[HN Gopher] Atkinson Hyperlegible Font
___________________________________________________________________
Atkinson Hyperlegible Font
Author : zdw
Score : 542 points
Date : 2022-09-11 14:24 UTC (8 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (brailleinstitute.org)
(TXT) w3m dump (brailleinstitute.org)
| schoen wrote:
| How effective is the German FE-Schrift license plate typeface for
| this purpose?
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FE-Schrift
|
| It was designed to make different characters visually distinct
| from one another, but also especially difficult to _alter_ into
| something visually similar. The latter part is a slightly
| different goal.
| TakeBlaster16 wrote:
| Maybe it would work, but I can't see myself ever using a font
| without lowercase letters.
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| I'm uncomfortable with people publishing work like this without
| studies to back up whether they work for their intended audience.
| I'm sure the Braille Institute is expert in needs of low vision
| readers. And the design certainly looks promising. But AFAICT no
| one has studied whether this font is actually more readable.
| https://www.maxkohler.com/notes/2021-02-16-atkinson-hyperrea...
|
| The mess with the popular-but-not-effective OpenDyslexic isn't
| good for anyone except publishers wanting to tick off an
| "accessibility" checkbox. (Thinking particularly of the library
| e-reader Axis360 which includes only two fonts; a bad regular
| font and a "dyslexia font". Neither are particularly readable
| IMHO.) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5629233/
| culi wrote:
| To be fair, most studies on fonts, at least as they relate to
| reading speed, have shown that there's much more cultural
| variation than we realize. Different line spacing, serifs vs
| sans serifs, font weights, etc can all affect reading speed
| positively or negatively based on age of the reader or cultural
| background.
|
| It turns out that the fastest fonts to read in are the ones
| people have practiced using the most.
|
| Given this, perhaps a more useful metric would be the maximum
| reading speeds for each font. This could give us something of
| an idea of what is possible given sufficient proficiency.
|
| Fonts like Atkinson Hyperlegible are very well designed around
| some simple but well accepted principles yet, to most people
| without a designer's eye, it looks like any other sans serif
| font
|
| ---
|
| PS if you wanna keep up with the latest in font readability
| research, you should check out the Readability Consortium:
|
| https://www.thereadabilityconsortium.org/
| clearcarbon wrote:
| As a dyslexic the mechanism for OpenDyslexic always seemed a
| little off for me. How does a differently shaped font help
| adjust for a difference in cognition?
|
| However in this case it would seem like focusing on ensuring
| that the letters can be distingushed with poor vision has a
| more direct mechanism? - though it may be that other fonts are
| better
| pbhjpbhj wrote:
| >"How does a differently shaped font help adjust for a
| difference in cognition?"
|
| AIUI for some people with cognitive difficulties when using
| text they find orientation of glyphs (which form letter
| characters) to be difficult to discern, and similarities
| across glyphs to be confusing. Thus, if glyphs are more
| differentiated from one another, and if they have a non-
| rotationally-symmetrical shape, then letters can be easier to
| comprehend.
|
| I'm curious whether fonts like Dyslexie mighty bed better for
| those learning to read. Children learning to read often
| confuse letters, b/d/p/q for example. I can see ways it could
| both help and hinder.
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| The answer to the question "Was there any scientific data or
| studies used in the design?", which begins "The design comes
| from the tradition of type design. It's not really rocket
| science... " does little to inspire confidence.
| gnicholas wrote:
| I work in this area and it's true that OD hasn't fared well in
| various studies, but there are some people who swear by it.
| When it comes to matters of cognition and perception, it's hard
| to say what does or does not actually make a difference for
| people, and what evidence should be accepted.
|
| After enough people asked for an OD option in my browser
| extension (which is used heavily in the dyslexia, ADHD, and
| vision impaired communities, as well as by other readers), we
| decided to offer it. I know the science behind it is not
| stunning, but who am I to tell people that the thing they think
| helps them read does not actually help them read? Even if they
| read more slowly with OD than without (something I'm not sure
| is true for people who choose to use OD), it's possible that
| one might enjoy reading more with OD even if it doesn't improve
| reading speed.
|
| I wholeheartedly agree with your point about companies wanting
| to check the box on accessibility by offering OD, and it's
| unfortunate more companies don't do more.
| taeric wrote:
| This implies there is a study showing the open dyslexic font is
| actually not good? I can't say that would shock me, but it is
| surprising that they wouldn't have done some studies to justify
| the claims.
|
| Edit: the second link wasn't loading for me, so now I see the
| study. Bad phone internet... :( Again, still surprised they
| didn't have the counter study.
| yellow_lead wrote:
| That's the NIH study that was linked.
|
| > Results from this alternating treatment experiment show no
| improvement in reading rate or accuracy for individual
| students with dyslexia, as well as the group as a whole.
| NelsonMinar wrote:
| That's the key finding. And while "no effect" may sound
| harmless the Discussion section of the paper highlights all
| the ways having a popular ineffective solution is actively
| harmful to people with dyslexia.
| taeric wrote:
| Yeah, apologies for my post before the extra links loaded
| for me. Definitely should have either worded it with the
| expectation that the link was that study, or waited.
|
| My intent was to express that surprise that they didn't
| have studies showing benefit. That is, the implication
| that really surprised me was the reverse, that there are
| not studies showing it works.
| [deleted]
| mabbo wrote:
| I feel as though there should be a standard set of tests that any
| or all fonts run through to demonstrate the various properties
| they want to claim.
|
| Don't tell me "better", tell me "Scored an 8.6 on legibility in
| the standard font assessment test".
| leephillips wrote:
| That would be valuable in comparing and searching for fonts.
| But some of these criteria are aesthetic.
| riedel wrote:
| Why do content creators need to do this? Particularly if they
| are experts and live off the trust in their experience. I am
| very happy if someone publishes something and states there
| goals an claims, so someone else can verify them independently.
| If it is not working they would risk reputation.
|
| If a few publisher's really check accessibility against
| relevant end users and verify that this works it is much
| better, than any kind of scores that often overlook important
| usability/accessibility issues.
|
| a11y Checkers are OK like any linter but I think we should not
| overdo this. That something has a higher score does not
| translate to better overall a11y.
| CodeWriter23 wrote:
| It's from The Braille Institute. They ARE the standard when it
| comes to dealing with vision challenges / vision loss.
| userbinator wrote:
| Ironically those who need Braille are also unlikely to care
| how readable a font is.
| samatman wrote:
| The Institute is named after the same person as the writing
| system for the blind, rather than being named after that
| writing system.
| wcerfgba wrote:
| Are there any monospaced fonts like this, with a focus on
| hyperlegibility?
| fxtentacle wrote:
| I'm going to assume you want to use it for development. For
| screen fonts, you typically have different design goals,
| because otherwise anti-aliasing and ClearText will reduce
| contrast and void your legibility improvements by spreading
| things out over subpixels.
|
| I tried to make my own highly legible high-contrast coding font
| using TensorFlow to fit things onto a high-resolution pixel
| grid based on a low-resolution draft. That way, characters
| align with the pixel grid (at the right scaling) which makes
| them appear much clearer.
|
| https://hajo.me/images/HajoCode16px_hr.png
|
| https://hajo.me/blog/2021/07/24/making-a-font-that-doesnt-su...
| upofadown wrote:
| Smaller bitmap fonts tend to be easy to distinguish. ... once
| you learn the patterns.
| Terretta wrote:
| Everyone has a favorite for clarity (mine is Andale Mono) but
| see the hyper-configurable https://typeof.net/Iosevka/ to make
| one your own.
| hombre_fatal wrote:
| Browsing around, the popular monospaced fonts for coding
| already have high distinction between glyphs like 8Bi1l.
| cratermoon wrote:
| Also 0/O and '` often matter. There are probably others that
| don't come to mind immediately.
| cratermoon wrote:
| Perhaps surprisingly, the ancient Monaco is still a good choice
| for development work. It has the key features of
| distinguishable 0/O and 1|Il. (Which you may not be able to
| distinguish here, depending on font choices).
| epgui wrote:
| There are a number of very nice monospace typefaces that have
| lots of character variants so you can essentially pick and
| choose different letter styles (dotted, crossed or regular
| zeros, etc).
|
| I personally love Fira Code with its ligatures.
| vanderZwan wrote:
| I love Fira Code. I suspect Iosevka is the winner when it
| comes to customization though:
|
| https://typeof.net/Iosevka/
|
| You can basically mimic features of almost any other big name
| among monospace fonts.
|
| The only downside I can think of is that it updates _really
| often_ and the website doesn 't have a way to save your
| customizations, so upgrading is a drag.
|
| Given that it's a free font I'm not complaining though.
| epgui wrote:
| Yes, that's another great one!
| xmonkee wrote:
| I recently discovered Fira code through
| https://www.codingfont.com/. I played with font names off,
| and Fira code won two times in a row :) I'm still amazed at
| how pleasant it looks on my screen.
| Version467 wrote:
| Oh, I didn't know of https://www.codingfont.com/, the
| tournament style competition is pretty cool. I also like
| that you can turn off the labels.
|
| I've used Fira Code for years and tried to find an
| alternative on https://www.programmingfonts.org/ but it's
| very difficult comparing so many different options at once.
| pmarreck wrote:
| I am a big fan of Berkeley Mono. It has (for me at least) this
| really hard to describe fusion of retro and modern that just
| feels perfect for coding and console to me. Note: Unfortunately
| not free, but I did manage to figure out how to make it a
| static definition as part of my NixOS declarative
| configuration, lol.
|
| https://berkeleygraphics.com/typefaces/berkeley-mono
|
| Note that I just noticed that you can easily add Atkinson
| Hyperlegible Font to your Nix config, the package is called
| (unsurprisingly) `atkinson-hyperlegible`
| Terretta wrote:
| Oh wow -- I love Univers and Eurostile, makes Berkeley Mono a
| contender!
| pmarreck wrote:
| I ended up forcing my browser to use Atkinson Hyperlegible
| for sans-serif text and Berkeley Mono for monospaced text
| and I may never change this config lol (although I wish I
| could force sites to use just the fonts, but not the
| fontsize settings, in Firefox...)
|
| Glorious!
| pmarreck wrote:
| The other cool thing about it (not sure if this is common)
| is that you can customize your variety of the zero
| character and a few other characters that have debatable or
| preferential forms
| electric_mayhem wrote:
| Font preference is very subjective.
|
| My personal fave is bitstream vers sans mono.
|
| But the one that ships with pychcharm is really good, too.
| roter wrote:
| Python developer here seconding Bitstream Vera Sans Mono. I
| like having that tiny space between successive underlines,
| i.e. in things like def __init__(self, a, b,
| c)
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| well legibility is an objective, measurable characteristic
| AlexAndScripts wrote:
| That's JetBrains Mono. It's open source
| falcolas wrote:
| I use Atkinson for the browser things, and I personally
| recommend DejaVu Sans Mono. The rest of that font family is
| excellent as well.
| homarp wrote:
| see also https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2022/08/an-update-to-the-
| atkinson-h...
| takoid wrote:
| If anyone else is having trouble loading the page:
| https://archive.ph/ok1ro.
| h3mb3 wrote:
| The designer/YouTuber Linus Boman has a video [1] about this font
| and his involvement in the project, it's a pretty interesting
| watch IMO.
|
| [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjE5eHLICzc
| ainar-g wrote:
| Linus' channel is severely underappreciated. I especially
| enjoyed his dive into the typography of comedy club logos:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XPmlv7cDk6Q.
| asah wrote:
| Curious: was this tested on users with various kinds of vision
| deficiencies?
|
| That study would be super interesting !
| micheljansen wrote:
| Note: the page itself is set in Atkinson, which looks more than
| good enough to stand on its own, even if you would not be aware
| of its hyperlegible properties.
| cratermoon wrote:
| Just FYI, I downloaded the font (after some time) and put it on
| my Kobo. When I tried to use it my Kobo just rebooted. Bad news,
| everyone.
|
| But good news, everyone. It's available from Google at
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegible and this
| one works with my Kobo.
|
| I don't know why, I'm no font expert, but it does make for nice
| reading.
| DiabloD3 wrote:
| Although the font did really try to nail its goal, I think
| Iosevka really nailed it.
|
| On top of that, somebody took some of what Atkinson did with
| their font, and applied it to Iosevka, using its insanely
| powerful ability to be customized wildly, to produce
| http://thedarnedestthing.com/iosevka%20hyperlegible
| scubbo wrote:
| Off-topic, but I think this might be the first time I've loaded
| a url including `%20` and had it actually render in my address
| bar as a space, rather than the percent-code. Is this something
| new in Firefox?
| riquito wrote:
| It's been like this in Firefox for quite some time
| Razengan wrote:
| Umm that website is barely legible, let alone hyper. Small,
| thin, spindly, faint, what the hell? (On Safari Ventura)
| moralestapia wrote:
| FWIW, the font on that blog post is not Iosevka,
|
| You can find Iosevka here -> https://typeof.net/Iosevka/
| einpoklum wrote:
| I find the 0.5em character width reduces readability
| somewhat. YMMV.
| _emacsomancer_ wrote:
| It is _an_ Iosevka.
| mouzogu wrote:
| the irony of having "hyperlegible" in the title when the title
| itself is barely legible.
|
| using a tiny 11px grey colour font, the body text is borderline
| while the navigation text is almost transparent.
| IncRnd wrote:
| Meybe they did that for their target audience to see that the
| font is legible.
| mikotodomo wrote:
| Wow, this is extremely well-designed and legible. Almost perfect,
| but I found one small issue in only one example on the screen. I
| read "B8 1Iil" as "B8 1TiL".
| shakabrah wrote:
| An aside: Why is it that most posts about a new product or
| project some people have put together is usually greeted with
| skepticism and negativity in HN comments? What is that all about?
| It is a pattern Ive continuously seen and it seems like only the
| true home runs receive any kind of praise.
|
| Most replies are either about lack of evidence or someone's
| alternative preference. I see that latter one a good deal.
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| It does feel like sometimes we go beyond "healthy skepticism",
| and assume bad intent. I think there is good intent here.
| Perhaps their work is coming from more of a liberal arts angle,
| than an engineering angle.
| systemvoltage wrote:
| There is a healthy amount of skepticism that is required to
| produce good for the society. It can be adjusted based on
| supply/demand of such commodity or service. But, by large,
| skepticism is _good_. As a creator myself, it is important to
| equip yourself with the right mentality. I would never blame
| everyone else for being skeptical. After all, most people mean
| good and there is often a solid reason they 're spending time
| writing about it.
|
| Highly, _highly_ recommend reading Adam Savage (Mythbuster
| fame) 's book about creativity and skepticism, it is filled
| with good wisdom:
| https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/43319933-every-tool-s-a-...
|
| If there is a complete lack of criticism/skepticism, you get a
| regressive world: https://fs.blog/chestertons-fence/
| MatthiasPortzel wrote:
| Because most of the time, the original post has enumerated all
| of the good things. There's no reason to reiterate the points
| made in the post in the comments, and so the comments add an
| opposite view.
| Bakary wrote:
| - The comment structure favors the 'middlebrow contrarian'
| style of response. This phenomenon is particularly acute on
| Reddit but on here it's a more understated process that's
| proportional to HN's design differences to the former.
|
| - Insecurity. Criticism is the most acute and well researched
| on here with child prodigies, more so than any other topic.
| Since people here get their sense of identity from their self-
| perception of intelligence, knowledge, and capacity to build
| certain things, there are many vulnerability points.
|
| - Wide, industry ranging experience with bullshit technology
| claims for most users.
|
| - Class and ethnographic differences. Criticism will vary
| depending on whether the product in question is inherently
| appealing to adult high-income nerds, no matter its overall
| utility
| throwaway_forev wrote:
| It is not just when there is a post about a new product or
| project. More broadly for ANY post here, the top comment and
| most comments will generally claim the opposite of what the
| original post presents is true (or some variation of that).
|
| I would say mainly it is just the need for some people to feel
| good about themselves that they know better, or to try to show
| that they are smarter than the author of the post (so that
| again, they can feel better about themselves).
|
| Don't take the comments too seriously. A lot of people think
| they are smarter than they actually are.
|
| And next time notice, whatever the post is, when you click to
| view the comments expect the top one to have a contrarian view.
|
| EDIT: As an example, as of right now, this post is the top post
| on HN. The second top post on HN?
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32800869
|
| Title: "Build Your Career on Dirty Work"
|
| Top Comment: "Really bad advice! Hard work does not pay"
|
| -
|
| Upon further thought, looking at the bright side (less
| cynical), I guess this does help give a more balanced view of
| the topic as you get to quickly see both sides of a story. But
| it's still kind of funny that this consistently happens.
| leeoniya wrote:
| probably the same reason new JS frameworks get a lot of
| criticism. adding another one expands an already daunting array
| of choices to make, most often without a clear benefit, as
| seems to be the case here.
| TheRealPomax wrote:
| Because you are the easiest person to lie to, yourself. Just
| because you work in a field doesn't mean your assumptions are
| valid. The more people (or you yourself) consider you an expert
| in something, the more you _should_ test your assumptions
| through studies etc. If you don 't, then claiming you made a
| thing "for X" without any proof that X benefits from that means
| you've almost certainly lied to yourself, convinced yourself
| that lie was true, and are now perpetuating that lie by putting
| it on the internet. Especially when you do things based on your
| own experience, it's incredibly easy to forget that there are
| almost infinitely more people who are different and have
| different needs and experiences.
|
| And of course, your things can be just fine, but without proof
| of that, claiming that they are just tells people you have no
| idea whether what you did was actually worth anything, and that
| undermines your effort.
|
| The thing you made MIGHT actually be great! But it might also
| only be great for a super select few hyper-focussed people that
| you happened to ask for help (or not even, you might have
| purely relied on "your own past experiences"!), and be terrible
| in general.
|
| Make tiny claims centered around tiny groups (e.g. "I/my
| customers needed something better so I made this"), not a
| problem. Make big claims involving "everyone" (e.g. "we made a
| typeface that improves legibility")? Back them up with proof.
| Show the studies where you've pitched it against a wide set of
| other typefaces, and have people of all visual impairment
| levels perform (also scientificially justified for this
| purpose) tasks that hinge on legibility.
|
| (Because winning awards may be nice, but doesn't tell us
| anything. It just says "other people already liked this". It
| doesn't say anything about whether the thing you made is
| actually good)
| deltasevennine wrote:
| >Why is it that most posts about a new product or project some
| people have put together is usually greeted with skepticism and
| negativity in HN comments? What is that all about?
|
| It makes perfect sense why these things are greeted with
| skepticism. Because Most things in the world don't succeed.
| Most things fail. Thus when you see things treated with
| negativity and skepticism that is MORE likely to be inline with
| the actual reality. Thus if HN is actually more negative then
| normal, then that means HN users have a more realistic view of
| reality.
|
| >Most replies are either about lack of evidence or someone's
| alternative preference. I see that latter one a good deal.
|
| Why is the latter a good deal if it isn't true? If 99.999% of
| the world doesn't have this alternative preference it's biased
| to even bring it up. There's no need to be personally insulting
| but if you think something is genuinely bad then i think it's
| perfectly ok to just say what you think.
|
| When someone asks for praise, or when someone asks for
| positivity in a way they are by probability more likely to be
| asking for fake opinions and white lies. I don't come to HN for
| that kind of thing. But I will say that Dang (the moderator)
| loves this kind thing; and the moderation culture he promotes
| is more inline with your attitude. If you see a negative post,
| you can flag it, and he will take a side.
| forgotpwd16 wrote:
| >Why is it that most posts about a new product or project some
| people have put together is usually greeted with skepticism and
| negativity
|
| Because most posts about a new product or project tend to make
| extravagant claims without anything to back it up. "The best",
| "the fastest", "the smallest", "the most legible", etc.
| pmarreck wrote:
| Did we hug it to death? Not loading over here
|
| EDIT: it loads now
| djcannabiz wrote:
| I use this for my IDE, I dont have any vision issues or anything,
| its just really nice to look at :)
| mrunseen wrote:
| It is more legible than your average "font-family: sans-serif"
| (aka Arial, Roboto, Helvetica) but it's not that much of an
| "original idea". For example _Frutiger_ by Adrian Frutiger, a
| type family that a lot of airports use as it's designed with
| legibility at long distances, or even the _Verdana_ by Matthew
| Carter, ubiquitous web font that powers this and a lot of other
| websites' typography that has specifically designed for
| legibility on low resolution screens, aren't _that_ less legible
| than this font. Still, I like the idea that some people on
| Braille Institute has decided to commission a typeface with a
| "free" license.
| Gordonjcp wrote:
| It looks almost exactly like Helvetica.
| fredleblanc wrote:
| Also worth checking out is the Lexend family:
| https://www.lexend.com/
|
| I love seeing this push into legibility!
| sumul wrote:
| Yes! I auditioned dozens of fonts for the UI of
| https://figure.game and chose Lexend for its legibility, even
| at small sizes. It's also got lots of understated charm and
| character (no pun intended) in my opinion. After reading about
| the project, I was very impressed with the reading fluency
| improvements reported, especially considering that (to me) it
| just looks like a very classy contemporary geometric sans.
| Sunspark wrote:
| Reminder that fonts are subjective.
|
| This one is good for specific people, not everyone. I can't use
| it because I find it overly rounded with tics.
|
| An example of a font that is also meant to be legible, but is on
| the squarish side, is Tiresias Screenfont.
|
| Increased legibility does NOT mean "flow". Just because each
| character is more "distinct" does not mean that the whole word is
| able to be processed with ease. Important to evaluate them in
| body text.
|
| Also, one's cultural background absolutely affects which fonts
| are preferred. If you grew up with German blackletter writing,
| you're not necessarily going to like or appreciate a sans-serif
| font. In Germany's case, the change from blackletter to latin
| shapes happened fairly recently (WW2). It's happening now again,
| Kazakhstan has decided to stop using cyrillic and change to latin
| characters.
| jackblemming wrote:
| >Reminder that fonts are subjective.
|
| Yes but you can survey a fraction of a population and make
| strong statistical claims such as, "most people found so and so
| font more readable".
| Sunspark wrote:
| Which population though? There are differences in age groups.
| People who grew up only with print won't lean toward a sans.
| People who grew up only with screens will lean toward sans,
| etc.
|
| If you go with that metric of doing a survey, then the answer
| is Times New Roman and Arial, not because they are superior
| (though they have excellent hinting) but due to long-term
| familiarity and exposure.
|
| I don't have a problem with providing what people are
| comfortable with, but comfort does not necessarily translate
| to better. It's subjective.
|
| Companies commissioning their own fonts, is not due to a
| desire to get improved quality, but simply to not have to pay
| a licensing fee for usage.
| samatman wrote:
| Fonts can be a core part of a company's brand identity, the
| present-day fad for incredibly bland Helvetica in a solid
| color notwithstanding.
| jackblemming wrote:
| >Which population though?
|
| The best population to sample would probably be the readers
| of your content.
|
| >If you go with that metric of doing a survey, then the
| answer is Times New Roman and Arial, not because they are
| superior (though they have excellent hinting) but due to
| long-term familiarity and exposure.
|
| I don't know the answer to this because I didn't do any
| studies. I'm probably reasonable to assume you didn't
| either, and thus should be careful about making such
| assertions.
|
| >I don't have a problem with providing what people are
| comfortable with, but comfort does not necessarily
| translate to better.
|
| I don't know what you define as "better", or what you're
| trying to get at.
|
| >Companies commissioning their own fonts, is not due to a
| desire to get improved quality, but simply to not have to
| pay a licensing fee for usage.
|
| Could be. This is a pessimistic take, and I'm sure it's
| right sometimes and wrong other times.
| KronisLV wrote:
| > An example of a font that is also meant to be legible, but is
| on the squarish side, is Tiresias Screenfont.
|
| Here's a quick example that a DuckDuckGo search turned up:
| https://catalog.monotype.com/font/bitstream/tiresias/screenf...
|
| Personally, I rather liked the Atkinson Hyperlegible as well,
| though I found the "bgrpq" characters too similar in shape
| regardless, but maybe that's a criticism of the alphabet
| itself.
|
| Regardless, a lot of the time I find myself using whatever is
| popular (e.g. Open Sans for web development) or something like
| Liberation Mono for writing code (though the rest of the
| Liberation fonts are great alternatives to Microsoft fonts, for
| example, when using LibreOffice).
|
| Open Sans: https://www.opensans.com/
|
| Liberation fonts:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_fonts
| mcdonje wrote:
| Preference has nothing to do with legibility.
| Kaibeezy wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26011945
| fold3 wrote:
| I also find the website confusing, the font is available here
| however https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegible
| npteljes wrote:
| Also here, if one would like to avoid Google somewhat
| https://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/atkinson-hyperlegible
| chronogram wrote:
| GitHub link: https://github.com/ThomasJockin/readexpro
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| Thank you; couldn't get the download link to work.
| cbsmith wrote:
| The Braille Institute site makes the file available by http
| instead of https, which a lot of browsers will reject for
| security reasons.
| GuB-42 wrote:
| With a few tweaks (monospaced variant), it could make a great
| coding font.
|
| Coding fonts have essentially the same goal: make similar looking
| characters different: 1liI|, 0O, etc... Code naturally strains
| our visual acuity: we want to see as much as possible, it means
| that we may use a smaller font size than we would find
| comfortable reading text with. Single letter, punctuation, etc...
| can be really important, in regular text, you can understand even
| if you can't read all the characters. So a hyperlegible font can
| help coders, even those with good vision, and many coding fonts
| already have "hyperlegible" features.
| pen2l wrote:
| Pardon me, where do I find the monospace variant?
| mtrpcic wrote:
| What OP was saying was a few tweaks could make a monospace
| variant, which would be a nice programming font. I don't
| think a monospace variant is available right now.
| pen2l wrote:
| Ah yes, sorry. I think MonaLisa actually fits the bill:
| https://www.monolisa.dev/
| fercircularbuf wrote:
| For the life of me I just can't get over how different
| the g is from the rest of the letters. I find it
| incredibly distracting, so I can't use this font.
| pen2l wrote:
| Increasing differentiability (within reason and within
| identifiability) is the point of fonts that are trying to
| increase legibility. g has the potential of being
| confused with 9, y, 0, etc. for folks with non-optimal
| sight.
|
| > https://www.monolisa.dev/
| onetom wrote:
| Their paid (120 USD) Monolisa Plus variant does have the
| regular g, though.
| userbinator wrote:
| Indeed, that's what I thought too when I read about the letter
| distinction. The reverse slash on the 0 seems a little odd, but
| otherwise this looks like a proportional version of Consolas.
| turtledragonfly wrote:
| Check out DejaVu Sans Mono[1], if you haven't already. That's
| what I use for programming. Has good versions of 1LiI0O (etc).
|
| [1] https://dejavu-fonts.github.io/
|
| (examples in PDF:
| http://dejavu.sourceforge.net/samples/DejaVuSansMono.pdf)
| NonNefarious wrote:
| No font should lack crossbars on the capital "i." That's just
| straight-up dumb. Nice to see that the font in question doesn't
| suffer from that mistake.
|
| Failure to distinguish O from 0 ranks pretty high on the
| "don't" list as well.
| robertk wrote:
| This seems like a great use case for those long zoom meeting
| codes.
| juancn wrote:
| Do they have data backing up their claims? Also, how does it
| compare to other high legibility fonts such as Highway Gothic?
|
| It seems like a promising font, but it needs testing.
| beprogrammed wrote:
| Really is quite a nice font
| sylware wrote:
| "Please enable JavaScript in your browser to complete this form."
|
| Any noscript/basic (x)html download link?
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _Atkinson Hyperlegible - a font by the Braille Institute
| designed for legibility_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28010540 - July 2021 (1
| comment)
|
| _Atkinson Hyperlegible Font_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26011945 - Feb 2021 (86
| comments)
|
| _Atkinson Hyperlegible Font_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25154417 - Nov 2020 (10
| comments)
|
| _Atkinson Hyperlegible Font_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24853550 - Oct 2020 (3
| comments)
|
| _A Free Hyperlegible Typeface from the Braille Institute_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24791358 - Oct 2020 (4
| comments)
| ComputerGuru wrote:
| The link is down for me. Here is a cached copy so you can at
| least see what all the hype is about: https://archive.ph/ok1ro
| supernova87a wrote:
| Interesting that the slash on the zero character goes in the
| opposite slant direction than you normally see?
|
| Also, in the middle of that webpage, they show how the shapes in
| "ER79jr" are slightly different from conventional (they didn't
| notate it but I assume the yellow background alternate shapes are
| what are usually seen), but could have used some better
| explanation why those alternate shapes are confusing.
| an_ko wrote:
| I imagine the "backslash" in the zero is intended to make it
| more distinct from O and o.
| pengstrom wrote:
| I assume this is to differentiate with 'O'
| silvestrov wrote:
| As an "O" language user, the 0-with-backslash is very wrong,
| it makes my brain say "syntax error". It does definitely not
| help reading speed.
|
| It would be much better using a 0-with-dot.
|
| Feels odd to use such a weird variation when there is AFAIK
| only a single language using O and we never have problem with
| 0 being mistaken for O.
| awoooo wrote:
| Maybe opticians should use this as their eyesight testing font.
| If they don't already.
| homarp wrote:
| https://github.com/denispelli/Eye-Chart-Fonts says "The Sloan
| font file was created by Denis Pelli based on Louise Sloan's
| specifications and used for the Pelli-Robson contrast
| sensitivity chart (Pelli, Robson, & Wilkins, 1988).
|
| Louise Sloan's design has been designated the US standard for
| acuity testing by the National Academy of Sciences, National
| Research Council, Committee on Vision (NAS-NRC, 1980)."
| OneLeggedCat wrote:
| I like this idea, but when I go to the web page...
|
| > Download the Font... and change the world! By downloading,
| installing and/or using the font software, you confirm that you
| have read and agree to be bound by the terms of this End-User
| License Agreement...
|
| Sigh. I guess I need to read that EULA.
|
| Anyway, clicking on that then downloads a pdf rather than a nice
| link to some web page text. Sigh.
|
| So then anyway, trying to open that pdf then fails in the first
| two readers I tried. Sigh.
|
| Why must everything in the world be so hard? Fuck it, never mind.
| I'll let someone else change the world and wait for widespread
| adoption for this font to reach me in whatever other ways.
| naillo wrote:
| I had such a different experience. I found the EULA
| surprisingly readible and easy to understand. Just 5 easy
| bullet points rather than a multi page document of legalese.
| Zak wrote:
| They could have used the SIL Open Font License instead.
| People in the open source world are often already familiar
| with it, and resources like tl;dr Legal are available for it.
|
| Their EULA is, in fact almost exactly the SIL Open Font
| License, but someone decided minor changes in wording were
| more valuable than standardization.
|
| https://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL_web
|
| https://tldrlegal.com/license/open-font-
| license-(ofl)-explai...
| ShockedUnicorn wrote:
| If you go to the google fonts version of this font (
| https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegible )
|
| It DOES use SIL Open Font License. Maybe it's dual
| licensed?
| aliqot wrote:
| That could have been in-page information rather than a PDF.
| Or even better, get rid of it. EULA for a font is a wishful
| move.
| balefrost wrote:
| The EULA is giving you permission to e.g. copy and modify
| the font with certain restrictions (e.g. include the
| license text if you distribute it). In that regard, it's
| not terribly dissimilar in spirit from an open source
| software license.
| danuker wrote:
| Why is it not an actual open source license? Perhaps CC-
| By or something?
| leephillips wrote:
| It downloads rather than opening in your browser because that's
| how you've configured your browser. For me it opens in the
| browser (albeit in a new tab). There's nothing wrong with the
| PDF, I can open it with all the PDF readers on my machine; it's
| a basic v.1.6 PDF file. This is, in fact a "nice link to some
| web page text": a page of text served over the web.
| teo_zero wrote:
| I think linking a PDF is less friendly to users who need
| Text-to-Speech technology, something the Braille Institute
| should be sensitive to...
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| What font does the PDF use?
|
| Maybe their Atkinson font?
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| It does indeed :)
|
| Kinda funny that you need to read the EULA before
| downloading it because once you have the PDF on your
| computer you have already downloaded the font.
| leephillips wrote:
| That's a good point. I have no idea if Text-to-Speech works
| with PDF.
| dotancohen wrote:
| It does, and in many cases even better than on most web
| pages.
| einpoklum wrote:
| > By downloading, installing and/or using the font software,
| you confirm that you have read and agree to be bound by the
| terms of this End-User License Agreement
|
| ... says them. I don't agree and I don't confirm. I can
| download the font without accepting/consenting to whatever text
| they put on the web page. And if they're not ok with that -
| they can limit the availability of the download to only those
| who accept whatever weird terms they put in that PDF you
| mentioned. Except they won't do that, since that would harm
| adoption of their font.
|
| More about this kind of "licenses":
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrink_wrap_contract
| npteljes wrote:
| >And if they're not ok with that
|
| Then they can sue. EULAs often state things that don't matter
| in the jurisdiction of the end user, yes. But copyright is
| not related to that. If they hold the copyright to the font,
| then they can set the rules in the license, and if those
| don't clash with the local laws of your place, then you're
| liable legally.
|
| And yes, they probably won't do that. But that's, again, a
| different matter, other copyrighted works are also always
| stolen.
| dannyw wrote:
| You can clone a GPL-licensed repository without clicking any
| checkboxes either, but if you violate the license, you can
| expect to be sued.
| lupire wrote:
| Shrinkwrap/clickwrap is when the license is displayed _after_
| you pay for the product. The concept doesn 't and cannot
| apply to freely downloadable content.
| cyral wrote:
| > Except they won't do that, since that would harm adoption
| of their font.
|
| Is it because it would harm adoption or because it's
| infeasible? You can download copyrighted images and use them
| for your own profit, copy github code with GPL code for your
| closed-source project, or sign pretty much any contract (say
| for a car or a house) without actually reading it. Just
| because there is no safeguard to ensure you are really read
| what you "agreed" to, doesn't mean it's unenforcable.
|
| Moreover, the terms are very simple (1.5 pages) - hardly some
| "weird terms" to define how you are allowed to redistribute
| intellectual property.
| ryanmarsh wrote:
| I was showing this exact problem to my wife, a moment after
| trying to order something from The Container Store and their
| website being broken, just after trying to pay a bill and that
| website not working too.
|
| I swear to God this f**ing industry.
| johndough wrote:
| Reminds me of the parking at my local lake were you now have
| to read a 60 page EULA, a 30 page data "protection" agreement
| and install an app which requires way too many permissions. I
| happily paid the quite reasonable parking fee in the past
| when there still was a human person collecting the money. She
| was very friendly and always had an interesting story to
| tell, but now she's out of her job. Anyway, the surveillance
| cameras have been vandalized and parking is free now.
| dylan604 wrote:
| >Anyway, the surveillance cameras have been vandalized and
| parking is free now.
|
| This totally reads like you just did the vandalizing. Just
| saying ;-)
| GordonS wrote:
| I'm always coming across airline and hotel sites that don't
| work for days at a time, or which don't work in Firefox etc.
| Latest was EVA Air a week ago.
|
| When I think about the money these kind of sites in
| particular must be losing from shoddy engineering... I
| honestly don't know how their devs get away with it!
| cyral wrote:
| Do you have an adblocker on? It will frequently break sites
| especially in the checkout process I have found (probably
| because their crappy code calls some tracking/analytics
| script without try/catch and can't continue). 90% of the time
| disabling it for the page will fix these broken sites.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| > I swear to God this f*ing industry.
|
| this again. Developers and any publisher should test their
| stuff with ad blockers enabled.
| dotancohen wrote:
| Why? They test in default configurations. As someone who
| changes many, many default settings, I don't expect
| developers to test in every possible combination of non-
| default settings, browser extensions, atypical devices,
| text zoom settings, etc.
| cyral wrote:
| These analytics scripts aren't critical and the checkout
| process shouldn't go down just because they don't load.
| It could be a user on spotty wifi or even the external
| service being down entirely. I agree that they shouldn't
| test all the functions of random third party extensions,
| but this failure point is pretty foreseeable for reasons
| besides adblock.
| samatman wrote:
| I'd bet there's a pretty solid correlation between using
| an ad blocker and propensity to spend money, if only
| because the good ones only run on desktop browsers.
| Someone who owns a keyboard is likely to be white collar
| if they aren't a student.
|
| So if you want to leave money on the table because some
| dumb script which has no bearing on selling the product
| breaks, go ahead and damage that funnel.
| tejtm wrote:
| ff on linux w/ various ad/script blockers can't ever get that
| far. a never loading page that proclaims itself to be
| "privileged" on my machine.
|
| nope.
| cyral wrote:
| Not sure why it wouldn't open for you, but it opens fine in
| Chrome on Mac. I thought it would be some ridiculous 50 page
| legalese but it's actually only 1.5 pages long. it's basically
| a license similar to what you'd see on a Github repo.
| soco wrote:
| But why PDF at all? Is there a reason to put the online
| license in a PDF? Or any other places, like the restaurant
| menus? is there anybody who wants/needs to print the license
| or the restaurant menu?
| anigbrowl wrote:
| So organizations that publish documents can store it for
| legal purposes. A pdf has useful metadata that a text
| document does not, and can be easily authenticated. If
| there's a dispute everyone in the legal process understands
| what a pdf file is.
| dual_dingo wrote:
| I kind of understand it for restaurant menus. Both "real"
| restaurant and takeway places need to print actual menus
| and/or flyers, and it's just easier to create a PDF
| document and upload it to your website than it is to
| reformat the document to be useful as web page in many
| cases if you are not well versed in this. Since PDF readers
| in browsers got decent, this isn't too much of an issue
| anymore anyway, IMHO.
| bardworx wrote:
| My guess? They use an agency to service their website and
| made the license in PDF so the org can change it without
| incurring additional cost of an update.
| bongobingo1 wrote:
| I think you probably meant to write " _can 't_ change it
| without".
| bardworx wrote:
| I was alluding that the Org has the ability to re-upload
| the pdf in a shared resource without the need of a
| developer.
|
| Vs making the license file a static page that would incur
| billable hours to update.
| schwartzworld wrote:
| To OPs point, a .TXT would work just as well.
| bardworx wrote:
| Orgs place a lot of value on control. A TXT, even if
| better, would be a hard sell. Especially in a 501(c),
| where optics matter and they are targeting a demographic
| that usually prefers PDFs.
| solardev wrote:
| > Or any other places, like the restaurant menus? is there
| anybody who wants/needs to print the license or the
| restaurant menu?
|
| Web devs are expensive, sadly, and not everyone has the
| patience to figure out the DIY platforms (Square,
| SquareSpace, Wix, etc.). It got a bit better during the
| pandemic when takeout took off. But generally restaurants
| need to print menus anyway, so it's just easier to upload
| that design as a PDF than to redo it for the web with labor
| they don't have, or paying for it with margins they don't
| have...
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| I _really_ hate those restaurants that only have QR codes
| on the table for menus. A restaurant is for eating and
| talking, not for messing around with my phone.
|
| I avoid those now. During Covid there was a slight point
| (though it was pretty soon proven that surface transmission
| was so minor a factor not to warrant such actions). But now
| we should just go back to normal menus.
| KMnO4 wrote:
| Heh. I went to a sushi restaurant recently and sat down
| to an iPad menu. After ordering a few rolls and
| confirming the order, it was delivered by a robot[0].
| After finishing the plates, I returned them to the robot
| which carried them away. I scanned a QR code on the table
| which allowed me to pay for everything from my phone.
|
| Curiously, I was presented with options to tip 18%, 20%,
| 30%, or other. I thought about it and tipped accordingly
| to the effort the waitress put into my experience.
|
| Shortly after, the manager came to me (essentially the
| first point of human interaction) and asked if there was
| anything wrong that caused me to tip 0%.
|
| So yes, I too really hate the direction restaurants are
| heading in.
|
| [0]: https://www.pudurobotics.com/product/detail/pudubot2
| Zak wrote:
| I'm curious who would get the tip in this scenario. The
| sushi chef? Ok, I guess. The restaurant owner? I'm going
| with 0%. The robot? Maybe if it can pass a Turing test.
| verall wrote:
| > The sushi chef?
|
| Yes, and most likely split with other cooks,
| host/hostess, and waitstaff for people that refuse to use
| the iPad.
|
| > The restaurant owner?
|
| Illegal in most states.
|
| What an iconoclast, refusing to tip hourly workers...
| renewedrebecca wrote:
| Only in the past few years has it been remotely expected
| that you'd have to tip someone who didn't actually take
| your order at a table and then walk your food out from
| the kitchen.
|
| We've all been tricked into tipping in situations where,
| honestly, the management should be paying better. And
| yeah, I know that means that the cost of things will be
| higher on say the menu, but the real cost of a $20 dinner
| should be $24, why not just pay the $24 up front and
| raise the base wages to what they should be.
|
| I'm pretty sure this is only an American lunacy too.
| verall wrote:
| Yeah but if you are in America where higher minimum wages
| or public healthcare are not happening anytime soon,
| maybe you should tip the hourly workers if you can afford
| it?
|
| I think people just don't want to be confronted with the
| idea that the people servicing them make a pittance. It
| brings up uncomfortable feelings to have to decide how
| much a service employee "ought" to be paid, each time you
| eat at a restaurant.
| idiotsecant wrote:
| The social contract is currently approximately 'when I
| interact with human wait staff I am expected to add some
| cash to what the bill says on it' This is evident from,
| for example, the drive-thru example. There is no waiter /
| waitress, you just get your stuff and keep rolling. A tip
| jar is sometimes available but is rarely expected. If I
| never interact with a human and the restaurant expects a
| tip I think they should tweak their presentation to more
| closely adhere to that social contract.
|
| In actual fact I wish we could stop dancing around the
| fluffy idea of when to tip and when not to tip and just
| expect restaurant owners to pay their staff and include
| that in the price charged for the goods. It's super
| annoying having to think about this stuff all the time.
| verall wrote:
| Except that in most areas, tips are legally required to
| go end workers (not management or ownership) and in jobs
| where tips are allowed, end workers make more than in
| service jobs where tips are not allowed on average. We're
| talking about America, I don't know why you would expect
| restaurant owners to pay workers a dime over the market
| clearing price. The chances service employees get
| employer provided health insurance is very low.
|
| I don't know your financial situation and noone is
| forcing you to tip. But if you make, say, more than 3
| times what the people servicing you make, and you choose
| not to tip, I think that's quite selfish.
| kevin_thibedeau wrote:
| Those hourly workers are getting screwed by an employer
| who won't pay them what they're worth. It isn't my
| responsibility to feel shame and make up for their
| circumstances with an arbitrary tithe.
| mjevans wrote:
| I agree with tipping the robots (for whom service is
| always the same) N% of their wage; which is still 0.
|
| Tips should be _not-legal_ and proper wages for the
| workers should be _required_.
| ModernMech wrote:
| Lol. What's next, they'll want tips for the dishwashing
| machine too?
| throwaway14356 wrote:
| ill put in my robotmancipation notes
| JasonFruit wrote:
| Sometimes now this is because of supply problems that
| make a single, consistent menu embarrassing to the
| business: nobody wants to have to say, "I'm sorry; we're
| out of salmon and eggplant, and we haven't had coconut
| milk for a week. Can I offer the three of you something
| else?" An electronic menu can be changed immediately and
| at practically no cost.
| drekipus wrote:
| This sounds like over estimating a lot of restaurants
| ability to handle electronic menus.
|
| I don't think I've seen that functionality in many
| restaurants at all.
|
| There is always a cost in updating the menu.
| HyperSane wrote:
| An electronic menu can also have prices that change every
| hour based on how busy the place is or even have prices
| based on demographic information gleaned from the user's
| phone.
| verall wrote:
| What restaurants do this?
| JasonFruit wrote:
| International House of Hypotheticals, Strawman Cafe, and
| the Red Herring Bar and Grill.
| NonNefarious wrote:
| +1 for you, sir
| Zak wrote:
| I don't mind this when it's done well. I'm going to have
| to mess with _something_ to find out what food the
| restaurant sells and my phone is about as good an option
| as any. It can allow easier menu changes, inclusion of
| specials, and the like.
|
| In practice, however most restaurants seem to go for a
| PDF of their previous menu design formatted for printing
| on a paper many times the size of my phone. That's a bad
| experience and restaurants that do it deserve to lose
| business over it. I'm reminded of about a decade long
| period not long ago when a restaurant website was more
| likely to have animations and music than the hours and
| menu.
| NonNefarious wrote:
| Menus on phones blow. It's a pain in the ass to fussily
| scroll around on a dinky screen and try to remember what
| has scrolled away that you were interested in, instead of
| being able to glance across a page.
|
| I sympathize with the PITA of changing printed menus, but
| that's part of what you pay for. If I go out, I'm not
| paying for a lunch-counter experience.
|
| E-paper menus would be a pretty good compromise, if they
| could be made practical.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| PDF works better when downloaded, sent over e-mail, printed
| to be used in a court case or hard archives, and has stood
| the test of time.
| jonpalmisc wrote:
| PDF also cannot change from underneath you, unlike a web page.
| Better to have a copy of what the license was at the time you
| agreed to it, imo.
| mattnewton wrote:
| Pages can be saved in modern browsers about as easily, if
| they aren't actually js apps in disguise. Never had a problem
| doing just that for plain html pages like this could have
| been.
| dylan604 wrote:
| I guess it depends on what wrote the PDF as to how much can
| be edited later, but I'm constantly
| opening/modifying/resaving PDFs.
| bmacho wrote:
| PDF can change the same as any other format. Yes, line length
| in an html file if not specified is left to the browser, but
| css exist and also there are other formats, like txt.
| kulhur wrote:
| > Why must everything in the world be so hard?
|
| linux user?
| 12ian34 wrote:
| if you want "everything in the world" to not be "so hard"
| you'd probably avoid Linux.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| On FreeBSD with Firefox this PDF opened right away, just
| saying
| bastardoperator wrote:
| Loaded for me too, zero issues.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| Firefox and chrome will both open the PDF by default unless
| you tell it to use your own reader.
|
| Both gnome and KDE come with a capable reader better than
| your browser.
|
| If you don't like those there are several options.
|
| Reading a pdf under Linux is super easy.
| aendruk wrote:
| Their EULA looks similar to the OFL. I wonder why they didn't
| just use that.
| hermitcrab wrote:
| I was talking to my opticians recently and he said "Everyone gets
| cataracts, PVDs[1] and macular degeneration, if they live long
| enough". So we should all be glad that people are working in this
| area.
|
| [1]Posterior Vitreous Detachment.
| cratermoon wrote:
| Over the past 2-3 years I went from needing reading glasses for
| small print to needing reading glasses for nearly everything in
| "normal"-sized print. I even keep HN at +125% (thanks, Chrome)
| because the default is too small. I still need my reading
| glasses at this magnification, but I don't want to magnify it
| too much more because of limited screen real-estate. This is
| just from normal age-related presbyopia.
|
| I'm hoping that as the tech-savvy population ages, more thought
| will be put into design for vision challenges. Honestly I very
| low expectations, though.
| hermitcrab wrote:
| Tech is mostly designed by young white English-speaking males
| and they tend to design with young white English-speaking
| males in mind. On the plus, this means that there are quite a
| few unexploited opportunities.
| cratermoon wrote:
| > Tech is mostly designed by young white English-speaking
| males
|
| Indeed, and readability is one of the less pressing
| problems that result from that. It's also why I have
| marginal hope, at best.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-09-11 23:00 UTC)