News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A brief history of Times New Roman. Parent comment

Re:A brief history of Times New Roman by CivBase on Tuesday December 16, 2025 @11:05AM (#46290255)
The author provides a single critisism ("The italic is mediocre"), does not elaborate, then immediately hedges their critique.

Helvetica is used as an example of a font which garners more "affection" in contrast to TNR, but is never praised by the author or recommended as an alternative - at least not in the linked passage.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A brief history of Times New Roman by DiogenesKynikos on Tuesday December 16, 2025 @11:56AM (#46290948)
The author also criticizes the narrowness of the font (and particularly of the bold style). They're not trying to argue that Times New Roman is terrible - just that it's substandard.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A brief history of Times New Roman by citizenkeen on Tuesday December 16, 2025 @11:28AM (#46290557)
Helvetica is not usually in the running for use by lawyers.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A brief history of Times New Roman by ghaff on Tuesday December 16, 2025 @01:42PM (#46292517)
As a body copy font, sans serif is generally seen as "friendlier" and more casual--which is one reason you see more of it than you used to in marketing copy and many other uses. Friendly and casual are generally not things I'm looking for in legal documents.
[ Parent | on HN ]