3 ms·

Besides the terrible and pointless abuse of "Das", i find myself amazed that these people purport to be interested in typography, use the article about Gutenber

Besides the terrible and pointless abuse of "Das", i find myself amazed that these people purport to be interested in typography, use the article about Gutenberg as their header, and then fail to use "text-align: justify;" as the default for paragraphs. Edit: On reading further, i find that they did consider it, but decided against providing something that looks great and is helpful to the reader in 99.99999% of all cases, because the remaining 0.00001% don't look perfect. Instead they opt for a solution that is decidedly mediocre² in all cases. Brilliant. ² Note how in the header, Buchprodukti-on is hyphened very awkwardly, while Buchdrucks, a prime candidate, isn't at all.

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
currysausage 12y ago
I'm not a fan of this project either (see my other comment), but I totally agree with them on this one. Justified text is really hard to get right, even with TeX, InDesign and the like, and simply placing "text-align: justify;" in your CSS will worsen the quality and therefore the readability: Gaps will occur between all words in every other line, which doesn't only look ugly, but also destroys the flow of reading. Left justification is always preferable over bad full justification; I don't know many (read: any) typographers who would disagree. The first of Tschichold's Penguin Composition Rules (always worth reading - http://s3.amazonaws.com/tsch/compositionrules.html http://s3.amazonaws.com/tsch/compositionrules.html) says: "All text composition should be as closely word-spaced as possible." By relying on automatic full justification, you violate that rule in cruel ways. "Wide spaces should be strictly avoided."
- Mithaldu 12y ago
  You'll be hard-pressed to find any wikipedia article that looks bad with it, unless you zoom in to something like 6 words per line on average. Edit to your edit: I don't particularly care for your appeal to authority when experience has borne out for me that wildly varying line lenghts hinder reading considerably more than occasional gaps. Besides, your authority doesn't even mention justification or alignment, as such i question your binding his statement to that matter.
  - currysausage 12y ago
    Actually, the first line of the first article that I F12'ed looked horrible. (Despite 18 words per line.) Typography is a really subtle craft.
    - Mithaldu 12y ago
      Your claims would hold more weight if you actually demonstrated them. Also it would be nice if you actually marked your copious edits into your post as edits.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
vacri 12y ago
"Proper hyphenation makes for a balanced right edge of the text column and looks way better." This is the caption below a full-justified image with several words broken by hyphens - which looks awful, and, more importantly, is harder to read. I'd much rather deal with the occasional 'river' than read hyphen-wrapped words.

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

currysausage 12y ago

I'm not a fan of this project either (see my other comment), but I totally agree with them on this one. Justified text is really hard to get right, even with TeX, InDesign and the like, and simply placing "text-align: justify;" in your CSS will worsen the quality and therefore the readability: Gaps will occur between all words in every other line, which doesn't only look ugly, but also destroys the flow of reading. Left justification is always preferable over bad full justification; I don't know many (read: any) typographers who would disagree. The first of Tschichold's Penguin Composition Rules (always worth reading - http://s3.amazonaws.com/tsch/compositionrules.html http://s3.amazonaws.com/tsch/compositionrules.html) says: "All text composition should be as closely word-spaced as possible." By relying on automatic full justification, you violate that rule in cruel ways. "Wide spaces should be strictly avoided."

Mithaldu 12y ago
You'll be hard-pressed to find any wikipedia article that looks bad with it, unless you zoom in to something like 6 words per line on average. Edit to your edit: I don't particularly care for your appeal to authority when experience has borne out for me that wildly varying line lenghts hinder reading considerably more than occasional gaps. Besides, your authority doesn't even mention justification or alignment, as such i question your binding his statement to that matter.
- currysausage 12y ago
  Actually, the first line of the first article that I F12'ed looked horrible. (Despite 18 words per line.) Typography is a really subtle craft.
  - Mithaldu 12y ago
    Your claims would hold more weight if you actually demonstrated them. Also it would be nice if you actually marked your copious edits into your post as edits.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]

vacri 12y ago

"Proper hyphenation makes for a balanced right edge of the text column and looks way better." This is the caption below a full-justified image with several words broken by hyphens - which looks awful, and, more importantly, is harder to read. I'd much rather deal with the occasional 'river' than read hyphen-wrapped words.