On Jan 7, 2008, at 2:16 PM, Callie Neylan wrote: > Not true. Sometimes you do refer to type readability studies. Like > when you're designing typefaces for highway signs. And for people > with visual impairments.
The highway sign is an example of validation, not in using a study to literally *choose* the font itself. That's an important distinction. In other words, the testing done on the highway signs was *very specific* to the font designed, and tested to make sure it satisfied the requirement of legibility at distances, in fog, in rain, with headlights hitting it, fast speeds, etc. That's vastly different than using a study to determine what font you should use for a web site. Typographers spend a massive amount of time testing the legibility of their work. It's built into their DNA and their process of work. In that regard, they are doing that to validate their design for its intended purpose. But what they don't do is what is done in that linked study, which is a backwards way of testing "font usefulness." -- Andrei Herasimchuk Principal, Involution Studios innovating the digital world e. [EMAIL PROTECTED] c. +1 408 306 6422 ________________________________________________________________ *Come to IxDA Interaction08 | Savannah* February 8-10, 2008 in Savannah, GA, USA Register today: http://interaction08.ixda.org/ ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
