Re: [OT} Was "Re: Rounded beams"

[David Kastrup]

Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi Andrew,
>
>> Judging by the sheer number of these fonts and the number of
>> professional type designers who devote sincere effort to making this
>> style, there is a desire in people to overcome the stiff rigidity of
>> the typical printed letterform.
>
> The overuse of Comic Sans doesn’t make it any less irritating or more
> readable.  ;)

Well, the main problem with stuff like curved beams is that they require
taste, skill, and moderation.  There are no actual tangible benefits,
and taste, skill, and moderation are not reliably available from human
engravers and reliably unavailable from typesetting programs.

I like superspicy food but don't really bother ordering it anymore.  The
problem is that the cooks are no longer able to control their product
and don't notice if the other ingredients aren't well-balanced, or
whether their particular chilification agent has a mushy or powdery
taste to it that ruins the texture.  They think that capsaicin numbs the
taste when it actually renders it more acute.

LilyPond's focus is creating good, readable scores.  That's what
typography is about.  Not creating visual artworks.  The boundary
conditions for bulk manufacturing work (like engraving once was) are not
that dissimilar: skilled and effective workers are not the same as
artists.  Typography is about rendering the content, not being it.

So curved beams are an area where there's a lot to lose and little to
gain.

-- 
David Kastrup