Daily Kos

View Story | 99 comments

  •  It would be defined (none / 0)

    ...as a standard part of the typeface; that is, the "proportionality" between letters is a part of the typeface's detailed design.  It'd be in the design handbooks, somewhere, if anyone has those around.

    Since Microsoft's Times New Roman was very explicitly designed to mimic the original Times New Roman as closely as possible, I think it's safe to assume that they did indeed use the exact same character widths, and so the character spacings are identical in each.

    •  standard widths? (none / 0)

      Hunter- I am REALLY confused now.  Online I have read that the executive could only do 4 widths and every letter had to fall into one of those categories.  Now we learn that the composer can do 6th widths (and we know that all are used).  Times New Roman on the executive would be distintuishable from Times New Roman on the composer because of this right?  Or am I missing something important here?
      •  It's possible... (none / 0)

        ...either way.  So far I don't necessarily know whether they were the same or not.  We also don't know if the differences would be enough to pick up on in such a blurry photocopy -- there's a lot of 'bleeding' going on at each letter.  If you compared the Executive and Composer typeface to each other, side by side, you might be able to see very tiny differences, but comparing either to this memo won't tell much.

        The differences between 4 proportional widths and 6 proportional widths, when talking about fonts this small, are very subtle, but I suppose it's possible.

        •  See below... (none / 0)

          Someone appears to have made an off by one error in reporting the of "only 4 widths" thing that I see all over. I think the known values are 5 (for the Executive Model A) and 7 (for the Composer). Although the values for the Executive B, C and D are not known they must be at least 5.

View Story | 99 comments