3 ms·
Tabular numerals, when done correctly, are both monospaced and duplexed (sharing the same advance width) across weights.
by sings 6y ago
Tabular numerals, when done correctly, are both monospaced and duplexed (sharing the same advance width) across weights.
- a1369209993 6y agoAgreed, though I maintain that it's in general unclear exactly which properties the advance width is constant with respect to. (For tabular numerals, is-digit-zero-versus-one clearly is, but what about digit-versus-question-mark when writing "27'3?? items" to indicate three significant figures? What about "+" and "-", which should have the same width as each other, despite not being numerals at all? Full monospacing solves this, but that's often a stronger constraint that you actually need.) Also, nominally monospace fonts often end up having character-dependant width anyway (ranging from blatant bugs like substiting fallback characters without forcing them to the correct size, to completely legitimate-ish variations like CJK ideographs with integer multiples of the normal character width). So, I'd still say tabular numerals are more like a weaker form of monospace than a stronger form of uniwidth - constant width across styles may or may not be relevant, but if it is, it's table stakes (no pun intended).
- sings 6y agoYep it's totally up to the type designer which extra glyphs are supported alongside tabular numerals. Usually period, comma, plus, minus, equals, dollar (and other currencies), space, but I've never thought to include a question mark in the set.