Standard font for technical documentation

[Gary Schnabl]

Syed.Hosain at aeris.net wrote:
>> For standard typefaces embedded in print PDF documents, I use Palatino
>>     
> Linotype for serifs, the new (free) Inconsolata-dk for monospaced, and
> any of a number of sans-serif typefaces--usually Arial, Verdana,
> Calibri., etc.
>
> Hi, Gary.
>
> Did you mean Inconsolata-dk or Incolsolata-dz? I have not seen the
> former ... just found the latter and will do some comparisons to my
> current favorite (see below).
>
> My fonts for printed technical documentation - these are always sent to
> customers in PDF files:
>
> 1. Palatino Linotype for all body text. I used to use Palatino and
> discovered an unusual spacing problem with copyright, registered and
> trademark letters. The space after these characters is insufficient and
> they are too close to the first character of the next word. I don't know
> if others see it too and it is just a problem with the Palatino font I
> have - I can provide a PDF sample if anyone wants.
>
> 2. Helvetica for all headers. I used to use Arial, but was clearly shown
> (in this list! :)) that Helvetica looks a lot better in larger sizes
> (like headers) and in printed form - better curves, etc.
>
> 3. Consolas for monospaced code examples, etc. I used to use Courier,
> but after I discovered Consolas (in Word 2007) some years ago, I have
> not looked back!
>
> Z
>   

My bad, as it was Inconsolata-dz. Helvetica is a Mac font for most 
systems--not on my XP Pro system.

A couple years ago, somebody ran a comparative study on various 
typefaces, including the seven or so new MS "C" typefaces. Palatino 
Linotype fared the best of the serifs. Forget TNR, unless a narrow 
newspaper-type typeface is desired for narrow columns.

Consolas may appear poorly unless ClearType is enabled, I understand.


Gary