Slashdot Mirror
The Feds' Freeway Font Flip-Flop (citylab.com)
McGruber writes: Citylab has the news that the U.S. Federal Highway Administration is revoking its 2004 approval of the "Clearview" font for road signs. Clearview was made to improve upon its predecessor, a 1940s font called Highway Gothic. Certain letters appeared to pose visibility problems, especially those with tight interstices (or internal spacing)—namely lowercase e, a, and s. At night, any of these reflective letters might appear to be a lowercase o in the glare of headlights. By opening up these letterforms, and mixing lowercase and uppercase styles, Clearview aimed to improve how these reflective highway signs read.
Now, just 12 years later, the FHWA is reversing itself: "After more than a decade of analysis, we learned—among other things—that Clearview actually compromises the legibility of signs in negative-contrast color orientations, such as those with black letters on white or yellow backgrounds like Speed Limit and Warning signs," said Doug Hecox, a FHWA spokesperson, in an email. The FHWA has not yet provided any research on Clearview that disproves the early claims about the font's benefits. But there is at least one factor that clearly distinguishes it from Highway Gothic: cost. Jurisdictions that adopt Clearview must purchase a standard license for type, a one-time charge of between $175 (for one font) and $795 (for the full 13-font typeface family) and up, depending on the number of workstations.
That doesn't seems like a very good use of tax money, for something that can be nondestructively reused once created.
Now, just 12 years later, the FHWA is reversing itself: "After more than a decade of analysis, we learned—among other things—that Clearview actually compromises the legibility of signs in negative-contrast color orientations, such as those with black letters on white or yellow backgrounds like Speed Limit and Warning signs," said Doug Hecox, a FHWA spokesperson, in an email. The FHWA has not yet provided any research on Clearview that disproves the early claims about the font's benefits. But there is at least one factor that clearly distinguishes it from Highway Gothic: cost. Jurisdictions that adopt Clearview must purchase a standard license for type, a one-time charge of between $175 (for one font) and $795 (for the full 13-font typeface family) and up, depending on the number of workstations.
That doesn't seems like a very good use of tax money, for something that can be nondestructively reused once created.
.. and very pro capitalism, etc bla bla.
But ... common ... how can our Federal Highway Administration go about researching and the setting a standard for a font ... and then be so stupid as to not procure rights to that font and then license them to every other agency/company at no cost?
As a republican ... this is the kind of thing I expect my government TO do. I know wikipedia says "It was developed by independent researchers with the help of the Texas Transportation Institute and the Pennsylvania Transportation Institute, under the supervision of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)," why didn't any of these agencies say "So ... we're going to pay you a huge pile of money ... once ... for this font."
END
True, but it's a relatively small amount of money. It's not completely out of whack with what commercial enterprises pay for non-free fonts. And, to be honest, if someone invested in this project thinking "Hmm, if I invest on research into improving something with a direct affect on road safety and transportation efficiency, I'll make money!" that's... not a bad thing. Beats "Hmm, if I invest in research on blowing people up, the government will give me money!" anyway.
Copyright isn't a terrible idea, just one that's abused from time to time. The target audience for this font can easily afford the money they're asking for, and it's a worthy product if the font does what it's designed to do. (Whether that's true is a separate issue from "Should we occasionally pay for fonts?")
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
You know... I've actually had serious conversations with serious people about the font used on signs. It is not, technically, my area of expertise but I'm expected to know it, have hired someone familiar with it, or to have a consultant on hand for it. Well no, now I'm expected to be retired...
While I realize you were joking... How familiar are people with it? How well is its contrast with the various lighting expectations? How much information can be conveyed in the same space?
Given my druthers, and not being an expert, I'd like to see Helvetica be tested for use. So long as certain highways (namely those that are federally owned and under their authority) meet a minimal criteria, the municipality is allowed to enact most anything it wants. Of course, wide variations would be bad as they would lead to confusion and unfamiliarity.
For the English language, Helvetica seems to be a good choice. If, on the off chance, you're interested - there's actually a movie by that name. It's a documentary (of course, that's all I watch) and surprisingly interesting and informative. I watched it because I knew a bit about it but it turned out to be much better than one might expect. (A documentary about fonts???)
I'm also partial to some of the Ariel (or is it Arial) fonts. I'm not sure that they'd make good signage due to their width of the letter body (those crazy bastards have a specific name for all that stuff - including stuff like serifs, kerning, etc) and I'm not sure about Helvetica - I am not an expert. I have hired and consulted with experts and passed their recommendations along. (Usually it's basically, "How the hell should I know and it's not like they're actually going to listen. Go with the default. At least it works.) So, my suggestion is that they look into it. I'd hate to make an authoritative statement when I am not, in fact, an authority.
In the course of my professional career, I've had many discussions about signs and their fonts. No, I did not recommend the font you hate. That was some other guy or they didn't listen to me. It's never my fault, after all. I did not, however, expect to see it on Slashdot - ever. I didn't even submit this. So, if you have any questions about fonts and signage, I'm sure plenty of people here have an opinion on the matter. Me? I've really only got suggestions. There exist actual experts on this topic. I kind of doubt any of us are. I'm moderately familiar so I'm sure I'll be amused by the contents of the thread.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."