Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!bcstec!voodoo!zombie
From: zombie@voodoo.UUCP (Mike York)
Newsgroups: comp.fonts
Subject: Re: Why is Courier ugly?
Message-ID: <1154@voodoo.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 91 15:25:33 GMT
References: <1991Mar19.011328.16296@zeus.mgmt.purdue.edu> <1133@voodoo.UUCP> <93559@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV>
Organization: BoGART To You Buddy, Bellevue, WA
Lines: 24

In article <93559@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> preston@lll-crg.llnl.gov (David R Preston) writes:
>In article <1133@voodoo.UUCP> zombie@voodoo.UUCP (That's Me) writes:
>>Unfortunately, the Air Transport Association dictates that manuals for
>>airplanes be printed with "a sans-serif monospaced font" which is generally
>>interpreted as OCRB.  So that's what we use in our manuals.  What I wouldn't 
>>give to use Courier for text paragraphs and Helvetica for illustrations...
>
>Bitstream has a monospaced Helvetica (at least, it's listed in their
>catalog, 10/89 printing).

Ah, you've hit on an interesting point.  One of my co-workers recently whipped
up a proportional OCRB font for some testing that had to be done.  It looks
much better than monospaced OCRB -- everything seems much more "balanced" 
especially the "i", "l" and "L".  We got the impression that OCRB was
originally meant to be monospaced ;^).  I would imagine that a monospaced 
Helvetica would show many of the same problems as OCRB, but then again, I 
haven't seen a monospaced helvetica.


-- 
    Mike York                            |  "Lord help me, I'm just not
    Boeing Computer Services             |   that bright."
    (206) 865-6577                       |
    zombie@voodoo.boeing.com             |                  -Homer Simpson