed.

    4. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes we do. It is called dollars.

    5. Re:Language? by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      and yet we still do not have an official language!

      Huh? English is the language of the United States. We've danced around the issue by pandering to hispanics, but for all intents and purposes all official business is conducted in English. For god's sake, the Constitution is written in English!

    6. Re:Language? by ucsckevin · · Score: 1

      California does not have an official language, or languages, which is why you can get state information in several languages, including Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese, Spanish, etc. bilingual education is banned in state schools, which doesn't include ESL or special ed. And remember, 227 was supported by a lot of hispanic families who wanted their children to have a better opportunity to learn proper English.

    7. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was no significant movement to make German the official language of the U.S. In the 30's german propagandah was spread saying that in 1776 German was one vote short of becoming the official U.S. language. There was never any such vote to decide on an official language 1n 1776, but perhaps a few decades later there was discussion on translating official documents to other languages such as German.

    8. Re:Language? by IANAAC · · Score: 1

      Perhaps I'm mistaken, but didn't Prop 63 pass in 1986? That made English the official language of California.

    9. Re:Language? by DaHat · · Score: 1

      Nay, check the books. While traditionally in this country we speak English. It is the language you talk to your insurance person in, it is the language the girl at McDonalds takes your order in, and it is the language that your tax bill is in, the US has no 'official language'.

      In virtually all places in the US, if a person goes to a public school, the school is required to accommodate them because of this lack.

      Example:

      Note: I'm going to come off as a racist by saying this but so be it.

      Years ago when my ancestors came over on the boat, they quickly realized that they needed to learn the local language (English) otherwise they'd be left behind, because if they didn't fit in to get a job, someone else was going to get the job they were working for.

      Today, in places such as California which provide bilingual education and even bilingual directory assistance, there is not the push to force people to learn the local language; many realize that there is a support mechanism for them if they choose not to assimilate.

      If I'm not mistaken, for the recent California recall election, the ballot was printed in 7 different languages!

      Think of the cost savings both locally and federally if a language was made the official language and those who do not read/speak/understand it had to make accommodations for themselves instead of expecting/demanding/etc that accommodations be made for them free of charge.

    10. Re:Language? by rundgren · · Score: 0

      you should be glad. official languages is a pain in the butt. here in norway we have three, two of which have almost as much in common as american-english and british-english. for some sick reason everybody have to learn to read and write these two in school.

    11. Re:Language? by Peyna · · Score: 1

      English is the de facto language; however, you can request many government documents in multiple languages, and there is no law that says you have to do anything in English.

      Adding a law to make English the official language would create a lot more problems than it would solve, and would cost a lot of money. Would we force all businesses to have everything labelled in English? Would we have to stop any public instruction in other languages (not learning a new language, but those schools that teach students who only speak Spanish for example).

      All that such a law would do is restrict access to certain things for some people. It wouldn't really help you or me or most of us out in any way.

      With the large influx of Hispanics into the United States, it is probably more likely that we will see increased Spanish language education, as many existing businesses will want to cater to as many people as possible, and it is easier to adapt to your clients than to demand they adapt to you.

      --
      What?
    12. Re:Language? by winkydink · · Score: 1

      California State Constitution, Article III, Section 6

      Section 1:

      (a) Purpose.

      English is the common language of the people of the United States of America and the State of California. This section is intended to preserve, protect and strengthen the English language, and not to supersede any of the rights guaranteed to the people of this Constitution.

      (b) English as the Official Language of California.

      English is the official language of California.

      (c) Enforcement.

      The Legislature shall enforce this section by appropriate legislation. The Legislature and officials of the State of California shall take all steps necessary to insure that the role of English as the common language of the State of California is preserved and enhanced. The Legislature shall make no law which diminishes or ignores the role of English as the common language of the State of California.

      (d) Personal Right of Action and Jurisdiction of Courts.

      Any person who is a resident of or doing business in the State of California shall have standing to sue the State of California to enforce this action, and the Courts of record of the State of California shall have jurisdiction to hear cases brought to enforce this section. The Legislature may provide reasonable and appropriate limitations on the time and manner of suits brought under this section.

      Section 2: Severability.

      If any provision of this section, or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, the remainder of this section to the extent it can be given effect shall not be affected thereby, and to this end, the provisions of this section are severable.

      --

      "I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey

    13. Re:Language? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      The thing is, I think you are right. Even if it looks or sounds like bigotry, the people that choose not to learn English hurt themselves by not giving themselves a voice which business and government understands.

      I'm not trying to justify how business handles it, but for example, hiring spainish-only speakers also means hiring translators, and it also means communication barriers in spite of the translation, so the workers can only be asked to do basic, minimally skilled labor, meaning being stuck at the bottom end of the scale.

    14. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Great more dumbing down of the American culture. Are we really so poor and stupid that multiple languages can't co-exist? What a bunch of babies. Oh, I'm too stupid to learn another language, and its scary when people look like they are making fun of me in another language. Stop it, it's un-American and hurts my feelings. Boo-Fucking-Hoo. Grow up and learn that the world is bigger than you and your petty hang-ups. Why not enforce this standard on the rest of the world. I'm sure George-they-boy-king would make a much better world leader if everyone spoke 'merican. By the way, lets make Windows the "official" American OS while we're at it.

    15. Re:Language? by petabyte · · Score: 1

      That's not acurate at all. There was a good bit of time during the large waves of immigration when language shifted. The area I live in had such a large portion of German speakers, you'd be better off in Deutsch until the first world war. But continue to believe your revisionist history.

      I'm not going to call you racist because your remarks dont' reflect that. Ethnocentric, intolerant ass seems to fit better.

    16. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would we force all businesses to have everything labelled in English?

      Nope. It has nothing to do with businesses at all. It only has to do with government-related stuff, like tax forms and public schools.

      Would we have to stop any public instruction in other languages (not learning a new language, but those schools that teach students who only speak Spanish for example).

      Yes. That's the whole point of the movement to make English the official language. No more non-English education. Public schools teach only English-language classes, excepting of course foreign language classes and "English as a second language."

      If you wade across the river and start picking asparagus, you're going to have to learn English. Nobody will accommodate your lack of English. If you have kids, those kids are going to go to school, and they're going to speak only English there.

      All that such a law would do is restrict access to certain things for some people.

      Exactly! That's the whole point!

      It wouldn't really help you or me or most of us out in any way.

      It would save an estimated $3.7 billion a year in taxpayer dollars. Those are 1991 dollars, too, so fudge that. (Google GAO English official language cost analysis)

      With the large influx of Hispanics into the United States, it is probably more likely that we will see increased Spanish language education

      Over my dead body. The wetbacks can speaka de Engles if they want to stay here. If they don't learn the language, they can get the fuck out.

    17. Re:Language? by jdiggans · · Score: 1

      India somehow manages to function as a state even though their government holds something on the order of 17 languages to be 'official.' They function so well, in fact, that they're taking 'our' jobs. Not bad for a state so-burdened with eight times the number of common tongues found in the States, eh?

      Language and culture are intertwined; there are words and phrases in every language that express ideas English has never adequately addressed (and vice-versa). You do yourself and those who seek shelter here an enormous disservice by claiming that asserting the dominance of English (itself an overly-complex and difficult language to learn) would fix any real world problem.
      -j

    18. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard this story, but never been able to confirm it. Would you have a reference (ideally linked!)?

    19. Re:Language? by jc42 · · Score: 1

      [excerpt from California constitution declaring English the state's official language]

      Actually, it makes sense that California would have done this way back in the state's beginnings. Various historians have pointed out that most governments have never declared an official language. The reason is simple. Most governments are formed by people who have a common language, and there's no point in wasting time on the topic.

      When a government does declare an official language, it is almost always done as a way to oppress linguistic minority groups. This normally only happens when there is a significant minority that speaks another language, and the dominant group wants to make life difficult for that minority.

      When California was becoming a US state, it was a mostly Spanish-speaking area. It had been taken over by an influx of Americans, mostly due to the Gold Rush, but they were still a linguistic minority. Outside of San Francisco and the mining areas, most of the people spoke Spanish.

      So the constitution declared English the official language, for the usual reason.

      The US government, when it was formed, had no such significant minority language. There were lots of minority languages, true, primarily German and French. But there was no debate about the subject, and no question about the official language.

      Actually, there's a related "urban myth". You sometimes see the claim that one of the historic votes that was decided in the US Congress by one vote was whether English or German should be the official language of the new country. This turns out to be not quite what happened. First, it was the Continental Congress, but that's a nit. What the vote was really about was whether the official Congressional Record should be published in just English, or in both English and German. At the time, there were large German-speaking areas in the new country, and some of the Congress thought that those people could be better brought into full citizenry if the Record were published in their native language. They would be expected to send English-speaking reps to Congress, of course, but a Record in German would make them all better informed and thus better citizens. Bilingual publishing was voted down by one vote, mostly for reasons of cost, and the Record was published only in English. (The German-speaking population supported the Revolution anyway, because they had even greater complaints against their English oppressors than the English-speaking colonists had.)

      There was no question about the working language of the US Congress or any other part of the government. Since it wasn't an issue, it was never decided or declared.

      There are a few countries where the debate over the official language(s) has been actually interesting. India for example.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    20. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but when my ancestors immigrated (to Minnesota) flyers announcing county meetings were printed in English, German, and French to make sure as many people as possible would be reached. America has *never* been a monolingual country, only the makeup of its languages has changed. English is, of course, by far the most common. But recognize the use of other languages in an immigrant country is not a recent phenomenon nor "pandering to hispanics". It's representing the country as it is, not as scared adults falsely remember their childhood to be.

    21. Re:Language? by Echnin · · Score: 1

      Well, I disagree with your statement that nynorsk and bokmal have far more differences than US and UK English. However, I don't like having to learn nynorsk, with its stupid third gender and lameass rules. Of course, it's rather more Norwegian than bokmal is, so...

      --
      Lalala
    22. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know about you, but I can get in my car and drive 3000 miles and *gasp* everyone will speak the SAME language. You silly europeans only learn other languages because you all have such patheticly tiny countries.

    23. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is my comment above and I live the American Southwest and when I drive 50 miles I can find at least 4 different language that were spoken here for several hundred years before George Washington was born. Just because some silly white guy says this is now America doesn't mean every thing changes. Maybe us Americans should learn that the sun doesn't revolve around our stars and stripes. Americans want every one to speak the same language because we are simply too lazy to learn about the world we live in.

    24. Re:Language? by yarbo · · Score: 1
    25. Re:Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't agree with you.
      English would be among the easist languages to learn, it has no tildes or accents, for starters...

      Have you ever tried French or German?

  46. waste of money... by Lehk228 · · Score: 1, Interesting

    How much money is this going to cost? Sounds like someone with nothing to do wanted to make himself/herself feel important by changing the official font, all it will do is waste the time (money) of the employees who will now have to check the font settings every time they type something for a while till all their software is switched, or waste time re-printing after realizing "oh shit it's in Courier".

    --
    Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  47. *sigh* by Cleon · · Score: 1

    Good to know they're doing something useful with our tax dollars.

    Next up is a bill to declare the official cow of the United States... [*sigh*, ok, go ahead, insert Monica or Hillary joke here]

    --
    Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
  48. Obligatory Welcome by pc-0x90 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I, for one, welcome our new roman time overlords

  49. More Modern by pete-classic · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the article: "a 'more modern' font."

    I'm sure glad they put "more modern" in quotes, as Times New Roman was introduced in 1932!

    -Peter

    1. Re:More Modern by kirkjobsluder · · Score: 1

      True, but for a long time you were only able to use Times New Roman or similar proportional fonts if you had a professional typesetter and thousands of dollars in equipment. I suspect that Courier New was chosen back in the early days of word processing when you still had offices using a flavor of Courier on typewriters and the dreaded daisy wheel printer.

      I'm probably the lone standout on this, but standardizing on a proportional serif typeface is overdue. I don't see this as a big deal in terms of money or cost. They probably just picked what a bunch of academic journals are recommending for submissions.

    2. Re:More Modern by tbmaddux · · Score: 2, Informative
      'm sure glad they put "more modern" in quotes, a Times New Roman was introduced in 1932!
      Also, from the same page, Courier was first designed as an IBM typewriter face. IBM started as Computing-Tabulating-Recording-Company in 1911 and its name was changed to IBM in 1924. So it is possible that Courier predates Times New Roman. However, Adrian Frutiger redrew that font for IBM selectric typewriters, thus creating Courier New in 1961.
      --
      Can't you see that everyone is buying station wagons?
  50. It'll be even easier to read if . . . by Brahmastra · · Score: 1

    they don't let bloody lawyers write the documents.

  51. Your tax dollars at work. by mystery_bowler · · Score: 0

    Thank you, U.S. Government, for giving me more reasons to continue to preach for smaller government.

    Attention, citizens! Your government has so much time and money on its hands that it felt compelled to declare an official font! That is all!

    --

    My sigs always suck.
    1. Re:Your tax dollars at work. by MCZapf · · Score: 2, Funny
      Would you rather have your State Department send out documents to other nations with the old-fashioned-looking Courier font, or, worse yet, no standard font at all? It's nice to appear to be organized, at least. On the other hand, we'll look like a country of blind people sending out 14pt documents to everyone.

      BTW, as others have pointed out, this is not a government-wide standard, just a State Department one.

  52. Slashdot Headline 6 months from now... by Caeda · · Score: 0

    US government seeks method to reduce paper waste caused by increasing the font size to 14 point...

    --
    ~~ Please keep your arms, legs, and outright stupidity inside the ride at all times. Thank You ~~
  53. Visually impaired people? by BabyDave · · Score: 1

    I'm sure I've been told (by someone whose job is teaching the disabled to use computers) that Times New Roman is relatively difficult for partially-sighted people to read, and sans-serif fonts such as Arial are much better. Can someone confirm/refute this, and does anyone know if they've taken this into account?

    1. Re:Visually impaired people? by byolinux · · Score: 1

      As a screen font, yes it is.

      Sans-serif is much better for screen, and serif, such as Times NR is better for printed works.

      Default fonts and user defined stylesheets come into their own, here.

    2. Re:Visually impaired people? by WuphonsReach · · Score: 1

      As a screen font, yes it is.

      I'm guessing that's primarily due to the low-dpi of a computer monitor?

      Hopefully that will improve rapidly (e.g. the IBM high-dpi displays). My current laptop is 128dpi, and my next one is around 140dpi. 200-250dpi is what I'm hoping for as a reasonable "good enough" resolution. For a 15" laptop screen, that would be 2048x1536 or 3072x2304 on a 19" CRT.

      --
      Wolde you bothe eate your cake, and have your cake?
  54. ummm, common? by jgabby · · Score: 1

    This is no different than college profs spending an entire class hour explaining how they would like papers to be formatted. Or TPS report cover sheets. Or any other stylistic guideline. It's a common occurrance, and as this only applies to the state department, the general public will not be affected in the least by this.

    It's not like all AIM users will be forced to use TNR 14, black on white background....though that might not be a bad thing if they were. Those damn hot pink on lime green fonts are simply painful.

    1. Re:ummm, common? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Those damn hot pink on lime green fonts are simply painful.
      You spend a lot of time chatting with preteen girls, jgabby?
    2. Re:ummm, common? by jgabby · · Score: 1

      You spend a lot of time chatting with preteen girls, jgabby?

      Don't tell the FBI, please.

  55. An of course the font will be renamed by tr0llb4rt0 · · Score: 1

    Freedom Font :-)

    --
    Worst .sig ever!
  56. GOvEnMEnt maKEs STudLY CaPS tHE oFFIcIAl STanDARD by nutznboltz · · Score: 1

    iN A nEWs flASH tHE GOVenMEnt HAs adOPTed STudLY CaPS AS tHE oFFIcIAl STanDARD FOr capITalIZaTION oF WoRdS...

  57. Official Font, no Official Language? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hope that font contains Spanish specific characters, English is still not the official language of the United States.

  58. Yeah, Peter..... by clckwrkMalChick · · Score: 1

    I see that you used Courier New on your last document, did you get the memo? Yeah, because we switched to Times New Roman, Yeah, I'll go ahead and send you another copy of that memo.

    --

    -=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-
    What would Yossarian do?
  59. Re:Sounds like somebody was slacking on their essa by enkafan · · Score: 1

    If I recall, Wordperfect had a feature that would actually adjust margins, font sizes, and line/character spacing to get your document from 13 to 15 pages long. Simply brilliant.

  60. No More Government ASCII ART!! by A55M0NKEY · · Score: 0, Troll
    They are switching from Courier to Times New Roman?!!! This sucks!

    How are they going to construct ASCII art without a fixed width font? Plus wouldn't you expect a spy vs spy courier type person to carry secret documents written in Courier type? Geez! And 14 pt font??? That's frikken huge!! What ever happened to typewriter size font?

    --

    Eat at Joe's.

  61. Most readable font..according to Google by erick99 · · Score: 0, Troll
    I checked "most readable font" on Google and it does seem that the Times New Roman font is generally at the top of the list. Most of the articles say that first and foremost a highly readable font is sans serif. Then, among the sans serif fonts, Times New Roman generally rates highest.

    Then I did a google search on "way too much free time" and my name came up 133,000 times....

    Happy Trails,

    Erick

    --
    http://www.busyweather.com/
    1. Re:Most readable font..according to Google by redled · · Score: 1

      Times New Roman is a serif font.

      --

      --
      "Insert witty quote here."

    2. Re:Most readable font..according to Google by fhmiv · · Score: 2, Informative
      Not to pick nits, but Times New Roman is a "serif" font, which means it has the little horizontal bars at the tops and bottoms of the letters. "Sans serif" fonts lack those little bars, which makes sense if you think about the name.

      Serif fonts have been found to be more readable in printed material.

    3. Re:Most readable font..according to Google by OECD · · Score: 1
      It depends on the context, but it's usually accepted that serifed fonts, like Times, are easier to read. I haven't heard anyone put it quite like this, but the serifs work almost like anti-aliasing, helping the eye recognize whole words at a time (most folks say they "guide the eye.")

      Part of the reason Times NR is so readable is that it is a very well designed font. Another part is that it seems to be the de facto default serifed font. (Helvetica/Arial would be the sans serifed defaults.) Since you see it all the time, you're used to reading it.

      --
      One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
    4. Re:Most readable font..according to Google by erick99 · · Score: 1
      TYPO ALERT - I meant to type "serif" and not "sans serif." Sorry for the confusion. And, yes, I still have way too much free time today.

      Happy Trails,

      Erick

      --
      http://www.busyweather.com/
    5. Re:Most readable font..according to Google by byolinux · · Score: 1

      It's okay, I read it as 'serif' the second time anyway.

  62. Its a shame.. by naelurec · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They should have used an open license font like Bitstream Vera. This would have given them the fixed spaced "Bitstream Vera Sans Mono" for tabular data, "Bitstream Vera Serif" for paragraph and "Bitstream Vera Sans" for headers, captions, etc. Simply beautiful and open. :)

    1. Re:Its a shame.. by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Bitstream's release is very much appreciated by the OSS community, as it did a tremendous deal to help typography on open source systems.

      That being said, use of Vera probably isn't a good idea. It has no equivalent in the standard Adobe fontset. It has not been distributed nearly as widely as even the standard Microsoft webfonts.

      I agree that it would have been nice, but remember that it probably took a committee years to decide on which proportional font to use. Vera is new...

    2. Re:Its a shame.. by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      I love Bitstream for opening up Vera, but in small as well as large font sizes, I think it looks crappy compared to TNR.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    3. Re:Its a shame.. by line.at.infinity · · Score: 2, Informative
      They should have used an open license font like Bitstream Vera. This would have given them the fixed spaced "Bitstream Vera Sans Mono" for tabular data, "Bitstream Vera Serif" for paragraph and "Bitstream Vera Sans" for headers, captions, etc. Simply beautiful and open. :)
      Ahh, simply beautiful and open... But are typography copyrightable? They sure seem to be free most of the time. Let's see here:
      In the United States, font design is not copyrightable, but it is patentable if novel enough. Stone and Lucida are the only two patented typefaces, and this may not hold up in court.

      Europe used to have the same "can't copyright typefaces" laws as the United States, but Germany (in 1981) and the UK (in 1989) have passed laws making typeface designs copyrightable. The UK law is even retroactive (!), so designs produced before 1989 are also copyrighted, if the copyrights wouldn't have already expired (the German one is not retroactive).

      --Wikipedia

      So what's the big deal with the copyright notice at the bottom of BitStream Vera's page?
    4. Re:Its a shame.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vera is new...

      and therefore dangerous!

  63. I prefer this waste of taxpayer dollars by the_skywise · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So long as they're wasting their time picking out new fonts, they're not writing new laws restricting freedoms, increasing taxes or wasting money on new boondoggle programs.

    1. Re:I prefer this waste of taxpayer dollars by That's+Unpossible! · · Score: 1
      --
      Ironically, the word ironically is often used incorrectly.
  64. In related news.... by ThomasFlip · · Score: 1

    It was found that a tainted shipment of Congressional office stationary notepads were 1/4 inch too large, and the letterheads were clearly in Western font which is simply inexcusable. A full inquiry will be launched in the coming weeks.... Lets pray to god someone gets to the bottom of this.

    --
    If the dollar is an "I owe you nothing", then the Euro is a "Who owes you nothing." - Doug Casey
  65. Bigger is... by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

    Better?

    In other news... government officials embarasingly admitted that they need glasses but don't like to wear them.

    --

    "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

  66. only cos bush aint seen comic sans yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    executive order coming soon.....

  67. Had to do it by Sp0ngeb0b · · Score: 1

    "Stop the presses!" ok... ok... sorry...

  68. Wingdings by Nutt · · Score: 1

    I'm suprised they didnt drop all their encryption, switch to wingdings, and say that they're more secure then ever.

  69. piddling & twiddling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    John Adams is spinning in his grave!

  70. to get credit... by bromoseltzer · · Score: 1

    Write clearly, and put your name at the top right corner.

    --
    Fiat Lux.
  71. no kidding... by gertsenl · · Score: 1
    Well, it's good to know they exempted telegraphs, considering "." and "-" don't really look all that different between the two fonts. "My word, we've really got to change the typographical appearence of this Morse Code. I've always told them those dashes are too short, I keep thinking ships are sending out S-S-S, and by the time I reply that I don't know what the bloody hell they're talking about, well, you know..." ::blink, blink::

    Quoth the article: There are only three exceptions to the draconian new typographical rules: telegrams, treaty materials prepared by the State Department's legal affairs office and documents drawn up for the president's signature, it said.

    Hey, maybe you should RTFA before posting an article!

    --
    --Leo
  72. The obligatory... by CrazyWingman · · Score: 1

    In Soviet Russia, font changes YOU!

    (besides, how many fonts can their possibly be for cyrillic? :P)

    1. Re:The obligatory... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
      besides, how many fonts can their possibly be for cyrillic?

      Not as many as the latin alphabet, but there's a few (most of them regional variations). One thing I've always found interesting as far a Cyrillic goes is that there isn't so much difference between monospaced and proportional fonts, as the letters are pretty much all "wide"-- no "skinny" letters like "i", "t", or "j" in the latin alphabet*.

      * to those who read cyrillic: yes, tvyordi znak and myaki znak look funny monospaced, but I think they should be abolished, as they're not really letters but accent marks. It's unfortunate that Cyrill and Methodeus chose the Greek alphabet as their basis in creating their 'azbuka' (alphabet), as the phonologies of greek and russian are painfully dissimilar. Even after Czar Peter the Great (and later, the Soviets) reformed Cyrillic to get rid of redundancies, they still have 33 letters! I mean, why give the sh-ch sound its own letter when you already have "shah" and "cheh" that could easily be used together?

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    2. Re:The obligatory... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IMHO, the Cyrillic alphabet works much better for slavic languages than the latin alphabet. Polish and Czech seem much less elegant than Russian to me, because I'd much rather have "shah" than sz or s^.

  73. Re:Encrypted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yeah, but terrorist too, ZM"Qoo

    try it using Wingdings

  74. Sure we do! by wiredog · · Score: 1

    The Official Language of Slashdot is Perl.

    1. Re:Sure we do! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Official Language of Slashdot is Perl.

      I thought it was -1 Flamebait?

  75. FOIA by libra-dragon · · Score: 1

    Does it really matter what font they use? It all ends up being blacked out anyway.

  76. Eurostile by lordmoose · · Score: 1

    Will now be Freedomstile

  77. Relax, guys by Theatetus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A lot of big organizations make decisions like this. The State Dep't wants documents coming from it to have a similar look and feel. Just consider it a social CSS.

    I subcontracted for State for a while, and this is actually a step in the right direction. They have 2 print shops, one for GS and one for FS, and people have lately been printing some really stupid looking reports and circulars. It's kind of a shame that they chose 14 pt TNR, since that pretty much keeps you from being able to make a small, glossy report like people like nowadays, but some consistency would be a good thing.

    Also, this only seems to apply to printed materials. Electronic publications can stay in whatever font you want, which is good since I hate seriffed fonts on a screen.

    --
    All's true that is mistrusted
    1. Re:Relax, guys by Boing · · Score: 1
      The State Dep't wants documents coming from it to have a similar look and feel. Just consider it a social CSS.

      Oh, if only...

      .government {
      corrupt: no ! important;
      idiotic: no ! important;
      }

  78. Students Rejoice! by phathead296 · · Score: 2, Funny

    In other news, students around the country rejoice. Now, they can use US Governement official font to turn a two page paper into three pages.

    1. Re:Students Rejoice! by PhxBlue · · Score: 1

      Four, actually. Page two is intentionally left blank, except for the words, "this page intentionally left blank."

      --
      !#@%*)anks for hanging up the phone, dear.
  79. ^^ Mod Up ^^ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Someone working for the lumber lobby?

    I am amazed how political slashdot is. A valid point is made, and it is modded down. *sigh*

  80. Real reason for the change... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    The President was tired of receiving official documents that ended with the ASCII art version of goatse.cx.

  81. So where's the Official Font for download? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    There are many versions of Times New Roman out there - Windows has one, MacOS has another (I do know they're different from Windows and pre-OSX MacOS), I believe LaTeX has yet another...

    Font fun...

  82. Resistance is futile. by rf600r · · Score: 1

    "All your serif belong to us."

    Go ahead, mod me down. I know I would. :)

    1. Re:Resistance is futile. by byolinux · · Score: 3, Funny

      In 12pt Courier New, War Was Beginning...

      What happen!!

      Someone set us up the Times!!

      What!!

      We get bigger!!

      New Font Turn on!!

      It's Huge!!

      How are you gentlemen!!
      All your document are belong to us!!
      You have no chance to survive, make your change!!

  83. Pages,,, by softspokenrevolution · · Score: 1

    This of course a holdover from the g-men's days padding out papers with page requirements.

  84. Jeezus!! by bfg9000 · · Score: 1

    Jeezus!!! What a freeking scandal!!!

    I can't handle the crazy pace of change anymore, it's stuff like this that made the UnaBomber snap.

    We're heading down a long dark spiral of doom, and this is just one example of the madness. From now on, just call me AmishMan. I'm done with all this technology crap.(*)

    (*) Well, except my iPod. I'm keeping that.

    --

    I'm not normally an irrational zealous dickhead, but I figure "When in Rome..."

  85. numbers are monowidth by default ws.Re:Interesting by WillAdams · · Score: 2, Informative

    Actually, the typically available Times New Roman has lining figures which are an ``en-space'' wide.

    If one types _just_ numbers things line up as if one were using a monospaced font. The problem is the default space (I checked TimesNewRomanPS YMMV w/ other versions) is half an en-space, so that even if one sets up the typesetting to not vary the space, one has to double up on the spaces. Naturally, people should just use tabs properly, but.....

    Microsoft has focused their OpenType work on linguistics, not typesetting capabilities, so the above should hold even for Windows 2000 and later (naturally it doesn't hold if someone is using Adobe InDesign and sets the option for old-style figures and proportional numbers).

    For those who're curious, I touch on some of this sort of thing in some of my didactic typography samples available from my website URL.

    William

    --
    Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
  86. wtf? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what a fucking fuck fuck fuck, i'd like to know?

  87. Re:Roman? Irony. by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 1

    Never ceases to amaze me how trolls will seize on anything to bash the US. So the Roman Empire collapsed under the weight of its own arrogance? Or maybe you just predict that the US will? Pray tell, learned troll.

  88. They didn't choose a font! by Quila · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They chose the Times New Roman typeface at 14 point, consisting of the fonts regular, italic, bold and bold italic.

    A typeface could technically be a font if you only have one version of that typeface = the one font in it.

  89. Joking aside... by Angstroem · · Score: 1
    Where I prefer monospaced fonts for programming, they are rather cumbersome to read.

    But what I really don't get is size 14. If you have problems reading size 12, you better make an appointment with your eye doctor. (Preferrably use a cab or public transportation to go there...)

    1. Re:Joking aside... by tommck · · Score: 1, Informative

      Heck.. have you ever watch CSPAN? They should rename that channel C-Geezer... congress if full of old farts... Their eye sight is bad. I'm sure it's the same the farther up the chain in the State Department you go. It's all OLD people. There aren't any 25 year old perfect-sighted guys in upper management in the government. They need big fonts!

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
    2. Re:Joking aside... by Angstroem · · Score: 1
      It's all OLD people. There aren't any 25 year old perfect-sighted guys in upper management in the government.
      So what's the difference... In terms of eyesight it's just the size of the glasses. And if you're too vain, just use reading glasses or (if possible) contacts.

      (I'm still unsure whether that enthusiasm for frameless glasses among those 25 year old guys in upper management really comes from the fact that they really need glasses or if they just find them fashionable. Admittedly, they are more fashionable than those glass face masks worn by the elder guys...)

    3. Re:Joking aside... by tommck · · Score: 1

      It's all about what's convenient for them! If they have to pay for glasses, it's easier to pass a law to change the font! :)

      --
      ---- It puts the lotion on its skin or else it gets the hose again. It does this whenever it's told.
  90. one downside to the change by r5t8i6y3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    moving from a fixed width/monospaced font to a variable spaced font will make it more difficult for simpler forms of communication to interface officially with government entities.

    increasing complexity typically reduces reliability.

  91. Re:Roman? Irony. by GodHead · · Score: 1

    You better hope we don't collapse. I "hate America" (ie. disagree with current policy) as much as any thinking person, but I know that as bad as we are, the death throws would be 100x worse for me/us/everyone.

    --
    Just wait till some crappy band steals your nic.
  92. Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 0, Troll

    Encrypted "Super Secret" communications will be done with Wingdings 16Isn't this the crypto that SCO used in their code comparisons?

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative

      Isn't [Wingdings] the crypto that SCO used in their code comparisons?

      No, that was Symbol, which any bilingual English/Greek speaker can read fluently. So now, under the DMCA and Patriot Act, are all residents of Greece who know English "terrorists"?

    2. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by tiger99 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Much as I would like to, even I can't actually find any way to blame SCO for this font change. I can't blame Sir Bill either. But, I think it is stupid, because 14 point is a bit too big and so wastes paper, not that the US government ever cared about waste.....

      In any case, there are more visually pleasing fonts, and I see no reason why official documents should not look good. Some organisations use their own custom font, I would have thought that the US government could afford to pay for a real expert to come up with a good one, which might also be more readable by the visually challenged.

    3. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by mikerich · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Much as I would like to, even I can't actually find any way to blame SCO for this font change. I can't blame Sir Bill either. But, I think it is stupid, because 14 point is a bit too big and so wastes paper, not that the US government ever cared about waste.....

      And just think of the endless committees, sub-committees, working groups, focus groups, font lobbyists, R and D, marketing and strategising people that were involved. There were probably millions spent on deciding whether they should go for the relaxed 12 point, or the more dynamic and assertive 'hell we're a superpower' 14 point approach.

      I hear they're working on rebranding the bald eagle for the 21st Century, apparently the existing bird just isn't - well - [makes feeble hand gestures] swooping enough for today's time-poor, internet-rich, xboxed, click-to-continue, frappacino generation.

      Best wishes,
      Mike.

    4. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by micromoog · · Score: 2, Informative
      But, I think it is stupid, because 14 point is a bit too big and so wastes paper, not that the US government ever cared about waste.....

      If you'll RTFA, you'll find "The new font 'takes up almost exactly the same area on the page as Courier New 12, while offering a crisper, cleaner, more modern look'". In fact, it takes slightly less paper, and anyone with half a brain can tell you it's a lot more readable. Add to that that it comes standard with Windows, and there's really no argument against it.

    5. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by jovlinger · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd expect Times 14 to put about as much text as Courier 12 on the same page: Courier is monospace, while Times is quite compact.

      Of course, I was hoping for a nice font; calson, newspaper gothic, or somesuch. Or my personal favorite: bembo.

      I think fonts are some of the most important and pervasive branding statements you can make: think of apple and their use of garamond condensed.

    6. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by RailGunner · · Score: 1
      That, and larger fonts take up more memory! After all - they're bigger!

      *wink*

    7. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > In fact, it takes slightly less paper,

      How in the world can you come to the illogical conclusion that using larger characters takes less space? Of COURSE it's more readable

      > there's really no argument against it.

      Except that our (or "my," dunno where you are from) country doesn't need to be wasting time and money to find which font should be standardized -- and you'll be sure that plenty of stupid crap will happen because of it. Contractors will be ignored or whatever because their proposals, while %33 less costly, were not in this exact font. Documents will have to be rewritten or reprinted because of this new "standard." It's just friggin stupid.

    8. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 4, Informative

      Test it out, loud mouth.

      Open a new Word (or other word processor of choice) document and paste in multiple pages of text and format it all as Courier New 12 pt. Print it out.

      Now convert it all to Times New Roman 14 pt and print it out. How many pages compared to Courier? The same or less, I'll bet you find.

      Courier New is a monospaced font, you can fit a fixed number of characters per line, whether they are all i's or m's.

      Times New Roman is properly kerned so that you can fit more characters per line as each character takes up only as much space as it needs.

      It sounds like 14 pt would take up more space, and if you stay within one typestyle you would be correct, but Courier New is not space efficient so you actually do gain back more space and make it easier to read large blocks of text.

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    9. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by sg3000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      > there are more visually pleasing fonts, and I see no reason
      > why official documents should not look good.

      Yes, there are more pleasing fonts, but don't let untalented people come any where close to them. Give them Times New Roman and delete all the other fonts from their computers.

      At my company, Futura is our corporate branded sans serif, with New Century Schoolbook used for serif work. However, only about 10% of the corporate population can deal with this. We've got people who produce hundreds of pages of Futura text (where its sans serif nature makes the document an eyestrain to read). We've got people who can't tell the difference between Futura, MS Comic Sans, and Arial. We've got people who will mix Futura and Times New Roman in the same freaking sentence. I once saw a marketing person (who should have known better) try to use Zapf Chancery (an abomination) in all caps all over a presentation for a trade show, before he was smacked upside the head.

      I can't imagine our Federal government is any better. So, if settling on Times New Roman is the way to prevent font atrocities, then so be it.

      Sheesh. The only way I can keep from exploding like this at work is to read Kibo's pages on this.

      --
      Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
    10. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by kinzillah · · Score: 1

      ...and what about Linux?

      --
      Douglas P. Price
    11. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Atryn · · Score: 2
      Except that our (or "my," dunno where you are from) country doesn't need to be wasting time and money to find which font should be standardized -- and you'll be sure that plenty of stupid crap will happen because of it. Contractors will be ignored or whatever because their proposals, while %33 less costly, were not in this exact font. Documents will have to be rewritten or reprinted because of this new "standard." It's just friggin stupid.
      Oh no, you are completely missing the point. Without this standardization more "time and money" would be wasted because every government entity and committee and RFP would all have to decide their own requirements. Having a single government-wide standard saves all of this effort.

      Now, I truly lament for all of the government employed ASCII artists who will no longer have a fixed-width font to work with.
      --
      Come play Moral Decay!
    12. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Really? I thought it was their formulaic and predictable sloganizing that made their branding statement so pervasive.

    13. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by micromoog · · Score: 1

      What about Linux?

    14. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by bluepinstripe · · Score: 1
      I ask this as a legitimate question, hoping someone will respond.

      I would have guessed--I don't know why--that a sans serif font would be easier on the eyes. Not that either of these two things are logical explanations: the only font I have seen developed for people with dyslexia, Read Regular was sans serif; and most of the people I have worked with whom have poor eyesight prefer a sans serif font.

      Is a serif font really easier on the eyes and why?

    15. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, Kibo really sets the e e e example. Arghhhhh. I h h h have a h h h headache now from other kibolized page on his site. Kiboshed? Kibolified?

    16. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Did you mean Caslon and Newspaper Gothic?

      The others are: Bembo, Garamond Condensed

    17. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by TobiasSodergren · · Score: 1

      RAM-wise or brain-wise? ;)

    18. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Ulven · · Score: 2, Informative

      From what I heard, the serifs are meant to lead your eyes along the text.

      People with dyslexia find the letters in words get jumbled up, so anything that serves to seperate the letters is of help. Hence the preference for sans serif.

    19. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by global33 · · Score: 1

      I think it's safe to assume the comment refers to 14pt Times New Roman being more pages that 12 pt in the same font. Your post is very informative, but a tad beligerent, and I think it worth noting that 14pt is a slightly excessive font size when most people can read 12pt TNR quite comfortably.

      --

      michael
      /global33/

    20. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by optikSmoke · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, the conventional wisdom is that the serifs help "guide" your eyes along the letters, making them easier to read. It does seem easier to me, whatever the reason.

    21. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Exactly.

      An example can be seen here.

    22. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by skotte · · Score: 2, Insightful
      ok, here's an argument.

      I fFind it easier to read, easier to visually digest, easier to scan through and attain the main ideas presented by the text;

      There's always the same number of characters, and therefore words. the even spacing of courier makes all text organized in even columns, which enables it's length of material to be judged quickly.

      Courier (monospaced) fFonts are handy because tables can be built easily, fForms can be written simply. it's very easy to determine how much space is required when you know how many letters are expected.

      Machines like monospacing because it is very easy to differentiate letters which have a tendency to look alike. OCR happens easier, fFax machines tend not to blur as much.

      Transcribers and archivists like monospacing because it is very easy to read quickly. similar reasons already presented, it is easy to quickly scan, read, and differintiate. (i call out this item in specific because government is riddled with transcribers and archivists)

      Courier is easier to read on an elementary level. remember, government is fFor everyone. disabled, poor vision, low literacy, young and old, all people must be able to read the documents in question.

    23. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Bush+Pig · · Score: 1

      While 14pt probably is a bit big (although it's about the smallest I can read without my glasses), Times New Roman is both more attractive and more legible than Courier (which I've always thought was an exceptionally ugly font). I can't think of too many fonts which look appreciably better than Times New Roman, except for a couple of custom-designed ones which don't come with word-processors.

      --
      What a long, strange trip it's been.
    24. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Attitude+Adjuster · · Score: 1
      OK, so I did your test in OpenOffice 1.1, with about 400 words or so of real text (from the abstract of one of my papers, not some unrealistic made-up line like TEST TEST TEST), and in Times Roman 14 it takes up about 15% more space than monospace Courier 12.

      Times 12 verses Courier 12, you'd be right, but 14pt is f'ing blind-man big....

      I don't know about the Goverment, but in my experience NASA typically allows any font as long as your less than some maximum number of words per line (which gives a font size for Times Roman of about 12pt). Thats a more sensible way of doing it than specifying both font and size.

    25. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't understand where you got the idea that Courier is easier for disabled/young/old/whatever people to read than Times.

    26. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by skotte · · Score: 1

      oh. I am pointing out, by being evenly spaced, there are never any unusual kerning issues. 'fl' never becomes A. 'rn' never becomes 'm'. and so on.

      think of a children's book. usually the text is monospaced. each letter has a uniform spacing and appearance.

    27. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      --Times New Roman is properly kerned so that you can fit more characters per line as each character takes up only as much space as it needs.--

      Very true. TNR was also originally designed for a newspaper so its "set width" is even more narrow than most other proportional typefaces. Still, I think 12pt Courier will usually be a touch narrower than 14pt TNR.

    28. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it amusing how Slashdotters like you read a story about something that a lot of people probably devoted serious time to, and then just dismiss it as stupid because some silly reason that just came to your mind this instant.

      Hey, Bozo, Courier is monospaced. It takes up more space, even if in 12 and TNR in 14. It's not wasteful, it saves resources.

      And as for more visually pleasing fonts, care to elaborate on that? I consider TNR the most visually pleasing font. Presumably a lot of other people do as well, since almost everybody uses it.

      And about "readable for the visually challenged" - that's why they changed to 14pts, the choice you complained about just two sentences ago (remember?). And how the hell do you know they didn't "hire a real expert"?

      But don't let that get in the way of your little rant. And I'm absolutely sure you would like to blame Bill Gates or SCO for this. I can just imagine what the contents of your posts on a more flamebaiting article is like... *shudder*

    29. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1

      Was I beligerant? Yes.

      Was the poster I responded to acting like an idiot and talking out of his ass? Yes.

      My new conspiracy theory is that if they reduce the number of pages used, the corporation with the contract to provide the US Gov. with printer paper had threatened that they would withold some campaign contributions, or hike up their price so they make the same amount of money in the long run...

      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    30. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Oliver+Wendell+Jones · · Score: 1
      Narrower in what way?

      This is a test of a proportionally spaced font. This is only a test. In the event of an actual font emergency you would have been instructed to use only Times New Roman 14pt type.

      This is a test of a proportionally spaced font. This is only a test. In the event of an actual font emergency you would have been instructed to use only Times New Roman 14pt type.


      Except for the indenting that using {ecode}{/ecode} induced, it's rather obvious that a proportionally spaced body font is much more narrow than a fixed width font like Courier New. On my 17" monitor, the text "This is a test of a proportionally spaced font. This is only a test." measures as 4" in length, in Courier it measures 5 5/8" in length. You mileage may vary.
      --
      A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing -- Emo Phillips
    31. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Zagadka · · Score: 1

      What about "F" becoming "fF"? That seems to happen a lot in your posts...

    32. Re:Once againe, SCO set the standard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fFuck is it with all the fFreaky doubled fFs, dude ?

  93. Not newsworthy , but a big deal. by ru-486 · · Score: 1

    I deal with the documents in the article and it's a big deal to those involved. There are standards and they are expected to be adhered to. I've seen documents thrown out or sent back due to the font and font sizing used! This change is also going to cause a problem in larger documents in which items are commonly referred to by page number. The new printouts of older documents will have different page numbers and this may cause a headache for those that refer to them in that way. This is especially prevalent in the judicial system.

  94. It's *New* Roman. Not the same thing by mr_rangr · · Score: 1

    We won't be making the same mistakes as the Old Roman Empire. *Our* leader is Yale and Harvard educated!

  95. Philip K. Dick said it best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    The Black Iron Prison is alive and well.

    But historically speaking, of course, the Roman Empire's western collapse did nothing to its eastern empire, which was later renamed the "Ottaman Empire", but was largely constructed out of lands conquered by the Romans.

    World War I was the former Western states of the Roman Empire attacking (and reclaiming) the actual power of the vestigal Roman Empire.

    While it could be argued that Victorian London was the new "Rome", the actual throne resided in Turkey.

    In any case World War II was the shifting of power amongst Western governments - for Hitler it was the recreation of the empire under him - but for everyone else it was in fact protecting the empire against the barbarians all over again. After the dust settled, the throne was moved from London to Washington, where it is today.

    The symbolism of 1st Century Rome continues today in America. Eagles, for example, where the symbol of both Rome and America. The use of Greek inspired architecture in our government buildings.

    The list goes on and on. Suffice it to say that the Roman Empire is alive and well, and under its new auspices - World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund, North Atlantic Treaty Organization - it continues to operate.

    1. Re:Philip K. Dick said it best by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


      The so-called Roman empire has fallen down because of:
      1. The rise of government incompetence and power abuse 2. The spreading of religious fanaticism (christianism) which created cracks on the slavery system which the roman society depended upon 3. Feeling the empire was weak, the [european] barbarians put the whole thing down, giving birth to the dark middle ages

      The currently most powerful country in the world was founded by religious fanatics. And it rose based on slavery. Its government incompetence keeps rising every year. And now it got into an isolated position with the rest of the world, while the "barbarians" (traficants, terrorists, mafias, microsoft, whatever) keep doing their job seamlessly.

      Time to fall down.

  96. Number in Times New Roman by Confused · · Score: 1

    Those columns of numbers align quite well, because the designers of this font made all the numbers of equal width.

    Facts have this annoying tendency to mess up the best theories..

    1. Re:Number in Times New Roman by greed · · Score: 2
      Those columns of numbers align quite well, because the designers of this font made all the numbers of equal width.

      Except in the case of a mixture of text and numbers. A lot of people don't use tab at all, let alone properly, and just space over.

  97. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  98. Ugh by Prune · · Score: 1

    Just because a font is widespread doesn't make it good. They should have chosen one of the other traditional typefaces, like Garamond or Palatino.

    --
    "Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason."
  99. Complainers all unemployed or never employed? by Zed2K · · Score: 1

    I'm guessing everyone who is complaining is either currently unemployed or never really had a job in the first place. If they did they would know that every company and big organization makes a decision like this.

  100. And in Related News... by fuzzybunny · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...the department of homeland security recently adopted Zapf Dingbats as its official font.

    Should clear up their communiques a bit.

    --
    Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage
  101. Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 5, Funny


    Times New Roman instead Garamond? What were those aesthetically clueless dingbats thinking?

    That's it. I've completely lost faith in our government, and political processes in general. If they can't ascertain Garamond's clear superiority to TNR, well, they'll just have to impeached, that's all.

    And sent for serious rehabilitation. And re-training, with those methods used for de-programming cult victims.

    I mean, seriously, TNR over Garamond? I ask you...

    1. Re:Not Garamond? by WillAdams · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Unfortunately, Garamond isn't readily available to all systems the government is likely to be purchasing / using, so the choice of Times New Roman (a Windows core font, and available on all Macs which have Internet Explorer installed) makes good fiscal sense.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    2. Re:Not Garamond? by gryphokk · · Score: 1

      They're thinking about what's available in a default windows install.

      That's the same reason I had to eliminate garamond from the eforms program of the fortune 500 oil company I design for.

      Also killed anything I do in Times (NOT TNR) or Helvetica.

      The unfortunate thing about standards is they must be lowest common denominator, or the rank and file can't acheive them.

      Or you have to pay per seat licensing to populate everydesk with the Adobe font collection.

      Why, oh why did Apple bother to invent TrueType :-(

      --
      And you, madam, are very ugly. In the morning, I shall be sober.
    3. Re:Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 3, Funny


      People have to *read* these documents! Subjecting them to the ugliness, the aesthetic horror, that is Times New Roman, is either depravity or at the very least, an incidence of putting pennies before dollars. What will the medical costs be of subjecting the world to Times New Roman simply to save a few cents in producing government documents?

      This is an outrage, I tell you! Think of the children!

    4. Re:Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 2, Funny


      I blame the French. If only Bill had renamed Garamond to something less French sounding, "George" maybe, or "W", then you *know* it would be the standard font.

      It's the simple tactic of putting putting petty international rivalries over self-interest, over simple aesthetic need, that we see time and time again from this government.

      I'm sick it, sick of it I say.

      Oh god, Times New Roman... I just... I can't...

      ARRRRRGGGGHHHH!

      (slurping sounds of a man being sucked inot an evil vortex...)

    5. Re:Not Garamond? by ENOENT · · Score: 1

      At least they aren't using Palatino.

      --
      That's "Mr. Soulless Automaton" to you, Bub.
    6. Re:Not Garamond? by jrockway · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why not computer modern, then? If you've ever read a document written in Computer Modern, you won't be using anything else anytime soon :)

      I don't think people even bother to read LaTeX'd documents, they're so beautiful that you just look at it and drool.

      (For a while I had the window titles and mozilla using CM, but it's HEAVILY optimized for print, so I stopped using it for that)

      --
      My other car is first.
    7. Re:Not Garamond? by red+floyd · · Score: 1

      No. They should use 9 point Chicago!!!!

      --
      The only reason we have the rights we have is that people just like us died to gain those rights. -- Cheerio Boy
    8. Re:Not Garamond? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

      Jesus. You just have no clue about sarcasm and humor, do you? Doh!

      --
      "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    9. Re:Not Garamond? by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well, it's not so much Computer Modern which is beautiful as it is the TeX layout algorithms which yield beauty. TeX could make an eviction notice pretty.

      Why anyone uses anything besides LaTeX to prepare documents is beyond me. Complete control of glyph composition; astoundingly beautiful and readable styles; PostScript rendering; BibTeX: it's truly the most magnificent thing going.

    10. Re:Not Garamond? by fishermonger · · Score: 1
      Mod parent +5 Funny. Just my opinion, no offense. Knuth is not Zapf. Ithink that that thing (CM) was supposed to be a filler until a real font was made.

      Other then bad writers and high prices, the only thing that stops me from redeaing Springer Verlag books is CM. Just one word: Cambridge University Press.

      --
      "...normal evolution would have gone Word to Frame to troff, but instead, the computer industry has gone the other way!"
    11. Re:Not Garamond? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Times New Roman (a Windows core font, and available on all Macs which have Internet Explorer installed)

      You don't need IE to get Times on Macs. I don't know about OSX, but Times has been bundled with MacOS (before IE) since at least OS7. See Mac OS 7.x, 8.x 9.x: Fonts Included With Major System Releases.

    12. Re:Not Garamond? by notchcode · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think Bembo would be even better. Nice and open, rounded letterforms, etc. etc.

    13. Re:Not Garamond? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Times != Times New Roman.

      I prefer palatino.

    14. Re:Not Garamond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft published TNR and other core MS fonts for free.

    15. Re:Not Garamond? by pmdboi · · Score: 2, Informative

      Interestingly enough, Times New Roman was first used in the Times of London and probably drawn by Brits Victor Lardent and Stanley Morison, so its origins are decidedly non-American. However, there's been evidence unearthed that Times New Roman was actually originally drawn by American yacht designer Starling Burgess.

    16. Re:Not Garamond? by g-doo · · Score: 1

      I think Lucida Grande is a lovely font. I suppose the font could be embedded in all documents?

    17. Re:Not Garamond? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      Why anyone uses anything besides LaTeX to prepare documents is beyond me.

      Perhaps because it's a lot easier to train someone to use the tools capable of outputting .doc files (especially since that frequently means zero training today) than it is to train them to use the tools capable of outputting LaTeX files?

    18. Re:Not Garamond? by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      "Freedom Font"

    19. Re:Not Garamond? by Atryn · · Score: 1
      (a Windows core font, and available on all Macs which have Internet Explorer installed)
      AHA!!! So evil Bill was involved! I'm sure someone from MS lobbied for them to choose a font that was CORE in Windows but only on a Mac if you installed IE!!! What a sly and sneaky ploy!

      Removes tin hat
      --
      Come play Moral Decay!
    20. Re:Not Garamond? by SychoSyd · · Score: 1

      People have to *read* these documents! Subjecting them to the ugliness, the aesthetic horror, that is Times New Roman, is either depravity or at the very least, an incidence of putting pennies before dollars.

      Hmm... incredibly bothered by bad aesthetics... trying to justify spending more money for something attractive and tasteful... You're a Mac user, aren't you? :->

    21. Re:Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      Ha! Dual-boot Windows & Linux, actually.

      But that is pretty funny. Nice one.

    22. Re:Not Garamond? by CmputrAce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree completely. Garamond is the Font that has lasted with dignity through ages. It is the font of the illuminated, the cogniscenti.

      Why, it's my favorite font!

    23. Re:Not Garamond? by CmputrAce · · Score: 1

      That is a very lame argument, for you are declaring that the government of the United States of America makes decisions based on "fiscal sense." For that reason alone, it is totally reprehensible that the gov't should select Times New Roman when Arial / Helvetica are FAR MORE READABLE than TNR.

      Besides, they could get a "site" license for any font they wanted, or they could legally have one of their hackers build a one-off clone of a copyrighted font.

      Since when has our government considered COST to be an issue in purchasing?

    24. Re:Not Garamond? by WillAdams · · Score: 1

      Helvetica / Arial aren't readable, they're _decipherable_ and suffer badly from poor spacing, awkward character shapes &c.

      Compare Arial / Helvetica to a decently spaced sans some time, say Adrian Frutiger's Univers to see what a readable sans serif can be.

      William

      --
      Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
    25. Re:Not Garamond? by Liquid+Len · · Score: 1

      Think of the children!

      Krusty: Sex cauldron!? I thought they closed that place down!

    26. Re:Not Garamond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Minion. Definitely the most readable typeface, ever.

    27. Re:Not Garamond? by not_cub · · Score: 1
      Why anyone uses anything besides LaTeX to prepare documents is beyond me.

      Perhaps because it's a lot easier to train someone to use the tools capable of outputting .doc files (especially since that frequently means zero training today) than it is to train them to use the tools capable of outputting LaTeX files?

      Just as it is easier to train someone to watch TV than to read a book.

      --
      q='echo "q=$s$q$s;s=$b$s;b=$b$b;$q"';s=\';b=\\;echo "q=$s$q$s;s=$b$s;b=$b$b;$q"
    28. Re:Not Garamond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And guess what... people who are having to do this for a job (you know, something 99.99% of the world hates having to do), they want things to be done quick, fast, easy.

      I can explain Word in 5 minutes. There's a class for LaTeX we send people who need it to - it's 6 weeks in duration and is the "basics" class.

    29. Re:Not Garamond? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Times != Times New Roman.

      But "Times New Roman " is "a" Times. If you can tell the difference from a printed sample at 14 pts, you have a better eye than me. Most software will silently use whichever one is available if one is specified.

      I believe TNR is metrically exactly the same as the version Adobe sells, as Arial is of Helvetica. MS and Apple wanted compatibility with standard Adobe fonts, but didn't want to pay for them. (Now they're all buddies again with OpenType.)

    30. Re:Not Garamond? by Bush+Pig · · Score: 1

      In my view, Helvetica and Arial are both uglier and less readable than Times New Roman. As an earlier post has already pointed out, sans-serif fonts are intrinsically less legible than serif fonts, and Helvetica in particular is extremely ugly to boot.

      --
      What a long, strange trip it's been.
    31. Re:Not Garamond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe you haven't noticed but almost all of /. is in TNR, including your post.

    32. Re:Not Garamond? by FredGray · · Score: 1
      they want things to be done quick, fast, easy.

      The point is that, for complex documents, you end up saving lots of time using a markup language like TeX. Yes, it takes training and practice, and you spend more time on simple documents in the beginning, but you never have those frustrating multi-hour sessions (so frequent with Word) fighting to get the formatting consistent throughout the document. This is especially true when you're dealing with merging pieces of the document written by different people, each of whom starts out formatting their contribution in a different style.

    33. Re:Not Garamond? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2

      Times New Roman is a Monotype design, Times Roman is a Linotype design. They're pretty similar, but there are subtle differences-- the most striking difference is that there's an extra serif on the Times Roman "5".

      Arial, however, is noticeably different. The cross stroke on the Arial "Q" is curved, but the Helvetica Q has a straight cross stroke.

    34. Re:Not Garamond? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Times New Roman is a Monotype design, Times Roman is a Linotype design. They're pretty similar, but there are subtle differences-- the most striking difference is that there's an extra serif on the Times Roman "5".

      Well spotted, but you do have to be a type nerd to notice or care.

      Arial, however, is noticeably different.

      I said metrically identical. Same widths. Helvetica is bland, but preferable, at least in print.

    35. Re:Not Garamond? by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      Well spotted, but you do have to be a type nerd to notice or care.
      Type nerd? Isn't nerdity something that slashdot extolls? Actually, I'm not much of a type nerd, else I would have found a way to describe the different serif designs.

      I said metrically identical. Same widths. Helvetica is bland, but preferable, at least in print.

      Ah yes. Metric identity. Look, if I'm going to be fiddling about with fonts, I might as well pay attention to the shape of the letterforms, and not just to metrics.

    36. Re:Not Garamond? by setmajer · · Score: 1

      But which Garamond? Garamond 3, Adobe Garamond, ITC Garamond, Simoncini Garamond? To say nothing of the various Garamond types from other foundries, like URW++.

      Garamond isn't a single face, but rather any of a range of faces based (sometimes indirectly) on the roman types cut by Claude Garamond, usually paired with an italic derived from those cut by Robert Granjon.

      While Garamonds are to varying degrees good print faces (not all are of decent quality), I'm not sure they make the best choice in an age of on-screen viewing and coarse output from cheap printers. They tend to have subtle curves and details which just don't reproduce well at low resolution.

      Times New Roman, a face designed by Stanley Morrison for the London Times, is likewise a poor choice for an all-purpose face. It was originally designed for newspaper work, meaning it was to be legible at small sizes (specifically 8 pt., IIRC). It is a transitional face, meaning there is moderate difference in weight between thick strokes (the 'stem' of the upper-case 'P' for example) and thin strokes (e.g. the crossbar on the 'H') and the type is generally more geometric than the old style faces like Garamond, but less so than 'modern' faces like Bodoni. While it was intended to be used with newsprint, and so isn't as vulnerable to coarse printing as, say, a Didot type, the rather thin bits of Times New Roman make it ill-suited to on-screen display, and it has never been a terribly great face for larger sizes (including 14 point).

      A better choice would have been a type specifically designed to work well on screen or when printed on low-quality printers, like Microsoft's Georgia by Matthew Carter. It's really a much more legible face on-screen, and in my experience prints acceptably as well. It's also among Microsoft's Core Fonts and distributed alongside Times New Roman so it is likely to be installed anywhere Times New Roman is available.

      --

    37. Re:Not Garamond? by BandwidthHog · · Score: 1

      Anybody who sees a choice of Times over Garamond as an atrocity goes on my Friends list.

      Sometimes twice.

      --

      Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
    38. Re:Not Garamond? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with Fraktur?

    39. Re:Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1

      "Type Nerd"?

      Sorry, gotta agree with the peer. "Type Nerd" went out at least 10, maybe 15, years ago.

      The proper term nowadays is: "Font Geek".

    40. Re:Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      Thank you. Couldn't have said it better myself.

      Well, I suppose I could actually. I mean, Univers over Garamond?

      Still, your critique of Ariel is spot on.

      Again, thank you.

    41. Re:Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1


      You do know that the Times of London is a crappy paper, don't you?

      A hundred years ago George Bernard Shaw was making fun of it in his plays (cf. Major Barbara), and it hasn't changed since.

      It's still the paper inbred Tories read to form/osmote their opinions since they're too stupid to formulate any of their own, and the only reason they don't read Page 3 of The Sun is because the desire got paddled out of them in Public School.

      One can in fact convincingly argue that the Times of London's best feature is its illegibility.

    42. Re:Not Garamond? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      "Type Nerd" went out at least 10, maybe 15, years ago. The proper term nowadays is: "Font Geek".

      A font geek is someone with 15,000 truetype fonts he's downloaded from P2P or usenet. Many are duplicated under different names, many have been mangled by poor conversion, but he's happy just to pick up every one he comes across. Occasionally he might use one, usually applying several PhotoShop filters to make it grungy.

      A type nerd probably has far fewer fonts, but they're all high quality and probably paid for (by his past employers -- he has at least actually been paid to set type). He'll argue endlessly about kerning or height of small capitals, and sneer at lining figures instead of old-style, "fi" instead of the ligature, and has strong opinions on which foundry's cut of Garamond is the most elegant or historically authentic.

      So on the whole, "type nerd" is probably the preferable epithet.

    43. Re:Not Garamond? by MuParadigm · · Score: 1

      "A font geek is someone with 15,000 truetype fonts..."

      Ok. I guess this is semantics and we're just defining things differently.

      For instance, what you describe as a "type nerd" is what I think of as a "font geek". And what you describe as a "font geek" (see above) is what I think of as just another variant of "clueless idiot".

    44. Re:Not Garamond? by 1u3hr · · Score: 1
      Ok. I guess this is semantics and we're just defining things differently.

      On the other hand, I might be joking.

    45. Re:Not Garamond? by TPFH · · Score: 1

      Perhaps because it's a lot easier to train someone to use the tools capable of outputting .doc files

      Or because they do not want to train them at all, just put them at a desk with a standard PC running the standard software and expect them to use it.

      The people upstairs think it is better to just let them figure it out for themselves than to spend anything training them. And they might be right. But from what I understand about LaTeX, it can do a lot of kewl shite.

      So, it doesn't suprise me that most people would run from the room screaming if asked to use LaTeX, but there are probably quite a few things where it would be the best tool to use.

      I don't expect people to use vi, but for me I think it is the most practical editor of plain text. Then again, a lot of people probably think I'm psycho for liking plain text.

      Do I have a point here? If I did I forgot it by now. Good Night.

      --
      This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
  102. State Department... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wow, I like how the State Department is suddenly the entire US Government. Good job, Slashdot.

  103. and no longer couriers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The couriers of freedom are turning into
    the couriers of globalism.

  104. Sign of demographic changes by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    This clearly reflects the increase in mean age in the US, for both the government and citizenry. As the average person's vision deteriorates (minus laser surger), on average, more people will need larger print.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  105. Paper Industry Pork Conspiracy by N8F8 · · Score: 1

    Just to keep the conspiracy nuts happy:

    I bet this is some big kickback to the paper industry for bribing politicians. 14pt documents use more paper.

    Or....

    This is just another example of how old people are taking over the country. Us young people don't need big fonts, why should we pay for big fonts only old people need?

    --
    "God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
  106. Screw the Trees! by teamhasnoi · · Score: 1
    Think of the Marks-A-Lot buzz everyone on Crapitol Hill is going to have! It's not bad enough that they're all smokin' dope and snortin' coke, now they'll be high in the sky everytime they censor a document.

    Senator Withered: "Hoo HA, I love the smell of pulling the wool over the American People's eyes!" *mark* *mark* *mark*

    Senator Oldfart: "You said it...SENATOR!" (Both collapse in laughter) "Hoooo...Whew. *sniff* *mark* *mark* *mark* What do you think, should I censor this part about a huge raise for us?"

    Senator Heartevent: "HAW HAW! Censor the whole damn thing! *mark* *mark* *mark* I'm losing my buzz!"

    And that's how it happened, I swear.

  107. 10 Point Falisy by Genady · · Score: 5, Informative

    See here's the problem. 10 point at 96 DPI and 10 point at 72 DPI *SHOULD* be the same thing, point does *NOT* equal pixel, that's a common fallicy propogated by Microsoft. Points are Points, there are 72 of them in an inch. Points are NOT pixels!

    So to answer your question. No, 12 point is the accepted standard for most communication. Unfortunately since the majority of computers in the world render points incorrectly '10 point' has become a defacto, and typographically incorrect, standard.

    --


    What if it is just turtles all the way down?
    1. Re:10 Point Falisy by Ivan+Karamazov · · Score: 1

      You sound a bit confused. 12 point refers to the size of a font when printed. Typical printing ranges from 9 to 12 point. 14 is definitely big. It will look a little awkward. The whole 96 DPI and 72 DPI thing refers to rendering the font on-screen. In this sense, 12 point start to become meaningless because some computers can render fonts at other resolutions besides 96 or 72 DPI. Regardless of what it looks like on screen, 12 should always be the same size on paper.

      --
      "The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy." Albert Camus,
    2. Re:10 Point Falisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What does how the text looks on screen have to do with anything? Don't these people look at their printed pages and say "maybe this should be bigger"?

      "...fallicy propogated by Microsoft."

      That's total BS.

      Microsoft's assumption has always been that the screen was 96 dpi (by default), so on Windows, points have never equalled pixels.

      If anything, it would be Apple's assumption that the screen is 72 dpi (and the inability to specify otherwise as you can in Windows) that would lead to confusing points size and pixel size because on Mac OS, they ARE the same.

    3. Re:10 Point Falisy by a1englishman · · Score: 1

      It should also be the same size on a screen.

      DPI refers to the density of pixels on the device. Basic lasers have a density of 300 DPI, Mac displays have 72 DPI, and Windows uses 96 DPI.

      A 12 pt font should be rendered the same size on either of the three devices; however, the fidelity will be much different. At 300 DPI, you can render every little serif, but at 96 DPI it becomes much cruder, and at 72 DPI, cruder still.

      In reality, the fonts aren't rendered correctly. On one platform, they're rendered larger than they should. Probably to overcome the lousy fidelity.

    4. Re:10 Point Falisy by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      a common fallicy propogated by Microsoft.

      Sorry? From where on Microsoft's web site do you get this idea? Somehow, I think this is an indefensible allegation.

    5. Re:10 Point Falisy by neurojab · · Score: 1

      >Mac displays have 72 DPI, and Windows uses 96 DPI.

      If that were the case, there would be required resolutions for certain size monitors. I can set a 19 inch display to 640x480, and I'm pretty damn certain that's not 96 DPI.

      Fact: You have no idea how big a font is going to be on a user's screen, windows or mac. The only thing you can control is how bit it is relative to the other documents the user might be dealing with.

    6. Re:10 Point Falisy by spitzak · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is not Microsoft's problem. If you did the minor detail of checking you would see that the Win32 API for selecting a font size takes the size in *points*. The same call takes a negative number to indicate pixels, which appears to be an addition at the last minute in an attempt to allow the DPI to change, but that appears to not have worked due to too many programs using the point interface.

      It is true they assumme the screen is 96 dpi so they multiply this by 96/72 to get the number of pixels. There is an internal setting for the screen DPI but changing it will screw up most programs because all the other calls are in pixels.

      The exact same bug exists on X, with the addition that screens are (correctly?) set to all kinds of different DPI values. Like GDI32, all other graphics are measured in pixels, which means if your screen is set to a DPI different than the original programmer had, your display is probably messed up. This is why your KDE display suddenly comes up with tiny fonts when you change the X driver. If this DPI was forced to 96 (or 100 which is popular on X) it would solve these problems the same as Windows does.

      I have no idea why X, Microsoft, and you all seem to think points are important, especially when every other graphics call measures stuff in pixels. It really would not be hard to have a DPI report from the device and let the program pick the pixel size to match, since they have to do this anyway to draw a 1" square or any other fixed-size graphic.

    7. Re:10 Point Falisy by tiger99 · · Score: 1
      It gets worse. Most graphics and picture editing programs, or the various books and articles relating to them, all talk a lot of rubbish about resizing to so many dpi. It is utterly irrelevant, yet I have seen serious articles purporting to tell you how to prepare photographs for publication, which really labour the point. The fact is that your camera takes a picture, in its best mode, of in my case 2560*1920 IIRC, which should be retained through the entire process until the final resize, to avoid losing detail. The DPI is irrelevant, yet the instructions were to resize to a certain number of DPI (then a bit later resize again.....)

      It does matter at the output process, typically a printer, where it is best to resize the image to exactly match the pixel resolution of the printer, or an exact multiple or sub-multiple thereof.

      I wonder where all this junk does originate? Yes, it is in X, but the screen does tend to be set up correctly, or can be by someone of modest ability. In most cases, certainly in Linux, the configurator program (which varies according to distro) asks the actual screen size, and anyone competent to use a PC can also use a ruler. As for using a positive value to get points and a negative value for pixels in the same call, that is about as disgracefully bad and iresponsible a programming practice as you will ever see, but rather good by Microtrash standards.

    8. Re:10 Point Falisy by Ivan+Karamazov · · Score: 1

      Actually no, because the DPI at which the OS renders (96 for Windows and 72 for Mac) does not match the DPI of the physical screen (typically over 100). The OS typically does not know or does not account for varying differences in DPI of differing physical displays. This means fonts that are 12 pt usually are different sizes on different computers. However, printer drivers typically know what DPI the physical printers are and therefore the fonts are printed the same on every physical printer (roughly the same).

      --
      "The struggle itself toward the heights is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy." Albert Camus,
    9. Re:10 Point Falisy by spitzak · · Score: 0

      Absolutlely agree about the image "DPI" stuff. I work in computer graphics for a living and can tell you the #1 important detail about a picture is "how many pixels it is wide, and how many pixels it is tall". But you go to Photoshop or any consumer program that manipulates pictures, and they will not tell you this information! Instead they tell you all this "DPI" stuff and perhaps, if you look carefully, they tell you the dimensions of the picture, so that you are forced to multiply to get the actual useful information. Tons of documentation says "change the DPI" which is meaningless: it can either mean you just change some DPI field which makes the picture bigger or smaller, or that you are resampling it so it draws the same size but has a different number of pixels (in reality it typically means both, Photoshop changes some internal DPI field and also resamples the image, but because the new size and dpi are both integers, it necessarily rounds the actual size to a different value, thus destroying any ability to do accurate sizing and defeating the only plausable reason for this DPI stuff in the first place!).

      I disagree with you that X works ok. Try setting up KDE to look nice, and then change the DPI of your monitor and restart X. The display is completely screwed up because only the fonts change size, nothing else does! The fact that Microsoft had the same bug is no excuse, this is a failure. I recommend the exact same solution that Microsoft did, which is to force the DPI to a defined value such as 96 so this does not happen anymore.

    10. Re:10 Point Falisy by ajagci · · Score: 1

      So to answer your question. No, 12 point is the accepted standard for most communication.

      Oh? Really? I suspect most scientific articles are published in smaller point sizes. Systems like TeX also make 10pt the default, and they predate pixel/point confusions for on-screen font display.

      Unfortunately since the majority of computers in the world render points incorrectly '10 point' has become a defacto, and typographically incorrect, standard.

      Well, that's not entirely accidental. Macintosh, for example, used 72dpi screens and made 1 pixel equal to 1 point. Then, those bitmapped "12 point fonts" got shipped around and rendered on many different screens. Apple could have called them "12 pixel fonts", but they didn't.

    11. Re:10 Point Falisy by ajagci · · Score: 1

      The whole 96 DPI and 72 DPI thing refers to rendering the font on-screen. In this sense, 12 point start to become meaningless because some computers can render fonts at other resolutions besides 96 or 72 DPI.

      No, it's not at all "meaningless". The character shapes in a 12pt font are different from those of the same font at 14pt.

      Regardless of what it looks like on screen, 12 should always be the same size on paper.

      A 12pt font on screen should "look like" a 12pt font on paper, no matter what. If the viewing conditions of the screen are very different, it may end up being a different size. So, for a wall-size display, you might render it as "a 12pt font scaled to 120pt". But that is not at all the same as a "120pt font".

    12. Re:10 Point Falisy by iabervon · · Score: 1

      The problem really comes from WYSIWYG computer programs, and the idea that it's remotely sane to show text on the screen at the same size that you would print it. If you print a document at 72 DPI and hold it at arm's length, you won't be able to read it at all with 10 or 12 point fonts. If you want to avoid driving you users crazy, you have to display the documents magnified, both to deal with the lower resolution and to deal with the distance from the screen. This means that higher resolution screens can also avoid magnifying the text as much.

      For user interface text, it doesn't make any sense to choose fonts by either point size or pixel size; using a higher resolution on the same monitor, you'll want a smaller point size but a larger pixel size, since you can read smaller text if it's clearer, but not text which is smaller by the same factor. Furthermore, using point size will confuse people who are looking at a magnified image of a 12-point document intended for print, because your 12-point unmagnified interface will have smaller text than the 12-point magnified document.

    13. Re:10 Point Falisy by T-Ranger · · Score: 1

      Actually there are slightly more then 72 points per inch, unless you beleive Adobe...

    14. Re:10 Point Falisy by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      It wasn't an assumption on Apple's part. They made sure that the screen is 72 dpi. Originally.

      When they started supporting third-party monitors, Apple should have added automatic scaling based on your resolution and screen size so that a 12-point font was still a real 12 points, and they should have changed pixel-coordinate drawing to a point-coordinate, and finally, they should have added a system-wide zoom so that the user could compensate for a far or near monitor.

      But, since all they had were bitmap fonts, which don't scale, I can see why they didn't do that.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    15. Re:10 Point Falisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Adobe Photoshop, under the "Units & Rulers" preferences, there is:

      Point/Pica Size
      - PostScript (72 points/inch)
      - Traditional (72.27 points/inch)

      I guess it's just a shame that PostScript was developed when computers handled integers far better than floating point.

    16. Re:10 Point Falisy by takev · · Score: 1

      X works perfectly ok, KDE does the wrong thing
      KDE should ask the X server at what horizontal and vertical DPI the window is renderd.
      Then it should draw the graphics for buttons, menus and font for this size.

      Remember, it used to be that we only had screens with 640 x 480 resolution, now on my notebook I'm running at 1600x1200 on a 15" screen. And I love it that my fonts are the same size on my screen as it is on paper.

      BTW, In the future windows on a screen could each have there own DPI settings as windows are now drawn as a texture on a polygon. Resizing a window may have a new meaning in the future.

    17. Re:10 Point Falisy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least X11 software works fine even if the DPI (and thus font sizes) changes, because widget toolkits are capable of automatically scaling.

      Personally, I prefer to define font sizes in points when using word processing and DTP applications where it is important, and in pixels everywhere else.

      In fact, this is what I've been doing in X11 until recently! The old X11 font rendering system can request either pixel or point (actually point*10, so it doesn't need to be integral) sizes for fonts, and X11 software always allowed you to choose your own fonts. But now, with xft/fontconfig, it's always point sizes in KDE/GNOME etc., and they don't let you set fractional sizes, so there are often many useful sizes that aren't available except by changing the DPI (ick).

    18. Re:10 Point Falisy by jstott · · Score: 1
      Points are Points, there are 72 of them in an inch.

      Except there aren't. True typography points are 0.013838 inches/point (or roughly 72.26478 points/inch) and not 1/72 inch. This is true for the US and UK. The rest of Europe, naturally, uses yet another size point (Didot points, 0.376 mm or about 0.01476 points per US inch). Postscript, from its beginning back some time in the 1980's, however, has used points that were by definition 1/72 inch and that usage has become fairly standard for computer applications.

      The TeXbook has a very good description of the whole point mess.

      -JS

      --
      Vanity of vanities, all is vanity...
    19. Re:10 Point Falisy by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Internally, Xft (I guess fontconfig now) allows you to choose sizes in pixels and accepts a floating-point number. You use XFT_PIXEL_SIZE as an argument to XftFontOpen.

      I have been quite annoyed with KDE's insistence on storing the point size as an integer. Pretty much this means that to get useful sizes you have to set the DPI of the screen to 72. Really stupid of them.

    20. Re:10 Point Falisy by spitzak · · Score: 1

      KDE does in fact scale it's buttons, etc. It does about as well as could be expected at scaling the GUI if you assumme they don't want to scale pixmaps.

      The problem is that it is completely the wrong size! It usually comes out really tiny for me when I go to somebody's screen that is set to 72 dpi. And if they go to my screen set to 100 dpi their graphics come out really big.

      Yes, in theory, it is compensating correctly for the dot scale. However experience has shown that this is absolutly not what users want! For ratios less than 2 everybody seems to expect the graphics to scale to match the size of the pixels. Microsoft seems to have realized this and fixed their screens at 96 dpi, no matter what the resolution or screen size. Also check out Freedesktop.org's Cairo, where they have also decided that the default scale should not be 72/inch or anything, but instead the nearest integer multiple of pixels to 96/inch (thus if there was a 200-dpi screen it might double the pixels of all graphics, but a 100-dpi screen draws pixels exactly the same as a 72-dpi one).

  108. Why did they choose a proprietary font? by Rauchbier · · Score: 1

    Did Microsoft bribe them for using their font?

    They could have chosen a free font (like Bitstream Vera) as well!

  109. Regarding the font size by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

    forgetting that Times roman is a shit font. Size 14 is way to big, i would feel insulted if i had to read a document with a font size like that. Size 14 is classed as being suitable for people with poor sight. Verdana or Skia is a much better font anyways.

  110. Actually, they're email messages by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't use "telegrams" anymore - that's just a name that's stuck around for who knows what purpose.

    Cables, telegrams...basically they're just emails.

    I say "we" b/c I work at the State Department.

  111. Think about the correct use of the apostrophe: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Try this.

    I remember doing this kind of crap in high school to make my papers X pages long.
    I bet your teachers never caught on either.
  112. Government Forcasts 30% Increase in Paper Use by stuffduff · · Score: 3, Insightful
    George W. Bush is expected to announce shortly the Timber Reclamation Act of 2004 in which all wood framed houses will be demolished and the lumber reclaimed and recycled to produce "Goverment Bond" in an effort to avoid a predicted paper shortfall for government documents.

    "I want to make it perfectly clear to every one in the world that just because I'm shortsighted does not mean that I can afford not to be misudnerstood."

    --
    "Can there be a Klein bottle that is an efficient and effective beer pitcher?"
  113. 1984? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that the font used in the book _1984_?

  114. Re:Roman? Irony. by Pike · · Score: 1

    The roman empire did not collapse under the weight of its own arrogrance. It decayed in the quagmire of its own apathy.

    -JD

  115. if you want your senator to pay attention... by sbma44 · · Score: 1

    call them. They will pay attention to whatever form of communication you choose, but: - email is worst -- they get tons, a lot is just dashed off, and they are frequently mailbombed by issue advocacy groups - the US post in and out of the Capitol is greatly delayed since the anthrax scares. The latency involved has made letters earn less attention than they used to. Again, volume is a problem. - phone calls are your best bet. You'll get somebody to talk to, and demand a portion of the staff's finite attention.

  116. I hate Times New Roman by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You see it everywhere. I'm so fed up with this Font.

  117. You do know what this means? by azaris · · Score: 3, Funny

    No more ASCII art in official US government memos.

  118. Great, a font... but no language by SmurfButcher+Bob · · Score: 1

    So, now we've got an official font to use... but they can't decide what language to write with it. English? Spanish? Spanglish?

    Personally, I think the official government language should be Engrish. It'd make that crap more fun to read, at least...

    --

    help me i've cloned myself and can't remember which one I am

    1. Re:Great, a font... but no language by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

      WE Are coming for Iraq!!!

      Mr. Saddam of Hussein is having the mass weapons of destroy. For us to stop the threat of the WORLD CENTURY we must ready for the WAR!

      Is ok if he is taking away the weapon, but NO Lyeing!! we mean it^^

      --

      What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  119. Just printed both out. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I put the article in both fonts and printed them out. For what it's woth the government is right. Times New Roman14 IS easier to read and (I found this a surprise,) takes up LESS space than Courier 12.


    While I personally would have prefered something a little more elegant, I can't see bitching to much about an obvious (print them out and tell me different,) improvement.

  120. I want my Courier! by Genady · · Score: 1

    I just want to scream. Yes, I'm something of a font/type geek. But still, who in the name of John Hancock decided to write legally binding documents in a non-monospaced font??!!? Yes I know that serifs are easier to read, there are serifs in courier. By making this a proportional font they're actually making these documents HARDER to edit! Everything I've EVER submitted for publication to an editor (a very very small sample mind you) has been courier 12, double spaced. Why? It's easier to edit that way!

    Grrr. Who gave the government desktop publishing tools anyway? The next thing you know they'll start sending out newsletters in 'Chicago'.

    --


    What if it is just turtles all the way down?
    1. Re:I want my Courier! by byolinux · · Score: 1

      Chicago is a great font! Next you'll be coming on here and complaining that you don't like Comic Sans MS, Wingdings, Webdings, and other useless fonts. ;)

  121. Why no arial by Zane+Edwards · · Score: 1

    So if I use Arial does that make me a terrorist?

  122. Times new roman is not best choice by Ixlr8 · · Score: 2, Informative

    A fixed width font like courier (new) is horrible to read when printed on paper. It's great for code or such things, not for actual documents.

    A font like Times New Roman was developped specifically for newspapers. It has a serif, which improves readabilty by guiding your eyes acros the lines. It has a relatively high size of such letters as a,e,o,m,n when compared to l,k,j,g. (Sorry I'm not familiar with the correct terms in english) This is done to effectively enlarge the appearance and thus readability. It has large thick vs. thin contrasts. All this is done to improve readabilty in a newspaper: narrow collumn width, small size.
    It is even designed to compensate (or use) the effect of overprint: a small amount of ink allways flows out, making the thinnest parts of characters less thin.
    When printed on a laserprinter, the font actually becomes a bit to contrast rich in thick/thin, because of the lack of overprint.

    Times New Roman is far from the best choice in my opinion. It's outdated (not really suitable for laserprinting). It's not meant to be used as 13 pt font in documents with long lines.

    A lot of people underestimate or are even completely ignorant to the influence of document layout: font, size, pagemargins. If you value the readability it's worth it to invest some time in the subject.

    --
    -- Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    1. Re:Times new roman is not best choice by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      This is LAWYERS we're talking about. They're going to print the whole thing ALL CAPS JUST LIKE THIS ANYWAY. Even then, It'd still be in legaleese...and with money involved you'd be hard pressed to find two LAWYERS who aggreed on what it meant!!!

  123. Rome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The area where Washington D.C. now resides used to be called.... Rome!

    A lot of Roman figures (such as Gods) are spread all over the area too.

  124. It makes sense by Alcoyotl · · Score: 1

    Bigger font = more paper. Let's get rid of all those useless forests. They're full of bugs and they burn all the time.

  125. great punchline by sootman · · Score: 1

    For those that don't want to RTFA, here's what you're missing:
    "There are only three exceptions to the draconian new typographical rules: telegrams, treaty materials prepared by the State Department's legal affairs office and documents drawn up for the president's signature, it said. The memorandum offered no explanation for the exceptions, leaving foreign service officers to speculate as to whether the White House, US treaty partners and telegram readers are not yet able to handle the change."

    Clever aussies.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  126. 14pt vs. 12pt by toganet · · Score: 1

    This is surely a sign that our leaders are aging beyond their usefulness.

    1. Re:14pt vs. 12pt by clarkc3 · · Score: 1

      nah, they probably just wanted to be able to say 'I wrote a 10 page speech' but kept coming up short even with double spacing - so the 14 point helps them get there

  127. The Times Roman lobby by Darth23 · · Score: 1

    ...has obviouly been spreading the cash and campaign contributions around in an effort to defeat their Courier competitors.

    --

    -------- In Soviet Russia, "Soviet Russia" sigs hate Slashdot.

    1. Re:The Times Roman lobby by edsel · · Score: 1

      Not to worry. The Courrier Lobby will be raising funds on that new Internet thingy soon. Yeaaaaagh!

  128. Should be smaller, not larger by dtjohnson · · Score: 0

    Using a large font like 14 pt might make the documents easier to read for some but it will waste a lot of paper and create more solid waste. They should switch to a smaller, but still usable size, like 10 pt.

    1. Re:Should be smaller, not larger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Read the Article -- it takes up less space on a page. If you don't read the article, just look up above a few places and you'll see that this has already been pointed out 4 times.

    2. Re:Should be smaller, not larger by dtjohnson · · Score: 0

      No, the article doesn't say that it takes up less space on a page. The article says: "[Times New Roman 14] takes up almost exactly the same area on the page as Courier New 12..." but what is not said is that the same number of words can be used on the same page with the larger type, which would be a credibility-challenging claim. Generally speaking, the larger the type size used, the fewer the number of words that can be inserted on the page providing that other factors, such as line spacing and margin size, are kept the same. If those other factors are being shrunk to maintain the word count with the larger type, then they should be doing that but staying with the 12pt type to *increase* the word count. Using less rather than more paper would be a good thing.

  129. One thing that they forgot to mention... by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 5, Funny

    Is that all US government reports now have to have to be accompanied by "the correct cover sheet". Oh, and all White House press conferences must have at least "fifteen pieces of flair".

    --

    "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    1. Re:One thing that they forgot to mention... by Werelock · · Score: 2, Funny

      You see, the thing is, you forgot your TPS report. You did get the memo that we're using those now, right? I'll just send it to you again just to make sure you understand.

    2. Re:One thing that they forgot to mention... by qwerty4000 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, If I could just have you pack up all of your things and actually move alllllllllllllll the way down to the basement, that would be greeeeeeeeeeeeeeat....... And I think I'll be taking this too.... Uhm, uhm, but, uhm, excuse me, but I believe you have my stapler

    3. Re:One thing that they forgot to mention... by Orion442 · · Score: 0

      Oh, and all White House press conferences must have at least "fifteen pieces of flair".

      Not to mention all single syllable words.

    4. Re:One thing that they forgot to mention... by jsebrech · · Score: 1

      Oh, and all White House press conferences must have at least "fifteen pieces of flair".

      Not to mention all single syllable words.


      It's not like it's hard to say complicated things with words of 4 letters or less.

  130. not official font of U.S. government by iggymanz · · Score: 1

    This was only the state department, choosing a font for correspondence. yeesh, even the submitters aren't reading the freakin articles.....

  131. Not everyone can handle the power of a mod point. by nlinecomputers · · Score: 1

    Clearly this needs more regulation. A license to mod perhaps.

    And modders when you slap this as flamebait, troll, or offtopic, be gentle, I'm recovering from a bad sinus headache and those headslaps hurt. Other then that I've got the karma to burn.

    --
    Slashdot, home of supporters of free software, free music, and free speech.Except for Moderators that disagree with you.
  132. Ban Comic Sans! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  133. I'm At USDA, We Use 12pt. Times New Roman by saudadelinux · · Score: 1

    Natural Resources Conservation Service, to be precise. We've used 12 pt Times New Roman for almost 10 years. Why was State still using Courier? IMHO, it's butt-ugly to read in print...

    --
    I didn't think the house band in Hell would play this badly.
  134. i was ahead of my time, when i worked for DoD!! by pezpunk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "In response to many requests and with a view to making our written work easier to read, we are moving to a new standard font: 'Times New Roman 14'," said the memorandum.

    this is pretty amazing. back 13 years ago in 1991 i was working for the Army Materiel Command Headquarters and i repeatedly got a "talking to" from my bosses for using Times instead of Courier in official correspondence to other departments. i then went to the head of AMC HQ and suggested a change in policy to allow Times New Roman to also be acceptable, since we were now in the computer age, and not limited to typewriters and daisy-wheel printers, and since Times New Roman was demonstrably easier to read, and more attractive. He took my request to the Chief of Staff of the Army, who shot it down.

    i was ahead of my time!

    --
    i could live a little longer in this prison
    1. Re:i was ahead of my time, when i worked for DoD!! by tverbeek · · Score: 4, Funny

      How did he respond to your suggestion that lowercase letters at the beginning of sentences and for the pronoun "I" should be acceptable?

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    2. Re:i was ahead of my time, when i worked for DoD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm USAF a friend in personel suggested they use times new roman (because it was the default in Word) for their awards. They took it and gave him $25.00 under the suggestion program. This was at the wing (base) level I believe, definitely not Chief of Staff level.

    3. Re:i was ahead of my time, when i worked for DoD!! by basingwerk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Years ago, I imposed the use of courier fixed font on official flight procedures for a satellite mission, to make it easy to line things up in the days before word processors had table features. This made it quicker for the SATCONs to find the right action when anomalies happened, so I don't necessarily agree that Times is more readable. My decision stood for some years until a new clerk 'translated' the procedures into a proportional font and formatted the tables 'properly'. I suspect this was a make-work activity, for which the government is famous. By then, I couldn't care less, although I would be most peeved if someone translated my FORTRAN source code into Times!

      --
      I stole this .sig
    4. Re:i was ahead of my time, when i worked for DoD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is pretty amazing. back 13 years ago in 1991 i was working for the Army Materiel Command Headquarters and i repeatedly got a "talking to" from my bosses for using Times instead of Courier in official correspondence to other departments.

      Well, at least if I run across all or part of an Official U.S. Government Document from 1991 printed in Times, I'll know from whom and from which office it came.

      Oh wait, maybe that's why they have standards?

    5. Re:i was ahead of my time, when i worked for DoD!! by dead+scientist · · Score: 1

      In the army, if you are ahead of everyone else, you are charging the machine guns when the others are still in their foxholes.

    6. Re:i was ahead of my time, when i worked for DoD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know how accurate this is, but I've heard that Courier was specifically designed so it would still be readable in the face of extensive mutilation.

  135. times new roman sucks by Perianwyr+Stormcrow · · Score: 1

    I'm a Palatino Linotype man myself.

    The differences are small, but they mean a lot.

    --

    What we call folk wisdom is often no more than a kind of expedient stupidity.-Edward Abbey

  136. More paper wasted by four12 · · Score: 1

    I have a copy of the Constitution done in TNR 10 and it takes 9 pages. Bumping the size up to 14 point makes it 16 pages.

    80% more paper for what??

    1. Re:More paper wasted by Detritus · · Score: 1
      Readability.

      Many young people, and web page designers, have the mistaken idea that smaller is better when it comes to fonts. The goal is to communicate to the reader, not to cram as many letters as possible on the page.

      --
      Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
  137. Arial or Not by Snork+Asaurus · · Score: 1
    Traits: Clean, simple, clear, OCR friendly, low overhead, no baggage, no bullshit.

    Never mind, after proof-reading the foregoing sentence I can see that Arial would be utterly undesirable to the government. Have they looked at Dingbats?

    --
    Sigs are bad for your health.
  138. Now if only... by kitzilla · · Score: 1

    Now if only what the government writes is as clear as their typeface...

    --
    This is my post. There are many others like it. If you don't like what you read here, go try one of the others.
  139. Telegrams? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A telegram font in this day and age is simply scrumptrilescent.

  140. Other important news: by hoggoth · · Score: 2, Funny

    Today the U.S. Government has issued these equally important directives:

    1) All federal employees must tie their shoelaces using a right-over-left Ian knot.

    2) Handwritten ampersands must be of the official '&' variety and not the 'sloppy plus' variety.

    3) Toilet paper must be folded, not crumpled.

    --
    - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
  141. Not just the Fed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I worked for a nuclear plant for the past three summers as an IT intern. One of my jobs last summer was to find a way to standardize our documents that go to the NRC. The problem was basically that we had a ton of documents from way back when - many of which had equations that had special characters, such as a sigma, or an integral symbol - that were converted to modern formats inconsistently. Some would literally say "Sigma", some would have the character, some would have an ASCII art character.

    This causes big problems. The NRC doesn't have all the fonts that could possibly have been used, and when they opened them with Word (we were, to my personal disappointment, a Microsoft shop), it would do its best to convert unknown characters to a readable format. However, some characters - even standard letters like a period - would convert poorly. In one instance, 2.60 converted to 2660 (or something very similar). This is definitely not a desired result for highly technical documents in a highly regulated industry. Thus, one thing we (I) had to do was to set the rule for our plant that any documents must use a very strict set of fonts.

    At quick glance, it seems like a stupid thing to waste company money on my pay for doing something like this, but it actually helps a lot. My first summer, I had to go through an inch tall stack of documents to make sure they converted properly. What a waste.

  142. Dubya by hellfire · · Score: 4, Funny

    The 20 point dingbat is actually running the country, so maybe you should collect on your bet.

    --

    "All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"

    1. Re:Dubya by DAldredge · · Score: 3, Funny

      It isn't smart to talk about Karl Rove like that!

    2. Re:Dubya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The 20 point dingbat is actually running the country
      YM "12 Step." HTH.
    3. Re:Dubya by Orion442 · · Score: 0

      As much as I hate him, believe me that is a lot, it will be a cold day in hell before I vote for Kerry. There's just something about him I find extremely distrustfull.

    4. Re:Dubya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spelling error, you wrote "running" instead of "ruining" the country!

    5. Re:Dubya by WIAKywbfatw · · Score: 1

      What, like the fact he actually fought for and was decorated by his country rather than using the family influence to ensure he wouldn't be shipped to Vietnam and then going AWOL whilst on National Guard duty? Yeah, that's a major bummer.

      --

      "Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
    6. Re:Dubya by Orion442 · · Score: 0

      There's just something I don't trust about him. You forgot to mention Dubya's nice lil ole cocaine problem. I'm just hoping Edwards picks up some steam.

    7. Re:Dubya by quasimodal · · Score: 1

      ...and I always thought he was a 72 point dingbat. Not just loud, but overbearingly obnoxious.

      --
      Fight Spam! Join CAUCE! == http://www.cauce.org/
    8. Re:Dubya by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

      I dunno. There are criticisms that you could make in favor of Bush's administration, but "trustworthy" just isn't one.

      Clinton was untrustworthy about what he did with his penis -- an, in my opinion, thoroughly more acceptable issue than Bush, who has been untrustworthy about reasons for sending a country to war.

    9. Re:Dubya by ratsnapple+tea · · Score: 1

      How about a Kerry/Edwards ticket? That's what I'm crossing my fingers for, now that Kerry/McCain seems unlikely.

    10. Re:Dubya by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Edwards and anyone else. Kerry is an evil looking fuck; almost as bad as Bushbaby

  143. Re:Roman? Irony. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No the U.S. is going to collapse under the weight of it's own greed and stupidity. And the rest of the world doesn't seem to be doing all that well in that department either.

  144. What about... by HungWeiLo · · Score: 2, Funny

    What about the official font for college freshmen? TNR 14-point is fine when you sort of know something about the topic of the paper you're writing, but TNR 20-point will happily fill the 3-page requirement of the paper.

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
  145. Yes yes dammit ... by RedA$$edMonkey · · Score: 0

    But which smileys are officially sanctioned for use? The wrong smiley could start an international incident. :O

  146. As a person with poor eyesight.. by haggar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    (and before I get trolled: no, I can't correct it with glasses)

    I have had problems reading small font text for at least 10 years now, and the problem is, of course, getting worse. But I have learned a lot, about the needs of visually impaired people. One of these things is that Verdana is probably the ideal font for us. This fact was discussed in depth on the nystagmus newsgroup, and the good thing is, we all reached a consensus about Verdana.

    I am surprised so few companies use it. Actually, none as far as I know. I am surprised mostly because I believe that a nice, readable font is pleasant even for the healthy eye, it's more ergonomic.

    --
    Sigged!
    1. Re:As a person with poor eyesight.. by notchcode · · Score: 3, Informative
      Verdana is a great face, esp. for use on-screen, as it was designed for that use by Matthew Carter in 1996. I am not a fan of it in print, because so many other great, easily-accessible faces are already available that are so similar. Take Franklin Gothic, for example.

      For lots of text-on-paper reading, serifed faces are easier on the eyes, so I can see the arguement for Times. Times, though, was intended for newspaper use (hence the name), not long reports that run in wide columns...AS I've said elsewhere, I think something softer and rounder, like Bembo would have been a better choice. FWIW, I specify Verdana in all my site designs, because it's the best web-specific face out there. A lot of my designer geek pals do, too.

    2. Re:As a person with poor eyesight.. by haggar · · Score: 1

      I may be missunderstanding you, but are you saying that fonts with serifs are easier on the eyes? Well, not for my eyes, I guarantee you that. Serifs are just confusing and reduce the readability. And I guess this is the case with all other people with nystagmus horisontalis, which is by far the most common type.

      --
      Sigged!
    3. Re:As a person with poor eyesight.. by notchcode · · Score: 1

      I am not familiar with that condition. Serifs may indeed hinder readability in that case (maybe the horizontal caps--the serifs--create too much visual noise?); but as a rule, designers are taught to use serifed typefaces for body copy, and sans-serif only in shorter bursts, such as in headlines, or as pull-quotes, etc.

      I actually enjoy composing with sans-serif type, over serifed type, despite studies that show the average reader can read serifed type more quickly than sans-serifed type.

      At least with a web browser, one can tell the browser to override the code's typeface designation in favor of your own preferred font. That way, it can be Verdana all the time, if you want it.

    4. Re:As a person with poor eyesight.. by haggar · · Score: 1

      OK, so I did not missunderstand what you said. I admit to ignorance of the study you cite.

      The condition I mentioned has the practical effect similar to myopia (shortsightedness), with a particular direction/polarization; you could say that the horizontal resolution is much more degraded than the vertical. That is, I can count rows easier than I can count the columns. Also, my sight is strongly dependant on whether I am tired.

      OK, so, you're saying serifed fonts are easier to read for the general public. That's interesting. I have to say, I talked once with a fontographer that works for Nokia, and he told me something to the effect that is the opposite of that affirmation. At least, I was lead to believe that Verdana is easier to read for the general population, too.

      --
      Sigged!
    5. Re:As a person with poor eyesight.. by notchcode · · Score: 1

      I would agree with the Nokia typographer, who--I assume--is in the business of making type look good on cell phone screens, that Verdana and other sans-serifed fonts are easier to use and view on non-paper, i.e. computer screens and cell phone screens.

      I think the main difference is one of resolution: Paper has a huge advantage in resolution...2400dpi on a well-coated, high-quality sheet. Compared to a 72- or 96-dpi screen, paper can use subtle things like serifs to make reading easier to the average reader. With screen resolutions, you have to make letterforms do more with less...serifs are often the first thing to go in the name of legibility.

      Robert Bringhurst's The Elements of Typographic Style is a great introduction to all of this.

    6. Re:As a person with poor eyesight.. by haggar · · Score: 1

      Although I don't see the guy too often, I believe you're right.

      And I also would agree, thinking about it, that the choice of fonts on paper is probably a different business tahn for displays. Not only the higher resoution of the print, but the fact that it's a totally different kind of illumination.

      --
      Sigged!
  147. email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I've read that each incoming message is rated on a 1-4 scale...
    IIRC,


    4=phone call
    3=handwritten letter
    2=fax or typewritten letter
    1=email

    or something very similar. Also IIRC, email is nearly ignored because it's easy to send. That's why you ought to use a fax gateway when you are trying to influence a representative... the email is assumed to come from a 12-year old with too much time on his hands, whereas the fax or written letter (presumably) took some amount of resources to send. (don't let them realize what a fax gateway is!)

    Anywho, don't email. Fax or call. That way you'll be ignored with the rest of us instead of being ignored right off the bat. :-/

    1. Re:email? by Zathrus · · Score: 1

      Shrug. That's how it used to be, but letters have dramatically fallen in importance since 9/11 and the anthrax letters.

      Here's a question for you -- just how much importance is being placed on letters, handwritten or otherwise, right now?

      Answer? A ton. Unfortunately, it's not by anyone in your representative's office. Every single letter to both the House and Senate is being intercepted and checked for ricin. Sure, the staffers will eventually get (most of) them back, but that may be several days or weeks from now.

      Additionally email has become more widespread in usage in the last few years. You can't just assume that it's some 12 year old now. Form letters are, as always, trash.

    2. Re:email? by amplt1337 · · Score: 1

      I worked in a Senatorial office.

      If you want your message to get through, call or send a handwritten letter. Typed is fine too, especially if your handwriting is illegible, provided you have sufficient content (bullet-point memos are good, as are references to research, rather than just crotchety opinions, though keep in mind the people who read and reply to your letter are paid to be researching the issue you're writing about.) The people who open the mail (usually an intern, ie a bored and overqualified college student) are very, very good at spotting form faxes, even if you add a little bit of bonus non-form text.

      Contrary to commonly held misperceptions, government officials are not stupid. They know just as much about fax gateways as you do, and probably more, since they've talked to more of them than you have.

      Email is still bad, though. You're usually not guaranteed a response this way, and you'll be lucky if anybody in an advisory position even reads it (instead of just an even-more-bored office flunky).

      --
      Freedom isn't free; its price is the well-being of others.
  148. It is supposed to be a column font by jmcharry · · Score: 1

    Times New Roman is intended for newspaper columns where it scans easily. For wider formats, like letters and memos, New Century Schoolbook or some other font intended to be read at that width is more appropriate.

  149. blind gov't by oohp · · Score: 2, Funny

    I always said governments were blind and this futher proves it. I could read Times New Roman 14 from space.

    1. Re:blind gov't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe that's why they went to 14. 12 was too hard read from the satellites.

      Who knows, the CIA may have mis-read "Weapons of Math Instruction" from some papers a professor at the University of Baghdad was carrying around the campus.

  150. How long before SCO claims they own it? by Petronius · · Score: 1

    I'm sure at some point they must have used it in their manuals... "You must pay us $670 for each printed page that uses Times Roman. Have a nice day."

    --
    there's no place like ~
  151. OOO, well Mr. Computer Genius ... by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 0

    Do you have any better way to pass on documents from one machine to another??..

    Come on Mr. Computer Geek, go and invent some kind of super device that lets you store data on it!.

    --
    WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
  152. 14pt? by fluch · · Score: 1

    ...are those people shortsighted or what?

  153. Australian Broadcasting Company? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone notice that the story is copyrighted by the Australian Broadcasting Company and all relevant URLs point to web sites in the .au domain?

    I suspect this whole thing is a joke playing on the fears that if it came from ABC (the American Broadcasting Company which competes with NBC and CBS), it must be true!

  154. Is funny... by softwarekalteis · · Score: 1

    ...from a typographer's view.

    No serious typographer would EVER dare to use Times New Roman nowadays. One could say it's the font for those who don't know better. Same with crappy Arial (Helvetica is waaay superior)!

  155. Fonts Matter by yintercept · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Font selection and standardization is a big deal. People read through the process of pattern recognition. Using standard fonts substantially increases the speed at which people read and their comprehension of what they read.

    Times New Roman is not a Microsoft v. the world thing. The font was developed by The Times in 1932. It is a relatively compact font. It was used by papers as they were able to get a large number of words per page and was easy to read.

    A standardized font improves quality. It makes documents uniform, etc..

    Microsoft included Times New Roman because it was a common, standardized font, not the other way around.

    1. Re:Fonts Matter by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But Times New Roman 14 is specifically a MS Word font!!! Note that courier is so old it's generic...whereas TNR is copyrighted. Now nobody can send Offical docs without MS licensing approving. It's one of those small things that has profound repercussions in the world of lawyers.

    2. Re:Fonts Matter by yintercept · · Score: 1

      You do have a good point, the fact that a 1932 font is still copyrighted is absurd. The law is also a bit narrow if it limits to the process that generates the font and not simply the appearance. At least there is a chance that in the next 50 years, the copyright will expire...unless Congress decides to extend copyright durations again.

    3. Re:Fonts Matter by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      TNR would be an MS sponsored derivitive work....with its own copyright in the 80's!!!

      The real problem I see is that the memo does not specify "Times family 14" font, the original base, but rather "Times New Roman 14" which is specifically the MS word version. Other OSes would have slightly different names and characters to be different enough to skirt copyright. What I see as the problem is a MS crackdown on all the other "times" fonts out there making it impossible to use any non-ms approved clones for federal work.

      This is the problem with the current software situation in govt right now. Many of the important things are very small, specific details of implementation. Something like this automatically forces everybody's hand to use the MS programs. Sure it was well meaning to use the default setting of the most common word processor, but using beaurocratic fiat to "prefer" one companies product over another is a dangerous misuse of govt power. Who's to say this "change" wasn't part of the DOD's sweathart deal to by all those PCs last year? You gotta wonder that they used Linux to get a better deal...but then sold the farm to MS anyway...the situation hints at some serious impropriety.

  156. In related news... by Hel+Toupee · · Score: 1

    Back in 2001, Helvetica Bold Oblique was the big winner of the 73rd annual "Fonty Awards". Times New Roman 14 didn't even get an honorable mention! Look at how far a font can come in a mere 2.5 years!

    --
    PERL:
    All of the power of Voodoo with most of the understandibility!
  157. Readability? by julesh · · Score: 2, Informative

    I find this interesting.

    Ask anyone in the publishing industry, and chances are they will tell you that the most readable font available is Courier (in any standard variety) 12pt Regular.

    I.e., precisely the font they are moving away from, on the grounds of readability.

    I wonder if the person who made this choice is someone who has to read a lot of documents, or just somebody who thinks a proportional font looks nicer?

    1. Re:Readability? by NickFitz · · Score: 1
      Ask anyone in the publishing industry, and chances are they will tell you that the most readable font available is Courier (in any standard variety) 12pt Regular

      Which is why it is so often used for books, newspapers, magazines... oh, hang on...

      --
      Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
    2. Re:Readability? by julesh · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Courier is preferred by people who have to read large volumes of text, such as those who work in the publishing industry, because they find it easier to read.

      Proportional fonts look nicer, which is why they are used in areas where visual presentation is important, such as consumer goods.

    3. Re:Readability? by TKinias · · Score: 2, Informative

      scripsit julesh:

      Courier is preferred by people who have to read large volumes of text, such as those who work in the publishing industry, because they find it easier to read.

      Proportional fonts look nicer, which is why they are used in areas where visual presentation is important, such as consumer goods.

      I honestly can't say what they're smoking over at the university press if they prefer Courier... but I can quite categorically say that when I have a stack of three hundred pages of student papers to mark, they sure as fsck better be in a clean, serif font. Of course, getting them in Computer Modern is a bit too much to ask, but anything in the Times/Garamond/Georgia/Palatino camp is fine. Courier, though -- oy, after five pages I'm going crosseyed and my head hurts. Even Arial isn't as bad, although for long documents it is pretty hard on the eyes, too.

      --
      In principio creauit Linus Linucem.
    4. Re:Readability? by leelapolis · · Score: 1

      The answer is obvious, the government will publish the truth except it will be so ugly to read so nobody will.

    5. Re:Readability? by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1
      Courier is the type of mass-produced legal copy. Stuff that spits out of line printers on triplicate at 100 lines a minute! Check out court papers, legal notices, things like that where there's legality if words are "mistyped" or "illegable"...really, lawyers get people off for this stuff.

      Also, it's easy to format, especially when dealing with triplicate forms. It's important in many documents that numbers line up in boxes and tabbed columns match exactly to prescribed samples. It's a big legal deal because stuff has to be printed by machine en mass...often going directly to folders without human interaction!!!

    6. Re:Readability? by julesh · · Score: 1

      Strange. Maybe, after all this, it is just a matter of what you're used to.

  158. The real reason? by flu1d · · Score: 1

    "the department declared Courier New 12" - the font and size decreed for US diplomatic documents for years - to be obsolete and unacceptable
    Because our elected officals are too old and have a hard time reading 12pt fonts.

  159. Further changes by CCRancor · · Score: 1

    If they have problems reading their own documents they should change the red ink too.

    --
    Open source is the art of letting other people write your bad code.
  160. Re:10 Point Fallacy by Tassach · · Score: 1
    DPI refers to the density of pixels on the device. Basic lasers have a density of 300 DPI,
    Correct so far
    Mac displays have 72 DPI, and Windows uses 96 DPI.
    Maybe by DEFAULT, but that's all. DPI on a computer screen is a function of display resolution and screen size. An 800x600 display will have a variable DPI depending on the size of monitor being used. If using a CRT it's even more variable, because even two identical 19" monitors won't necessarily be set up with the same viewable image size. LCDs have a fixed DPI when running at their native resolution, which remains the same regardless of what computer it's connected to.
    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  161. Clearview! by unixcub · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised they didn't standardize on that ugly road sign font in Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Transportation Department has been lots and lots of money researching that font. It suppose to be easier for elderly people to read. Maybe it would look better on paper.

    --
    "Life is such a sweet insanity, the more you learn, the less you know"
  162. Federal budget by OscarGunther · · Score: 1

    No wonder the new federal budget is so massive. One of these things could be used as a murder weapon or ballast. I'm sure the real reason for this new rule is that it takes more paper to print something in a bigger font, which looks more impressive on TV. See! Your tax dollars at work!

  163. Yes, but... by khrustalicious · · Score: 1

    What font will the cover of the TPS reports have?

  164. And the best part is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The memorandum offered no explanation for the exceptions, leaving foreign service officers to speculate as to whether the White House, US treaty partners and telegram readers are not yet able to handle the change.

    The White house, they use crayon font.

    What treaty partners?

    You can still send a telegram?

  165. Enforcement... by finelinebob · · Score: 1


    Now they just need to hire Terrible Terry Tate to ensure workers make the transition.

    You still using Courier, Richard?! Get ready for the Pain Train ... WOOOOOO!!!

  166. Slaving typographers by PateraSilk · · Score: 1

    I know! You'd be amazed how many poor slobs are scribing out every official document on copperplate. What a waste! Not to mention the stockpiles of white space in government warehouses for tweaking kerning pairs.

    --
    Danke tres mucho, tovarishch.
  167. Re:Speaking of COMICS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    shut up and quit posting on Slashdot like you promised.

  168. Why... by bruthasj · · Score: 1

    Sans serif fonts such as Tahoma, Verdana, Vera Sans, etc. are most suitable for on-screen display of textual documents such as web pages. However, Serif fonts still reign supreme for readability in print form.

    As an exercise, for your enjoyment, take a sheet of paper and cover the upper slice of a word on a Serif font. 100% of the time, you can still read it. Do the same on the bottom slice as well. And, lastly, print out some Verdana/Tahoma and perform the same exercise, you'll find that more often than not you'll be second guessing what the word really is.

    I'm not a font expert, but there are legit reasons for standardizing on this font.

    14 point might be needed to:

    1. Reduce government redundant wording by allowing the book to fill up faster as to allow one to "feel" that the content is thick.

    or

    2. Aid in the ever-aging American population.

  169. Native North Americans by chocolatetrumpet · · Score: 1

    Years ago when my ancestors came over on the boat, they quickly realized that they needed to learn the local language (whatever Native North American language was spoken) otherwise they'd be left behind, because if they didn't fit in to get a job, someone else was going to get the job they were working for.

    Think of how much more cost effective it was to simply massacre the Native North Americans! And besides, since the Native North Americans weren't smart enough to invent guns, they didn't deserve to live, right? Nevermind their (superior) knowledge of the land, of medicine, food, and survival.

    Language and culture go hand in hand. Language is powerful. Not everything is translatable.

    A country with many cultures is a country with many challenges, but it is also the country with many strengths.

    Please respect and love your neighbors and their children as you do your own.

    --
    Spoon not. Fork, or fork not. There is no spoon.
    1. Re:Native North Americans by DaHat · · Score: 1

      There is a difference between language and culture.

    2. Re:Native North Americans by Echnin · · Score: 1

      But language is an important part of culture -- if you kill the language of a culture, it will deteriorate. Imagine, for example, if the US was invaded by aliens that demanded everyone spoke Gufloaargh, everyone forgot English, and couldn't even read the constitution in the language it was written in. Language is very important.

      --
      Lalala
    3. Re:Native North Americans by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Language and culture go hand in hand. Language is powerful. Not everything is translatable.

      While it's true that not everything is translatable, it's less true than some people like to think. Anyone who tells you that their language is the only one that can describe their culture, or the only one which can explain their philosophy, or the only one which can capture the fundamental truth of the universe, is wrong.

      Jokes don't usually translate very well, but the fate of the world rarely rests upon a joke being understood. Any serious statement can be translated between any pair of languages; one may have to adopt new words in the process, but there is nothing inherent in the language which is stopping the idea from being expressed.

    4. Re:Native North Americans by amplt1337 · · Score: 1
      Not everything is translatable.
      True. However, everything is explainable, provided both parties are patient enough to go through with the process of explanation.
      --
      Freedom isn't free; its price is the well-being of others.
  170. Has anyone spotted the flaw by ajs318 · · Score: 1

    Courier was monospaced. Times is proportional.

    Some documents are going to be made unreadable because of this ridiculous piece of bureaucratese.

    Documents that use too many fonts, or fonts that aren't installed on my system, or that use joke fonts, are a pain to read. But it is hardly the business of government to dictate what typeface should be used for documents; and at the very least, three typefaces are required: one monospaced and two proportional (serif and sans). The typographer should be trusted to select the most appropriate, because that's what typographers do. If you're going to let people loose on a system where they get to pick their own typeface, then freakin' teach them how to pick one. {They probably will pick Times [or Helvetica] anyway, or Courier if it needs to be monospaced, but if they know why to use it then they aren't going to get all resentful.} Governments run countries, and one would expect them to have drier lentils to soak.

    Of course, if and when lives are lost due to such whims and caprices of the US Federal Government, the blame will be laid squarely on the shoulders of "terrorists", "drug dealers" or "paedophiles".

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  171. Oh, darn... by vudufixit · · Score: 1

    I was so hoping the font of choice would be "wingdings."
    Not that a government doc in that font would be any more or less decipherable.

  172. Font-size race heats up: China has new 16p font by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the official statement of Chinese givernmenet:

    "We are the largest nation in the world and we truly deserve to have the largest font. We are not afraid to compete with the US in this font-size race. Ultimately our glorious nation of over one billion citizens will be the winner."

  173. More Pages = More Official by lysium · · Score: 1
    They are just following a Bush directive to enlarge the fonts, because "...book reports always look better when they are longer."

    ===============

    --
    Together, we will drive the rats from the tundra.
  174. Times New Roman to be renamed...? by phorm · · Score: 1

    But, in recent news, the "Times New Roman" font is being renamed to "Freedom Font"

    Sorry, I had to...

  175. Resolutions . . . . Most people think of New Years by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 1
    or that it is the last Matrix movie, much less know about screen resolution (and thats just for TV's), not to mention a desktop computer.

    and please don't get into refresh rate or MHz

  176. magenta scribble font by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

    I remember several years ago my cousin from Costa Rica filed documents with INS to get her student visa extended.

    What we received back was a hand written note from INS...the note was on a form explaining that, as part of an INS program towards efficiency, many correspondences would be handwritten instead of typed.

    I wonder if that program is still in effect....it was in blue, and nice handwriting.

  177. I, for one, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    welcome our new Times New Roman 14 overlords.

  178. Ottoman Empire by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    ... the Roman Empire's western collapse did nothing to its eastern empire, which was later renamed the "Ottaman Empire", but was largely constructed out of lands conquered by the Romans.

    Partly true, but confused.

    The Western Roman Empire fell in the 400's AD; the Eastern Roman Empire (known to modern historians as Byzantium) surived until 1453, when the capital of Constantinople fell to the Ottoman Turks. Byzantium was not exactly "renamed" the Ottoman Empire -- the Ottomans established their empire on conquered Byzantine land.

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
  179. Hmmm ... any Firebird experts around here? by jc42 · · Score: 1

    Just for yuks, I thought I'd check out what these fonts looked like in my browser window. I happened to be running mozilla firebird on my Powerbook at the moment, so I went to the menus, selected Preferences, looked for the fonts section -- and couldn't find it. I went through all the rest of the menus, and couldn't find the string "font" anywhere.

    Anyone here know if it's possible to set firebird's fonts? Did they just overlook this? Or, more likely, did they find some clever and inventive way to hide it, including calling it something without "font" in its name?

    Onward to setting fonts in mozilla itself. And safari, and IE, and maybe the old Netscape 4.7 that somehow got included.

    Or maybe I won't bother. I usually override the fonts and colors anyway, so pages that set them are just wasting bandwidth.

    (14 points? I usually force everything to 10 points. And people looking over my shoulder always complain about the unreadable text. But screens are always so small ... ;-)

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    1. Re:Hmmm ... any Firebird experts around here? by Sick+Boy · · Score: 1

      Mozilla Firebird -> Preferences -> Web Features -> Fonts and Colors

      Not exactly hidden.

      --
      Does narcissism count as a hobby? --Shawn Latimer
    2. Re:Hmmm ... any Firebird experts around here? by Zilfondel2 · · Score: 1

      Wait until your eyes go bad from computer screens, you'll be cranking the screen characters up to size 34 just to read slashdot.

    3. Re:Hmmm ... any Firebird experts around here? by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Mozilla Firebird -> Preferences -> Web Features -> Fonts and Colors

      I was puzzled by this for a while. The Mozilla Firebird -> Preferences got me a window, and there was a Web Features on the left, so I clicked on that. But there was no "Fonts and Colors" anywhere. Then it dawned on me: That funny button just labelled "& Colors" must be it. I clicked on it, and got a fonts window (though the colors were another window beyond that). Very weird.

      I suppose that something got trashed, and it'll probably be fixed in the next download.

      Not exactly hidden.

      There is a certain amount of hiddenness here. Putting it inside something labelled "Web Features" is a bit of misdirection, since this has nothing to do with any web features. It's solely about local rendering. The natural place for it is behind the "Appearances" label, as the older mozilla does.

      But I guess I'm used to software totally misclassifying and mislabelling things. It's a long tradition. ;-)

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    4. Re:Hmmm ... any Firebird experts around here? by jc42 · · Score: 1

      Well, that hasn't happened after a few decades, and the way things are going, it's becoming less likely.

      Much of this is that I've taken seriously the rhetorical question that I ran across some years ago: Would you ask your customers to stare at a lit flourescent tube for hours at a time? No? Well, if your windows default to a white background, that's exactly what you're doing. A computer display is a flourescent tube, and a white area is a fully-lit flourescent tube. A white background is a direct attack on your customers' eyes.

      The sensible defense is, when facing a new machine, quickly locate the color config stuff. Set all the background to a neutral grey. Grey 40 is usually pretty good. Select the "Always use my colors" when you can. If you do this for most of the screen, you've eliminated the vendor's attacks on your eyes.

      The only white backgrounds on my screen at the moment are the Location bars in the two mozilla windows, plus the two little checkboxes below this textarea. That's not enough to worry about.

      It can be fun to respond to claims of user friendliness by pointing out the white backgrounds. This totally debunks any user-friendly claim. No company with any concern for their customers would ever assault their customers' eyes like that.

      Anyway, my eyes are doing pretty well so far. Hope yours are, too.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
  180. Re:Roman? Irony. by tbone1 · · Score: 1
    What a fitting font for an empire in danger of collapsing under the weight of its own arrogance..

    But enough about France ...

    --

    The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
  181. Like the Wall Street Journal? by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    Not to be petty or anything, but just how slow of a news day does it have to be when a font change is considered newsworthy?

    Even the prestigious -- and drearily pedestrian -- Wall Street Journal has an "offbeat article" column on the front page, with such heavy-hitting economic news as "pickle packing still not automated" ....

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
  182. hurrying up and waiting at the DOD, and at DMV too by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

    I'm amused and depressed by this post...we can sent hundreds of thousands of troops to liberate a country several times the size of Texas in a very short time...and the head people still don't realize that Courier faxes not worth a shit.

    On a side note, many states have moved to flat license plate printing (at least for special plates.)

    Here in Ohio we're gonna be getting a special plate that has a kids theme, and I've suggested that the numbers for the plate be in lower case comic sans, or lower case first grader font. I know the BMV is gonna holler and go crazy about it, but the law will be written so that the organization can dictate what the plate will look like and I take that as we can dictate the font as well. :-)

    I admit though, messing with the BMV is a personal past time.

    But I mention this because states have been using upper case font since license plates were made, and it makes no sense. A lot of upper case letters are very similar to other upper case letters (in Ohio "D" as in dog "O" as in opera and the number zero are pretty similar looking.) By going to all lower case fonts, it would be much easier to figure out the license plate number from afar.

  183. You *work*? by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 2, Funny
    ...we work all day...

    10 posts on Monday, 4 so far today... You work? I want your job...

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
    1. Re:You *work*? by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 0

      jajajajaj, well, i work for a hosting company, i take care that the GNU/Linux servers doesn't blow up and insult my bosse's mother (i am the one that takes care of insult her :] ); there are really busy moments, at wich i really overwork (for example, about a month ago, we had a hard drive crash, together with a broken tgz (the backup); so i was awake and working for 56 hours, continued, on the office; but some other times i just have nothing to do ... It's not like i get paid to post on slashd... o .. wait

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
  184. Other people's documents by Julian+Morrison · · Score: 1

    Standardize for documents recieved, and you can OCR inbound letters.

    Standardize for documents sent, and people who want to OCR your outbound letters can do it easily.

  185. Like it's 1984 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    We have always been at work with Eurasia.
    We have always used Times New Roman 14.

  186. Empire strokes back by Maljin+Jolt · · Score: 1

    We already noticed a Times of a New Roman [Empire] coming, thank you for your information.

    --
    There you are, staring at me again.
  187. SimCity? by ave19 · · Score: 1

    I've been playing a LOT of SimCity 4 lately, and... for a second there... I forgot which monitor I was looking at!

    -ave

    --
    ...or maybe not.
  188. Just the standard for ONE department by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Agency I work with, which is part of a different cabinet-level department, uses Times New Roman, 13 point, which apparently is OK with their bosses since we are to use it even for correspondence to the Secretary and to Congress.

    I still can't get them to let up on putting two spaces after every period. Perhaps that will finally die off when the last of us who ever used a typewriter regularly are gone.

  189. Crimethought! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have one: NewSpeak.
    Report to your telescreen.

  190. The New Rome Choses a New Font by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    how appropriate. But wouldn't be Dingbats the right font for Mr. Bush instead?

  191. Fresh off Google by akruppa · · Score: 2, Informative

    Nice history on Times Roman and Times New Roman here

    Alex

    --
    Heisenberg may have been here
  192. Could the linked article have a worse headline? by kirkjobsluder · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "US bans time-honored typeface"

    What the heck?

    1: The memo only applies to standardizing internal documentation for one department.

    2: Courier is "time-honored" only in that it was the ubiquitous typeface for single-font devices like typewriters and ascii printers, as well as degrading nicely to dot matrix. Monospace is a pain to read in extended printed documents.

    3: The article calls the new rules draconian, in spite of the fact that previously, Courier New 12 was mandated for all official documents!

  193. Linux Equivalent of Times New Roman? by poopie · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You're all missing the point here - Linux as I see it doesn't have the exact font "Times New Roman" as part of the default install - (at least OpenOffice 1.1 on Fedora Core 1 shows now Times Roman font...)

    So, what does this edict from the government mean for Linux desktop adoption in the Government?

    1. Re:Linux Equivalent of Times New Roman? by macfixer · · Score: 1

      You thought the government wants open source? Dubya will take care of that for you...

      k.

    2. Re:Linux Equivalent of Times New Roman? by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      Linux as I see it doesn't have the exact font "Times New Roman" as part of the default install.

      So install it then.

    3. Re:Linux Equivalent of Times New Roman? by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      Yes we have. As I understood it, Microsoft has pretty much let the Core Fonts out to the wild, much to the dismay of Monotype and other companies who created the fonts... The license allows free distribution in unmodified form.

      But there's also Times, which is a standard PostScript font. A crappy bitmap version ships with X11. You can buy a PS version of the font from Adobe, I think. There's a magnificent free version, URW Times, which is pretty damn good. I guess nobody will notice the difference unless they look really hard - the typeface hasn't changed that much since 1930s or so, and you can always explain the slight rendering differences with "oh yeah, this Linux stuff is still beta, I won't get 100% accurate rendering anyway". In short, cheat. =)

    4. Re:Linux Equivalent of Times New Roman? by poopie · · Score: 1

      Redistribution of Microsoft's Core fonts for use on Linux where the end user doesn't have a windows license is a gray area at best.

      Why don't the major distros include Microsoft Core fonts. Why did redhat need to go to monotype and have them design default fonts?

  194. Not as trivial as you say by Iowaguy · · Score: 1

    The assumption that the entire federal government lays paralyzed while this hot issue is debated is absurd and frankly simple minded. I find it amazing that in a discussion list full of IT people fail to realize the importance of standardization. At first glance it may seem trivial, but having all government docs in the same font and formet saves time and energy and layout. It also projects a constistant image, which is more professional. In addition, if font type and size were not controlled, then US government docs could be posted in dingbats, chancery, or 8 point font depending on the whim of a random bureaucrat. Rules are what holds a large organization together. At face value, it may seem silly, but underneath it can streamline processes.

    My two cents,
    Iowa

    --
    "He who laughs last, didn't get the joke."-Cap
  195. In other news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The federal government has also standardized all correspondence to be printed on paper. This will cause considerably difficulty for the IRS during the transition. An IRS spokesman stated that their practice of using onion skins was simply to give taxpayers another reason to cry when the open a letter from our agency.

  196. ...updating the gov's look to 1985. by notchcode · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, I guess it is only appropriate that the government waited until the 21st century to abandon a typeface meant to look like a typewriter, in favor of a typeface that is almost synonymous with Microsoft Word.

    The choice of 14-point type, too, is interesting: the standard is usually 12 points, but I guess the point size increase is meant to appeal to baby boomers' aging eyes.

    For my money, I would have preferred a slightly less stuffy serifed face, like Bembo, or even Goudy. No less official-looking, but rounder and more accessible.

    OK, I'd actually have preferred something even more modern, like a sans-serif font such as the emininently readable Gill Sans, but that would be asking too much of the Fed.

    1. Re:...updating the gov's look to 1985. by AvengerXP · · Score: 1

      Arial would have been plainly a better choice. Times New Roman is hard to read cause of all the curvatures in it. It also looks italic all the time. Arial, big round letters, so sexy.

      --
      Trolls dont like to be Flamebait, because they burn so well. Protect our Troll heritage!
    2. Re:...updating the gov's look to 1985. by GenetixSW · · Score: 1

      (This may incite or already be part of a font flame war, but...)

      I agree with you about the "suffy serifed face" attribute of Times New Roman. I've always preferred Garamond myself. I find it very pleasant to read, especially in large volumes.

  197. e-shredder by cgenman · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    [Dean's transition team enters the Oval Office]

    "Ok, Mr President, there are the emergency switches, that's the big red button, this button kills an underpaid worker somewhere in the US, and this is your computer, left behind by ex Vice President Dick Cheney."

    "Let's take a looksee... Hm. Looks like he's got 3 trojan horses, two copies of Gator, more viruses than you can shake a redneck at, and a dozen porn dialers. And in the trash I see..."

    [Jaws drop in amazement]

    "...Everything"

    "Everything"

    [Cheney walks into the room]

    "Hi guys, I just came for my... What?"

    "The department of Homeland Security was the secret funder of SCO?"

    "I um, err. Yes. I mean, no. No. Of course not. We wouldn't, uh..."

    "Kim Jong-Il recieved nuclear weapons in exchange for running the Republican Party's vote solicitation call center?"

    "No! How dare you attack our patriotism! All of those documents were in English Standard Measurements. They'd never figure out anything useful."

    "All public school textbooks are supplied by Haliburton?"

    "Their publishing arm gave the best price in a no-bid contract war, with full editorial control to the administration. America's minds need faith-based guidence to excel in a world market."

    "You approved Gigli?"

    "I was young! I needed the money! How...?"

    "You never emptied your trash."

    "What do I look like, a janitor? I pay someone good sub-minimum wages to do that."

    "No, I mean you never emptied your trash. On your computer."

    "You have to? I Uh... Err... Oh.
    Poopies.
    Hey-what's-that-over-there!?"

    [Cheney slams his hand down on the big red button, and runs for his life]

  198. BAN SERIF FONTS ALTOGETHER by chargen · · Score: 1

    I CANNOT TOLERATE SERIFS. I think they should be banned from the known universe. Only to be discovered by archeologists in the distant future.

    Sans Serif fonts are soooooooo much easier to read!

    -Pete

    1. Re:BAN SERIF FONTS ALTOGETHER by 0x0d0a · · Score: 2

      You're thinking of onscreen use, where you are absolutely right, due to poor screen resolution. I still cannot figure out why web browsers *still* ship by default displaying many fonts as serif by default. It's simply stupid in terms ofusability.

      From what I can tell from other analysis here, the new rule applies to printed documents, where serif fonts really are easier to read for large chunks of text.

    2. Re:BAN SERIF FONTS ALTOGETHER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Take a look at a Mac OS X 10.3 system sometime. Serifed fonts look absolutely gorgeous (except for Times New Roman, which is just fucking ugly to begin with).

  199. Re:Encrypted by hesiod · · Score: 1

    > ZM"Qoo [...] try it using Wingdings

    Unfortunately the '"' is scissors instead of box cutters. Where is the darn boxcutter character!

  200. FREE THE COURIER NEW 12! by cvonh · · Score: 1
    c'mon, let's start a protest movement here folks -- we need a website, buttons, bumperstickers. let's get the candidates on the record about what they think of this most important issue. if michael powell can waste money on an investigation of the appearance of janet jackson's left breast in prime time than i say we need a protest movement EVERY BIT AS ABSURD!!! Are you with me?

    "Bluto's right, psychotic, but absolutely right. We gotta take these bastards. Now, we could fight 'em with conventional weapons, but that could take years, and cost millions of lives. No, in this case, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part."

    --
    "All decent men are ashamed of the government they live under." -- Mencken
  201. Re:Language? German! by Rufosx · · Score: 1

    I think Congress should have approved a national language the first time they voted on it. Then we'd all be speaking German!

    Of course, I'm kidding. A national language is not needed. Businesses will continue to cater to their customers in whatever language they want to to get business. The IRS will continue to publish forms in as many languages as is needed to get people to pay up. Schools will continue to do what they have to to educate our children. Fine by me.

    I've lived in a country with thee national languages and never had a problem. The US doesn't need to look any more racist and nationalist than we already do.

  202. Ugh by EvlG · · Score: 1

    The only thing worse than an OS zealot is a font snob.

  203. Holy Fucking Shit. by torpor · · Score: 1

    Times New Roman.

    I just can't fucking believe how blatant and, frankly, overt the New World Order is being about things.

    Gotta love 'em. Theres nothing else to do. ')

    (... shouldn't they at least have given a starving typographer the chance to bid for the problem, i dunno ...)

    --
    ; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
  204. It's a CONSPIRACY, Itell you, a CONSPIRACY... by qtp · · Score: 2, Funny

    See, it all makes sense now! "New Times Roman".

    "New Times" == "Changing Times" == "New World Order"

    And what kind of "Order"? Roman law, the law of Empire, the end of the Republic, the... the...

    Well, at least they didn't choose Comic Sans. I'd hate to think what kind of world that font would be ushering in.

    --
    Read, L
    1. Re:It's a CONSPIRACY, Itell you, a CONSPIRACY... by Peyna · · Score: 1

      Comic Sans = humourless world.

      --
      What?
    2. Re:It's a CONSPIRACY, Itell you, a CONSPIRACY... by zhenlin · · Score: 1

      "Comic Sans MS"

      Comic -- humour.
      Sans -- without.
      MS -- Microsoft.

      "Humour without Microsoft"

      Impossible.

  205. Re:Speaking of COMICS by hesiod · · Score: 1

    *GAG*

    > How about comics about fonts!

    That is not a comic. Some kid just learned how to use Photoshop and his Wacom tablet (and not well, mind you). The title of the comic, however, is brutally appropriate -- it would definitely be a mercy killing to get rid of the author & artist.

    It is not funny, is not well done at all, the drawing is sickening (except the hair, which is alright)... It doesn't even make any damned sense! Why the FUCK would a copier rip your arm off, and what does said copier ripping your arm off have ANYTHING to do with fonts?

    Maybe it's in reference to the memo, as when I get some memos I would like to rip my own arm off & beat myself to death with it.

    > Is this the US Government in action?!

    What a slyly disguised troll. Oh, wait, it wasn't -- disguised. Come on, I can accept insults to the government, but the link has NOTHING TO DO WITH ANYTHING YOU SAID, except he mentioned the word "font" twice.

    Oh, and if you moderators feel like modding me down, look at the link first -- My never-to-be-born first son can do better.

  206. Re:hurrying up and waiting at the DOD, and at DMV by Neward+Rylet · · Score: 1

    I'm amused and depressed by this post...we can sent hundreds of thousands of troops to liberate a country several times the size of Texas in a very short time

    If you're talking about Iraq, it is only about 60% the size of Texas. If you're talking about Afganistan you're closer but it's still not as big as Texas is. So what country are you talking about?

  207. ...and? by KlausBreuer · · Score: 1

    Well, after reading through the article, reading all comments at 3+ and grinning at some jokes I still wonder - so what?

    So a company/state/whatever decided that from now on they'll use a different typeface? So what? Who cares, except the little grey men in the gouverment? Why is this "News For Nerds?" Why is this "Stuff that Matters"?

    --
    Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
  208. Seems accurate to me by Snowmit · · Score: 1

    I'm sure glad they put "more modern" in quotes, as Times New Roman was introduced in 1932!

    Generally, we agree that the Postmodern period began sometime after the 2nd World War. So this makes Times New Roman a very Modern font.

    --
    I have a lot of opinions about Cyborgs and Architects
    1. Re:Seems accurate to me by pete-classic · · Score: 1

      Your post has been bugging me two days. I realized why this morning.

      You have confused the word "modern" with the idea of the "Modern Age" or "Modern Period." Your error is even exposed in your own use of capitalization.

      See Merriam-Webster or Webster's 1913.

      This is, of course, assuming you weren't trying to be funny. If that was, in fact, the case . . . try harder.

      -Peter

  209. Re:hurrying up and waiting at the DOD, and at DMV by Ugot2BkidNme · · Score: 1

    Interesting Idea howwever you forgot one thing. Uppercase was chosen for a reason. Not because it was distiguishable but because it was linear. if you don't understand what I mean look at the letters "g" "p" these two letters hang down below a line. So in the case of a liscence plate you would have to shirink the size of the letter to accomidate this change. Shrinking the font will make the liscence plater harder to read. But I do Understand what you are saying the "D" "0" and "O" do look very similar.

  210. saving paper? by bat2k · · Score: 1

    Contrary to popular belief, Times New Roman at size 14 takes up less space then Courier New at size 12. It's the proportional font width that reduces the length of documents. Hell, different fonts of the same size aren't necessarily the same size when displayed or printed. Don't compare apples to oranges.

    --
    My other sig is a Porsche.
  211. Bigger font = bigger report by failedlogic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Too justify their jobs and the amount of work they do, beaurocrats can probably increase the font to 15 point without much notice. This makes the document longer, ensuring job security by showing how much work they do. Consultants, pay attention here! You can make more money, with less work.

    What high school, college or university student hasn't heard of this trick before?

    1. Re:Bigger font = bigger report by catdevnull · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I used fixed space fonts like courier to pad my papers in college. Times New Roman 14 will probably be just slightly smaller than the mono-space Courier New 12.

      Try it in a Word document. I filled a page with Time's New Roman 14 and converted it to Courier New 12. Courier takes up slightly more space (adding 6 lines).

      --

      I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
  212. Death to trees! by Duncan3 · · Score: 1

    So that would be approximately (14/12)^2 more trees brutally slain right... Give or take a forest.

    And here I thought the government was only worried about killing people, now trees to?

    WILL NOONE THINK OF THE SEEDLINGS!

    --
    - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
  213. Yechh! by Tom7 · · Score: 1

    Yechh. Now we are only 50 years behind the "times" instead of 75.

  214. Homeland Font Set 1.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    16 point "Spooky" font

    Naa... it's all in 14-point NSA Redacted Font, with random unredacted words just to peak your curiousity.

    We have XXXX XXX alert X XXXX a XXXXXXXX XXX Laden XXXXXXX XX transgendered XXX XXXXX X to XXXXX XXX XXXX giraffes. Advise XXX XXXXX XX XXXXXX the XXXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX.

    1. Re:Homeland Font Set 1.0 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "pique," not "peak," doof.

    2. Re:Homeland Font Set 1.0 by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Naa... it's all in 14-point NSA Redacted Font, with random unredacted words just to peak your curiousity.
      >
      > We have XXXX XXX alert X XXXX a XXXXXXXX XXX Laden XXXXXXX XX transgendered XXX XXXXX X to XXXXX XXX XXXX giraffes. Advise XXX XXXXX XX XXXXXX the XXXXX XXXX and XXXXXXXX.

      I just realized what a font in which every character was rendered as an "X" would do to enhance security.

      Just like classified PDFs with "redacted text" covered with blacked-out boxes, all you have to do to get the plaintext is copy the text into the clipboard and paste it into a text editor!

      pwn3d! No security added, trivially overcome, but looks secure to a pointy-haired bureaucrat, which is to say that its adoption by the bureaucracy is inevitable.

    3. Re:Homeland Font Set 1.0 by Axem · · Score: 1

      Actually, that gives me a neat idea. The entire font looks like X's, but there's like a pixel missing or added somewhere in each different letter. You print it out, its all X's, but when you OCR it, it comes up as text.

      I'm sured there's a big flaw somewhere in there but that's just my thought...

      --
      We all live in a #FFFF00 submarine...
    4. Re:Homeland Font Set 1.0 by Tackhead · · Score: 1
      > Actually, that gives me a neat idea. The entire font looks like X's, but there's like a pixel missing or added somewhere in each different letter. You print it out, its all X's, but when you OCR it, it comes up as text.
      >
      > I'm sured there's a big flaw somewhere in there but that's just my thought...

      Big Flaw: It's basically a substitution cipher. If I know what language you're writing in, I can crack it with pen and paper.

      It might be effective (assuming a good enough printer, scanner, and OCR software) to pass visual inspection by humans.

      Problem is, if a human noticed something suspicious ("Hey, about 10% of your Xs are malformed the same way... and 5% of your Xs are also malfo--ooooh!"), he'd just ><erox your "secret" memo and send you on your merry way, then crack your cipher in his own sweet time, report you to his superiors for followup investigation, and you'd never know you'd been compromised. You might even think your untimely demise was an accident.

    5. Re:Homeland Font Set 1.0 by Short+Circuit · · Score: 1

      Ah, but he'd need a good enough xerox machine. (And I've never seen one that good.)

    6. Re:Homeland Font Set 1.0 by crmartin · · Score: 1

      Congratulations! You have just caught up with the top ciphers of the 16th century.

      This is called "steaganography" -- I think that's spelled correctly, it's too much for my local spellcheck -- and the version you suggest was also suggested by Francis Bacon.

      For a really good time, imagine twiddling the least-significant bit of a big GIF file: use a 1024x768 wallpaper, and you can encode about 100K bytes of text. Compression helps: the more compressed it is, the more it looks like statistical noise ("white").

  215. Bitstream Vera by xant · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised you bring that up to ding BV fonts. What you say about BV Sans is true, but BV Sans Mono is simply, absolutely the best monospace font ever. It was clearly designed with the assistance of programmers.

    If you can tell all of the following apart, you have a good font (and it's probably BV Sans Mono :-).

    |I!i1loO0({}).,`'"-_:;

    I'm using it to type this comment right now.

    --
    It's rare that you're presented with a knob whose only two positions are Make History and Flee Your Glorious Destiny.
    1. Re:Bitstream Vera by Haeleth · · Score: 1

      I can tell them all apart quite easily, although I admit that l and | are slightly too close for comfort; it helps that most of the time I have syntax highlighting turning that | green.

      The font? MS Gothic, 11 pt, 100 dpi.

      I don't use BV Sans Mono because it doesn't fall back to clean pixels at low point sizes; I like antialiasing on headings and so forth, but I want clean pixels for the fonts I use for programming in, I find them easier on the eyes.

      I also don't like the dotted zero; MS Gothic handles it by having 0 be much squarer than O, and 25% narrower, which is sufficiently visually distinct for me.

      Oh, and there's the little matter of BV Sans Mono only handling ISO 8559-1, too... call me again when it can do mathematical symbols.

  216. Gawd, those meetings had to be fun by Sand_Man · · Score: 2, Funny

    My mind goes numb just thinking of a conference room full of Gov't types arguing the merits of their "pet" fonts.

    Be bringing the BIG coffee cup to that one.

    "..... and next Bob will be doing a PowerPoint presentation on the exciting history of Lucinda 12, go ahead Bob......"

    [head smacks table]

  217. And of course.... by FurryFeet · · Score: 1

    Ultra Top Secret - White

  218. Actually, Apple's fault by 0x0d0a · · Score: 1

    I believe the font problem is actually Apple's fault.

    WYSIWYG was a big selling point of the Mac (remember, this was the era of DOS WordPerfect). The standard Mac screen resolution (though not, to the best of my knowledge, ever guaranteed by Apple) was 72 DPI. TextSize() was specified as taking the font size in number of *points*, not pixels.

    When Microsoft ripped off a good deal of Apple work, they happened to use a similar API (using points at *all* for onscreen work). However, *unlike* Apple, they did not have control over the hardware in the wild.

    The rest is just sordid history. Apple spent an absolutely stupid amount of time trying to hack around differences in onscreen/printed format with Display Postscript and a complicated imaging model as Classic Mac OS started to get old.

    The point-based font rendering worked roughly on the Mac because, even though the entire non-font onscreen rendering scheme was pixel based, there was (at least originally) a 1:1 correspondence. On Windows, the API *also* used pixel-based positioning (*except* for a few random things like dialogs), but didn't have the corespondence.

    To be honest, GTK+ is the first sane widget set I'd used. Instead of specifying pixels positions (which, unfortunately, can still be done), the widget library handles positioning most things -- you just pack widgets in where you'd like them, something like HTML. It's the first vaguely sane step to allow different screen resolutions.

    1. Re:Actually, Apple's fault by spitzak · · Score: 1

      That does not really explain why X came up with the same bogusity at the same time Apple was developing the Mac, and well before Windows did it.

      It does seem a bunch of people all came to the same mistaken conclusion that people wanted to see fonts the same physical size on all screens, but for some reason were uninterested in seeing any other graphics be the same physical size.

      Quite awhile ago I fixed fltk to take the font size in pixels. That is why I know about the (somewhat undocumented) negative value to the GDI32 call. In X there is also a "pixel size" field in those long stupid -*-dash-font-names-* so I used that. Fortunately Xft got smarter and at least provides a clean and documented way to request font sizes in pixels (though they STILL provide a way to select it in points, despite the fact that none of the rest of Xrender does any such scaling, so even Keith Packard seems to not have learned...)

    2. Re:Actually, Apple's fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    3. Re:Actually, Apple's fault by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Actually I found the information in a "insiders guide to Windows" book, and since some other posters here seem unaware of it I guessed Microsoft did not document it well.

  219. Re: Times New Roman? Yuck. -- Fw: CmdrTaco! by dynamiteweb · · Score: 0

    Quick! Someone tell CmdrTaco. ;-)

  220. More politics ... by pherris · · Score: 2, Funny

    If Steve Jobs was President is would've been chicago.

    --
    "And a voice was screaming: 'Holy Jesus! What are these goddamn animals?'" - HST
  221. What about Arial? by luigi22_ · · Score: 0

    Isn't that a pretty commonly used font on all platforms? Not every Mac has TNR on it, and I'll never put IE there, even if it means getting it.

    --
    On /., first you get the karma, then you get the power, then you get the women.
  222. pandersite.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Is there a place on the web that panders to my lust for violence?

    You're on it...right now.

  223. Even hardcore Windows user was convinced... by devphil · · Score: 1


    ...when we worked together on a project. She wrote up most of the documentation, then I copied it into LaTeX. She was stunned when she saw the two printed outputs side by side. There's Word, looking like someone held a transparent piece of paper to the screen and did a tracing, and LaTeX, looking... well, as its stated goal, beautiful.

    She just stared at them for a while, and said, "Now I know why you despise Word so much. This is gorgeous." and never brought up Office again. :-)

    --
    You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
    1. Re:Even hardcore Windows user was convinced... by GreenKiwi · · Score: 1

      Does OpenOffice have an output format that can easily be converted to LaTeX? I wonder whether an xstl could be created to easily transform an OpenOffice document into LaTeX for output?

    2. Re:Even hardcore Windows user was convinced... by devphil · · Score: 0, Redundant


      I've no idea...

      --
      You cannot apply a technological solution to a sociological problem. (Edwards' Law)
  224. Re:Roman? Irony. by joshua404 · · Score: 1

    And it never ceases to amaze -me- how that arrogance permeates our society. I'll have you know I am an American and I love my country, and that's why I fear for my country when I see it heading down the same path of previous great empires. The question is: will the arrogant sods like you pull your heads of the sand in time to help save her? Or will you continue to close your eyes and cover your ears to reality until there's nothing left?

  225. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 0, Troll

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  226. But where will they find enough periods? by ouroborealis · · Score: 1

    According to Steve Martin in The New Yorker (June 9, 1997) the Times New Roman font experienced a dearth of periods. One hopes that this issue has been addressed, lest the US Gov't go to war over the vital commodity.

  227. And.... by Mr_Cheeky · · Score: 1

    from now on the official language of the United States will be Swedish, and everyone will have to change their underwear every half an hour. Of course, we must all wear our underwear on the outside, so the government will be able to check...

  228. What Would Ben Franklin Say? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just thought I'd point out that the Declaration of Independance was set in Caslon, by the rebellious colonies' premier typsetter.

  229. Re:Encrypted by binarytoaster · · Score: 0, Troll

    At one point in old versions of Windows, you could type "NYC Q77" (New York City, and the flight number) and it would come up with a skull, a Star of David, some other evil symbol that I don't recall, a plane and two tower-like objects... :P

  230. Re:Speaking of COMICS by nospmiS+remoH · · Score: 1

    That is quite literally the most pathetic excuse for humor I've ever seen.

    --
    !hoD
  231. Re:Speaking of COMICS by hesiod · · Score: 1

    > you read it deeply enough to retain that the word "font"

    No shit. I was reading it in the context of "font" being the subject, so of fucking course I would remember that. OTOH, I wasn't reading in the contxet of "arm" or "memo," so I do not know how many times it was mentioned. It's not that I was studying it intensely, but that I was trying to figure out if you had a point. Obviously not.

    > These are minutes that you'll never get back and a memory you can never erase.

    Well, I would have been reading some other nearly-as-stupid thing on /., so that does not bother me.

    > Welcome to comedy, the joke is you.

    1) That Comic was not comedy
    2) That post was not comedy
    3) There is no joke to speak of except the artist's lack of skill and your attempts to move the punchline outside of the comic itself -- You Fail.
    4) No, you still are not funny.

  232. Re:Roman? Irony. by LittleLebowskiUrbanA · · Score: 1

    Nice answers to my questions.. So what makes me an arrogant sod?

  233. you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1

    I have no idea why X, Microsoft, and you all seem to think points are important, especially when every other graphics call measures stuff in pixels.

    It's because "Times Roman 12 pt rendered at 144 dpi" and "Times Roman 24 pt rendered at 72 dpi" have different character shapes. It's not a resolution issue--the character shapes themselves are different. Fonts don't just scale. Just knowing the pixel size simply isn't enough--you are going to get the wrong font if you just ask for pixel size.

    If FLTK doesn't use both screen resolution and point size for font selection then FLTK is seriously broken and will give many people the wrong fonts--they'll usually still roughly look right, but they won't be exactly right.

    I wish it weren't so complicated, but that's how fonts work. And fonts work that way because human eyes work that way. And it is elementary computer graphics stuff.

    1. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      All modern font rendering systems render those two fonts exactly the same. Check the source code for FreeType if you don't believe me. Font renderers are much more concerned with pixel mapping and hinting and thus only change the rendering depending on the pixel size. You are probably thinking about kerning issues (which are easily handled at a higher level, especially because the user wants to control them anyway) or obsolete photographic effects involving blooming and focus that are better compensated by processing the entire page image before it is printed.

      Your argument also makes no sense because there is no way to seperately specify the point size and pixel size. Because of this, it is trivial to figure out the point size from the pixel size (just multiply the other way) and use this result to control your fancy font renderer. Thus you have lost absolutely NOTHING by specifying the font size in pixels.

      There does seem to be an incredible mental block on the part of a lot of posters here. There is NO reason why exactly one graphics call (select a font) is specified in a different coordinate system than every other graphics call! Fonts are not special, if you think they are you seem to be stuck in 1960's graphics!

      Notice that if the graphics interface took everything in points, or let you scale and transform and applied that same transform to fonts (like Postscipt does) I would have no complaint. There is nothing wrong with points, but there is a serious problem with not being consistent!

    2. Re:you are deeply confused by thogard · · Score: 1

      Theres a nice bit about why the two fonts should be rendered slightly differently in Knuth's book called Metafont.

    3. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      I will explain this once again because people here are too dumb to understand:

      Lets say that all sizes above 10 point need to be done with A() and all smaller sizes done with B(). You are saying this requires this code:

      pick_font(float points) {
      if (points > 10) A(); else B();
      }

      Now look carefully and try not to get confused when I show you how I would write the EXACT SAME FUNCTIONALITY:

      pick_font(float pixels) {
      if (pixels*72/DPI > 10) A(); else B();
      }

      To be a little more specific, unless you provide a call that takes two sizes (ie the size in pixels and the point size you are trying to simulate) the fact that fonts might render differently at different sizes is irrelevant, as it is trivial to convert the requested size into the other size. Since none of the interfaces I see take two sizes, specifying the size in points serves no purpose!!!

      Knuth certainly does know what he is talking about. That is why he seperates the generation of the outlines (which may use a point size, and weight, and arbitrary other information that most people think of as specifying different fonts) from the rasterization (which only uses a scaling matrix).

    4. Re:you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1

      All modern font rendering systems render those two fonts exactly the same.

      That's complete nonsense. TrueType supports non-linear scaling; it's part of the hinting. Non-linear scaling is an essential part of typography.

      Your argument also makes no sense because there is no way to seperately specify the point size and pixel size.

      Sure there is: the two parameters you specify are point size and resolution. (You might also specify point size and pixel size, but you need two parameters.) It's just that historically, some APIs implicitly assumed that you always wanted screen resolution (which could still vary from machine to machine).

      There does seem to be an incredible mental block on the part of a lot of posters here. There is NO reason why exactly one graphics call (select a font) is specified in a different coordinate system than every other graphics call! Fonts are not special, if you think they are you seem to be stuck in 1960's graphics!

      You are quite right: fonts are not special. You should implement non-linear scaling will all graphics. That means that with all graphics, you need to know both the physical size and the resolution at which it is to be rendered. It's just that with fonts, someone else already has done the work and that most applications don't bother doing it for anything else because either their authors don't know any better or because they (often justifiably) decide that it's too hard.

    5. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      Sure there is: the two parameters you specify are point size and resolution.

      As I said, this would make sense IF THERE WAS A CALL THAT TOOK BOTH! Please point out to me the call in X, Xft, Macintosh, or GDI32, or any other popular graphic system that takes both a size and a point size to render.

      Yes, an interface that said "render the point size N so it is M pixels tall" would be very useful. However none of the current graphics systems offer this, they just take "render points size N and I will calculate M internally so it is N*DPI/72". Since M and N are absolutely irretrivably linked, there is no reason not to specify M instead of N. This is all I have been saying!

    6. Re:you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1

      As I said, this would make sense IF THERE WAS A CALL THAT TOOK BOTH!

      There usually isn't a single call that takes both because there doesn't need to be. The usual sequence of events is that you separately inform the system about the rendering resolution you use (or use the default), load a scalable font, choose the point size you want, and maybe even choose a magnification at which it is to be rendered. The actual call that renders glyphs usually takes no size information of any kind in most APIs, just the string and a location where it is to be rendered.

      On X11, as you observed, you can select fonts based on any combination of resolution, point size, and pixel size.

      In PostScript (and similarly PDF and OS X), you get a resolution from the device, then pick a font in a particular point size, and you can optionally set a scale factor using the "scale" operator before rendering.

      In Windows, you apparently can also make graphics scalable with the new GDI, so it probably works similarly.

      In TeX, you say that you want "Computer Modern 12pt scaled by a factor of 3" or "scaled to 36pt" or something like that.

      In FreeType, you can also determine the two parameters separately (I don't remember how, but you can, since I've done it).

      Sorry if those choices are not blindingly obvious, but they are there...

      Since M and N are absolutely irretrivably linked, there is no reason not to specify M instead of N. This is all I have been saying!

      No, they are not linked. Even if a platform was so broken that it didn't give you a separate "scale" or "magnification" parameter in its font rendering library, it has to let you set device resolution for things like creating bitmaps for printing.

      And, in fact, all major platforms allow you to render "Times Roman 24" at 1x magnification and "Helvetica 12" at 2x magnification and get two different results, and they actually have multiple ways for you to do so.

    7. Re:you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1

      And, in fact, all major platforms allow you to render "Times Roman 24" at 1x magnification and "Helvetica 12" at 2x magnification and get two different results, and they actually have multiple ways for you to do so. ... and they might even let you render "Times Roman 24" at 1x magnification and "Times Roman 12" at 2x magnification and get two different results :-), provided that the hints for the Times Roman font you are using specify non-linear scaling.

    8. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      You obviously have not used these interfaces.

      On X, yes, there are two fields for the "point size" and "pixel size" in a font. However any attempt to specify them seperately results in a non-existent font on traditional X servers. On ones using FreeType it appears the pixel size is ignored. The only way to get a specific pixel size is to put a "*" into the point size.

      On Win32 GDI32 there is only a single number passed to the font selector. If positive it is point size and if negative it is the pixel size. It is not possible to specify both at once.

      In Xft/Fontselect there is a way to specify both (the call takes a list of attribute name/value pairs), but some trivial tests show that the last one specified takes precedence. The first one you specify is ignored.

      Scalable systems like PostScript and PDF seem to get it right. They let you specify the font size in "current units". Yes those current units can change size, but the font is specified in them! You know what size you are getting without having to query about the DPI. I am unaware of any implementation actually changing the glyphs based on the resulting physical size of the font, though this is certainly allowed.

      If modern Windows GDI allows scaling, the definately should NOT specify point size, as the size is now meaningless. It is either scaled by the current transformation and then by the "DPI" to get the font, or it is ignored which means you must do an inverse transformation and DPI multiplication to figure out how big the font is.

      All non-linear-scaling I have ever seen has been pixel-based. On modern anti-aliased font renderers it is mostly concerned with changing the widths of characters to integers so that a row of repeating characters looks even. Again this is much better specified in pixels.

      I agree that a perception-based font renderer that changes the shapes based on physical size is a good idea, but none of the systems do this. I would agree with you if you could point out a system where the following is true:

      1. You can specify a font size in the same units that you use to draw everything else. On most systems this means in pixels, on scalable systems this means in "current units". This unit can be "points" if and only if other graphics are also measured in "points". The "size" can be a single number or a 2x2 matrix or even more complicated transformation.

      2. The result of setting a font size to N units tall is that an "em space" is N units in size. Another way of saying this is if the lines of text are spaced N units apart they look reasonable (though most people would feel they are tightly packed) and they look approximatly equally packed together no matter what N value is chosen.

      3. There is a way to specify a "point size" that is used to control the rendering. This can be specified in points or any other physical unit like angstroms. Probably this is given to the same call, but it could be specified in a seperate call. Like the size, this can be a 2x2 matrix or even more complex information. This must not change the "em space" size. It can change the appearance and width of the glyphs in any way it wants, however.

    9. Re:you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1
      You obviously have not used these interfaces.

      Well, that's another misconception you have.

      I agree that a perception-based font renderer that changes the shapes based on physical size is a good idea, but none of the systems do this.

      I can only say it again: read the Microsoft page.

      TrueType fonts can contain fairly general scaling instructions, to move pixels around as well as to achieve better apearance at different sizes. Therefore, you simply cannot use the font size parameters to achieve physical scaling. But all common graphics APIs now give you simple physical scaling (for fonts or anything else) through transformation parameters in addition to the font size parameter.

      Many TrueType fonts (including all the "standard" Microsoft ones, AFAIK) only use TrueType to push pixels around a little. But some fonts do more more work (a good Bodoni implementation should).

      I would agree with you if you could point out a system where the following is true:

      You can implement such an API on top of PostScript, Java2D, RENDER, and MacOS X, if you must. You can probably implement with the new GDI, although I don't know that very well.

      In pseudocode, minus your newly added and unnecessary complications, it looks something like:
      drawtext(gc, x,y, text, font, fontsize_in_points, physsize_in_points) {
      font = getfont(font,fontsize_in_points);
      gc.save();
      scale = physsize_in_points/fontsize_in_points;
      gc.scale(scale);
      gc.drawtext(x/scale,y/scale,text,font);
      gc.restore();
      }
      Depending on the font design, changing fontsize_in_points may or may not affect the appearance of the glyphs on screen.
    10. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      I can only say it again: read the Microsoft page.

      Yes I read it. It talks almost entirely about changing letter shapes for rasterization, though it does mention the type of scaling you are talking about, calling it "Optical scaling".

      I'm confused why you think your pseudocode is doing what I want. I want the argument to be "physsize_in_UNITS", where "units" are the same dimension that I would send to the path contstruction calls or to fill a rectangle.

      Your code as written would work, if and only if getfont(name,n) returned a font that is exactly n units tall. Then scaling by physsize_in_units/n would result in the correctly-sized font. However making a font n units tall means IT IS NOT MEASURED IN POINTS!!!

      If in fact your getfont() returns an image scaled to be a certain number of points tall, we are forced to scale by the desired size times the inverse transformation of that number of points to the current space. This is nowhere near as simple as you seem to think. Even if you ignore rotations, skew, and different x/y scale, it is going to be:

      scale = physsize_in_units*current_scale/(fontsize_in_point s*DPI/72)

      I'd like to know what you think rotated, skewed, or 3-D current transforms should do when you specify fonts in "points".

      Please let me repeat: I fully understand the desire to change the letterforms based on a "point size". This has nothing to do with what I want. Let me show you some pseudo-code where in my scheme you can select fonts by "points" in an entirely unambiguous way:

      scale(DPI/72, DPI/72);
      pickfont(actual_size=n, render_as_though_point_size=n);
      DONE!!!!

    11. Re:you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1
      I'm confused why you think your pseudocode is doing what I want.

      I have no idea what you want. You started off with statements like these:
      I have no idea why X, Microsoft, and you all seem to think points are important, especially when every other graphics call measures stuff in pixels.

      All modern font rendering systems render those two fonts exactly the same. Check the source code for FreeType if you don't believe me.

      I think we have established now that a single TrueType fonts can have different shapes depending on the point size it is rendered at, so that simply scaling one to match the size of the other will not give you the same thing. That's all I'm saying.

      How you choose to parameterize it is up to you. Suffice it to say that the current parameterization (select font in point size, then use geometric transformations for rescaling) seems completely natural to most experienced developers of graphics software.

      Yes I read it. It talks almost entirely about changing letter shapes for rasterization, though it does mention the type of scaling you are talking about, calling it "Optical scaling".

      Good. That's all this discussion has been about as far as I'm concerned.

      All the other stuff you throw at me now has nothing to do with your original statement.
    12. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      I think we have established now that a single TrueType fonts can have different shapes depending on the point size it is rendered at, so that simply scaling one to match the size of the other will not give you the same thing. That's all I'm saying.

      Yes, but we have also established that asking for "bold" or "italic" should change the letter forms, too. However the interface you are suggesting is the same as if asking for "bold" always returned a font that was 1.2 times taller. Do you really think that makes it easier to mix bold and normal text? No I submit that it makes it MUCH harder!

      Your pseudo-code implies that you think asking for an N-point font returns a font that is N UNITS tall. This is because you clearly state that you think that a scale of desired_size/N put into the CTM would produce the desired font size. Unfortunatly, and this is where my argument is, all the interfaces I have seen return a font that is N*DPI/72 pixels tall. Thus to get a predictable size I must look up the DPI and do a division. Now you could try to argue that this makes sense, but if it does, why don't I have to do it for every other graphics call?

      This has nothing to do with a PostScript like interface where it is possible to set the CTM so the units are 1/72 inch. In that case, fonts are selected in "points", but so are all the other graphics!!!

      My complaint is that in all current systems for screen graphics, the font is selected in a mysterious unit that is different than every other graphic. This is a stupid, brain-dead method and no amount of typographic history or buzzwords will change that fact!

    13. Re:you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1

      However the interface you are suggesting is the same as if asking for "bold" always returned a font that was 1.2 times taller.

      I'm not suggesting an interface at all, I'm simply describing the interface that is there. And, yes, a 12pt bold font may well be slightly taller in terms of pixels than the corresponding 12pt plain font, but it would still be a 12pt font. Point size does not give you the exact size at which a string in a given font will actually render. If you want to render at a precise pixel size, you have to query the font metrics and choose a scale that makes the rendered string exactly the size you want.

      My complaint is that in all current systems for screen graphics, the font is selected in a mysterious unit that is different than every other graphic.

      Yes, and the reason for that is that something like "a 12 point Bodoni font" has a well-defined meaning: people know what the purpose and the look of that kind of font is going to be. Nobody knows what "a 40 pixel Bodoni font" looks like--it just isn't well defined, because it could have the shape of a 12 point Bodoni font or of a 40 point Bodoni font. The actual shape of the glyphs is only defined in terms of points, i.e., in terms of the size that the corresponding font would have were it printed on paper. Just think of the point size as part of the font name.

      So, you have to specify the point size because that determines the shape of the font. And since the point size implies a default pixel size through the known resolution, people figure they might as well make that "natural" size the default rendering size, because that's often the size people want anyway.

      You could have another API in which the user always specifies the point size and the pixel size of the rendered string, although most developers would probably find that more cumbersome; the usual way fonts are used is that the rest of the UI accomodates the text, no the other way around. But while that is a valid choice, it just makes no sense to specify only the pixel size because then the shape of the font would depend on the magnification at which you view the document and on the resolution of the output device.

    14. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      So, you have to specify the point size because that determines the shape of the font. And since the point size implies a default pixel size through the known resolution, people figure they might as well make that "natural" size the default rendering size, because that's often the size people want anyway.

      Yes I am aware that that is the logic that was used to arrive at the current situation.

      There would be nothing wrong with an interface that took the font size in pixels or in current units as the "simplified" interface. You could still render the font correctly for it's size by the simple step of converting the pixel size to points to select the rendering algorithm. For instance if the complicated call is "setfont(pixels, points)" the simple call is "setfont(pixels, pixels*72/DPI)".

      I really don't care how logical or anything else selecting fonts by points seems to be. They are graphic elements and they should be measured the same. Ask any user anywhere, such as all those Windows users that insist that changing the screen resolution is important, and see if any of them would be happy if this caused all the fonts to re-render. I'm afraid you are going to find the answer is no. I am completely pissed off at KDE for obeying the DPI, since the dpi comes up with random values each time I reboot the machine (switching between 75 and 100). What should be a minor XFree86 bug is turned into a complete disasterous headache, despite the fact that KDE is working "perfectly" according to your definition. Fixing this results in it printing fonts the wrong size, too. Also Microsoft has forced their DPI setting to 96 at all times, since they (probably due to user testing) have realized this is a misfeature and have decided to disable it as best they can.

    15. Re:you are deeply confused by ajagci · · Score: 1

      There would be nothing wrong with an interface that took the font size in pixels or in current units as the "simplified" interface.

      So, what shape should a "40 pixel Bodoni font" have? The shape of "Bodoni 12"? The shape of "Bodoni 40"? Should the shape of the font you get change with the resolution of your screen?

      Think of the "font size" as a "visual angle" specification. A "Bodoni 12pt" font is actually "Bodoni designed for a viewing angle of 0.95 degree" (12pt at 10"). That's what the "point size" really means--it's not a size, it's a design parameter. The fact that it renders at a size that makes its largest letters approximately (12pt/72 * resolution) is because it has to render at some size, and one might as well pick that one because it's the most natural one.

      I am completely pissed off at KDE for obeying the DPI, since the dpi comes up with random values each time I reboot the machine (switching between 75 and 100).

      If your hardware is broken, then use the "-dpi" flag to override it in software. It is also correct to use "-dpi" to compensate for non-standard viewing conditions (if you sit very close, lower the dpi, if you sit very far away, increase it).

      What should be a minor XFree86 bug is turned into a complete disasterous headache,

      Well, gee, if XFree86 changed the color channels around, would that also be a "minor bug"? Would you then insist that we all use black-and-white to avoid turning such a "minor bug" into a "disastrous headache"?

      And DPIs aren't there to annoy you, some people really do work on 300dpi monitors with regularity.

      They are graphic elements and they should be measured the same.

      Quite right: other complex graphic elements, like buttons and scrollbars, should also be parameterized by the viewing angle they are designed for. The fact that they aren't in most toolkits is a problem with the toolkits, not with fonts. That's why most desktop toolkits look awful on handhelds or very high resolution screens.

    16. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      So, what shape should a "40 pixel Bodoni font" have?

      It should have the shape you would have chosen for a 40*72/DPI point font in your scheme.

      Should the shape of the font you get change with the resolution of your screen?

      YES!!!!! As long as the general size in units does not change. I mean I could substitue a different font for "Bodoni" and the widths and letterforms might all change, but I certainly would never expect the vertical size to change. Besides in the "complex" interface where it takes both pixel and point sizes this can easily be avoided.

      IMHO the answers to these questions are glaringly obvious and totally trivial to implement. I do not understand why you think this is somehow difficult.

    17. Re:you are deeply confused by spitzak · · Score: 1

      And DPIs aren't there to annoy you, some people really do work on 300dpi monitors with regularity.

      If I am forced to figure out the DPI to draw a 1" square, then having the fonts in "points" serves NO purpose. So unless the API for that 300-dpi monitor allows scaling, and can easily be set so that a unit is 1/72 of an inch, then no I do not want "points" I do not want points even if it is a million dots per inch. I want the same units that all other graphics are drawn in. How many times do I have to say this?

      Even if it does allow scaling, I would copy Cairo which has decided that the nearest integer multiple of 1/96 should be used. This is needed so that antialiasing does not show up unexpectedly in your graphics. Fonts should definately be specified in current units, otherwise with this even more complex rules for default transform I have to do even more annoying work to get a font to match my other graphics!

      I would never, ever, accept an interface that took "points" unless the normal interface for drawing lines accepted units that are 1/72 of an inch (that is not impossible. With sufficently advanced anti-aliasing algorithims you may eliminate the need to match any graphics to pixel boundaries). However even the most advanced algorithims will not excuse an interface where I have to keep track of two different CTM's just to match the size of some of my graphics to others.

  234. Re:hurrying up and waiting at the DOD, and at DMV by JimBobJoe · · Score: 1

    So what country are you talking about?

    The one with the weapons of mass destruction of course. :-)

  235. Re:Encrypted by Joe+U · · Score: 1

    The tower like objects were actually computer keyboards.

    Seriously, try it in write.exe set to wingdings and increase the font size.

  236. you broke it by ajagci · · Score: 1

    It does seem a bunch of people all came to the same mistaken conclusion that people wanted to see fonts the same physical size on all screens, but for some reason were uninterested in seeing any other graphics be the same physical size.

    No, they simply understood that the semantically meaningful piece of information is whether a font is 12pt or 24pt. A 24pt font is wrong for running text even if its pixels happen to fit into the rectangle you want to fit them in. An MS Word or OpenOffice document using a 24pt font when viewed at 50% isn't the same as an MS Word or OpenOffice document using a 12pt font when viewed at 100%.

    Applications are selecting fonts from a two-dimensional space when they select by point size; it's just that, historically, people happened to view documents only at 100% (machines were slow in the early 1980's) and that the toolkit implicitly assumed that you wanted screen resolution. But that assumption is no longer warranted. Like so many other things, X11 got this right from the start.

    Quite awhile ago I fixed fltk to take the font size in pixels.

    Then it sounds like you broke it. Any toolkit that only lets applications select fonts using a single parameter is incomplete and outdated. Font specifications require two size-related paramters: size and resolution. You can specify size in pixels or in points, but the pixel size is pretty meaningless, so people usually go for points.

    1. Re:you broke it by spitzak · · Score: 1

      All your arguments make sense if there were calls to draw scaled things other than fonts. For instance a call that is "draw a rectangle this many points in size at this many points from the top and left of the window" would allow you to mix rectangles with point-sized fonts.

      The fact is that X, Win32, and Xft, do not provide any such calls except for fonts. This indicates that the whole idea is a mistake, not some intelligent design.

    2. Re:you broke it by ajagci · · Score: 1

      All your arguments make sense if there were calls to draw scaled things other than fonts.

      Non-linear scaling of graphics is something that cannot be implemented by the graphics API at the level of individual primitives because it is a property of the entire image you are rendering. Therefore, there is nothing sensible the API can offer you--it can only give you physical coordinates and let you do the work. But fonts are already compound graphics objects, so someone had the opportunity to think about it and the API can actually do the work for you; that's why the font API takes both point size and resolution parameters (at least implicitly).

      So, yes, when you scale a drawing to twice the size, the width of the line with which you draw a rectangle may not, in fact, scale up by a factor of two. Or it may. It depends on what that rectangle means. But since the low-level graphics API can't know what the rectangle means, it can't make that decision for you, and so you just get an API in terms of physical coordinates.

      In some cases, the need for non-linear scaling is blatantly obvious even to people who don't usually think about such issues. For example, it becomes clear quickly to most people that you can't just rescale 3D buttons linearly: you'd get bevel sizes that are far too large if you did.

  237. got reading glasses? by SoCoKapSig · · Score: 1

    Sounds like there are too many old people that are in denial about their need for reading glasses!

  238. Re:Encrypted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    first of all, it's supposed to be Q33. the 3's look more like buildings than the keyboards do. they're supposed to be pieces of paper I think.

    second, neither Q33 or Q77 are flight numbers of anything. flight numbers are NUMBERS

    I wish someone would make a good website to dispel myths like this. Oh well, better not get my snopes up.

  239. The ink lobbyists by Zevets · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think you just realized the real motive. The ink lobby has "donated to the president". Everyone knows how expensive ink cartridges are(or laser). Open Open Office (pun intended) and type something. You will see that the end number of pages is the same, but that Times New Roman 14 uses wider parts of letters (total width same including spacing). You will need to open it up to see what I mean. This will cost the governement millions paying for these extra cartridges. Fear the Ink Lobby!

    --

    Mod Wisely.

  240. still no cure for cancer... by schuss42 · · Score: 1

    not sure if i should laugh or cry at the inane-ness. sigh...

  241. Upset by andy_geek · · Score: 1

    And here I thought Microsoft Sans Serif was making inroads....

    --
    "Don't matter how New Age you get, old age is gonna kick your ass." - Utah Phillips
  242. Of course by Godeke · · Score: 1

    Because we apparently are entering into the New Roman Times. Surely any other font would fail to capture the feel of the new empire in the same way. For more information about the new empire, please see New American Century, which uses Times New Roman extensively.

    --
    Sig under construction since 1998.
  243. object placement in text flow w/ TeX? by StandardDeviant · · Score: 1

    Is there a reasonably straight-forward way to control the placement of "blobs" (charts, pictures, tables, etc.) in the flow of text in (La)TeX? I looked through the TeXbook some for an answer, but didn't manage to find anything. (I'm not a TeX expert by any means, just a chemistry major who wants to make pretty reports.) Should I look at the LaTeX layer for this? Some sort of gui like LyX? Thanks in advance to anyone with insights on this...

    1. Re:object placement in text flow w/ TeX? by Bob+Uhl · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that TeX has some (low-level) way to do this, but LaTeX is better--just use the figure or table environments. The tables are another instance in which LaTeX outshines WYSIWYG. There are several good LaTeX books; Helmut Kopka's Guide to LaTeX is a good one, as is The LaTeX Companion; the author of the LaTeX macros, Leslie Lamport, has his own book, but I've not read it.

    2. Re:object placement in text flow w/ TeX? by StandardDeviant · · Score: 1

      Thank you! :)

  244. When I was in college by ducomputergeek · · Score: 2, Funny
    I used Courier to add that extra dead space on those 20 page papers that were really about 18 pages long, and I always used the excuse, "Well, its good enough for the government, its good enough for you!".

    Now why did I go and enroll for a Masters program next fall again?

    --
    "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    1. Re:When I was in college by understyled · · Score: 1

      Now why did I go and enroll for a Masters program next fall again?

      sorority girls.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  245. They didn't listen to the nuns... by ralfg33k · · Score: 1

    See? Chronic masturbation *does* lead to blindness!

  246. In other news... by BillyBlaze · · Score: 2, Funny
    In other news, although negotiations will still be conducted around a round table, the ratio of the its circumference to its diameter will be exactly 3.

    And for classified documents, Wingdings.

    Sorry.

  247. Re:hurrying up and waiting at the DOD, and at DMV by daeley · · Score: 1

    Well, to be far, the poster wrote "we can sent" which might be taken to mean we have the ability to do so, not that we have. ;)

    --
    I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
  248. What - Crayon no longer acceptable ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Single or multi-coloured text ?

  249. Re:Speaking of COMICS by MrBlint · · Score: 0
    Information doesn't want anything -- it just is

    But can you have information without configuration?

    --
    That's very perceptive of you Mr Stapleton and rather unexpected in a G Major
  250. this only proves that ... by simonharvey · · Score: 1

    ... the average US civil servant is getting older

  251. And then there's Excel by jmichaelg · · Score: 1
    Excel bases its row heights and column widths on Ariel metrics. Set a column width to 12 and you can fit 12 lower case, 10 point, Arial 'a's in it.

    Which is fine until Microsoft decided to modify the base metrics on Ariel. All my spreadsheets that I had carefully sized to fit on a single sheet of printer paper suddenly started using two sheets after my customers downloade some patches to Windows. Buried in the usual welter of security patches was an "upgrade" to several of the system fonts. I discovered this nasty little surprise when my customers started calling for tech support. That unilateral font change on Microsoft's part cost me several days to clean up the mess.

  252. Did nobody notice the source? by Eunuchswear · · Score: 1
    This doesn't come from ABC news, at the bottom it says:
    -- AFP
    For those of you not up to date on your "spot the enemy" homeland defense classes "AFP" is "Agence France Presse".

    This is yet another attack on our sacred American government by those atheistical Frogs.

    Liberate Paris Now!

    --
    Watch this Heartland Institute video
  253. Re:You are wrong by benzapp · · Score: 1

    The New Testament was written at least 100 years after Jesus died.

    Are you familiar at all with the history of ancient Judea? Lets just say that they fought whole wars against hellenized Jews who spoke Greek. The traditional Jews won, and Hanukkah is the resulting holiday which commemorates the slaughter of the hellenized Jews.

    This extremist attitude towards gentile culture ultimately led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD by Emperor Vespatian. Decades of turmoil followed until the Jews revolted again in 132 AD. Emperor Hadrian simply eradicated the population of Jersualem, and prohibited all Jewish customs,language, culture, and laws. Roman culture was then imposed on the region and Judea ceased to exist until 1948.

    Thus, when the bible was being written in 100 AD, it was not going to be written in any language of the Jews.

    The Holy Lands changed very radically between the time Jesus was supposedly born and when the first gospels were written. Further, Jews were quite hostile to Roman and Greek culture and in Jerusalem itself neither would have been used by Jews except perhaps after 132.

    --
    I don't read or respond to AC posts
  254. Is this a copyrighted font? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Who own the rights on Times New Roman? Is that a copyright infringement to use it under an "alternative" operating system? Will someone be allowed to use Linux to compose official government documents?

  255. Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Where is the link to send anthrax?

  256. fucking aweful title... US doesn't "Ban" anything by kaltkalt · · Score: 3, Interesting

    An administrative office in the US gov't decided to use a different font. Not only is this not news, but for them to frame it as "US Bans old font" is downright misleading and dispicable. Pretty much every office I've ever worked for has had a standard font. The Dept. of State decided to change fonts--and to a much more eye-pleasing one, I might add. Nobody is going to jail for using Courier Font in the USA. Not even a fine. This is basically just a "TPS Report" saying how they're gonna do the cover sheets from now on... new font. No big fucking deal. The USA has not banned any fonts. If you work for the Dept of State, start using Times new Roman. Shoulda been using it years ago anyway. Of course, if the title of the story had been "State Department Chooses New Font" the editors would have laughed the reporter out of the office... so it had to be more dramatic. "US bans..." ... yeh we've banned lots of stupid things that shouldn't be banned, but fonts are not yet one of them.

    --

    Stupid people make stupid things profitable.
  257. conspiracy by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    This is all a conspiracy against ascii-art, as Microsoft is trying to wrest control of communications away from dialup BBS systems, the kinda frequented by those evil hackers.

    With courier, we could view our ascii art in peace, but modern variable-spaced fonts don't allow us to effectively express our war plans, such as the ones shown below:

    Lameness filter encountered. Post shortened.
    Reason: Please use fewer 'junk' characters.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  258. On a related note ... by Cyburbia · · Score: 1

    The Attorney General's office will now be using Fraktur as its official font.

  259. a better name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    would have been 'Operation American Lubrication'

  260. look who is talking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe my computer is broken, but it looks like this entire site is writen in times new roman

  261. Knuth is the fontmaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Computer Modern Roman 11. A fine font, and a fine font.

  262. My boss can't see by bobalu · · Score: 2, Interesting

    so I use the same font. It's freaking HUGE.

    But maybe GWB and company will notice when they say "this intelligence is unreliable".

    --
    The revolution will NOT be televised.
  263. FALLACY YOU MORON. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    God, I can't believe that none of the 12 pedants who replied to you could be bothered to correct your mistake.

  264. Duhhh...It's MS Word Default!!!!! by mabhatter654 · · Score: 0
    Does anybody else get this...Times New Roman 14 is the DEFAULT FONT of Microsoft Word!!!! The real reason they changed the spec is that it's way too much work for the govt IT guys to go to all those small scattered farm offices and change every installed copy of Word to use a different default....that and stupid politicians' secrataries that can't change fonts too!!!

    If the govt was really serious about open communication they would have used Bitstream Vera Serif....most /.rs should know why!!!

  265. Double? Ha! by HiggsBison · · Score: 1
    rot13, twice (for good measure) !

    I use quadruple rot13. Damn near unbreakable, I say!

    --
    My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.
  266. Spelling cop post... by jlleblanc · · Score: 1

    Fallacy. 10 Point fallacy.

  267. All your questions answered. by crucini · · Score: 1
    1. Is the government really specifying a new font for all documents?
      No, only diplomatic notes. It says so in the article.
    2. But I read it on slashdot?
      That should be your first clue.
    3. Isn't it a waste of government resources to specify such a trivial thing?
      No. The U.S. clearly values a uniform, professional and modern appearance in its diplomatic correspondence. The article indicates that pressure for this change had been coming from many directions. In general, the government achieves economy by carefully standardizing. Failure to standardize is usually a false economy.
    4. But Times New Roman is so ugly! Why didn't they pick an aesthetically superior typeface like Apple uses?
      Times New Roman is one of the most common typefaces in business correspondence. It's available on Windows PCs. The U.S. wanted to appear modern and businesslike, not clever and arty.
  268. Rumor has it... by popo · · Score: 1

    Rumor has it that the new U.S. Budget Proposal was written entirely in Comic Sans.

    --
    ------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
  269. 14 point is a BIG font by Zog+The+Undeniable · · Score: 1

    Actually, it isn't...it's just that Windoze displays all fonts larger than other operating systems. A frequent problem when designing web pages that will also be viewed by Mac and *nix users.

    --
    When I am king, you will be first against the wall.
  270. Better late than never... by beaverfever · · Score: 1

    Times Roman 14pt: " a crisper, cleaner, more modern look"

    Whose secretary made this decision?

  271. here's a question by le+duf · · Score: 1

    What font did they use for the memo?

  272. OCR Errors by Giggle+Stick · · Score: 1

    So the order stating, "DO NOT ATTACK IRAQ" was incorrectly OCRd as "DONUT ATTACK IRAQ" explaining the large amount of Krispy Kremes dumped on Kabul that one time.

  273. Sounds like something a child would do by Cyno · · Score: 1

    When I was 9 years old Times New Roman was one of my favorite fonts. Along with wingdings.

    But now that I've been using computers for a long time I much prefer Sans Serifs like Helvetica or Arial! They are so much easier to read and don't look so gothic.

    Although I did find this:
    "According to most studies, sans serif fonts are more difficult to read. For this reason, they are used most often for short text components such as headlines or captions."

    I wonder who conducts these studies. Do you find Times New Roman easier to read?

  274. China, EU & Russia will use size 16 by zungu · · Score: 1

    To counter the US dominance shown through the font size 14. China, EU, India and Russia have first time agreed jointly to counter the US dominance by agreeing to use font size 16. The US is reported to be contemplating to do a pre-emptive strike by increasing it font-size. However, details of the new size are classified.

  275. Re:You are wrong by Tassach · · Score: 1

    That's in line with what I was remembering: in the early first century middle, the "lingua franca" was Aramaic. Jews would be speaking Hebrew amongst themselves, but would almost definately know at least 1 other language for dealing with gentiles.

    --
    Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
  276. Re:Encrypted by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 1

    Heh, that "other evil symbol" is a thumbs-up.