Sujet : Re: Favorite Font
De : candycanearter07 (at) *nospam* candycanearter07.nomail.afraid (candycanearter07)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.advocacy comp.os.linux.miscDate : 17. Apr 2025, 20:00:03
Autres entêtes
Organisation : the-candyden-of-code
Message-ID : <slrn1002jo5.54u.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : slrn/1.0.3 (Linux)
John Ames <
commodorejohn@gmail.com> wrote at 15:06 this Wednesday (GMT):
On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 14:00:05 -0000 (UTC)
candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid>
wrote:
>
Neither is Times New Roman, or Arial. It gets the job done, and looks
clean enough.
>
True enough - never liked those, either. I'd actually put the FOSS
Alternatives (TM) over both, in a head-to-head; it just doesn't make
Liberation *aesthetically pleasing,* is all.
Again, theyre Just Fine.
Print? Does anyone still print?
>
Well, if I ever get around to finishing the typesetting for my
novel...
Do you mean printing documents from a standard printer?
>
Well, more "intended to end up on paper at some point" than "I actually
currently own and use a printer" - haven't used one on the regular
since the mid-'00s. But I sure didn't write a novel to *not* hold a
print copy in my hands at some point...!
Wow, you wrote a novel? Can we see?
-- user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom
Favorite Font
Re: Favorite Font -- Unicode Test