Re: Wrong characters for Serbian cyrillic

[Sander Vesik <Sander Vesik Sun COM>]

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> Le mer 22/10/2003 � 02:15, Sander Vesik a �crit :
>
> > Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>
>
> > > Actually considering the number of people here that do work in monospace
> > > environments I suspect you'll find more demand for monospace than serif
> > > (which lacks italic anyway)
>
>
> > Lack of italic Vera Serif is unfortunate - esp as there is mono italic 
> > and bold italic which i can't imagine getting used all that often
>
>
> In tech doc all monospace variants are heavily used.
>
> Vera was released for Gnome, and most computer people use only two fonts
> - a variable one and a monospace one (for terminals, mailers, news
> readers, RAD/text editors, tech doc...)

Sure - but terminals basicly have mono & mono bold (at most). Some 
editors use italic (highlighting comments). I can't at the moment think 
of any largescale use of mono bold italic. But all of this is practicly 
always just ascii, as programming languages usualy insist on code being 
in ascii.

> I'd be really surprised if there was a significant number of people that
> used Serif for their variable font - it's way too ugly on a computer
> screen. Vera Monospace on the other hand received raving reviews when
> released so there will be some demand to extend it.
>
> (looking back at the comments you had basically Monospace -> awesome,
> Sans -> nice, Serif -> average)

I'm largely indifferent to monospace - as far as extension goes imho all 
the actionis in sans and serif.

> While I understand the Office people might like a Serif font, it might
> be better to play on Vera strengths first - Sans and Monospace.

From my POV that would be playing on a weakness. But ... I can hardly 
claim to have some kind of special access to universal truth.

> regards,


--
	Sander

Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?