Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!esosun!seismo!uunet!iconsys!bryan
From: bryan@iconsys.UUCP (Bryan Cardoza)
Newsgroups: comp.fonts
Subject: Re: Italic & Oblique
Keywords: read my lips
Message-ID: <324@iconsys.UUCP>
Date: 1 Feb 89 18:15:43 GMT
References: <11514@gryphon.COM>, <1989Jan23.144822.29002@cs.rochester.edu>, <11122@gryphon.COM>, <1989Jan24.053717.19313@cs.rochester.edu>, <43873@linus.UUCP>
Reply-To: bryan@iconsys.UUCP (Bryan Cardoza)
Followup-To: poster
Distribution: na
Organization: Icon International, Inc. -- Orem, Utah
Lines: 73

In article <11514@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
Followup-To: nowhere, it's only a joke
Keywords: no bryan, ken said he was wrong already
>(insert :-)'s until you feel better)

Sorry, I have to make myself clear, since you took the trouble to raise the
issue.

I made reference to the common usage by professionals; follow if you will.
[Skip to the end for the short version.]


In article <1989Jan23.144822.29002@cs.rochester.edu> ken@cs.rochester.edu (Ken Yap) writes:
>>I agree that regular Helvetica kind of gets on one's nerves, but Helvetica
>>Italics aren't half bad at all...
>
>Small nit: it's Helvetica Oblique. Italics are for serif fonts.


In article <11122@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>Is this really true ? I thought that Italics were a very old idea,
>and were basically a curvy character different from the ``original''
...
>serif vs. sans-serif fonts. Another thing to perhaps back this
>up is that Times-Roman oblique != Times-Italics.

In article <1989Jan24.053717.19313@cs.rochester.edu> ken@cs.rochester.edu (Ken Yap) writes:
>Yes, I agree.  That's the very point I was making badly.  Italic is not
...
>through a skewing matrix.  Italics are a different design within the
>family.  In careless nomenclature, all sloping fonts, italic or not,
	  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>get called italic.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

PLEASE NOTE, it doesn't look like Ken is saying he's wrong.


In article <43873@linus.UUCP> ted@mbunix (Ede) writes:
>Correct me if I'm wrong (he says, reaching for his flame retardent
>suit).  I was told that an Oblique font was just a normal font tilted
>(by an algorithm) a certain number of degrees and an Italic font was
>one that was re-designed (by hand) at that angle.

In article <323@iconsys.UUCP> bryan@iconsys.UUCP (Bryan Cardoza) writes:
>You were told wrong; Ken is correct according to my professional designer
>friends.

In article <11514@gryphon.COM> richard@gryphon.COM (Richard Sexton) writes:
>So why don't you post their names so none of us makes the mistake
>of hiring them ?

Cute.

In the common usage of typographers [that I know] (those who design type)

	italic		is a slanted serif face
	oblique		is a slanted sans serif face

In the common usage of type typesetters [that I know] (those who place type)

	italic		is an originaly crafted slanted face
	oblique		is a non-slanted face skewed by machine

In article <1989Jan24.053717.19313@cs.rochester.edu> ken@cs.rochester.edu (Ken Yap) writes:
>Being too terse in postings has drawbacks too.

AMEN.  End of story.
-- 
Bryan Cardoza			uunet!iconsys!bryan
Software Engineer
SANYO/ICON			Telephone: (801) 225-6888
Orem, Utah			FAX: (801) 226-0651