3.3.2 fonts

[allanj-uaag]

Section 3.3.2 – I think this section should also include something like the following. “Avoid the use of serif fonts such as Times New Roman because the serifs produce visual clutter that makes it more difficult to distinguish characters and impedes reading efficiency.” Include examples like how the lower case “g” in Times New Roman looks like the number 8. I am not sure if you want to mention or include the work that Dr. Elaine Kitchel (APH) did when she developed APHont. It would be nice to offer that as one of the font choices available. http://w3c.github.io/low-vision-a11y-tf/requirements.html#font

from: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-a11y-tf/2016Mar/0078.html

[shawna-slh]

"Avoid the use of..." is "best practices"/techniques-type guidance, not a user need. So it might go in another document, but not this one. (Also, some people with low vision prefer serif fonts.)

user need is:

User Need - Font: Users can change the font face (also called font family or typeface) of all text, choosing from a wide range of fonts including serif and sans serif fonts.

(We could switch the order to "sans serif and serif fonts" since more people with low vision prefer sans serif.)

Related issue https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-a11y-tf/issues/45

[shawna-slh]

resolved that fits in best practice, not user needs - 6 April telecon (after item 6)

[allanj-uaag]

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-low-vision-comments/2017AprJun/0001.html

[shawna-slh]

An important aspect of the default font is distinguish-ability of I, l, 1; S, 5; etc.

more info on default font: https://github.com/w3c/wai-website-design/issues/52

[shawna-slh]

Re-opening for Best Practice. Still closed for Use Needs Requirements doc.

[Myndex]

Serif vs sans-serif fonts is not a "thing", at the very least it is unsettled science. In studies into reading with and without serifs, and carefully controlling for other typographic aspects such as size, weight, tracking, kerning, and leading, there has not been shown a consistent advantage to one or the other font type.

I believe it was Dr Arditi (thought it may have been Dr.Legge) who determined that there was no clear advantage either way, other factors as mentioned being the same, and debunking some other studies in the process.

have you got the time...

So let's consider Times New Roman. This is a small font, with a small x-height. Originally developed for the London newspaper in the 1930s, and newspapers loved it because the font allowed them to print more words in less space.

But the font size tho....

Font-size is not standardized. You can put the CSS property font-size: 14px; and it will render six different fonts six different ways. Here's a recent example I created for another thread that illustrates this.

Among other things, this is part of the foundation for font-x -size.

And I've read some pretty bad science over the last couple of years where the study used a font at a value set, as opposed to actually measuring the glyphs as rendered. As you can see from the example above, that is not an approved method. A font's true x-height and cap-height need to be assessed relative to the font body size. And this goes for tracking kerning and leading as well, as these also very per font.

On the subject of Times New Roman, as in the example above if someone was to just compare against Verdana and set them both at 14px, Verdana would have a clear advantage being 20% larger.

Screen Render Issues

Now, it IS true that on lower resolution screens that serif fonts may not render as well, due to the fine details of the serifs being mangled by the antialiasing. This is less of an issue today with subpixel antialiasing (eg MS cleartype).

And all this said, I consider Times New Roman to be an anti-accessibly font, due to size and the tight tracking/kerning. For a serif font I recommend Georgia or Baskerville as better choices.

Homoglyphs

@shawna-slh said:

An important aspect of the default font is distinguish-ability of I, l, 1; S, 5; etc.

Hi Shawn, YES absolutely, and Good rnorning (see what I did there) r n and m are a giant fail for many fonts. As is 1Il. I cover this in an informal guide you can download at ResearchGate.

Crosslink

I discuss much of this more in depth at CSS-FONTS in a subject on default generic fonts (I am making the case that generic fallbacks should also be accessible fallbacks).

[mraccess77]

I found this font - https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegible#about @Myndex be interested in your thoughts. https://brailleinstitute.org/freefont

[Myndex]

I found this font - https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Atkinson+Hyperlegible#about @Myndex be interested in your thoughts. https://brailleinstitute.org/freefont

It looks pretty good overall... am going to evaluate it closer when I have a change.

My initial knee jerk reaction is that is did well with most of the most problematic issues.

My main reservation (to be evaluated) is it seems the font's internal tracking/kerning is a bit tight, especially the bold variant has very little letter spacing. The lowercase db lack some distinction, which is odd as the pq are great. The upper case Y I mistake for a V in a glance or two. Otherwise a well done font, reminds me of the one that Lighthouse (I think?) did some years ago.

[mraccess77]

There was also APHont.... There's been a few of these and the Dyslexia font had overall had pretty mixed reviews.

[Myndex]

The dyslexia fonts (there are a few) might have been over thinking a bit, and misunderstanding the nature of dyslexia.

We learn a lot when we discover that dyslexia is almost unheard of in Korea, as their language is very clear… English is very obtuse LOL. That is not a problem that is going to be solved by weirdly shaped glyphs… :)

On Oct 5, 2021, at 4:58 PM, Jonathan Avila @.***> wrote:

There was also APHont.... There's been a few of these and the Dyslexia font had overall had pretty mixed reviews.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-a11y-tf/issues/40#issuecomment-935105976, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AKAQG4KQUBNXNZDD3AANJHTUFOGKDANCNFSM4B7XQVMA. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675 or Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub.