Hacker News Reader

HNHacker News

Top New Best Ask Show Jobs

Comment by cpach | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

cpach·

Well, setting whole books in fixed-width has never been the norm.

Personally I find fixed-width very hard to read for regular text.

For example, compare these two documents:

http://www.laputan.org/pub/papers/aim-349.pdf

http://www.larcenists.org/Documentation/Documentation0.98/r7...

I know which one I prefer when it comes to typography and readability.

View on HN

Though in that example, to be fair, a major point in readability is the quality of the scan. Of course the LaTeX document is nicer, because it's digitally rendered instead of low-resolution scanned from a paper original. ;)

That doesn't make me agree with you any less, though. Some words are just unnaturally wide in monospace.

> Well, setting whole books in fixed-width has never been the norm.

In books, I agree. Even Gutenberg's press had variable width "types". However not everyone reads books regularly and fixed width was all that was available in offices (well, that or handwritten documents). So for a great many people like myself, fixed width typefaces were still the norm.

However when you’re programming, you’re looking for structural rather than semantic meaning of words.

The only true meaning of natural text is the meaning given to the words; but the only true meaning of code is the way punctuation is organised around superficial natural texts within the elements.

In your example, I find the typewritten text to be very beautifully laid out. The latex rendering is cluttered and uses a font which is too thin.

I agree that the layout of the R7RS document could be further improved.

Computer Modern was designed to be printed with ink presses, and so it assumes a certain amount of running in the liquid. If it will be rendered solely on-screen, it needs to be thickened slightly. Fortunately this is easy with Metafont; unfortunately the default TeX installations don't do it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com